Carrots and Whips to Encourage Player/Character Cooperation

[Thornir Alekeg]

As others have said, you need to talk to the players. One thing you don't mention is how large your group is. In talking with them if you find that the removal of a single player might make a huge difference in the group, would you still have enough to continue?

Otherwise, I think you may need to consider not gaming, especially if they are so immature/ungrateful that they blame you for being bored when they decide not to participate.

While I love gaming, my #1 rule has been; it's better to not game that suffer a bad one.

 

[Pbartender]

(And unfortunately, I can't find another group if that's a suggestion. It's taken me years just to find these folks in my small town.)

A lot of people will tell you that bad gaming is better than no gaming.

They are all bald-faced liars.

Listen to the advice in this thread. It's all good. Give your players every chance to play along, but if they won't... Let them go.

 

[Alzrius]

Give your players every chance to play along, but if they won't... Let them go.

This sounds good in theory, but as the OP said, it's a different matter if they're the only game in town.

I recently got into a new group after several years of searching, and despite that we're having some real problems getting together every weekend (two of the players are working a job where their schedule is rearranged every week at their manager's whim, and often don't have their weekends free), giving up that group means not getting to game.

When you really want to game, and you can only find a bad group to game with, it's enough to make you seriously consider if bad gaming is better than no gaming at all. It might not be...but it's tempting.

 

[crazy_monkey1956]

Here's a possible in-game solution...

BBEG wizard or demon or some other powerful magic person teleports the party in their sleep to a death-trap dungeon, sans equipment.

The group will have to work together to survive. For added fun, put collars on them that transfer wounds to every party member, so if one PC takes damage, they all do.

Even more heavy handed than your method, but it will get them to work together. If they survive, they'll have a much better apprection for teamwork.

 

[Rechan]

Y'know. Just pointing this out, but there is always the option of online gaming. Either PBP or using voice chat/virtual tabletop programs. I've been gaming online for about 12 years now, compared to the very few times I've managed a face to face game.

They may be the only game in town, but they're not the only option.

 

[Umbran]

Yeah, like the others have said, this isn't a problem that you should try to solve in-game at all. Not with bonuses, not with XP, not with penalties, nothing.

This is a people problem, and the only way--the only way--to successfully deal with it is a frank and honest group discussion.

I find I have to agree - This is a problem to talk over, not to solve with in-game mechanics.

Ask them if they actually like how the game is going. They'll probably answer that they don't. Then point out how their own behavior seems to be the problem, and suggest solutions.

A lot of people will tell you that bad gaming is better than no gaming.

They are all bald-faced liars.

No they aren't. They have a different opinion. You do the boards a disservice by calling them liars. Please don't do that.

 

[the Jester]

Well...

Follow the biggest group of players that are sticking together. Tell everyone else that, as their pcs have left the party, it's time to make new characters and they can rejoin next session.

The biggest stick/carrot towards party cooperation is allowing- encouraging- the party to dump dead weight. None of this, "Oh, he's a pc, even if he's betrayed us and stuff we'll trust him again" crap. The pc that is disruptive when the party is talking to the guy that's hiring him? Is there any reason for the party not to fire him? Buh-bye!

 

[amerigoV]

Sounds like your group would rock at Paranoia, since it seems to be what they are playing anyway.

 

[TarionzCousin]

As a last resort, you might try starting over. Have the players make up their characters together at the table, supervised by you. Instruct them that all their characters are friends, have a common goal (you decide this, based on your campaign ideas), and inform them that if they don't all work together, the game will end.

Alternately, you could award disruptive players "Obstacle Points" whenever they do something counter-productive or non-cooperative. When they get 3 points, they get kicked out of the game. No save.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

This might be very bad advice...

This might be very bad advice...
...or it might be good advice, depending on your group, their personalities, etc.


Say you're starting over. Everyone rolls percentile dice (or you choose, but this is dangerous because you get blamed) and the highest person makes a character.

Give him a plot hook and an Inn Full of Adventurers TM.

Then, he needs allies to go on said plot hook. Have him recruit characters. He meets a motley group of candidates, one after another, who he interviews...AND ALL OF THESE CANDIDATES ARE PLAYED BY THE SECOND HIGHEST ROLLER.

No character sheet, no abilites, just a race, class, alignment, and outlook/attitude.

Player 1 can veto player 2's characters until, in game, they find a pair who can work together.

Then, the two of them, realizing they still need more people, work together with the other players, one at a time, interviewing prospective candidates.

Repeat until they have a cohesive party.


The reasoning behind this is threefold... 1. It creates "in game roleplaying reasons" for a group that gets along. 2. It gives onus to the group to kick out rabblerousers in game...and go back to recruiting. 3. It makes pretty clear/explicit who is intentionally trying to use "but I'm roleplaying a character" as an excuse for "I enjoy being a pain in the arse while playing D&D".



But, yeah, this is a people problem. Talk to them before this.