Hmmm... so many to pick from.

The no call no show.

The "**** initiative, whoever screams out first goes first, right?" (IMO, the GM deserves at least as much blame as the player in this scenario).

The metagamer.

The "I'ma bookmark this page by bending the corner of your book, 'K?" Related to the "I'ma use your book as a writing desk" and "I'ma use your book as a plate".

Alignment.

People who don't understand that "alignment" and "personality" are not synonyms.

DMs who feel the need to change your alignment (esp over a single incident).

The people who would rather have to retcon an entire session than look up a rules question when it first appears.

The veteran noob.

The rules lawyer who knows he's wrong, and is just hoping for a favorable ruling from an ignorant GM. Happily, whenever I've noticed this happening, it was under GMs who took the time to look up the rules.

The nerf bat.

GMs who believe in nerfing the strong, but have no interest in empowering the weak.

Intolerant people.

The PvP player, especially when coupled with the player who can't differentiate IC & OOC.

Alignment.

I'm sure I could come up with lots more...

Quote Originally Posted by Knitifine View Post
More recently a behavior that was endemic to the group.

Player 1: "You can do this."
Player 2, after a few moments of fact checking while they are not in the scene: "No, actually you can't."
Player 1: "Ugh, don't fact check me, that's so rude."

If someone corrects you about a rule, you shouldn't get in a tizzy about it. This is only a problem if they're not letting play continue and/or paying attention to things that are happening to their character. This is especially true if the thing you brought up is something you literally shouldn't be able to do.
I don't think I could play with people like that. At least, not and take them seriously. Not without totally abusing the lack of rules.

Quote Originally Posted by Earthwalker View Post
I call it a chess master player.

A player who sees all the other characters at the table as his pieces to move to “win” the game / encounter. Its not like I aren’t a team player but if I have abilities that will help let me choose to use them, don’t start ordering up what you need.

Standard Chess Master Talk (Chess Master is Fighty Mcfighterson)

“Ok before we go into the room, Earthwalker you cast spell bulls strength on me and Thiefy McStabb. Then cast Hast on the group. Once we are in the room I will engage the big guy, Thiefy McStabb you get flanking. Earthwalker don’t waste your spells we might need buffs after. Cleric McHealsalot you stay back and burst heal if needed”
Me – “You know we can work out what to do ourselves”
Fighter McFighterson – “I am only doing what’s more effective”.
My signature character, for whom this account is named, is a tactically inept god wizard. His lack of tactical mindset prevents him from overshadowing the party. Happily, I believe I have never played Quertus with a Chess Master in the party - at least, not one who viewed Quertus as one of his pieces. I often play as... odd man out... in group tactics; the Chess Masters I remember playing with Quertus encouraged him to be the unpredictable portion of the party's plan. Although I have had tactically inept players try to order Quertus around, in ways that would make the encounter noticably harder - which is quite a feat, given that Quertus' signature actions are to read from a book or make a sketch.

So, yeah, I'm not sure how having a real Chess Master making Quertus live up to his potential would turn out, but I doubt it would be fun for the party.