Breaking Group Habits

Has anyone had success with changing or breaking group habits for their role playing groups? I'm hoping to be able to run a game soon, but they games I enjoy running are ones that they seem to like, yet they pull back to a "kill, loot, who's next?" mentality.

My current group has been together for well over a decade, however I only joined in 2012. They are sometimes very stuck in their ways, particular in regards to solving problems in game. The short version is that they kill everything. They claim it was too many years of dungeon crawls.

It can be done and I have done it. But it requires three things:

1. Honest conversation. You need to tell your group that you'd like to try another playstyle and make sure if they are interested in less combat focused play. Because if they are not, you won't succeed in changing their habits.

2. If they are interested, it still requires some time. The best approach is to run several games set up in such a way that non-combat solutions are more efficient. As long as violence works as a universal solution, people will keep using it out of habit. If you're talking with someone you treat as an opponent and talking doesn't work well, escalating to combat is a natural next step. But if you're exploring (as in "learning about the world and how it works", not "going through dungeons"), or engaging in a romance, or trying to stop a plague, or negotiating a trade agreement, then violence is just not an option.

3. To encourage less violent approach, games need to contain non-antagonistic (and maybe not goal oriented at all) interactions. Getting to know NPCs and maybe befriending them. Learning interesting facts about the setting. Engaging in local customs and religious rites. And so on.

Razjah said:

Has anyone had success with changing or breaking group habits for their role playing groups? I'm hoping to be able to run a game soon, but they games I enjoy running are ones that they seem to like, yet they pull back to a "kill, loot, who's next?" mentality.

My current group has been together for well over a decade, however I only joined in 2012. They are sometimes very stuck in their ways, particular in regards to solving problems in game. The short version is that they kill everything. They claim it was too many years of dungeon crawls.

Click to expand...

I feel your pain. The core of my current group is very similar, even if many of the peripheral members are more partial to newer games. In my case, at least one of the members driving the "kill 'em all and cast Speak with Dead later" attitude is quite explicit that that's exactly what he wants from the game. However, we did recently go on a "try different games kick" after a recent old-school game kinda imploded from magic-item overload. That was really great, and at least gave the rest of us a chance to show the "core" players some of what the rest of us enjoyed.

Razjah said:

An example, our last game was a Dresden Files FATE game (details here [we even won campaign of the year]) where I played a cowardly demonologist who ran The occult bookstore of NYC. He was envisioned as a person who would assist in gathering information through various demonic entities by binding and bargaining for information. However, due to the group's tendencies to run headlong into battle the character soon became a walking force of God-Powered destruction. Tired of being unable to fight his enemies, he turned to God and was granted soulfire, he then turned from demon-summoner to demon-killer.

While the transformation was awesome to play, and the final character recap hits on the points, it was a very combat heavy campaign. We never really talked to people and interrogated them. The thief and socialite quickly dropped aspects to build up combat abilities. In short we went from Dresden Files to Modern D&D.
​

Click to expand...

I love Fate, but one of its limitations is that it doesn't do subtle suspense very well. The PCs really do need to be very competent and pro-active to make the most of it. However, that doesn't mean that you can't include such a character in the game.* See, there's nothing in particular about the way Fate handles things that restricts a character sheet to describing a singular person. (You might see this referred to as the "Bronze rule" or Fate Fractal.) If your group was amenable, you could write up a sheet that describes a pair of paranormal investigators: one bookish, and one tough. (High Concept Aspect: She's a tough young wizard, he's an occult bookstore owner, together they fight crime!) Keep them together for most of the adventures (or don't). Taking consequences like Castle's captured provides really nice fodder for invokes that would reflect one member of the team being out of commission.

If you're interested in that sort of thing and lucky enough to get your group to want to try it, I'd recommend any of the Gumshoe games. They do a nice job of highlighting the investigation part of things, and you can probably run it in a one-nighter.

*I must admit that I don't have the Dresden Files game, so I can't comment on how well those books/that variant would support such a thing. The Fate Core rules could handle it quite easily, IMO.

steenan said:

1. Honest conversation. You need to tell your group that you'd like to try another playstyle and make sure if they are interested in less combat focused play. Because if they are not, you won't succeed in changing their habits.

2. If they are interested, it still requires some time. The best approach is to run several games set up in such a way that non-combat solutions are more efficient. As long as violence works as a universal solution, people will keep using it out of habit. If you're talking with someone you treat as an opponent and talking doesn't work well, escalating to combat is a natural next step. But if you're exploring (as in "learning about the world and how it works", not "going through dungeons"), or engaging in a romance, or trying to stop a plague, or negotiating a trade agreement, then violence is just not an option.

Click to expand...

1) The honest conversation is difficult. I have been able to discuss things one on one, but in a group they seem to fall into solid roles "he always plays chaotic neutral characters" "he always plays a front line fighter" which makes this difficult. When one player was being disruptive, it took multiple weeks before the group brought it up and finally had a discussion about it.

I guess I'm going to need to try pushing a bit more for an open discussion. It may need to include a talking stick, like many gamers I've met they get intense.

2) This is what the previous GM attempted. But the group just blasted their way through everything. I'm pretty sure we made quite a few enemies throughout the game and if we return to that world and those characters, our lives will be extremely complicated because of it. If I get to run a game for this group (grad school problems ) I will definitely pursue the trade negotiations, stopping a plague, and other routes to success. I don't want to stop all combat, but I don't want "Kill it!" to be the only choice the group makes.

Ratskinner said:

See, there's nothing in particular about the way Fate handles things that restricts a character sheet to describing a singular person. (You might see this referred to as the "Bronze rule" or Fate Fractal.) If your group was amenable, you could write up a sheet that describes a pair of paranormal investigators: one bookish, and one tough. (High Concept Aspect: She's a tough young wizard, he's an occult bookstore owner, together they fight crime!) Keep them together for most of the adventures (or don't). Taking consequences like Castle's captured provides really nice fodder for invokes that would reflect one member of the team being out of commission.

If you're interested in that sort of thing and lucky enough to get your group to want to try it, I'd recommend any of the Gumshoe games. They do a nice job of highlighting the investigation part of things, and you can probably run it in a one-nighter.

Click to expand...

I really like the idea of splitting characters*, but that really only works for FATE. Also the group has 7 people total; adding more characters bogs things down quickly. I don't think that path is best for this group. But it is a good idea.

I have a gumshoe game or two on PDF, I'll need to go back over them. Good idea, I forgot about them.

*If I ever run a solo game for someone, I am almost definitely doing this.

Celebrim's Second Law of RPG's says: "How you think about and how you prepare to play a game is more important than the system."

Normally, I'd say that the best way to change how people think about a game is to change systems, but it sounds like you've tried that and you ran into 'Knights of the Dinner Table' behavior where every system was D&D.

You might try shifting again to a game that makes combat not such a priority - Gumshoe, Call of Cthulhu, My Life with Monster, etc.

If that doesn't work, you may just have to give up and accept that your players just don't have that sort of range.

Ever tried to discuss it in email?

Celebrim said:

You might try shifting again to a game that makes combat not such a priority - Gumshoe, Call of Cthulhu, My Life with Monster, etc.

If that doesn't work, you may just have to give up and accept that your players just don't have that sort of range.

Click to expand...

That's what I think I need to aim for. Once the semester calms down I'm going to check out the Gumshoe game(s) I have. I'll also dig deeper into some systems they do like and find ways to reward non-combat options more.

Lwaxy said:

Ever tried to discuss it in email?

Click to expand...

I have not. When something like this can upset people, I prefer in person discussions so that tone can be heard and body language seen.

Is there a particular reason you suggest email? I'm definitely open to the suggestion if it works.

I suggest email because in my experience, people react more logical when they do not need to answer straight away but have time to think about what is said to them. It is also easier to process the information when you can reread it a couple of times before answering. Less chance for misunderstandings, easier to ask for clarifications, and as a lot of people suck with body language and voice, especially among the gaming community, I've gone to never discuss such matters in person anymore unless with the family.

When telling someone they are disruptive, for example, the usual answer will probably be along the lines of "come on, I'm joking" while when done in email and people think about it (and most people seem to think about it first) will be more helpful to both sides, the player understanding what the issue is and the GM probably getting a better explanation as to why it is happening.

Lwaxy said:

Less chance for misunderstandings, easier to ask for clarifications, and as a lot of people suck with body language and voice, especially among the gaming community, I've gone to never discuss such matters in person anymore unless with the family.

Click to expand...

Well that makes perfect sense, I feel silly now. I was looking at it differently, from a counseling perspective. But you are right, the others likely aren't as likely to look for body language.

The ability to respond after time is a good one too, it will hopefully keep certain members from feeling attacked.