DnD Boiling Point: Here's What I Did

[Gundark]

There is only one way out of this.....get a new group....I know that it may be hard, but it is the only way that you'll be happy. I had a similiar situation a while back, I tired talking and eventually had to clean house. This wasn't easy because one of my problem players was a good friend. This may not be possible where you live, in that case maybe quiting until you find a group that suits your style would be better. What you could do is sit down have a talk and as nicely as possible say "This campaign is going in this direction, no if ands or buts. If you want to play this way then fine, if not then don't bother coming". It sounds harsh but IMO it's the only way.

 

[JesterPoet]

I'm one of those die-hard homebrewers, and for the most part I refuse to game in pre-canned settings. But I'm frustrated, because it seems with my group I can't get enough of the feel of the world across sometimes. Like I want a low-magic world where most people are normal humans and there's few mages, but my players insist on making half-celestials and crap, and I have sorcerers and wizards coming out my ears.

This is just my opinion, so take my 2 cents for what they are worth, but there is a possiblity that, in your players' opinions, your world sucks. Chances are, it's actually pretty good, but there's a chance that it's the polar opposite of what they want to play, and if that's so, they'll probably hate it.

The reason I am even responding is that I always cringe when I hear, "I want a low-magic world...etc." It brings back horrible memories of a game I used to play with an old group that was "low fantasy, low magic." It was set right after the fall of the roman empire, and it was probably very historically accurate.

Unfortunately, that's not what I want when I play D&D, nor is it what the other players wanted.

Overnight, the guy who ran this game turned a bunch of good Role Players, into REALLY CRAPPY players, because they thought his game was boring. I felt the same way. I was playing a character whose ass I could kick if I met him on the street. For some people, that would be fun, but for us, it wasn't.

I feel for you, specifically because I HATE all the crazy races and classes that are available out there. For that very reason, I banned any non-core races, and am VERY picky about the classes my players can choose. At the same time, though, I'd never try to get my group to play a low fantasy campaign, because they'd hate it, and rebel. And I honestly think that rebellion would take the exact form of how your players are acting.

As an experienced GM I want to go along with everyone else and say this is the result of crappy players... and it may still be. But my personal opinion is that it is a case of the GM wanting "his world" too bad, when that world is of no interest to the players.

Have you tried asking them how they feel about a low fantasy (or, low magic, or whatever) game? For many players, role-playing is a chance to escape and be something you never could be. I know if my GM took that away from me, I'd lose interest fast. I've been there.

Also, in your defense, it doesn't hurt if you make a strict rule limiting them to races out of the core books. There's still a LOT you can create.

Lastly, kill your PCs when they deserve it/earn it. It cheapens the experience if there is no risk. Sure, it is a disappointment when a character dies, but without the risk, where's the fun?

 

[Ranger REG]

Life is too short to let little people with little minds ruin your fun. DUMP THE [censored], you'll feel alot better. If the other players winge, dump 'em as well. Make new friends, look for gamers. If you can't find 'em, raise a family and wait untill your children are six years old, the game with 'em.

I dunno, bro. That statement sounds too ... for lack of a better word ... elitist? Arrogant? Like you're too good for your group so you have no choice but to find one more to your self-proclaimed "higher level of gaming."

 

[CyberSpyder]

I dunno, bro. That statement sounds too ... for lack of a better word ... elitist? Arrogant? Like you're too good for your group so you have no choice but to find one more to your self-proclaimed "higher level of gaming."

Normally you only put such a damning statement in quotation marks if it's something the person you're replying to actually said.

Really, I think "If you don't get along with them, find people you do get along with" is a fairly simple and obvious concept. Am I wrong?

 

[Ranger REG]

A fair statement.

 

[Andrew D. Gable]

Well, I solved it. What I'm going to do is finish up the current campaign (a githyanki invasion, from Dragon) and then switch to a Swashbuckling Adventures campaign with Theah (another world that appeals to me) modified slightly to incorporate a more fantastical flavor, just enough to give me my homebrewing fix. That way my homebrew can stay like I want it, and I'll maybe only use it for PbP games and such.

Alternately, I'm considering a monster campaign using Savage Species stuff.

 

[Norfleet]

Well, if they're really obsessed with video game-style campaigning....give them a campaign, that's just like a video game. Right down the finest detail of being a video game: l33t-speaking lamers, camping monster spawns in lines, and saving throw vs. lag. That'll show 'em. It'll do you good, too. Once you stop taking everything so seriously, and don't burn your creative energies on things that won't be usable for a bit, it'll feel that much more relaxing. Just keep it up until your players complain that your campaign is lame.