• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

My Game Is In Trouble :(

I don’t have much to add, either, save for a question. Is there a reason to stick with this group? I know that sometimes, we put up with stuff from friends that we wouldn't from strangers and acquaintances.

I think many of us are used to sticking it out with a gaming group, because once upon a time, it was hard to find people to game with. These days however, it’s like Walter said in the Big Lebowski:

“You want a toe? I can get you a toe, believe me. There are ways, Dude. You don't wanna know about it, believe me. Hell, I can get you a toe by 3 o'clock this afternoon”

Except, the toe is a D&D group. Whether online or in-person, it's pretty easy these days.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Would you be happy DMing a gonzo murder-hobo game for a party whose primary aesthetics of play are social?

If so, I can maybe help you. If you wouldn't, it's time to close the DM screen.

PS: I am ROTFL over here at the number of people who told you that you should switch out Caverns of Thracia for an "old school dungeon crawl" or something more "sandbox".
 

Entirely possible there are other issues involved, but based on what you shared, I wonder if you could apply some “problem is the solution” thinking here.

I am DMing Caverns of Thracia. My group is the following:

One player who likes to DM from the backseat and correct you on rules at all times

I’d recruit him (?) as the rules lawyer. When there’s a rules question I’m not sure about or don’t care to look up in the heat of DMing, I’d ask him to make a ruling based on his superior rules knowledge.

One player who refused to do anything except for dumb sitcom nonsense
One player who finds the sitcom player hilarious

Sounds like one player is in touch with his (?) sense of humor. It may not be to your taste, but it’s making at least one more casual player laugh, and that’s a good thing. You want some amount of humor in your D&D games. It breaks tension, it helps the group avoid inter party conflict, and reminds the more serious-minded to have fun.

One player sort of new to D&D and these are the only people he has played with so that's all he knows

We also have guest players who come and go:

One player who just learned the game and doesn't really know how to play

Someone's girlfiend

One player who is a math whiz in real life and for whom rules are his safe zone, so he plays with an eye toward rules, the narrative is irrelevant to him. It's a logic puzzle you just need to know the rule to solve.

You’re introducing new folks to D&D - hats fantastic! Don’t worry that they don’t know the rules or are bit quieter or whatever. If they’re having fun, it’s all good. Hey, maybe one of them is not so good at math & I could have the math whiz buddy up to support that person?

They all play murder hobo style.

This story is true of most DMs at some point in their DMing career. The thing I did was embrace it, and run an adventure/setting that supports that style.

I have been trying to DM Caverns of Thracia for them...

They don't think to search for secret doors.

Maybe the 10-foot pole dungeon search / painstaking description of searching for traps isn’t their style of play? Nothing wrong with that. Maybe a more cinematic/swashbuckling game of derring do would be up their alley?

The Ranger went into the woods and I mentioned this might be a good time to scout around and see what the place is about. He decided that no, he just wanted to look for berries.

Fantastic! You’ve got a player who - despite a warning from the DM about danger, sticks to his guns in portraying his character as a forager. I’d describe the berries he finds (goodberries?) along with some conflict of challenge tied to the berries. Maybe he notices some of the fallen overripe ones are squished forming a trail of hyena like humanoid tracks with berry seeds in them...gnolls!

The adventure concerns warring factions and I first had them meet one group who actually namedropped someone (their leader) but that just went in one ear and out the other. I sent three small groups of gnolls at them and had each group the last member surrender hoping they might question him, "take me to your leader", let him go and follow him, something to get the basic idea out in the open to the players, but no they just kill the gnolls even if they drop their weapon.

Every DM will face this challenge too. “Take no prisoners, remember no names.” One trick I use is coming up with names that are a bit close to something recognizable. Even though it charges my inner narrator to hear the players call Ras T’fima “Rasta” or Asric “Asterisk”, you know what? They’ve actually remembered those names cause they had a good laugh about it.

But humor isn’t the only way to get players to remember names you want them to remember.

Memory is linked to emotion. The more the players feel something when that NPC is introduced - fear, humor, sympathy, suspicion, anger (or several at once) - the more likely someone in the group will remember. For example, I hinted about a death knight for my low level PCs and they were scared, when they found out his name was Ras T’fima they made the “Rasta” joke, and then after a tense first meeting they realized he was kind of sympathetic. That play of emotions means they remember his name now.

Another way to reinforce this is with a recap of last session at the beginning. Usually I have a player do this, but I read the room and if I feel like I need to go it (e.g. to repeat a name they’ve forgotten), I will.

They found a clue telling them to look for a squat black building, but they didn't. They ignored it.

Wonderful learning moment for you as DM. Google the “three clue rule” on the Alexandrian blog: basically, if there is a clue the PCs need to get where you want them to go, you need to be prepared to drop that clue 3 Times. The first they’ll miss, the second they’ll misinterpret, and by the 3rd time they just might get it.

They needed help rules wise since they were just barging in everywhere acting foolish. They ran into a creature that had 3 attacks per rd for 2d10 +4 of damage. They are second level and were getting their heads handed to them, so I split up the three attacks having the monster take 2 attacks with his 19 initiative but saving his last attack for next to last in the rd. The idea was to give them a chance to kill this thing before he attacked with his third attack. The rules lawyer told me this is wrong, and one player told me don't do that. I told them in D&D the DM can change rules around, but the backseat DM is fighting every call I make.

Wow! Players arguing with you to stick to rules even to their detriment! That’s a very fair-minded group. Sounds like they want a real challenge, and they want to see their actions have consequences for good or ill. Maybe establishing that baseline of trust - that you respect their style of play and are going to run it without fudging much - will help them be more generous towards those few times when you really do feel it’s in the game’s best interest to fudge. Personally, I appreciate it when players say “No, lets play it where it lies.” I just had a player do that with a zombie scene I was trying to wrap up as their progress through a dungeon had been slower than I’d haves liked, but one player said very emphatically “no, don’t give me benefit of the doubt, I want to play this combat out.” Listen to players like this! They are a gift!

The sitcom guy played a gnome ranger because he found it funny he can't see through the grass and he wanted a longsword. I said that seems pretty impossible to me and I could see a dagger or a short sword as a stretch. I was told by the guy who finds sitcom funny "what difference does it make?!?"

“I could see a dagger or short sword as a stretch.” Classic. Good one. ;)
 

You’re introducing new folks to D&D - hats fantastic!
OK, "hats fantastic" just became my slogan for the week! :)

As for the OP, other than the rules guy (on whom I'd probably have to use the smackdown hammer once or twice) I'd probably have a blast DMing this group. And from what I know of Caverns of Thracia it's as good a dungeoncrawl as any, stick with it.

I worry that maybe you're taking the game a bit too seriously, where your players aren't; and I'm sorry but that's on you. Let whatever happens happen and some of the players will come around once they get invested in the campaign and attached to their characters, but note this "get invested" process can sometimes take a few years. Yes, that's right: years.

And I always find the parts that come before they "get invested" are always the most fun, and often the most memorable.

Lan-"hats fantastic!"-efan
 


Seems to me like you need to run a different style of campaign with this group. This doesn't seem like the sort of group that will follow the plot, or clues. A sandbox may be more up their alley. One with a less serious tone.

Alternatively, you can look for a more serious group of players.

Agreed, you have a party of non-serious murder hobos. That suggests a very episodic campaign style where very little carries over from one episode to another.

Put them deep behind enemy lines in a setting where two large kingdoms are at war and everyone they come across is perfectly happy to kill them.
 

I once spent way too long running a campaign I had no interest in for players who loved it. I wound up burning out so hard I very nearly quit the hobby entirely. So I would say if you can adjust your style/campaign to something that better suits your group, and you would enjoy that campaign, then rock on. If not, it's probably time to have a frank conversation with your group about the sort of campaigns you're willing to run, which may lead to finding/building a new group.
 

You've given them chances and clues. Don't hold back anymore until their stupidity kills them. Sounds like they don't want to play a serious game--which can be ok and fun to do from time to time, but if you don't share that same mindset, then move on. Try to take the new guy with you...we need the new blood.
 

I noticed that you said my game is in trouble. Well, the game is not only yours, but also of every other participant. As you are the DM, it doesn't automatically become only yours and it doesn't mean that you don't have to have fun.
It is OK that you are looking for solutions to make it better for the others, but the other players should be looking for solutions to make it better for you as well (assuming they know that you are not having fun....)
 

I don’t have much to add, either, save for a question. Is there a reason to stick with this group? I know that sometimes, we put up with stuff from friends that we wouldn't from strangers and acquaintances.

They are my friends before the D&D so it is complicated.

We had another session. The backseat DM who is playing a sorcerer found a crystal ball they were told controls some sort of teleportation device somewhere. He smashed it. So ok, I can get a plot element out of that since it is important, but what kind of sorcerer would do such a thing? Forget the sorcerer, the lack of curiosity and total disinterest on the part of the player in anything except combat is depressing at times.

The sitcom guy found a scroll. He says "well this could be dangerous, I better rip this up!". The new guy is playing a wizard, it's such disregard for anything other than his own chaos agent nonsense. I nodded no to the wizard player and he decided he was going to have to kill the sitcom character. In the end, the person playing a cleric charmed or commanded sitcom to drop the scroll, and then the player said "I can't come back if you guys aren't going to let me play". Then the discussion later was "we can't do that to him because he will take it personally outside the game"

It's a mess.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top