How nice should you be as a DM?

[Crazy Monkey]

Where do you start to draw the line with a new group? I'm dm'ing a group of relatively inexperienced players, but all of whom have played at least once or twice before. Two of the (6) players are quite experienced and even dm their own games. They run very different kinds of games though, where no one EVER dies. I hate games like that, both as a pc, and to a lesser extent, as a DM. Its not nessecarily the death that makes it fun, but the risk of death.

Most of the pc's in my group are use to this fluffy world where the dm will always jump in and save them when they do something very very stupid. I have given this party many breaks so far (I said I would do as much) only because the games they are used also far below what a normal party should be facing. For example, one dm typically had encounters 1-3 CR below the groups level, and ends the adventure with a bbeg of equal CR to the groups average level. So the first adventure was sort of like a test drive. I told them our next adventure will be much harsher (and it is, after looking through it - The forge of fury).

Without going into to much detail, the group does not do many things that most people I haved played with consider common place. They do not listen at doors before going in, they have yet to try to talk their way out of a fight (even when prompted to). They do not heed obvious warnings.

How do I get them to start being more aware/ cautious without simply TPK'ing and then going "Well, if you would have"....

 

[CanadienneBacon]

It seems to me that this situation requires you having an out-of-game, to-the-point discussion with your players before the start of your next session. Tell them that you're interested in a more roleplay-oriented, cautionary game and get their reactions to your idea. I think you should avoid railroading your players in a gaming style that suits you and doesn't suit your players, but you should still be able to have this discussion in direct and diplomatic terms with them. It may turn out that your players are simply in love with the idea of hack and slash, door-busting D&D. If they haven't 'taken the hint' from you by this point that you prefer them to think before they act, then now's the time to bring it up OOG. They aren't mind readers, after all.

 

[d4]

as said above, if that's the style all of the players prefer, i don't think just going ahead and forcing them into a harsher, more lethal game is the way to go. most likely, you'll just end up irritating and possibly alienating the players.

playing style is really something that needs to be discussed beforehand, so that everyone knows what to expect and agrees with it. if none of the players want the type of game you want to run, then perhaps you shouldn't be running games for that group.

 

[Mark]

Tell the players you are planning on trying something new. You can do this so that you are more in tune as a DM for running games at tournament, gamedays or conventions. Let them know you wish to run a very deadly campaign and you need them to create a handful of characters in advance so that they can quickly jump back in if they lose the one they are playing. Let them know they should keep their portfolio of characters updated to the same level as the current group average, so that game play isn't slowed. If they have a problem, tell them you will run it every other session. You will probably see some difference in how they approach the regular game after they have scratched a few names off their lists.

 

[Crazy Monkey]

The whole reason im even running the campaign is because the players were starting to get bored never having a chance at dieing. I was content to stay a pc in the other two guy's games until I was asked to run this game. We are having a blast, them geting stomped on and all.

Its not that I want to change their type of playing style. It's just that they are inexperienced and make bad decsions as a result of it.

I guess my question is, how do you get your players (or rather, their characters) to be more "experienced" without killing people off? They get shot by people concealed behind a wall fireing through arrow slits and sit and fire back with missle weapons.... things like that.

I think I'm going to talk to them out of game, as well as keep dropping hints in game ("That half fallen wall looks like it would provide excellent cover"). I'm content to run a less challenging game, but im not comfortable with repeatedly saving the group when they get in over their heads. I'll talk to them and see what they say.

 

[Mark]

What level is the group?

 

[Nifft]

Roll in the open. Give them "fate points" or "action points" or some other player-controlled way of avoiding instant death. Make them earn these points, though.

Let them know that they are responsible for keeping their PCs alive.

Then, don't pull punches. Death in D&D usually isn't permanent anyway.

-- N

 

[Crazy Monkey]

Lets see, we have:

Cleric 3 (Uthgar)
Bard 2 Fighter 1
Samurai 3
Barbarian 3
Sorcerer 2
Dwaven Fighter 2

We started without the dwarven fighter, but had an elven rogue and a human shaman. The shaman became a dwarven fighter after dieing, the rogues player was basically kicked out of the group (their decsion not mine) after he died. The dwarven fighter died, and he became another dwarven fighter.

So we started the citadel with 7 - two died.
Started the Forge with 6 - 1 death so far.

 

[Emiricol]

Roll in the open. Give them "fate points" or "action points" or some other player-controlled way of avoiding instant death. Make them earn these points, though.

Let them know that they are responsible for keeping their PCs alive.

Then, don't pull punches. Death in D&D usually isn't permanent anyway.

-- N

I like this idea. It lets them feel the pain of learning, without suffering the scars

Also, an NPC to spell out more clearly what the party ought to be thinking up by themselves, might be a good idea. "Ranger Rick says, "That wall looks suspicious. If there's goblins back there they could snipe us without getting shot back. Let's go around that rocky outcropping for cover, and attack from another angle!"" for a rough example. By showing them the possibilities, that might get them thinking on their own.

 

[Acid_crash]

Have a good discussion with all the players and explain how you are feeling. Also ask them what their own opinions are, and if you have to ask each of them one on one to avoid peer pressure amongst the group. At least this way you will get everyones view without everyone else watching them. Get together, order some pizza, talk about the game and what kind of game they all want. After a final discussion and everyone has agreed on what they should be expecting, don't give this another thought and let what happens, happen.

I had a situation kind of like this happen to me in a group over two years ago. The situation was on alignments, and after having a five hour discussion on what we all thought of the alignments, and after we realized that all six of us have six different views on what each alignment really meant, we ended up discarding them and ignoring them. After that our arguments during the game lessoned to almost nothingness...at least for a month when something else crept up. And the pizza was good also.