What to do when your PC's have just lost the plot

[Janx]

I really have to ask, and trying to not be disrespectful of anyone, what do the players/PCs actually succeed at accomplishing in their sessions? What do they actually do with their game time if not actively trying to thwart bad guys that they know are out there?

I have no doubt celebrim has consequences like that in his game, per some other post he added here.

I'm puzzled by celebrim's follow-up post where he considers doing some puzzles in the next session.

If the players are acting dumb, adding more content that requires acting smart is probably not going to work.

I think a out of character conversation about the game is in order. My idea to bring in an NPC to help is stupid, because the players don't work with NPCs.

So talk to the players directly. Spill some answers. Make them feel a little dumb by virtue of revealing how simple it was (rather than calling them names). Find out what they were thinking, why they did what they did and why they didn't do what you thought they should.

No doubt there's a style mismatch. I don't know if that can be fixed, but there's no point in either side struggling anymore.

 

[Umbran]

I need to brain storm up some puzzle pieces too. Hopefully, with more pieces the picture will start to get clearer.

Um, have you actually ever done a jigzaw puzzle? You know why they are considered more difficult as the number of pieces increases? Because it becomes more difficult to see the forest for the tress, rather than less. Given the description you've given us so far, giving more pieces may not be the best solution. *Repeating* pieces, so their relevance becomes clear, might help.

One of the problems is that I've removed the 'Gather Information' skill. You can still 'gather information' by using either Bluff, Diplomacy, or Intimidate but modern gamers seem to need not only a button to push, but a button that is very clearly labeled as such.

I think the "modern gamers" crack is dismissive and getting in your way. Maybe you personally were a creative prodigy, but gamer-skills and patterns are generally learned things. That means they need to be taught. It is not enough to make it an option. You have to demonstrate that the option functions, and how you expect them to exercise it. We tend to forget, decades later, our own learning processes, and how they worked, and so then say that they didn't even happen! We then attribute the issue to a flaw of character in whoever doesn't play like we do.

Remember that most of the rulebook is about combat. They know full well that the bad guy has hit points, and if they whittle away at those hit points, eventually they may be able to succeed over the monster. The same is not true of the social skills. In fact, you took out the one social skill with fairly clear and unambiguous use! The rest of those skills a pretty much a "black box" to the players - the way to use them to get what they want is unclear. Unless you give them a framework (like, say, a skill challenge), or at least demonstrate them in action, they don't know how likely they are to succeed with them unless you teach them.

And that's if they even want to play the type of game you're presenting.

 

[Nytmare]

This would not be the first time that I saw a game where the players had absolutely no interest in (or granted, maybe no idea how to) play in an investigative manner. Some people are all about following where either the DM or the alpha player is dragging them.

I'd also push for just asking everyone what's up, and seeing if they're even interested in doing what you're trying to surreptitiously lead them to do.

 

[Janx]

U In fact, you took out the one social skill with fairly clear and unambiguous use!=

That is certainly part of the problem. Celebrim's a detailed guy. Stuff he creates is layered and has a reason.

I don't think the players think the way he does. adding more Celebrim styled stuff isn't going to help them.


I think the easiest way to settle this is to cut to the chase and talk to them. In-game solutions are going to be in the same language they have been, which is going to keep failing.

I don't think it's anybody's fault really. At least it won't help to think in those terms.

Just figure out what language they do understand and decide if you want to learn that language.

 

[Pseudopsyche]

To echo others: your players simply aren't as proactive about investigation as you are. I recommend identifying clues as clues (so your players don't assume these details are merely flavor text) and potentially calling out avenues of investigation.

Where to go from here? Here are some ideas:

• The city's only tradesman of a certain rare trade is gruesomely murdered. When the PCs learn of this event, you can say, "You recall that this is the profession of the employee the BBEG mentioned in that letter." Optionally: "maybe his home/place of work has some more clues." Or the only other tradesman of that craft can hire the PCs to investigate.
• An NPC approaches the PCs and offers to exchange notes on their respective investigations into the BBEG. The NPC might also be working to bring down the BBEG, or he could be an agent of the BBEG sent to determine how much the PCs know.
• The close friend of the known underling approaches the PCs to solicit their help in extracting their friend from the BBEG's influence. The NPC realizes now that their close friend is in over his head.
• One of the BBEG's minions is in trouble and uses a locate-object ritual to find the nearest other special-token-owned-by-minions. He approaches the PCs assuming they are also agents of the BBEG.

Critical point: once the PCs engage with any of the events above, don't just give them some new information and ask, "what do you do now?" Have the event refer back to one of the other clues and possibly introduce a new clue, then ask, "Which of these two clues do you want to investigate next?"

 

[Nellisir]

jjj

 

[Umbran]

I think the easiest way to settle this is to cut to the chase and talk to them.

I have rarely found talking to players to be a *bad* idea.

In-game solutions are going to be in the same language they have been, which is going to keep failing.

In-game solutions are good once you have everyone on board with the same playstyle. You say, "Guys, I was hoping to run investigative adventures," They go, "Yeah, willing to give that a shot, but how do we do it?" You then present the in-game solutions to bridge the gaps.

I don't think it's anybody's fault really. At least it won't help to think in those terms.

Well, you have to figure out what the points of failure are before you can fix them. That can look like finding fault if you aren't diplomatic and even-handed about it. If it comes out as, "You guys aren't proactive and don't follow up on leads," then they aren't going to get very far, I agree.

 

[howandwhy99]

Think of the plot like an Advanced Squad Leader scenario. It isn't a line to be followed, but more of a maze or web to be navigated. If the players ever do reach the edge, generate more map. (It's best to do this during prep I find)

 

[Penthau]

I just had another thought. What system are you using? Does it have any definitions of the character's personalities? Does it have any built in reasons for the players to care what the BBEG even does? Some systems have skills and abilities focused on one thing, killing stuff and taking the loot. Maybe the players just don't care about what the bad guy is doing. He hasn't triggered any character traits that make them hate him. He is just another sack of xp and loot that is hard to find. They have lots of other xp sacks that are easy to find. They may figure that eventually, he will make himself known, maybe by attacking first, then they don't have to work to find him. Maybe something as vague as alignment just doesn't motivate them to go after the guy, maybe they have to really HATE him. Looks like it's time to kidnap Aunt May.

 

[steenan]

1. The first and most important step in solving nearly every game problem is talking with your players - and you probably already know this. The non-obvious part is how exactly to do it. I would probably start by asking what in your campaign players perceive as fun and what they find frustrating. This will allow you to focus on events and challenges the players are interested in and cut out what they don't like.

2. If players just aren't interested in investigation, get rid of it. Completely. Have a friendly NPC put together the clues. Have a minion betray the villain and come directly to PCs. Have the villain make an obvious move when he thinks he's ready and does not have to hide any longer. Just no more clues, no more puzzles. Cut to action.
It does not have to reduce the game to pure hack&slash. There are interesting things to do that aren't combat-oriented and aren't investigation. Present a moral dilemma. Have an NPC ask for an advice and help on business or romantic matters. Confront PCs with a culture completely alien to them. I believe you can tie any of these into the events of your campaign.

3. If player are interested in investigation or similar activities, but still get lost, you'll need some tools to help them. A few that were used in games I played and that worked very well are:
- Writing down campaign chronicle. Either the GM of one of the players writes after every session what happened, at least as a short summary, and makes it available to the whole group. Google docs or a campaign wiki work best for that. If it's a player who writes the chronicle, you should make sure that no important events are missed or confused.
- Introducing some kind of rule that allows players to pay an in-game resource to get a clear clue. "Ok, I'm paying a point for that. Of all that we heard about him during the royal ball, what is really important?"
- Allowing players to ask out of game for clarifications and encouraging them to do it. When they start analyzing the clues aloud then a) they start analyzing them, instead of sitting on them and b) you can let them know as soon as you see that they go in a completely wrong direction.


While I'm not in love with investigation personally, I like exploring various mysteries of a setting, figuring out how things really work and why. It requires a very similar mode of thinking, with gathering clues and deducing things from them. Even though I like it, I remember feeling frustrated and powerless a few times during the current campaign, while my GM was sure she gave us a lot of information. She did. It just wasn't clear what was the real information, what was just color and what was a (intentional or accidental) misinformation or omission.
She didn't skip any puzzles and didn't hand me answers. But she started asking questions - either through NPCs or out of game. And knowing what the questions are, I could start finding answers.