Player Unrest...
- Thread starter demiurge1138
- Start date
demiurge1138 said:
I don't have one that will help you in the current situation, but I do have one that will help you avoid things like this in the future.
This advice assumes that you have more than just a small handful of people to play with, that you can afford to turn people away from your game due to a difference in playing styles. If that does not describe you, skip the rest of what I have to say.
Before the next game starts, be up front with your GMing style. Lay out your known house rules, table rules, and all the other things that for you are the important things you don't want to change about your game. Be honest and stay honest, and don't get your feathers ruffled if potential gamers don't like that style of play and choose to not game with you for that campaign. Those who do stay and game with you do so knowing what's going on.
It's what I did recently, as I sent out the invites to people interested in a game that I'm starting tonight. Four of the people were new blood, so I wanted the important points on the table early.
Additionally, make the players give you goals for the characters, and then work those goals into your plotline. In reaching their goals, they'll accomplish yours
As for this guy... Well, he's right in that you can't really 'stop' him from doing what he wants. On the other hand, I think he's Not A Very Nice Man (/Piffany) to say the things you say he said. Just because your GMing style doesn't match what he wants does not make yours wrong. There is no wrong, there's just mismatched.
Arnwyn
First Post
I'm with Enkhidu on this one. Ask those two questions (see Enkhidu's post above) first and foremost. Are the other players having fun? If so, things are actually going okay.
Now, are *you* (the DM) having fun? A very important consideration - a campaign cannot continue if the DM isn't having fun.
You must also ask the player *why* he feels that there should be no heroic plot. It's all well and good that some goof player can vomit forth such a comment, but he should then back up his statements with some discussion as to why.
More information on the likes/dislikes of your players is always helpful. And remember, if you aren't having fun then it's time to consider folding the campaign. (I, personally, would do so in a second if I wasn't having any fun, even if the players were. I don't play this game for my health, y'know.)
Now, are *you* (the DM) having fun? A very important consideration - a campaign cannot continue if the DM isn't having fun.
You must also ask the player *why* he feels that there should be no heroic plot. It's all well and good that some goof player can vomit forth such a comment, but he should then back up his statements with some discussion as to why.
More information on the likes/dislikes of your players is always helpful. And remember, if you aren't having fun then it's time to consider folding the campaign. (I, personally, would do so in a second if I wasn't having any fun, even if the players were. I don't play this game for my health, y'know.)
Marius Delphus
Adventurer
IME, a really good D&D campaign requires a sort of willing compromise between the DM and the players: the players agree to a little "following along" and the DM makes it interesting for them to do that. The players rein in any impulses they have to diverge markedly from what they see as the "plot," and the DM prepares a game that has a little flexibility of direction.
When did this change? In my day (waves cane), the DM presented a situation to the players and their characters took up arms and dealt with it. (I feel *old*. )
I apologize if this sounds harsh, but IMHO a player who simply isn't willing to compromise in this way may not really belong in the group. Piratecat's solution is indeed the best if you want to keep the player... otherwise, it might be time for one of those "meaningful discussions" you always see on "Leave it to Beaver."
"Hey Beav, I think your character is a bad fit in my D&D game."
"Gee Wally, I didn't know you felt that way. I guess I've been kind of a jerk."
"Well, I shoulda talked to you sooner."
"I think I've had enough of the Lower Planes/meaningless monster hunting anyway."
"That's the spirit, Beav. I knew you'd come around."
"Being a DM is hard sometimes, huh Wally?"
"Yeah, but it's rewarding too Beav, like when I get Orcus to stomp your characters into the ground. Ha ha!"
"Ha ha!"
And everything is hunky-dory at the end of the half hour.
Or not. Specific free advice (take it or don't ):
demiurge: Bring on the demon cultists: take a page (or two) from the Book of Vile Darkness and show them what Evil *means*. Make sure it affects something they really cared about. I'm reminded of a second-hand story (was it in Dragon Magazine?) about an Evil PCs one-shot the DM ran to meet the players' expressed desire: the PCs *really* cut loose, apparently, with many sorts of behavior that needn't be mentioned in front of Eric's Grandma. Then when the regular campaign picked back up, the regular PCs walked in on the aftermath of the Evil PCs' unrestrained behavior... the story's writer said it was a *huge* wake-up call.
This approach (whether or not the players are allowed to do the marauding) has a significant chance of backfiring of course; 'tis not for those of us not involved in the situation to judge.
dshai: Same general idea: go ahead and bring the apocalypse. The characters don't feel like saving the world out of altruism? It should become *necessary*. Ideally, the players should come to realize, in a moment laden with drama and horror, "we could have prevented this!" where "this" is a scene that will really make them shudder (something on SHARK's scale ought to suffice... remember Helm's Deep? Imagine all the orcs are vrocks etc. instead, and led by four or five balors.)
HTH. YMMV. HAND.
When did this change? In my day (waves cane), the DM presented a situation to the players and their characters took up arms and dealt with it. (I feel *old*.
)I apologize if this sounds harsh, but IMHO a player who simply isn't willing to compromise in this way may not really belong in the group. Piratecat's solution is indeed the best if you want to keep the player... otherwise, it might be time for one of those "meaningful discussions" you always see on "Leave it to Beaver."
"Hey Beav, I think your character is a bad fit in my D&D game."
"Gee Wally, I didn't know you felt that way. I guess I've been kind of a jerk."
"Well, I shoulda talked to you sooner."
"I think I've had enough of the Lower Planes/meaningless monster hunting anyway."
"That's the spirit, Beav. I knew you'd come around."
"Being a DM is hard sometimes, huh Wally?"
"Yeah, but it's rewarding too Beav, like when I get Orcus to stomp your characters into the ground. Ha ha!"
"Ha ha!"
And everything is hunky-dory at the end of the half hour.
Or not. Specific free advice (take it or don't
):demiurge: Bring on the demon cultists: take a page (or two) from the Book of Vile Darkness and show them what Evil *means*. Make sure it affects something they really cared about. I'm reminded of a second-hand story (was it in Dragon Magazine?) about an Evil PCs one-shot the DM ran to meet the players' expressed desire: the PCs *really* cut loose, apparently, with many sorts of behavior that needn't be mentioned in front of Eric's Grandma. Then when the regular campaign picked back up, the regular PCs walked in on the aftermath of the Evil PCs' unrestrained behavior... the story's writer said it was a *huge* wake-up call.
This approach (whether or not the players are allowed to do the marauding) has a significant chance of backfiring of course; 'tis not for those of us not involved in the situation to judge.
dshai: Same general idea: go ahead and bring the apocalypse. The characters don't feel like saving the world out of altruism? It should become *necessary*. Ideally, the players should come to realize, in a moment laden with drama and horror, "we could have prevented this!" where "this" is a scene that will really make them shudder (something on SHARK's scale ought to suffice... remember Helm's Deep? Imagine all the orcs are vrocks etc. instead, and led by four or five balors.)
HTH. YMMV. HAND.
Last edited:
WizarDru
Adventurer
Flexor the Mighty! said:
I agree with the second statement, but couldn't disagree with the first one more. The DM "just manages things"? Where I come from, the DM is either the primary storyteller, or (and this is both my preference and the greater part of my experience) an equal part storyteller in a jointly-written tale.
The DM creates the world, the NPCs, and all the rest. He's more than just a number-crunching adjudicator. I think you do her a disservice by claiming that she's anything less than an equal participant.
To me, the best game is one where the players and the DM both drive each other to greater heights and a more interesting story. My current campaign was given a major drive, in large part, due to one character's back story. I was able to adapt it, bring it into some of the things I wanted to try, and wrap everyone's story into it as a loose framework. Without that character's story, things would have gone much differently.
fett527
First Post
demiurge,
I'l throw my comments in as I am a player in dshai527's current game. I would certainly evaluate the questions Enkhidu put forth. Fun should be the motivating factor for your game. Find out what everyone wants to do and go with it.
Marius,
Dashai's problem is with one character throwning a wrench into the works the rest are intent on the tasks at hand. We're starting to ask ourselves the same questions Enkhidu has put forth. Are we having fun in the current situation? If not, what can we do to remedy the situation? It's something we'll have to determine soon.
I'l throw my comments in as I am a player in dshai527's current game. I would certainly evaluate the questions Enkhidu put forth. Fun should be the motivating factor for your game. Find out what everyone wants to do and go with it.
Marius Delphus said:
Marius,
Dashai's problem is with one character throwning a wrench into the works the rest are intent on the tasks at hand. We're starting to ask ourselves the same questions Enkhidu has put forth. Are we having fun in the current situation? If not, what can we do to remedy the situation? It's something we'll have to determine soon.
Marius Delphus
Adventurer
fett527 said:
My apologies for misreading/misunderstanding.
schporto
First Post
Now I see a couple things to do:
1) The plot don't stop. Keep the plot going. Let the world end. Pop. Don't do what video games do. "Hurry you must hurry to save the heroine." And you ALWAYS get the "just in time". Bah. She shoulda been dead by now.
2) Fine you don't want to do heroic things. That's nice. Here's 6 kobolds. Here's four goblins. Here's 5 kobolds. Ohhh 2 gnolls. Heck all the 'real' monsters are trying to prevent (or foster) the end of the world. OK that's mean and spiteful, but they'd probably get on track realizing that's the only thing available.
3) Ask him how many adventures you (as DM) should have prepared. I may have a few things ready if the groups seems to wanna do something, but usually no more then 3 max. If they just wanna do whatever they want, how on earth are you supposed to prep that?
4) A wizard teleports in (acidental teleport?) and gaes' one of em. Lousy lousy lousy tactic. But works as a force.
5) Or let the party argue it out and go from there.
-cpd
1) The plot don't stop. Keep the plot going. Let the world end. Pop. Don't do what video games do. "Hurry you must hurry to save the heroine." And you ALWAYS get the "just in time". Bah. She shoulda been dead by now.
2) Fine you don't want to do heroic things. That's nice. Here's 6 kobolds. Here's four goblins. Here's 5 kobolds. Ohhh 2 gnolls. Heck all the 'real' monsters are trying to prevent (or foster) the end of the world. OK that's mean and spiteful, but they'd probably get on track realizing that's the only thing available.
3) Ask him how many adventures you (as DM) should have prepared. I may have a few things ready if the groups seems to wanna do something, but usually no more then 3 max. If they just wanna do whatever they want, how on earth are you supposed to prep that?
4) A wizard teleports in (acidental teleport?) and gaes' one of em. Lousy lousy lousy tactic. But works as a force.
5) Or let the party argue it out and go from there.
-cpd
Marius Delphus
Adventurer
fett527 said:
I was here for high school, and now that I'm back I find it's grown a lot since then.
Back on topic, *modified* free advice:
There's a chance of "netting" the errant player back into the plot using the old standby "hit [the character] where it hurts." That little side business dries up and it's no longer possible to turn a profit (nobody's buying the merchandise, the monsters flee the area, whatever). Someone the character knows/cares about becomes a statistic. With this player so focused on what his (selfish!) character would do, cheap story/plot devices might do the trick.
Similar Threads
