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

[Jack Daniel]

Jeez, long thread for what basically amounts to: special snowflake That Guys are really annoying. Yes, yes they are.

I used to encounter my fair share of knee-jerk contrarians, special snowflakes, prima donnas, spotlight-hogs, and would-be "main" characters who expected their fellow players to be their supporting cast… years ago, when I still played role-playing games that came with a built-in assumption of restriction-free, kitchen-sink character creation. But I quit playing games like that for good over a decade and a half ago. And now I don't have that problem anymore. It went away, along with the need to spend an entire "session zero" on the rote business of character generation.

Like, I get the appeal of buy-in and planned campaigns and creating characters custom-tailored to a specific campaign theme or story arc, I really do. I used to be all about that stuff, ages ago. But I also used to feel a lingering sense of vague unease and dissatisfaction with that "standard model" of RPG, because it never really worked for me. Ever. What does work for me, I've discovered, is creating a milieu that lends itself to a tight set of character generation parameters, and players (open-minded players, or better yet, new players coming to the table without assumptions) who sit down willing to roll 3d6 in order before they pick a character class off of a list that's been tailored to the milieu.

Is that terribly old-fashioned and undemocratic? Yup. And it works a treat. The referee creates the setting, the setting determines the rules (as opposed to the rules determining the setting), and the rules constrain character generation. When you do it that way, there's not a lot of room for a player to sneak their attention-sucking Donut Steel into the campaign.

 

[Raunalyn]

@Raunalyn did ask a very pertinent question though. What difference did it make that the players came to the session 0 with completely made characters?
I got a 1/2 orc bard who wanted to sell self help books, a firbolg druid runaway slave who was exiled from her people, a paladin soldier whose player refused the offer of a free house in Saltmarsh as part of the background, an illusionist charlatan and a human ranger smuggler.

So, every player shows up with a pre-made character, right? Could it be possible that you didn't communicate your expectation that everyone create characters in session zero as well as you thought you did? In every campaign we have done as a group, we show up to session zero with characters and discuss them with the DM. We've done this for years. You've done this with me when I ran my campaigns. Maybe it isn't so much that the players ignored you, or were special snowflakes (as mentioned in a previous comment), but maybe it is just what they are used to.

Oh, and did I mention no one actually read any of the setting background material that I presented?

That isn't quite true. I know quite a bit about Greyhawk, and a good amount about Saltmarsh. I did read the background material presented, and if I recall, I was helping you present some of that information to the other players. I own the module and read the introduction, but did not read anything else because you mentioned you would like to run it.

So, yeah, it was a major problem for me when everyone ignored what I said and showed up with fully made characters.

How would that have changed things? Would the players waiting until session zero to create characters have changed their character choices? As was mentioned before, at least one character wasn't completely created, and the mini-game would have done little to change character ideas since it was only to tie the characters to the setting in some way.

 

[Maxperson]

So, every player shows up with a pre-made character, right? Could it be possible that you didn't communicate your expectation that everyone create characters in session zero as well as you thought you did? In every campaign we have done as a group, we show up to session zero with characters and discuss them with the DM. We've done this for years. You've done this with me when I ran my campaigns. Maybe it isn't so much that the players ignored you, or were special snowflakes (as mentioned in a previous comment), but maybe it is just what they are used to.

To present another possibility. If it's what you all are used to, you could have ignored/forgotten about the request out of habit.

 

[Chaosmancer]

@Raunalyn did ask a very pertinent question though. What difference did it make that the players came to the session 0 with completely made characters? Well, here's what my expectations were and here's what I wound up with:

Expectation:

The character generation game that I was going to use would ensure that the PC's had ties to each other. But, just as importantly, they would have ties to events, NPC's and plots within Saltmarsh. Every PC would know at least one and probably several important NPCs, would know the political situation in Saltmarsh, and be embedded in the setting right from the outset.

What I got:

I got a 1/2 orc bard who wanted to sell self help books, a firbolg druid runaway slave who was exiled from her people, a paladin soldier whose player refused the offer of a free house in Saltmarsh as part of the background, an illusionist charlatan and a human ranger smuggler.

So, instead of hitting the ground running with things already settled, I had to spend the first two or three sessions trying to get as much information as I could from into the hands of the players so that they could make informed decisions about what they wanted to do, all the while trying to accommodate backgrounds that had virtually nothing to do with the campaign, and drop enough hooks to get them going on the introductory adventure - Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh. I had to introduce locations, NPC's, politics and everything else, all in three hour sessions while still making the session interesting enough for everyone involved.

Oh, and did I mention no one actually read any of the setting background material that I presented?

So, yeah, it was a major problem for me when everyone ignored what I said and showed up with fully made characters.

So, I'm confused. How did having them show up partially or completely made prevent you from tying them together or tying them to Saltmarsh?

Was there something about being, I don't know, a Firbolg that prevented that player from having ties to the community? Did the guy selling self-help books prevent him from having met the paladin on the road and fighting off a bandit ambush together?



I mean, if my players knew I wanted them to have ties to each other, it generally only takes a little bit of group discussion to create connections, like maybe the Charlatan enjoys the work of the half-orc bard and is enthused about the chance to have the author to add credibility to a con.

I almost feel like you just threw up your hands and gave up trying to tie these characters to each other and the town, but they arrived to the session 0, which tells me that there was still plenty of time to re-work backgrounds and build these connections. Maybe even completely alter a character or two.


I understand frustration with people ignoring the rules you want to set out, my most recent game I wanted to try a new way of rolling stats, where they rolled in batches of three so they could move their mental stats or their physical ones, but not mix them.

Everyone ignored me. A lot of players rolling even after I had said I didn't want them to roll yet, because I was helping newer players. And it was frustrating... but it wasn't really a big deal.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Maybe you didn't read the rest of it, or see my question from earlier. I didn't finish my character...I did everything but create the background.

My question is what, outside of background, is different about using a standard array to create your character abilities, your race, class, spells, and equipment before the session than it is during session zero? I can see waiting for the background (which I did), but not the rest of it.

How about this....

You have a prewritten character in your head...a heavily armored dwarven cleric who is also a blacksmith runeshaper type of character.

You show up at the table. You realize the other 4 players also had heavily armored dwarven clerics in their head as character ideas.

Then the GM show up and pitches the idea of running Tomb of Annihilation as the campaign where they want to strictly enforce the feel of the heat and oppression of life in the jungle....including penalties for heavy armor AND a lack of access to civilization.

At this point you can trash your concept and create something totally new so that you aren't a party of 5 heavily armored dwarves trudging through the jungles of Chult, or you can stick to your guns and see how it works.

The point is that it's not WRONG or BAD to come to session 0 with a concept in mind but people are trying to say ideally that concept will gel once you are sitting at the table and collaborating with the other players and GM.

My group during session 0 literally does a bit of bargaining amongst the players to decide who is going to play what class/style to ensure the party has the basics it's going to need to succeed. If one player strongly wants to play a ranged attacker, then the next player who is more open might be more likely to take a character concept that is melee to synergize better.

In a way, it's more important to create a PARTY during session 0, not a loosely meshed set of 4 adventurers each created in a vacuum.

That's my take, anyway.

 

[Raunalyn]

How about this....

You have a prewritten character in your head...a heavily armored dwarven cleric who is also a blacksmith runeshaper type of character.

You show up at the table. You realize the other 4 players also had heavily armored dwarven clerics in their head as character ideas.

Then the GM show up and pitches the idea of running Tomb of Annihilation as the campaign where they want to strictly enforce the feel of the heat and oppression of life in the jungle....including penalties for heavy armor AND a lack of access to civilization.

At this point you can trash your concept and create something totally new so that you aren't a party of 5 heavily armored dwarves trudging through the jungles of Chult, or you can stick to your guns and see how it works.

The point is that it's not WRONG or BAD to come to session 0 with a concept in mind but people are trying to say ideally that concept will gel once you are sitting at the table and collaborating with the other players and GM.

My group during session 0 literally does a bit of bargaining amongst the players to decide who is going to play what class/style to ensure the party has the basics it's going to need to succeed. If one player strongly wants to play a ranged attacker, then the next player who is more open might be more likely to take a character concept that is melee to synergize better.

In a way, it's more important to create a PARTY during session 0, not a loosely meshed set of 4 adventurers each created in a vacuum.

That's my take, anyway.

Except, beforehand, we did exactly this. We talked about our concepts (and the DM was present), and discussed which roles our characters would take.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Except, beforehand, we did exactly this. We talked about our concepts (and the DM was present), and discussed which roles our characters would take.

On minute 1 of session 1 if all the PCs were standing in the town square would they all know each other and be recognized by the townfolk with your backstories?

 

[Raunalyn]

On minute 1 of session 1 if all the PCs were standing in the town square would they all know each other and be recognized by the townfolk with your backstories?

What is the difference between discussing characters with each other with the DM present before session zero and creating those exact same characters in session zero?

 

[Raunalyn]

So, I'm confused. How did having them show up partially or completely made prevent you from tying them together or tying them to Saltmarsh?

Was there something about being, I don't know, a Firbolg that prevented that player from having ties to the community? Did the guy selling self-help books prevent him from having met the paladin on the road and fighting off a bandit ambush together?



I mean, if my players knew I wanted them to have ties to each other, it generally only takes a little bit of group discussion to create connections, like maybe the Charlatan enjoys the work of the half-orc bard and is enthused about the chance to have the author to add credibility to a con.

I almost feel like you just threw up your hands and gave up trying to tie these characters to each other and the town, but they arrived to the session 0, which tells me that there was still plenty of time to re-work backgrounds and build these connections. Maybe even completely alter a character or two.


I understand frustration with people ignoring the rules you want to set out, my most recent game I wanted to try a new way of rolling stats, where they rolled in batches of three so they could move their mental stats or their physical ones, but not mix them.

Everyone ignored me. A lot of players rolling even after I had said I didn't want them to roll yet, because I was helping newer players. And it was frustrating... but it wasn't really a big deal.

Bingo!

 

[Chaosmancer]

On minute 1 of session 1 if all the PCs were standing in the town square would they all know each other and be recognized by the townfolk with your backstories?

Wait, isn't this shifting goal posts?

Nothing in your first post necessitated that the party know each other, just that the players figured out their roles and the setting. That doesn't mean that they are already starting off in a group and working together.

Also, who cares if they are recognized by the Townsfolk? I mean, sure, Hussar has been saying he wanted to connect them to Saltmarsh, but you can be connected to a place without the majority of townspeople recognizing you.

You've moved from "You should be willing to change your concept if it doesn't fit" to "you should all be a pre-formed group, with defined roles attached to the starting town in recognizable ways" which is a way more specific ask.