D&D 5E DMs, what are the most baffling and/or pointless questions your players ask?

[discosoc]

I find these to generally be symptoms of an issue with the game's pace and the stakes in the scene which can be corrected on the DM side of the screen. I find that the players who love combat also like social interaction and exploration challenges when there are real stakes and tight pacing. Same goes for the ones who prefer social interaction/exploration. It's when these challenges drag or they don't appear to have a point to them or any compelling win or loss conditions that people start to check out in my experience.

That makes sense to a point, but I'm not going to turn everything into a game with win/loss conditions. Sometimes I just want to describe a scene in a way that you can better settle into character and start making decisions beyond the normal what-skills-am-i-proficient-in ones. Other times I just need to make sure that players aren't conditioned to know that I start describing something in detail that it must be important to a challenge.

More importantly, I think these types are often just coming from a gaming background where "character development" means getting better skills and gear or is non-existent. Everything else is minutiae. The guy I mentioned earlier actually reminds me a lot of someone who joined a session back in high school. He was an older guy who's gaming experience topped out at the Parker Brothers side of things. He was honestly confused about why the smell of a room mattered, or why the GM was describing how sturdy a lock. His reasoning was something along the lines of "When I play monopoly, I'm technically a real estate investor -- but I couldn't care less what the houses look like because it doesn't factor into my decisions." To him, it didn't matter if the lock was sturdy looking or not because he was going to try and break it either way.

 

[iserith]

That makes sense to a point, but I'm not going to turn everything into a game with win/loss conditions. Sometimes I just want to describe a scene in a way that you can better settle into character and start making decisions beyond the normal what-skills-am-i-proficient-in ones.

What do you mean?

Other times I just need to make sure that players aren't conditioned to know that I start describing something in detail that it must be important to a challenge.

Generally speaking, you're either in a challenge or you're in an exposition or transition scene that sets up a challenge later. So it should all be relevant in some way, no?

I guess sometimes there are just scenes for color which in some ways either establish the flavor of the setting or leave it wide open for players to establish something about their characters, but if those scenes last too long or there are too many such scenes, the risk is disinterest from at least some of the players. How often, for example, do we hear about how the conversation at the tavern lasted long enough for someone to get bored and steal from and/or stab the innkeeper? There's a reason for that.

Which is why I try to set up situations where this sort of information or opportunity for the players to establish characterization is embedded in the challenge. That way you can please all the people all the time. I find character development happens not through sitting around talking, but through doing adventuring stuff, making decisions, living with the aftermath, and being changed by it. That's an easy path for someone like you're describing to follow and you both get what you want in my experience.

More importantly, I think these types are often just coming from a gaming background where "character development" means getting better skills and gear or is non-existent. Everything else is minutiae. The guy I mentioned earlier actually reminds me a lot of someone who joined a session back in high school. He was an older guy who's gaming experience topped out at the Parker Brothers side of things. He was honestly confused about why the smell of a room mattered, or why the GM was describing how sturdy a lock. His reasoning was something along the lines of "When I play monopoly, I'm technically a real estate investor -- but I couldn't care less what the houses look like because it doesn't factor into my decisions." To him, it didn't matter if the lock was sturdy looking or not because he was going to try and break it either way.

An adventurer wanting to break a lock? That's unheard of!

 

[Lanefan]

Generally speaking, you're either in a challenge or you're in an exposition or transition scene that sets up a challenge later. So it should all be relevant in some way, no?

Not necessarily, for two reasons.

1. Sometimes you're in downtime, between adventures, and people in character are just kickin' back for a bit; and-or
2. Sometimes it's necessary to disguise the relevant bits in with a bunch of not-so-relevant bits, particularly in any sort of mystery-solving situation.

An adventurer wanting to break a lock? That's unheard of!

A competent Thief picks the lock. An expert Thief steals it and takes it home.

Lanefan

 

[iserith]

Not necessarily, for two reasons.

1. Sometimes you're in downtime, between adventures, and people in character are just kickin' back for a bit; and-or
2. Sometimes it's necessary to disguise the relevant bits in with a bunch of not-so-relevant bits, particularly in any sort of mystery-solving situation.

1. I address this in the paragraph after the one you quoted.

2. I'm not sure that's a great technique. Those sorts of details easily turn into red herrings which are epic time wasters in my view, creating exactly the sort of disinterest that some are pegging to certain "player types."

 

[Lanefan]

2. I'm not sure that's a great technique. Those sorts of details easily turn into red herrings which are epic time wasters in my view, creating exactly the sort of disinterest that some are pegging to certain "player types."

Sometimes red herrings are time-wasters, other times (on a larger scale) they can become their own adventures or stories which - even if not relevant to the main plot or story - are never a waste of time assuming people are enjoying themselves. It depends, I suppose, on how much a DM cares about following a pre-set storyboard.

But without red herrings and false clues, solving a mystery gets pretty dull and routine.

Lanefan

 

[discosoc]

What do you mean?
An adventurer wanting to break a lock? That's unheard of!

Yes, and on it's own it's simply an action. But what if the shiny new lock on a sturdy chest is located within supposedly long-abandoned or sealed tomb? Suddenly, a random property of the lock *could* open up some questions if the person took a moment to actually think about it in non-mechanical terms. Are they really the first people here in ages? Is the lock's condition indicative of a magical property? Something else?

But sure, let's just break the lock and start the next fight scene, because xp.

 

[iserith]

Sometimes red herrings are time-wasters, other times (on a larger scale) they can become their own adventures or stories which - even if not relevant to the main plot or story - are never a waste of time assuming people are enjoying themselves.

The type of person under discussion isn't. The question is why. And instead of blaming the player for being the sort of person who only likes combat (or whatever), I put it on the DM to use different techniques to engage that player in other aspects of the game.

 

[iserith]

Yes, and on it's own it's simply an action. But what if the shiny new lock on a sturdy chest is located within supposedly long-abandoned or sealed tomb? Suddenly, a random property of the lock *could* open up some questions if the person took a moment to actually think about it in non-mechanical terms. Are they really the first people here in ages? Is the lock's condition indicative of a magical property? Something else?

But sure, let's just break the lock and start the next fight scene, because xp.

Why should the DM care even one bit about that? I sure don't. I'm there to describe the scene and adjudicate actions, not judge why a player chooses to do a certain thing. And if you're using XP and that's what motivates the player, why not then make uncovering clues worth a non-trivial amount of XP?

 

[Bawylie]

Sometimes red herrings are time-wasters, other times (on a larger scale) they can become their own adventures or stories which - even if not relevant to the main plot or story - are never a waste of time assuming people are enjoying themselves. It depends, I suppose, on how much a DM cares about following a pre-set storyboard.

But without red herrings and false clues, solving a mystery gets pretty dull and routine.

Lanefan

Hm. Doesn't jive with my experience. I've found red herrings are freaking terrible and the players hate them.

The only time I find it works is as a frame job and the framing itself, once discovered, is a clue to the real solution.

My players tend to hate "wild goose chases."


-Brad

 

[robus]

Hm. Doesn't jive with my experience. I've found red herrings are freaking terrible and the players hate them.

The only time I find it works is as a frame job and the framing itself, once discovered, is a clue to the real solution.

My players tend to hate "wild goose chases."


-Brad

Agreed. A quickly resolved bad lead/red herring is one thing (e.g. A guilty NPC trying to redirect the investigation) but to have a grand quest end with no useful progress? Frustrating! ToD, while not a mystery, had way too many fetch quests with no reward and it got old very quickly.