Players That Ruin Games

[DJ_draken07]

I have a problem almost every week in my game.

1. Joking Around - More then half of my players Joke around way too much... And Acting completely not in character during gametime. Trying not to do the campaign and cause trouble in the world or not even caring about the campaign. They keep coming to the game but They joke around too much. I try to make the game within everyweek (EVERY Week I do a additional campaign or continue with the last campaign since it wasnt finish)

2. Players not getting along - I have some players who do some stuff and makes them get really pissed off... Like the fighter protecting the Wizard who had 8 Yuan Ti fighting them runs off to leave the wizard dieing from melee, Or Trying to kill off the players , Trying to steal from the players, Outside of game talk saying how their character sucks and their character is much better then anyone else. Blaming me for killing them in the game when it wasn't a smart move (Spellcaster wants to run into melee with only a staff) Some of the players get pissed off and team up on me when Things dont go their way.

3. House Rules: I made a house rule that i call it Ready items. Theres 4 items thats like in your back pack or something like that. So you can pull it out for a move action. But if you want to get something from your backpack isnt ready it be a full action to look for it and pull it out. I told them Several times about it but they try to make a Argument about it everytime.

These the things that bother me as a DM and I would like to find a way to fix it, I always worry myself if my campaigns are going to go down hill or not.

What should I do?

 

[milo]

Problem 1
When you get a group of players like that I have only found a few options to deal with it.
1.) Bring it up to them and let them know that they are ruining the game for you and/or the other players.
2.) Just deal with it and suffer.(Worst method I think, you can't fix it if they don't know it's broke)
3.) Find another group to play with.(Most drastic method)
4.) Set aside some time at the beginning and end for the joking around and a few minutes every hour.(I had a group that had a political conversation for about an hour to start every session, prior to that it interrupted the game all night)

Problem 2
Not much you can do if your group doesn't have much cohesion. That is just the players not meshing well together. You can have alignment restrictions and enforce those restrictions with punishment for improper alignment roleplaying. Have someone else try DMing and see if they like it or it makes if more fun for you.

Problem 3
You have to have your houserules in writing and if they don't get it then just read them out loud at the beginning of each session and have them give you a list of their 4 move action retrievable items on a note card.

The most important thing to remember is that this is a game and it is supposed to be fun. If you aren't having fun just let them know that something has to change.

Also, a side question, how many players do you have? I find that 3-5 players is the optimum number. Any more or less and you start to have some problems with the game flowing smoothly.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

It sounds like you've got a conflict of play-styles within your group. You might be better off dumping some or all of those players and forming a new group.

Of course, communication is always the key to a successful campaign and/or gaming group, so make sure that you talk out your issues with your players beforehand.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Problem 1: Give bonus roleplaying xp to the people who spend the least amount of time in out of character discussion, and do a lot of roleplaying. The others might get the message.

Problem 2: Find a friend you know to be a good player to be your "ringer" for a few sessions. Alternatively, use a DM PC. Make the DM PC / ringer a bard, marshall, or other class that benefits the group. Make him a tactician kind of personality and let the party see the benefits of teamwork. If that doesn't work at first, you could be dirtier about it: only those that follow his tactical decisions (or counter with ones of their own that they think are better) get the shiney bonuses.

Problem 3: Just tell everyone to use some of their money to buy a Heward's Handy Haversack. There, now they cna retrieve ANY item from thier backpack as a move action, no need to remember that houserule.

(This is my "kind" way of saying I don't like your houserule. )

 

[Hawken]

This is easy.

For problems 1 and 2: Talk with them about these points the next time you get together and play. Tell them that these problems are killing your enjoyment and unless it changes, you're going to find a different group to play with. Point out that you would be glad to hang out with them and joke around, have fun or whatever at other times (if that is true), but when you get together for D&D, you want to play it, not goof off. If they say you're being to whiny or something, point out that as the DM, you have to put in extra work on the games that they don't (it IS possible they don't realize this) and it makes you feel like you're wasting your time when they goof around after the hours you've spent preparing for the game.

For problem 3, that's on you. Your house rule sucks. The PHB rules that its only a move action, not a full round action to retrieve a stored item. Why are you penalizing them this way over something that is kind of trivial anyway? Its not making the game better or run any smoother which is kind of the purpose of a house rule anyway. Choosing 4 items is just more paperwork, more accounting to keep track of and doesn't do anything to improve the game. I'm with your players on this one.

One suggestion about house rules, is that no matter how good you think it is, you need to run it by your players first and find out if they are willing to try it out. Playing a game where you are telling them, "ok, guys, it works like this now" and forcing a bass-ackward rule on them is a sure way to get them to passively (goofing off at your game) or directly (get pissed off and team up on you) let you know they don't like what you're doing.

I suspect this is as much (or more) on you than it is your players. But if your players are just being jerks, then find others to game with.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

The PHB rules that its only a move action, not a full round action to retrieve a stored item.

So you're right! It provokes an AoO, but it is apparantly a move action to get anything from your backpack. My group's never played it like that, we always assumed you had to fumble aroudn to find things in there, so it took a full round action. We just allowed a character to have a few weapons, potions, scroll cases, wands, etc... (whatever's most appropriate for the PC to want at the ready) on their belt, in nelt pouches, strung to the side of the pack, etc... to be a move action to grab. Everything not readily accessible being a full round action. I doubt we'l go back to RAW, but good to know! ..We also tend to find the Handy Haversacks a worthwhile investment, making the whole thing pointless to worry much about anyway.

 

[Thanael]

I suggest you and your players read up on the excellent RPG group development cycle articles by chattydm and try to get a duscussion of playstyle going from there. see where you are, try to find out where you want to go.

The 4 Stages | Musings of the Chatty DM

 

[kitsune9]

I have a problem almost every week in my game.

1. Joking Around - More then half of my players Joke around way too much... And Acting completely not in character during gametime. Trying not to do the campaign and cause trouble in the world or not even caring about the campaign. They keep coming to the game but They joke around too much. I try to make the game within everyweek (EVERY Week I do a additional campaign or continue with the last campaign since it wasnt finish)

2. Players not getting along - I have some players who do some stuff and makes them get really pissed off... Like the fighter protecting the Wizard who had 8 Yuan Ti fighting them runs off to leave the wizard dieing from melee, Or Trying to kill off the players , Trying to steal from the players, Outside of game talk saying how their character sucks and their character is much better then anyone else. Blaming me for killing them in the game when it wasn't a smart move (Spellcaster wants to run into melee with only a staff) Some of the players get pissed off and team up on me when Things dont go their way.

3. House Rules: I made a house rule that i call it Ready items. Theres 4 items thats like in your back pack or something like that. So you can pull it out for a move action. But if you want to get something from your backpack isnt ready it be a full action to look for it and pull it out. I told them Several times about it but they try to make a Argument about it everytime.

These the things that bother me as a DM and I would like to find a way to fix it, I always worry myself if my campaigns are going to go down hill or not.

What should I do?

Usually these kinds of issues can be addressed with a social contract at the beginning of a campaign. The social contract outlines your expectations of the campaign itself (that the players are expected to be heroic, work together as a team, etc.), player behavior (stay in character, no metagaming, etc.) and arbitration issues (the DM has the final say, etc.).

These do work for the most part because you're clearly establishing the rules for the campaign and the expectations of behavior. Players will then be faced with a choice of either accepting the rules or suffer consequences (from game consequences to outright banning).

Also, require players to invest their time into the campaign by offering benefits for their characters. For example, I wanted my players to be heavily involved in guilds and thus be willing to pay dues, join, etc. so I created game benefits for them to join. If they don't want extra hp, skill points, or a feat, and so on, they don't have to join, but the benefits of joining a guild and being a member in good standing is obvious. Every player belongs to one guild or another.

Another is that players who invest time your campaign also get more benefits in terms of rewards. For example, if you want your players to be familiar with the local customs.

Even though you're having problems with players working together, don't feel too bad in that area. I play with a bunch of ex-hardcore RPGA types and their plans fall apart usually to someone not paying attention.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

Also, require players to invest their time into the campaign by offering benefits for their characters. For example, I wanted my players to be heavily involved in guilds and thus be willing to pay dues, join, etc. so I created game benefits for them to join. If they don't want extra hp, skill points, or a feat, and so on, they don't have to join, but the benefits of joining a guild and being a member in good standing is obvious. Every player belongs to one guild or another.

Just wanted to say that I appreciate this suggestion for guilds.

Thanks!

 

[aboyd]

This thread should be in general, not 3rd edition house rules.

More then half of my players Joke around way too much... And Acting completely not in character during gametime. Trying not to do the campaign and cause trouble in the world or not even caring about the campaign.

I've seen this, and generally it's a reaction to someone who is hyper-controlling.

To me, I think you need to evaluate not only why you are there, but why the players are there. It may be that they are not there to play D&D. They may be there to have fun with friends, and D&D is a convenient excuse. If so, and you want to keep playing with them, you'll need to switch your expectations -- you should expect to spend good time with friends, not run a D&D game. If you get a game running, great. But you shouldn't go in expecting it to work every time.

It may be that the players had a goal of playing D&D, but changed that goal to be "gang up on the annoying control freak" when you started to care too much about them acting in character. If their goal is to gang up on the control freak, then your goal each game needs to change from "having fun playing D&D" to "having fun not being a control freak." Do you enforce them speaking in character voices? Do you require funny accents? Do you mandate that they never speak about game mechanics? Do you eavesdrop on their team huddles (probably more like team pow-wows at the table, but same idea) and critique them? Are you rigid about it? Are you nitpicky?

If you think you're not, but they think you are... well, it won't matter what you think about it. They will act on their opinions only, not yours. If they think you're handling your leadership position poorly, they'll mutiny.

Different people have different skills at role playing. Some players aren't even comfortable carrying on an in-character conversation with normal speaking voices. They would prefer to "roll play" instead of "role play." You're going to have to decide how important it is to enforce your standards, because some people may not be able to do it (fear of speaking, etc.) no matter how much you push it.

I have some players who do some stuff and makes them get really pissed off... Like the fighter protecting the Wizard who had 8 Yuan Ti fighting them runs off to leave the wizard dieing from melee, Or Trying to kill off the players , Trying to steal from the players, Outside of game talk saying how their character sucks and their character is much better then anyone else.

Yeah, that's my group every game. In fact, they even named themselves the Intraparty Fighters and we're on our local game store's calendar under that name.

This stuff doesn't have to be a problem, however. You can impose house rules to handle this stuff. I enforce alignment -- if they fight amongst each other, they can expect their alignments to gravitate toward chaotic. If they cause harm to allies, they can expect their alignment to gravitate toward evil. I allow them to lose powers because of this. A paladin will fall. A Dragon Shaman will lose special abilities. I even had a sorcerer with Draconic Heritage feats lose the feats even though that's not RAW. (Why did I do that? Because the lawful good character chose a lawful good gold dragon as his heritage, and then killed a helpless party member in cold blood -- I decided that his gold dragon heritage was completely in opposition to the severe alignment change I imposed.)

In addition, because D&D is a team-based sport, you can reasonably apply XP awards to those who participate well. Did 3 players cooperate to defeat a pit fiend, while 2 other players bickered on the sideline? Give the 3 who cooperated a 250 XP award for team-based roleplay. Do this a few times over a few sessions, and the ones actually cooperating will be a level higher than the rest. That'll really make people pay attention.

I had a few players who would not show up every session -- the game was sorta their backup plan if nothing better came along. I didn't like how disruptive it was to the game. So, I stopped awarding XP to "the group" and instead only gave it to those who were there. Pretty soon 1 player was 2 levels behind and he dropped out, which was fine. Another player juggled his commitments and changed from being a so-so player to being there on time, every time.

In both cases, I feel like my house rules resolved the issue in a way that was satisfactory to me. You can do this.

Blaming me for killing them in the game when it wasn't a smart move (Spellcaster wants to run into melee with only a staff)

To me, this is just about one of the only types of fully justified PC killings. When a single character rushes into combat alone, that is stupid -- and being that stupid in the D&D world can get you killed. I killed a PC who did that as recently as two weeks ago, and I'll do it every time someone thinks being surrounded and hit by all the enemies is going to be OK.

I made a house rule that i call it Ready items. Theres 4 items thats like in your back pack or something like that. So you can pull it out for a move action. But if you want to get something from your backpack isnt ready it be a full action to look for it and pull it out.

Unlike the other people here, I'm with you on this one. At least, I'm with you in concept. I care about this stuff too. In fact, I bought the Forgotten Realms core book because it's the one with bandoleers, spell tube holders, and other special gear for quick drawing.

I think, logically speaking, it makes sense that you would need a full round and free hands to whip off a backpack in the middle of combat, open it, feel around to find the needed item, close the pack, and resume carrying it. I can't imagine doing that in fewer than 6 seconds, and I don't know what to do about any weapons that are dropped during the process. Having said that, I do agree that making something worse than the books may cause a lot of bellyaching in the game.

You may find that you care more about the rule than the players. If so, shut down the game, post an ad looking for new players who are OK with your house rules, and try again. Me personally, I'd probably drop the house rule, but become very well-versed in all the nuances of drawing & using items. Drawing a scroll is a move action, but casting it costs more. Drawing oil is a move action, but prepping it to be a Molotov cocktail is a full-round action, and tossing it is a standard action. Drawing a sling bullet may be a free action (like shuriken) but it's a two-handed move action to load it into the sling. You can get pretty hard-lined about what qualifies for Quick Draw, too. That'll make it more difficult for people to go around fast-drawing all sorts of stuff if you start making judgments such as "only actual weapons listed on pages 116 & 117 of the PHB qualify for the Quick Draw feat."

Being a rules-lawyer about how fast people can do things is kinda lame, but at least it'll follow the RAW, so people will have little to complain about other than, "He actually follows the rules." And that's not really much of a complaint.