D&D 5E Can my table focus on making things fun instead of optimizing?
- Thread starter jodyjohnson
- Start date
Flexor the Mighty!
18/100 Strength!
Not sure the best way to get your players to let the rules fall into the background and focus on the adventure at hand. 5e makes that easier thans 3/4e did but some players are really into that, trying to max builds for DPR and whatnot. Not my cup to tea but if others enjoy it then good for them. However if your players are looking for one thing and you another problems are looming that you should discuss.
Chocolategravy
First Post
If optimizing is the most fun part of the game, maybe play a different game. There are many story driven systems out there that don't focus so much on books of monsters to kill for XP and the best positioning, ways of increasing weapon damage and spell tacticals to get that XP.
Nebulous
Legend
As DM, i repeat names frequently, and I encourage the players to jot them down somewhere for quick reference. They do find the names nearly impossible to remember.
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him) 🇺🇦🇵🇸🏳️⚧️
And as I get older, it's even hard to remember an NPC's name 10 minutes after it is stated. And of course, no self respecting DM would name his important NPCs Bob, or Frank, or Tom, he has to name them fricking Alizar or even Ouzdavu (wth???).
As I play, I notice that players don't take enough notes. So, yeah, I have to repeat some things. And it's usually the same players every time who can't remember.
For names, though, I totally hear you. Too many fantasy characters, in games and literature, are named in such quirky manners. But my gaming groups often really do go for simpler names rather than . We have had a character named Bob fairly recently. One group currently includes an Alton and a Lancaster. Both names are easy to remember and use. The other group I play in has a Belinda and a Violet.
Flexor the Mighty!
18/100 Strength!
I'm glad my group takes detailed notes in the adventure annals.
Rod Staffwand
aka Ermlaspur Flormbator
As a DM you have to stress INTERACTION with your players:
If they're primarily interested in gaining XP for their PCs, give them options for getting that XP. Do they want to fight the dragon or protect the kingdom from the demon invasion? Never just give them a clear path of steady XP accumulation, either, with encounters carefully modulated to their level. Force them to find level-appropriate encounters on their own.
Do they want specific magic items as part of their build? Don't just hand them out or let the PCs buy them, make the PCs quest for them.
Learn to give them choices in play: a choice between good options (such as their choice of a single treasure from a hoard) or between bad options (getting into the necromancer's lair requires sacrificing magic items to the enchanted door or giving up all ability to recover hit points while inside).
Encourage them to set their own goals in character. Let them go off the adventure rails and find the plot hooks that interest them.
As long as the players are making choices and not merely going through the motions of gaining XP to level, they're playing the game.
On the subject of NPC names, I've had the same problem in these years of full-blown adult responsibilities. I've thrown in the towel and don't even give NPC names anymore unless the players ask. I use "the king" or "the village priestess" or "the Knight of Blades" designations for the most part.
If they're primarily interested in gaining XP for their PCs, give them options for getting that XP. Do they want to fight the dragon or protect the kingdom from the demon invasion? Never just give them a clear path of steady XP accumulation, either, with encounters carefully modulated to their level. Force them to find level-appropriate encounters on their own.
Do they want specific magic items as part of their build? Don't just hand them out or let the PCs buy them, make the PCs quest for them.
Learn to give them choices in play: a choice between good options (such as their choice of a single treasure from a hoard) or between bad options (getting into the necromancer's lair requires sacrificing magic items to the enchanted door or giving up all ability to recover hit points while inside).
Encourage them to set their own goals in character. Let them go off the adventure rails and find the plot hooks that interest them.
As long as the players are making choices and not merely going through the motions of gaining XP to level, they're playing the game.
On the subject of NPC names, I've had the same problem in these years of full-blown adult responsibilities. I've thrown in the towel and don't even give NPC names anymore unless the players ask. I use "the king" or "the village priestess" or "the Knight of Blades" designations for the most part.
I can't be bothered with taking notes at the table. It's too much like going to school. Fortunately, my wife is the exact opposite and writes copiously on what happens in the game. So, I get to cheat and look at her notes.
Bradley Hindman
Explorer
And as I get older, it's even hard to remember an NPC's name 10 minutes after it is stated. And of course, no self respecting DM would name his important NPCs Bob, or Frank, or Tom, he has to name them fricking Alizar or even Ouzdavu (wth???).
In my opinion there are three reasons that players don't remember NPC and PC names:
1) Strange names with little cultural traction. (I am glaring directly at Forgotten Realms with most of its names apparently produced by a random syllable generator.)
2) The natural human tendency to forget names that aren't repeated enough. (How many names do you remember from a party full of strangers?)
3) The natural human tendency to be lazy. (We've all done it.)
As a DM, I try to be very forgiving of the first two and gently remind the players of names whenever I hear, "you know that guy with the whiny voice who hired us."
Long ago, to combat reason 3, I started naming all the minor NPCs that the characters ran across with the same name. They players quickly realized that if they didn't care, I wasn't going to either. Solved the problem right away and provided some interesting discussion and roleplaying about why "Fuad" was such a common name in these parts.
Last edited:
So, I DM a lot and have run into this. It is a common thing for the characters to be optimized and for players to feel that need - after all, D&D on it's surface is a game of numbers, and lots of number-gifted people play it. 4e enhanced that a lot by making things very mechanical. I have one player who is extremely good at this. His characters are very hard to put down, his dice luck is exceptional, and he covers all his bases. He's arguably much more tactical than I am, despite similar intelligence levels, etc. It frustrated me to no end because I couldn't compete without blasting the rest of the party out of the water.
I expressed my frustration to my wife (totally not a gamer) and she said "don't. If he wants to do that and that's the fun he gets out of it, let him win." This line of logic actually made me think long and hard about it. I decided to stop competing, and actually toned down my combats, made things easier. Occasionally I would throw in a real doozy, but the average one I was sure they would sail through pretty cleanly, maybe not even using 10% of their resources.
This did a few things
Often it worked best when I presented multiple options (I started calling them quest question marks, like you get in most video games), and largely let them write the solution. If they said "hey, is there a <thing that is going to help put this plan into motion>", I almost always said "yes, but <some obstacle that must be overcome>"
some of this I pulled from more story-focused RPGs, like Fate and the Cortex Plus system stuff. Particularly the Cortex Hacker's guide and Leverage good about making me think a bit. We even tried a few of these, but the truth of the matter is, my guys DO like numbers and tactical stuff somewhat. I do to!
Running a fairly long 13th age campaign made me think more about how willing I was to house rule things and get away from RAW. Being open with what I was going to house rule and having a discussion with my players about how it was fun or not, and pretty much constantly asking them "was that fun?" helped some with that too.
It's also important to understand your players as much as anything. Push down your ego and listen to what they mean, even if it is not what they are saying. I have 1 player who won't spend much time out of game doing anything - I always recommend a mechanically simple class with few research points to him. No wizards ever. He's also a murderhobo-person, so barbarians and assassin-rogues suit him really well. I've got another guy who has massive character ADD and wants to do all the things. So, I give him the bards and the wizards.
The perhaps ironic thing about it was that Mr. Lucky Optimizer up there was one of my most valuable tools in making all this happen.
I expressed my frustration to my wife (totally not a gamer) and she said "don't. If he wants to do that and that's the fun he gets out of it, let him win." This line of logic actually made me think long and hard about it. I decided to stop competing, and actually toned down my combats, made things easier. Occasionally I would throw in a real doozy, but the average one I was sure they would sail through pretty cleanly, maybe not even using 10% of their resources.
This did a few things
- It made it so that the hard combats felt very special
- It allowed them to have enough resources that I could make the hard combats MUCH harder, and their optimizations felt really important
- It made the time for most combats much shorter, because they could handle it without effort, and sort of became "filler"
- which in turn freed up a lot of time for roleplaying
- which I encouraged by making open ended problems where i would present a situation and no clear solution.
Often it worked best when I presented multiple options (I started calling them quest question marks, like you get in most video games), and largely let them write the solution. If they said "hey, is there a <thing that is going to help put this plan into motion>", I almost always said "yes, but <some obstacle that must be overcome>"
some of this I pulled from more story-focused RPGs, like Fate and the Cortex Plus system stuff. Particularly the Cortex Hacker's guide and Leverage good about making me think a bit. We even tried a few of these, but the truth of the matter is, my guys DO like numbers and tactical stuff somewhat. I do to!
Running a fairly long 13th age campaign made me think more about how willing I was to house rule things and get away from RAW. Being open with what I was going to house rule and having a discussion with my players about how it was fun or not, and pretty much constantly asking them "was that fun?" helped some with that too.
It's also important to understand your players as much as anything. Push down your ego and listen to what they mean, even if it is not what they are saying. I have 1 player who won't spend much time out of game doing anything - I always recommend a mechanically simple class with few research points to him. No wizards ever. He's also a murderhobo-person, so barbarians and assassin-rogues suit him really well. I've got another guy who has massive character ADD and wants to do all the things. So, I give him the bards and the wizards.
The perhaps ironic thing about it was that Mr. Lucky Optimizer up there was one of my most valuable tools in making all this happen.
Similar Threads
