D&D 5E As a Player, why do you play in games you haven't bought into?

[Chaosmancer]

And, frankly, if that's what had happened, I'd be shutting up right now. If the five characters had ANYTHING tying them to a ship in any way, shape or form, then I'd be a happy person. But, as @Raunalyn has pointed out, his character is a perfect example of what I was given to work with. An illusionist charlatan. Nothing nautical about the character at all. Nothing tying him to the town at all. And, a character that was created whole cloth BEFORE our session 0 despite knowing (and I know he knew because I have the forum posts) that I had specifically asked that characters be created as a group.

I 100% agree with you @Chaosmancer. There are far more duties aboard a ship than simply steering. Not everyone needed a sailor background - the one with nautical experience wound up with a smuggler background. Having tool proficiency in wood working or something similar could make you the bosun. Cook. There are a thousand different things you could be.

But, guess what? Not a single one of those perfectly understandable and reasonable options were even considered. Every character came from far away with no family and no ties to the setting. One character had a naval background after what I remember as a lenghty discussion to finally get SOMEONE to take it.

No, I was most definitely the wrong DM for this group. Absolutely. They wanted things out of the game that I was not interested in at all and I was a terrible fit with those players. I should have walked earlier, but, honestly, the previous campaigns were very good and the some of the other players, who had dropped out of the game, made it a ton of fun. It just, rather unfortunately, ran aground on the shoals of everyone having seriously different expectations of what they wanted out of the game.

Honestly man, this is turning into something that seems to be incredibly personal.

No nearby family? Why does that matter?
No ties to the setting... well, what kind of ties do you expect?


And, frankly, there is another thought in my head, spurred by that family bit.

I was "recently" in a game based in Neverwinter. The DM wanted us all to be in Neverwinter, wanted to base the entire game there. I built a Paladin who was part of the city watch. Half-Elf he had actually been alive during the eruption of Mount Hotnow (sp) and had grown up with the citizens of the town defending themselves from the monsters unleashed. He had a wife (a half-orc shepherdess), ties to politcal organizations, ties to the economic structures. He was deeply embedded in the game. We only had one player who wasn't really tied to the city, and it would have worked fine.

Within a Month of game time the DM had us leave Neverwinter and we basically never came back again. We actually spent nearly 8 months Real Time on a quest through Hell that was a complete side-tangent from the quest we had left on. My wife? My character's literal wife that I told my DM my character would fall as a paladin to protect? She was vaguely mentioned once or twice. The Greycloaks which were a big part of my characters's backstory as a political activist in the city? Never met or mentioned.

I put in the effort to embed my character deep into that setting, and I got nothing for it. The DM abandoned the city very quickly and moved on to something else.



Now, I'm not saying you did this, would do this, have ever done this, would ever approve of this. What I am saying is that there are habits that people pick up, and sometimes for very good reasons. Most players create orphan wanderers. It is far easier, gives them free motivation to move wherever the situation demands without having to potentially abandon important ties their character has, and it is also a defense against the DM taking those NPCs and knifing them in the back repeatedly. It happens. And if "not tied to the setting" is a deal breaker for you, you might be in for a lot more heartache.


Additionally, while again I have no idea what the point of Saltmarsh is, and I have no idea what your other characters were, I can rather easily see a smuggler character with a boat and a charlatan looking to sell fake goods tying together in a business venture. I don't see a need for the charlatan to be tied to the town or to have a little sister in a nearby nunnery or any of that. I can tie his goals of "make lots of money" to the smuggler who also wants to make lots of money, and inter-party ties are a very robust way to get investment.

Because people want to help their friends and business partners.

 

[FrozenNorth]

I’m with Hussar on this. My players have gotten better, but I still have flashbacks to the Neverwinter intrigue court based campaign I proposed where one player made up a ranger who had never been in a city, and another made a plane-hopping magitek elf who wasn’t even from Faerun.

 

[billd91]

In a knights of the round table game for instance, make them feel the pain of not being knights in that kind of society. Make it clear if they want to be the special snowflake they must prove thier knightly worth or forever relegated to the naughty word unwanted adventures that the knights dont want.

Just don’t hold them accountable this way if they choose to play a Drow or gnoll. There are PLENTY of threads on that around here.

 

[MNblockhead]

Long thread, I ended up just skimming most of it, but I've come away with the feeling that everyone assume a TTRPG campaign follows a TV production modality where the DM as producer and director makes a pitch, gathers actors to play specific roles, and executes on a specific artistic vision.

In my experience, I make a pitch for my next campaign before the current one ends. Based on my player's reactions I go with it, ditch it for another campaign idea, or tweak it. At session zero assumptions tend to get challenged. Further tweaks may need to be made. Most importantly, as we play the game can go in a completely different direction than the initial vision.

Part of the joy of being a DM is seeing how the campaign organically develops.

In practice, I find that I always start with a strong vision and strong restrictions, but that the restriction get loosened, or fall by the wayside, and the vision is never fully realized as generally more interesting story arcs and themes evolve through play.

 

[Zardnaar]

The wandering orphan thing is also a way to avoid the DM screwing with your family.

Eg your kids have been kidnapped, your sister is the damsel in distress (or villain) etc.

Alot of D&D adventures are grand tours if the realms as well. You're never really in one place long enough in a few if the Aps.

Mist if the time is not even bother doing a family backstory. Happy to do so if DM asks for it.

Last DM just said no celestial/fiendish stuff or draconic anything else is fine. That game is yet to start, got delayed again so haven't even bothered writing up the character sheet.

Mine was anything in phb is fine plus Warforged and yuan ti. Outside that ask first.

 

[Hussar]

Heh the silver lining here is that I finally did what I should have done I the first place and just not run that game. I was basically in triage mode the whole time and it was seriously unfun and I imagine it was pretty unfun for the players too.

I’ve now rebuilt a new group who seem
To be much more on board with my tastes so everyone wins in the end.

Know thy players is the cardinal rule that I forgot.

 

[Zardnaar]

Heh the silver lining here is that I finally did what I should have done I the first place and just not run that game. I was basically in triage mode the whole time and it was seriously unfun and I imagine it was pretty unfun for the players too.

I’ve now rebuilt a new group who seem
To be much more on board with my tastes so everyone wins in the end.

Know thy players is the cardinal rule that I forgot.

Unhappy player they quit. Unhappy DM no game.

 

[Hussar]

Unhappy player they quit. Unhappy DM no game.

I don't know actually. I'm sure they've moved on to greener pastures. The advantage to online gaming is that it's far, far easier to find a group that fits your style than in face to face games. We're all veteran online players, so, that's not an issue. I'm sure they've found other groups if they wanted to by now.

I do want to be very clear here. I'm not saying my players were wrong. They weren't. They most emphatically were not wrong. They were just a wrong fit for me. That does not make them bad players or bad people or anything like that. I'm quite sure there a groups out there that will be very happy to have them as players. I know they will. This is not me pooping on anyone. It's simply a case of mismatched expectations and frankly my own bloody fault for not stepping away sooner.

 

[Zardnaar]

I don't know actually. I'm sure they've moved on to greener pastures. The advantage to online gaming is that it's far, far easier to find a group that fits your style than in face to face games. We're all veteran online players, so, that's not an issue. I'm sure they've found other groups if they wanted to by now.

I do want to be very clear here. I'm not saying my players were wrong. They weren't. They most emphatically were not wrong. They were just a wrong fit for me. That does not make them bad players or bad people or anything like that. I'm quite sure there a groups out there that will be very happy to have them as players. I know they will. This is not me pooping on anyone. It's simply a case of mismatched expectations and frankly my own bloody fault for not stepping away sooner.

I don't play online, traditionally played with friends.

Playing at gamestore with people the owners found or Facebook.

 

[Lanefan]

In my experience, I make a pitch for my next campaign before the current one ends. Based on my player's reactions I go with it, ditch it for another campaign idea, or tweak it. At session zero assumptions tend to get challenged. Further tweaks may need to be made. Most importantly, as we play the game can go in a completely different direction than the initial vision.

This.

No matter what you have in mind going in, either as player or DM, six months of play can stand it all on its head.

Part of the joy of being a DM is seeing how the campaign organically develops.

In practice, I find that I always start with a strong vision and strong restrictions, but that the restriction get loosened, or fall by the wayside, and the vision is never fully realized as generally more interesting story arcs and themes evolve through play.

Same here as regards the vision. I look back at my early thoughts on how my current campaign would go and after the first few adventures there's shockingly little resemblance between what's on that page and what's actually been played.

I try to stick to my guns on restrictions unless they become redundant - an example is in my previous campaign I initially banned Monks, but by halfway through I had redesigned the class from the ground up and so I found an in-fiction means of introducing them so they could get a run out and I could see if the redesign stood up.