D&D General How to work with players who wont accept any setbacks/defeat?

[Vaalingrade]

Take the hint and stop trying to defeat or hand out setbacks.

IF you are unwilling to do this, let someone else DM.

Don't try to 'teach lessons' or 'train' people.

 

[beancounter]

If they spent the session gathering ingredients, that’s accomplishing something. If you then try to take those away you’re flipping that accomplishment into wasted time.

Yeah, they’re going to fight you on that.

If the DM is intentionally trying to take stuff away, I agree - because that's just toxic DMing/powertrip.

However, if the players lose stuff due to their actions, and the end result of their actions as acted upon by the DM are reasonable, then that's the player's fault, and they should learn to accept that bad decision may have negative consequences.

 

[Velderan]

This came to a head last session when the party was more willing to have a character effectively die rather then give up the ingredients to make 2 potions they had gathered that session. This is just one example of many that has come up.

How did they end up in the situation where they had to give up the ingredients or risk death?

If their decision making led to them risking losing the ingredients, that's fair enough but if immediately after gathering them you sprung an ambush on them to take the ingredients away, I'd probably resent that as a player too.

 

[Scribe]

Let them win or change players. There is a mismatch of expectations here.

Let them win?!

Just TPK them until they improve tactics.

 

[MichaelSomething]

So the funny thing is Ive straight up asked tgem before "do you want me to dial it back." And was told its fine.

Then what's the problem? Its fine.

 

[tetrasodium]

I've found that 5e is pretty bad at helping with this because of how far the odds are already stacked for the players & the lack of support in player facing books but a dcc funnel with alcohol* can really help here if everyone is of legal age. Obviously if alchohol is involved nobody should be driving home & the host will probably need to let people chill or sleep on couches for the rest of the day/night.

*Doing shots is one thing but there's a more enjoyable way that introduces an extra layer of carousel hazard type strategy to the mix. If a player dies they must appoint someone at the table to make them a mixed drink of the mixer's choosing. The drink must be finished before the recipient of the drink dies again or they need to gulp it down & appoint someone for mixing their a new drink.

 

[iserith]

It just sounds like you all need to get on the same page about the sorts of games you enjoy and then do that. Because this isn't working.

 

[Lanefan]

So I've noticed a feature of my group, with some players being worse then others, that as a whole they would rather get their characters killed (up to and including a campaign ending TPK) rather than accept any sort of defeat or setback.

This came to a head last session when the party was more willing to have a character effectively die rather then give up the ingredients to make 2 potions they had gathered that session. This is just one example of many that has come up.

I admit I tend to run harder games/battles in general but i also try to give players an out or a way to fail forward, but its hard to do so if it feels like they'll only accept totally victory or death.

Has anyone else had a similar problem or just any general advice?

Me, I'd just run it neutrally and let the chips - and, sometimes, characters - fall where they may.

Don't go out of your way to hose them when it's not deserved (as others have noted, that's poor form for any DM), but don't hold back on hosing them if they bring it upon themselves through ir own decisions/actions.

You tagged the thread "general" - which edition are you running? I ask because characters dying in 0e-1e with their faster char-gen isn't nearly as much of a player-side headache as it is in 3e-5e where char-gen takes so long.

 

[jgsugden]

Talk to the group of players. Ask if they think the current tendencies are fun.

If so, no problem. Continue on as is.

If not, talk about other approaches. Give suggestions on things they didn't but could have, considered.

 

[Clint_L]

I like to remind players that not every situation is immediately "winnable," and that in terms of story structure setbacks are a good thing so that the eventual payoff feels earned. I will literally remind them in the moment that retreat is an option. Because I will intentionally design encounters where the only "win" is escaping to fight again another day. If they are persisting with a course of action that will very likely lead to death, I will make sure to emphasize that, since it should be apparent to their character: "Do you really want to charge across the lava? Because as the heat impacts you like a wall you sense that you are only going to survive for a few moments of terrible agony."

Edit: In my last game, a player decided to stay and "hold the door" against a wave of enraged cultists. I emphasized that this was a fatal decision, he insisted, and we put the dice down and I asked him to describe his heroic sacrifice. It was fun. He could have escaped instead, though.