How do I turn Powergamers into Roleplayers?

[muhcashin]

Powergamers to roleplayers...

It's impossible. You can't force people to do what they don't want to do.

I've also run into the same situation as you. I've tried interesting NPCs, XP penalties, rewards for roleplaying, the whole sha-bang. I also tried the sermon. I told them time and again about what roleplaying was. Their answer was that I took D&D too seriously and that they were only playing for fun.

And the bottomline is fun. So if the players have fun with super-characters (which is perfectly understandable) then let them play. And if you are simply really really really at the end of your rope, and absolutely want real roleplaying, you might as well get a new group. But then again, the whole point of roleplaying is about social interaction, be it in game roleplaying or just being with friends. So, it's your call. I'm not willing to put friendships on the line, so I continue to play powegame D&D. It can be fun. If the PCs are powerful, you make your monsters stronger, and make the players piss in their pants when they meet an army of illithid lichs. Basically playing Diablo without a computer.

Yech.

 

[Geoff Watson]

What's with the crap about 'weak characters make you a better roleplayer'?
Why do all the 'elite roleplayers' think that weak characters are better?
You can roleplay Spiderman just as well as you can roleplay Peter Parker.
So what if the group are total asskickers. They're high level. They're supposed to kick ass.

Geoff.

 

[Falcon]

Kestrel,

I applaud your inviting other people with whom you have gamed to provide their input and more context. The hardest thing I have encountered as a DM is asking player to let me know how things are going. I try my best, but I am me, and I know my strengths, weaknesses, likes, and dislikes.

If the current situation is not working, drop it. Be patient. Be true to what you like and who you are, and trust me, you will find the right campaign, Grasshopper.

Seriously, if it is not enjoyable for you as DM, considering how much time and energy you obviously devote to your campaign, and how concerned you are to make it work by inviting others who have gamed with you to comment here, why not take a break and do some other things while toying around with campaign ideas?

I had some serious difficulties with a player in the campaign I DM, and I ended up telling him he wasn't obligated to play in my campaign. That made him feel better, he is playing in a campaign he likes, and I continue with mine, and we are still friends. The differences were stylistic.

I highly recommend Robin D. Law's book on Gamemastering (title escapes me now). It has really helped me understand what style I like and am capable of, and how to work with players and their PC's in developing scenarios and campaigns.

Good luck and keep trying.

 

[TalonComics]

What's with the crap about 'weak characters make you a better roleplayer'?
Why do all the 'elite roleplayers' think that weak characters are better?
You can roleplay Spiderman just as well as you can roleplay Peter Parker.
So what if the group are total asskickers. They're high level. They're supposed to kick ass.

Geoff.

I think this idea is a little misworded. What it should say, IMO, is that characters with weaknesses make for better roleplaying.
D&D and most RPGs are games geared towards group play and group dynamics. If the characters are the best at everything and have no weaknesses what-so-ever what's the point in even playing? There's obviously no challenge that they can't defeat and if they can't that means the DM/GM had to make it so high in power there just was no way they could even attempt to defeat it in the first place.

D&D classes are built with weaknesses. Some have weaknesses that are worse than others but the classes are meant to compliment each other. Fighters don't cast magic and Wizards aren't very good in melee combat. That's about as simple as it gets. As soon as you introduce Fighter/Wizard/Clerics (Hmmm, that sounds like Elminster) what's the point of playing in a group? D&D isn't a contest as to who has the biggest badass character. Being a badass at everything just makes you look like you have insecurity issues.

So, characters with strengths and weaknesses create roleplaying and interaction among players. Characters who do it it all and are the best at what they do are just twinks.

~Derek

 

[LostSoul]

So, characters with strengths and weaknesses create roleplaying and interaction among players. Characters who do it it all and are the best at what they do are just twinks.

Character strength, even relative strength, has nothing to do with roleplaying.

 

[Sialia]

Everybody has weaknesses, regardless of their stats.

Let them be allmighty in the things that there are stats for. Let them kick ass and enjoy it.
There are a million things in the souls of the players that there simply are no stats for in the PCs. Find them. Exploit them.

In my case, I'm paranoid. Always terrified that the traps and puzzles are more devious than they ever turn out to be. I second guess myself all the time thinking "it can't possibly be this easy. I'm missing something . . ." Any clever GM who's gamed with me a while knows how to use this to his own advantage. They get me going and then let me nuke myself with overworking the problem. Then they sit there and chortle as if I hadn't done all their work for them. And the sick part is, I enjoy this, because it makes me feel like I've contributed immensely to the plot. Things happened in the world because of the decisions I made, and even if they were BAD things, they were MY bad things. I did this. But that's me. Not your players.

Your players are unique. They will have special weakness of their own you can exploit. What do they really love about adventuring? Do they secretly love feeling terrified? Do they crave approval? Do they gloat before striking? Are they overconfident about sizing things up quickly, or agonizingly meticulous and slow about working out all the details before making a move? What do they pride themselves on? If you asked each of your players what is their strongest asset and their greatest weakness, what would they say? Are they clever puzzle solvers, or tactics specialists?

And then give them the chance to excel at what they are good at when the dice are not rolling. Or let them confront their darkest fears about who they are, and what they can or can't do.

When the module becomes personal like this--not necessarily in a hostile or antagonistic way, just personal, the players will invest in thier characters. They will see facets of themselves in them, and want to work with them. When they love coming to your game because they have a chance to feel more handsome than they really are, or more clever, or braver, or less inhibited, or whatever it is they crave, they will start wanting to be that alternate self instead of their workaday Real Selves.

My favorite characters were all created for GMs who made me feel special, as though they were running the campaign just for my personal benefit. This doesn't mean they played favorites with me, just that they were aware of how I was responding to what was going on, and what I thought would be fun to have happen next, same as they did for all the other players.

Paper thin background is ok. Going up levels is all about growth. We all start out tabla rasa. It's what happens next that's interesting.

All actions have consequences. When the consequences of your actions start to affect the plot, you start to feel as though you are co-authoring the module, as if it isn't all defined by the box text already. As if possibilities were endless. And buy in follows.

 

[Nightfall]

Kestrel, send them my way. None of this namby pampy babying stuff. "Ah 6th level at last! We've conquered a goblin tribe, defended a village and found some nice treasures!" Me: "Well now you guys get to go the Blood Steppes. First hour passes...and oh darn, a large pack of creatures are coming your way..." "What are they" "You don't know, you've never seen them before" "Well we attack" "Mmm they scream the name of god of Destruction...and start to pick you apart with their sticks" "We kill them!" "Two do die...but the others appear to get stronger and scream the god's name louder" "We try to run..." "And find yourselves in the middle of an amush, as two leonine shapes attack you wielding battle axes in each hand!"

Mmm well that's start anyway.

 

[trix]

Ok, I'm at the end of my rope here...

At this point, I'm ready to call it quits and find some new players. I simply don't know what to do to get them to roleplay instead of powergame.

Any advice?

Firstly, if they want to min-max, than max-min them.... ie: Curse, Resurrect, get their keep robbed, looted sacked and raised. Give the players a rod of resurrection, and then kill them a few times. Have the players loose stats via curse (str 9 fighter?). It may take a few adventures to get them into a max-min situation, but if they dont want to continue, then dont gm them.

Give them cursed weapons, cursed armour. THey took the 'magical' plate mail off the orc that they just killed?

-Tim

 

[Mark]

Re: Re: How do I turn Powergamers into Roleplayers?

If they are having fun with it, make sure you let them know you appreciate that...

Ask your players what they want to do and what is fun for them.

I don't think powergaming excludes role-playing. You can have powerful characters with interesting personalities.

Try and introduce NPCs into the adventure. NPCs that have nothing to do with combat.

My suggestion is for Kestrel to wrap up the module, just for closure's sake, and attempt something new and experimental with different characters...

...change some of (your) presentation, focus more on a cohesive story and try to smooth (your game) into an overall story arch.

To thine own self be true.

As many others have pointed out, it's all about gaming styles. Since you're the DM, don't change yourself so much that you stop having fun. If the players cannot flex their own styles, they shouldn't be in this group. No group should be sacred.

No nuclear weapons!

Avoid escalating power levels. Upping the ante and buffing the opposition to "match" is a lot of work and results in character death.

But don't EVER run a module as is, or even close to as-is. It wasn't written for your party.

Those who say a module is worthless to them unless you use it as written is quite brain-dead as a DM, and in my opinion has no concept of what a module is REALLY used for - as a source of ideas.

...and make the players piss in their pants...

Yech.

Be patient. Be true to what you like and who you are, and trust me, you will find the right campaign...

Good luck and keep trying.

So, characters with strengths and weaknesses create roleplaying and interaction among players.

...give them the chance to excel at what they are good at when the dice are not rolling. Or let them confront their darkest fears about who they are, and what they can or can't do.

When the module becomes personal like this--not necessarily in a hostile or antagonistic way, just personal, the players will invest in thier characters.

None of this namby pampy babying stuff.

...but if they dont want to continue, then dont gm them.

 

[Uller]

How do you turn power-gamers into roleplayers? Errmmm....you don't. Power-gamers (and I'm one) have no desire to change. Why should they? They're happy leveling up their characters, gathering minor artifacts and kicking butt. However, most power-gamers are not happy without a challenge, at least not me. If I don't find myself upon the precipice of death every few sessions, I fail to see the point...

However, there is some hope. I got this idea off this board (I think from Arcady). In order to reign power-gamers in and encourage the creation of interesting characters with some reasonable background do the following:

Tell them that characters are to be created using a 28 (or whatever) point buy method. Also ask them for a one page (about 500 words) background and/or personality profile of the character...they'll moan and groan about it, of course. So give 'em what power-gamers crave most as an incentive: Power. Give them extra points for their background.

I give a max of 6 extra points based on the following criteria:

- 1 point (max 2) for each usable NPC described in the background. These can be mentors, enemies, familly members, allies, associates, cohorts, etc.

- 1 point (max 2) for each usable organization, nation, tribe, clan, guild, order, religion, god, etc. described in the background.

- 1 point (max 2) for each PC that the background ties the described PC to in a meaningful way. This helps answer the questions like: Why are these people traveling together? How do they know each other? Do they like each other or are they rivals? etc.

- Up to 4 points based on the quality of the background. Is it interesting? Unique? Well thought out? Well written?

The last time I did this, I only used the first three sets of points(with a max of 4 points). I added the last because one of the background I got was so astoundly good that I had to make it worth 4 points without even considering the other points. In the future I will usually give no more than 4, but for especially well written ones, I'll give 5 or 6 points.

From my players, I got a plethora of neat ideas and information. The write-ups varied from:

-No write-up. This is a completely voluntary thing. They've had about 6 weeks to write one page. This guy is the most "munchy" player in the group, yet hasn't produced a background. The game is tomorrow. If he's happy with 28 points, that suits me fine

-A whimsical description of a (Monte Cook) Ranger being orphaned by a giant raid(so she hates giants), making a living hunting dragons(so she is good at fighting dragons) and even taking on demons...

-A long history or the human Southern Nations and their various wars.

-A description of an ancient elven artifact that contains the spirit of a great Demon hunting Sorcerer/Fighter. The wearer of the armor becomes possessed by this spirit and hunts demons until he dies...the Armor then disappears until another suitable elf finds it (or is found by it, more likely).

-A discription of a cold hearted wizard who only cared for the aqcuisition of knowledge and power until a life altering event turned him into a champion of mercy and compassion. He sacrificed his most prescious spell book to save a child.

In short, I got some good stuff out of people who aren't particularly good or interested in role-playing. It was voluntary so no one was forced to do it. And the reward was reasonably small so it shouldn't affect game balance too much.

It seems to me you made two big mistakes:

- 50+ pts!!! What were you thinking man?!?! 25-28 points is usually best. 32-36 is good for power-gaming. 40+, you're asking for trouble.

- Allowing all the splatbook rules without justification and control. I don't disallow splatbook stuff, but it's gotta be justified by the character concept. Even then, it can't over shadow core-rules characters too much.