Campaign in trouble - need help!

[OracleOfNarion]

I am a player in a campaign that has been running for a bit more than a year. The players are all great, and the characters are all really good too, but they don't get along very well (the characters), and this is causing problems. The consensus seems to be that there is no unifying goal, no real reason for the characters to work together, so they don't - mostly they argue, which isn't much fun. Its true, but I it isn't the whole story. Another problem seems to be that the character concepts don't mix, so when they are played true-to-concept, they are in opposition, and the players feel that doing anything else is a cop out (character concept wise). Have any of you experienced anything similar? More to the point, do you have any suggestions as to what I, as a player, can do to get this game back on track?

Please help, this is a great game with great players, and I don't want to see it fall apart. Thanks.

 

[Hjorimir]

I have seen this firsthand as a DM and it just seems to result in a sad campaign. Part of this falls upon the shoulders of the DM who should have helped mold a unified approach to the game from the start. I know this is often seen as an infringement on the holy ordained right to character creation freedom (bleh, cry me a river), but D&D is a group activity and it is pointless if all the players wish to go in different directions. That being said, it is the players who choose weather or not to work together.

Ultimately, unless players start changing their concepts/attitudes, you will probably have to swap out characters (to align with preexisting character directions) or start anew.

 

[Lela]

Toss out a couple PCs and remake them. Boom. Done. At least some of your group should be mature enough to sacrifice to save the group. They'll realize the game will suck if they don't and it won't be good for the PC.

How long has the group been together? How experienced are they? Are they generally mature people?

If you can, get the whole group to redefine their members. One good way to secure a reason to travel together is religion. You all are servents (in some way or another) of a lawful deity and you happen to be a special team designed to handle "Special" situations.

That one works especially well for new players who aren't sure how/why to work together as a team but makes a great dynamic for anyone. Either way, you'll be able to follow your character's goals without screwing with everyone at the table.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

I've voiced similar concerns to the group I am playing with recently. To me, the characters (and only the characters) didn't have any logical reason to be together (this was after a half-tpk, after which new characters were rolled up). I got the group talking, and some new characters were changed and some events were played differently so that there could be some cohesion within the group. So far so good.

My advice would be to talk it out with the other members of the group. Perhaps they have noticed the same thing and aren't sure how to handle the problem.

You owe it to yourselves to make the game fun for everyone.

AR

 

[GMVictory]

It also falls on the players too. It appears they have created these rigid, unyielding characters that will not compromise or come to terms with each other. It is the players' responsibility to try to come together as a group.

Have the bad guys plans proceed while they argue and fight over what to do and how to do it. When it reaches crisis proportions, then they will probably work together.

If players insist on running off on their own, play it out. Run each a little ways and then switch back to the others. It will be hard and can mess up the game, but the players get to see the consequences of trying to play everyone for themselves.

If the others who aren't on the tangent become unhappy, then explain that there is only one of you and that if the players don't want to work together then this is the type of game they are going to get. The players may not understand the difficulties you face when they scatter like that, this might help them realize it.

 

[Wee Jas]

Yeah, you have to meta-game as a pc some.

We have a cleric, mage, 2 archers and a thief... with no tank we are getting pretty beat up. In retrospect one of the archers should be more melee oriented. I'm causing some problem cause the rest of the party doesn't want to kill nearby undead in downtime. I like my character but it looks like I need to swap him out to make a more "tankish" character.

 

[Lela]

Aw, we'll miss Erasmas Wee Jas. But you gotta make sacrifices for the group.

Look on the bright side! There may be a near-TPK and you'll get to bring him back.

 

[billd91]

Yeah, you have to meta-game as a pc some.

We have a cleric, mage, 2 archers and a thief... with no tank we are getting pretty beat up. In retrospect one of the archers should be more melee oriented. I'm causing some problem cause the rest of the party doesn't want to kill nearby undead in downtime. I like my character but it looks like I need to swap him out to make a more "tankish" character.

I hear a lot of sacrificing your character idea for the good of the group. That's fine to a point. If the campaign is disfunctional because of the characters, then it's really disfunctional because of the players. They're being too unbending.

However, if it's just a question of not having a particular character role filled in the party, that's not really a good reason to adjust a character you're having fun with. Why not hire and NPC to fill that slot in the party? It doesn't always have to be a PC who does that particular job.

 

[OracleOfNarion]

Thanks for the replies.

The players are all mature adults who have been involved with gaming for a long time. I am the most recent addition to the group, having joined a bit over a year ago when they changed campaigns due to dm fatigue. There have already been a few rounds of character swapping, in fact only two original characters are still around. They are a monk and a Conjurer, who don't have much use for each other - the monk is turned off by the conjurer's greed and selfishness, and the reverse is true from the Conjurer's perspective (he doesn't trust the monk's lack of greed and selfishness). There is a paladin character who is trying to pull the group together, but not (to my mind, anyway) having much success.

What I think we need is an over-story, and it has to come from the players - we can't dump this on the dm. Currently, the group is marooned in the Abyss, trying to find a way back. You'd think this alone would provide common cause, but it hasn't, and the divisiveness continues. I know this sounds like a really bad game, but that's more my fault for not explaining well than anything else, the players are great and so is the dm, but whatever it is that pulls individuals together to form a group just isn't there. So , anyone have suggestions on how to weld this (back) together? Thanks.