D&D 5E I NEED HELP ON SOME CAMPAIGN PROBLEMS!!!

[BeaniBum]

So I need help I’ve posted about this ongoing game before but it seems more problems keep sprouting up...

To start on if my players seems to have a mixed relationship with the nature of the game claiming that it is too “player centric”. They say that since I’ve said a couple times “Hey it would be really bad if any of you die” I have the framework of the story and how certain characters affect the end and they know this but they don’t know how the story goes obviously. He has a problem with this but I said that this is similar to having a pre written module with higher stakes. If someone could help with this that would be nice.

Secondly speaking of higher stakes this is a game where screwing up would lead them to dying. So I am having a hard time balancing the story with the fact that the players could die easily.

Lastly one of my players is trying to make this fantasy campaign way to realistic. For example he asked how big the capital was and I said “I don’t know like Phoenix Arizona” and he responded saying that the city could not feasibly hold that many people. He’s done this multiple times saying that parts of the city couldn’t possibly exist in medieval times, or that the world population is ridiculously small and that the distances between cities make no sense. I need help because this is becoming quite irritating because I’ve constantly said “Hey this is a fantasy game don’t overthink it but he won’t stop and it’s quite irritating.

I would love some help on any of these problems!!

 

[iserith]

The source of the problems seems to all stem from not being on the same page with the players in some fashion or another. It sounds like you have a particular vision for the game that was not communicated adequately to the players before the campaign kicked off or, you did that but the players aren't bought into said vision. A new conversation to hash all this out seems to be in order. I recommend doing so face-to-face so as to minimize any potential misunderstandings.

You may want to prepare yourself for the possibility that the players just aren't into the game you're presenting and that you may have to set the campaign aside in favor of a new one or step aside and let someone else run the game for a while. While this can sting, it's better than continued frustrations at not getting to the fun times and exciting, memorable story you're hoping for. Short of that, there's compromise, where each of you gives a little. I'm not sure what that will look like in your case, but an honest, direct conversation between adults should get you there.

On the specific issues, I do generally recommend you set up your campaign such that the death of one or more characters has an impact but doesn't otherwise cause the game to grind to a halt. This is a problem with storylines built around the characters in general or with the DM taking too heavy a hand in the outcome of the story. Location-based and event-based adventures that aren't based around the characters specifically tend to be more robust in this regard. Remember, the story is what comes out of the players engaging with the situations you present, not the plot you created before play. As far as stakes go, you can create challenges where death isn't really on the line but where the stakes are substantial enough that the players care about winning. After all, life and death are just one set of stakes among countless win/loss conditions. You can fail at a goal you care about and not also die. People do it every day.

With regard to the player taking his realism a bit further than you intend in this given campaign, you can always enlist his help in establishing those elements. In response to the query on the size of the capital, you might say, "I hadn't really thought about it in concrete terms, but I figure the population is X. What size city do you think that is?" And then go with whatever he says. The upside is that this means whatever you establish comes with his immediate buy-in since it's his own idea.

 

[DEFCON 1]

If you have a campaign arc plotted out and need the PCs in their current form to be there at the end for the arc to make sense or have actual impact... that's fine. But if that's the case, then don't have "higher stakes" mean death. Basically... don't have death be an actual end-result of combat. Instead, reaching 0 HP means they are too stunned to act but are still conscious (and healing spells can re-invigorate them to fight again), and three failed "death saves" means they fall unconscious permanently for like a day or two or seven. So they cannot get "woken up" to participate in the rest of the combat via healing or anything like that (unlike when they are at 0 HP).

That way... if by some chance you have a "total party kill" scenario... what you actually get is the bad guys knocking everybody out, and then the party waking up 1 to 7 days later wherever the bad guys chose to take or leave them. Thus the campaign with these PCs can continue... but if they were captured (for instance) then their next part of the story is escaping from the group that captured them.

Some players and groups don't like the "Nobody can die" type of story/campaign... but if this is what you have in mind, then just make sure that the alternatives to dying are just as important and difficult to work through, and not just brushed off.

 

[BeaniBum]

If you have a campaign arc plotted out and need the PCs in their current form to be there at the end for the arc to make sense or have actual impact... that's fine. But if that's the case, then don't have "higher stakes" mean death. Basically... don't have death be an actual end-result of combat. Instead, reaching 0 HP means they are too stunned to act but are still conscious (and healing spells can re-invigorate them to fight again), and three failed "death saves" means they fall unconscious permanently for like a day or two or seven. So they cannot get "woken up" to participate in the rest of the combat via healing or anything like that (unlike when they are at 0 HP).

That way... if by some chance you have a "total party kill" scenario... what you actually get is the bad guys knocking everybody out, and then the party waking up 1 to 7 days later wherever the bad guys chose to take or leave them. Thus the campaign with these PCs can continue... but if they were captured (for instance) then their next part of the story is escaping from the group that captured them.

Some players and groups don't like the "Nobody can die" type of story/campaign... but if this is what you have in mind, then just make sure that the alternatives to dying are just as important and difficult to work through, and not just brushed off.

That makes sense. One thing is though that not every encounter is really either they die or win but I do want them to think that. I’m a lenient dm and personally don’t like player death. It is a hard position but one necessary for the tone of the game and the high stakes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JacktheRabbit]

So I need help I’ve posted about this ongoing game before but it seems more problems keep sprouting up...

To start on if my players seems to have a mixed relationship with the nature of the game claiming that it is too “player centric”. They say that since I’ve said a couple times “Hey it would be really bad if any of you die” !

Just my opinion but you should never ever say anything like this to players. It makes them feel like they are just along for the ride as you have a planned story line for their characters. They do not feel danger in battle, nor do they feel accomplishment in victory.

I knew a guy who was in a game where a DM made it obvious his character was "special" and "crucial" to the story. The end result was the player acted like a bigger and bigger maniac knowing the DM would twist back and forth to keep the story going.

Even if for some reason you have to make a character into Jon Snow in your campaign you still need to make him feel like Ned Stark.

 

[iserith]

That makes sense. One thing is though that not every encounter is really either they die or win but I do want them to think that. I’m a lenient dm and personally don’t like player death. It is a hard position but one necessary for the tone of the game and the high stakes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the best way to make them think that is to actually make it a possibility. But that means making your game such that if that possibility arises, it doesn't ruin things. As the Basic Rules say:

"Sometimes an adventurer might come to a grisly end, torn apart by ferocious monsters or done in by a nefarious villain. Even so, the other adventurers can search for powerful magic to revive their fallen comrade, or the player might choose to create a new character to carry on. The group might fail to complete an adventure successfully, but if everyone had a good time and create a memorable story, they all win."

If character death is completely off the table, then I would make sure the players knew this. Otherwise, it puts the DM into an awkward position in my view where he or she has to pretend there's a real threat to the characters' lives when there isnt. I think it's better to be transparent in this regard and then make the stakes about something else the players care about.

 

[Kobold Boots]

Opinion - Any plot that does not have room to breathe will eventually fail to satisfy the audience at the table.

It seems like one of the hardest things for any DM to learn is to not over write or give away their hand. If the players don't know something then it's malleable until you define it. You'd think that would be dangerous except for the fact that this game is a creative outlet and players who've been playing a long time often, as a team, will come up with better plot than you originally came up with.

As long as you don't give away your hand, their plot is your plot. Do it with enough savvy and they'll think you came up with it. Shut up enough and your reputation as a DM improves dramatically because thier thoughts were your thoughts all along.

KB

 

[jasper]

London pop was 200K in 1600 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_London#Population
But in a high fantasy with magic as technology I could see being higher.
have you talked with your players about death and raise dead etc? How deadly do they want to be? I am Captain Kirk you can't kill me to the band of brothers where just as we liking Jasper sniper crossbolt to the head.
The realism depends on how much you and they want it. When I dming Homebrew it is "stick another quarter in the slot (aka just pay the raise dead fee)". But it has a dose of "don't slap granny! She is wearing combat boots!" If players do slap granny they discover 1. She 8th level retired fighter. 2. Grandmother of King. 3. Will have Elvis declare them outlaw. 4. Dip into her IRA to pay for a hit on the players. 5. Is an honorary member of "The Quilt Bee and Assassin Association.

 

[Krachek]

So I need help I’ve posted about this ongoing game before but it seems more problems keep sprouting up...

To start on if my players seems to have a mixed relationship with the nature of the game claiming that it is too “player centric”. They say that since I’ve said a couple times “Hey it would be really bad if any of you die” I have the framework of the story and how certain characters affect the end and they know this but they don’t know how the story goes obviously. He has a problem with this but I said that this is similar to having a pre written module with higher stakes. If someone could help with this that would be nice.

Secondly speaking of higher stakes this is a game where screwing up would lead them to dying. So I am having a hard time balancing the story with the fact that the players could die easily.

Lastly one of my players is trying to make this fantasy campaign way to realistic. For example he asked how big the capital was and I said “I don’t know like Phoenix Arizona” and he responded saying that the city could not feasibly hold that many people. He’s done this multiple times saying that parts of the city couldn’t possibly exist in medieval times, or that the world population is ridiculously small and that the distances between cities make no sense. I need help because this is becoming quite irritating because I’ve constantly said “Hey this is a fantasy game don’t overthink it but he won’t stop and it’s quite irritating.

I would love some help on any of these problems!!

Be more descriptive:
You see a crowded market place, and you never see that much people at the same time....
You have count 10 inns for now, and you dont know how many other are in town....

But about the player faith you will have to learn to be more 'Poker face'.
Players should be convinced that you try as much as you can to kill them at each session.
Dont talk about CR, xp budget, Random encounter or other technicals things.

 

[77IM]

Attach electrodes to each player's nipples (including your own!) and wire a bunch of heart monitors into a Raspberry Pi and whenever anyone's heart rate gets too low, everyone gets a harmless but painful electrical shock. Problem solved!

Seriously; this is how Chris Perkins got to be such a great DM.