Do you train your players?

[Liquidsabre]

Yes. The same way we train our DMs...

 

[Jdvn1]

Yeah, I think you always should reward players for good things, to try to promote ever improving behavior.

 

[threshel]

Absolutely. Mostly by reward, although I'll only give bonus XP if I feel the whole group earned it. The exception to this is my bonus XP-for-Backgrounds program. Every player is grilled by me about their character's background so I can use it in game. Those players that actually write their backgrounds down for me gain bonus XP at the end of the first session of play.
My other rewards tend towards the in-game type. Proactive players get my attention and table-time, those that insist on being merely reactive get pointed to when their turn in initiative comes up. I hate leading my players around by the nose as much as I hate being railroaded as a player. I've gone so far as to alter the intended solutions of puzzles and mysteries just because the players put forth valid effort, and in the process came up with a plausible solution.

J

 

[ThirdWizard]

Blue lightning. It's all about the blue lightning.

 

[Psion]

I put electrodes in their chairs and when they do something silly I shock them...

... okay, maybe I don't. But I should!

Um, I don't really actively try to train them. I do not award XP by CR. I tell them that bonuses are available, but rarely hand them out. Perhaps I should make it a habit.

 

[Khayman]

My players get little feed pellets when they successfully disarm traps.

 

[gizmo33]

I chose the "what the ...?" answer because I'm not sure I understand this.

But from what I've read from the replies, it appears it might have something to do with having things happen in your game in order to "teach" the players something. I don't like this idea at all. My preference as a DM is to run my campaign world according to it's design, take all player actions seriously, and judge according to what makes sense. So if they're not using good tactics or whatever, it's not my job to fidgit with the encounter so that they'll die and I can teach them a lesson. And any interpersonal problems between the people sitting at the table I take care of outside the game. That doesn't mean that I might not say after the game something like "you guys might want to work on your tactics".

I reward XP according to two main categories - risk and effort. Some things take effort (like roleplaying out some agreement between multiple groups) but don't necessarily entail a quantifiable risk - so I reward based on time/effort. Things involving risk (traps, monsters) are easier to judge because the charts exist for that.

 

[Wraith Form]

Ya, I train 'em. I give out extra XP for superior 'role'-playing skills. I encourage them to think of more diplomatic solutions rather than hin' em just hack-and-slash their way through a module. If someone does something clever, I put a checkmark next to their name on a sheet of paper. At the end of the session I ask each player what they think they have learned from the game. Based on all the little things that might add up a character could end up getting 25% more xp for the session.

Exactly. If by train you mean "reward good play" then yes.

 

[Empress]

Our DM trains us with requests and house rules.

 

[HellHound]

Yep.

I award roleplaying, but purposefully avoid doing so in cases where the roleplaying worked at odds with party unity or the enjoyment of the game.

If players' need a tip to get on with the plot, it comes to the person who has been roleplaying NPC interactions the best. Typically from one of the NPCs in question. Encourages players to talk to and interact with NPCs on a more long-term basis.

In fact, it consciously alters what games I run and how I run them.

For example, we were GOING to run a game based on the movie Truth or Consequences, New Mexico - but what players learn from that movie is to NEVER accept whatever hand-up the DM presents them with, as each easy out leads into deeper trouble.