D&D 5E Minor rant - y'ever just hate your players' characters?

[Umbran]

That all three are self-described pariahs makes me think even finding adventures is going to be rough for them -- what villager is going to want to ask for help from any drow, much less an unapologetic megalomanic?

"A halfling, a drow, and a half-orc walk into a bar...," does sound like the beginning of a joke

 

[Uskglass]

So you imparted your GM vision upon them, and it didn't go down as planned. Too bad.
Now deal with it: if they are 'afraid to die', then remind them that they won't (if monsters only go KO at 0 HP, surely that'd be the same for PCs as well). If they are not really into the comic and goofy thing and would rather play heroic, dramatic characters, perhaps you can try and pick up on that. How about starting from Lv3 directly (or get there real quick!) if that makes them feel more like the part?
Try to feed on what you get from them, don't fight back because it doesn't align.

 

[MarkB]

I have found that it's a good idea to set player expectations before a campaign.

I'd suggest that it's also important to gauge players' expectations before a campaign, especially if you have a particular group of players you want to play with. The DM can certainly set the tone of the campaign, but if that tone is totally out of tune with what the players are interested in, then it's never going to work out.

 

[Curmudjinn]

So you imparted your GM vision upon them, and it didn't go down as planned. Too bad.

The problem with that point of view, is it isn't appreciated by everyone. It isn't appreciated by a large portion of GMs. The seat-of-your-pants GMing-style that is mostly subservient to a group of open-world PCs with no direct line to their goals except ruining immersion until a goal is reached or death isn't for every GM.

That, though, is why virtual tabletops and play-by-post games have grown substantially in the last decade or so. People are just sick of dealing with players without a similar play-style, or without empathy towards a certain GM-style. It is pretty hard to narrow down your offline group in the same way you can a large online gaming community to your specific likes within a game or style. I long ago left many local gaming groups for just that reason, just because their GMing style was way outside of my fun zone or the other PCs were pushy selfish asshats that made each game feel like a card game of Munchkin. Moon Elf brothers? I steal your stuff when your sleeping. Work with the King? I make an attempt on his life instead and cause a party TPK.

Silly stuff.

You really need some sort of breakdown of options to be agreed upon by all of the players before the game even starts. Like Setting, Seriousness, Camaraderie, etc. When all of the players on agreed with each other on what type of communal game is wanted, you can move on from there. If one continues to ruin it for everyone, ask them to adjust or leave the table. People seem to tiptoe around asking players to leave, but sometimes you have to. It's like having teammate that continues to throw the ball out of bounds because everyone else's awe at the behavior is enjoyable for them, but they clearly can't continue to play as a team member.

 

[Curmudjinn]

It makes me not want to DM at all.

Try running some quests that are just as quirky as your initial intentions, with combat being a failure of the scene and not a success. The group has to investigate something unusual, maybe something ghostly or from the Far Realm, only to not be able to catch/attack/fully-see it, and can't prove it to anyone. The town may think they are losing their minds, as whatever terror it is actually causing disappearances within town and hysteria.

Use combat as a scene tool, not a finale to each hook. The next landing on the finite staircase of a campaign. If you are getting burnt out on a specific type of action the players are taking to a specific scenario you are providing, chance the tools needed to succeed. Someone mentioned social and skill-based stuff. Traps work, especially against min-maxers. Write yourself out a few small scenario ideas, and what they would likely do to solve or reach the goal. Then change parts of your idea to lengthen or alter how they will have to succeed alongside their usual method.

 

[Uskglass]

If one continues to ruin it for everyone, ask them to adjust or leave the table.

And that's fine, but here we have 3 players who have been given a 'brief' by the GM which none got on board with. So who's swimming against the tide?
The there is a complain about how they build their characters, based on a ruleset which has been agreed upon, with also some house rules allowed by the GM! Really? We want to tell players how they should build and play their own characters?
I mean, everyone is free to look for more like-minded people to play with, or adapt to the ones they are actually playing with. Trying to squeeze harder for more control will just result in frustration for all parties involved.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

"A halfling, a drow, and a half-orc walk into a bar..."

The Halfling got a concussion, the Drow bruised his thighs, and the Half-Orc twisted it into a pretzel.

 

[Herobizkit]

It seems like everything I want to do also would work better in a modern-day campaign. *lol*

The War Cleric has decided to go full Valkyrie and worship Sif, so that's at least something I can work with, especially now that her faith empowers women and the Drow ran away from a society where women are dominant.

My players' personalities are thus:
a) The Warpriest's player is extremely capable of free-form storytelling, going with the flow, and gets really deep into characters... if he can ever stick with one. Every day we don't play gives him time to make another character idea he wants to try.
b) The Drow's player is also a DM (currently running a 4e homebrew game for us) and is also a control... enthusiast. His DM style and mine are diametrically opposed. He wants things his way.
c) The Halfling's player is a 100% "love smash, sleep during role-play" player. He can't think extemporaneously and has to be constantly prodded to give any kind of feedback or contribution. He's getting better, though.

I'm a DM with more than 25 years of experience and they're players with a few year's experience. I'm sure that's part of the issue right there. :3

 

[jasin]

Fighter has 20 Dex and is two-weaponing Rapier and dagger (RAW he can't

Wait, what? Isn't this one of the most common TWF combinations in real life, in fiction, and in D&D up till now? How is it disallowed in 5E?

 

[shadow]

I've had that kind of problem every time I've tried to run a Planescape game. Inevitably at least one of the players wants to make a character from the real-world Earth. I always have a problem with such characters because the players want to play up their characters' naiveté and make constant real-world references which really goes against the tone that I try to set for the campaign.