Respect for the DM?

[moritheil]

That's the truth. My player in my one PC campaign is a great role player, but she admits that she can lose track of her wide array of options: Combat Expertise, bardic music bonuses, items, etc. I started doing out index cards which seemed to help a bit. I tend to role play my ranger more "heroically" than "grim mercenary playing the odds" despite being in one campaign with a DM who's a tactical whiz. I should probably change that behavior.

Paradoxically, I find attention to character generation helps most if you're a RPer. That's why I picked up character optimization when I switched to 3.5 - even if I don't use all my tactical options efficiently, it won't automatically wipe the party I'm with, because I started out with a bit of an edge.

Also, if player morale is poor, you might consider running a cake walk: let them be go-ram heroes and splatter the ordinary goblin tribal menace once in a while.

It works the other way around in most of my campaigns - kill the dragon? No sweat. Kill the kobold sorcerers? Trouble!

 

[Jin_Kataki]

Im wondering if I am being really picky or if any other DMs have had this problem more recently than previously.

In the past I had very little problems with players. Every group generally has a problem player but thats to be expected. Now adays though I see more and more people who either don't respect what the DM is doing or don't care.

Now you can chalk alot of this up to people not respecting other people, which fudimentally, is prolly what its all about. But Im wondering if there is a deeper issue here. Like maybe the way the game mechanics are taught or even the game mechanics themselfs.

I will give examples of what I mean by players "disrespecting" thier Dms.

1.) As a DM you pour over sources, books, and stories collecting ideas and building a game. You make it unique and involve all the players and characters to make it interesting for everyone. When you get to your second or even your first scene of the evening and the players don't like what they are fighting or were suprised to see themselfs at a disadvantage for once they get upset and claim that the encounter is "unfair" due to the fact that they have to work for thier treasure.

2.) You warn the group ahead of time that a rule will be changed for a paticular encounter. You explain why to the best of your ability without giving away the encounter ahead of time. You also go through the effort of making sure that everyone in the group fully understands the new rule. When it comes time to use the rule and they dont' like it, they refer to it as "retarded" or "stupid". Instead of simply telling you why they dont' like it and why its effects are too negetive, they go on a rant about how "dumb" it is, without citing a reason why. These types of things could be taken personally becaue you spend every free minute you have writting for them and they, inturn, bash your game.

3.) When some one in the group requests an item from a source book or a source you paticularly don't like, trust, or you may even think it is broken. At first a second appeal is to be expected providing that they can give a decent reason why THEY think it would be ok for them to have it in your game. But when you have to say "No" 3, 4, and even 5 times what do you do then? You may have reasons that you cannot reveal to them yet. The item or ability may not fit the campaign world. The item may even be broken. Isn't it a little disrespectful to assume that your DM is just skrewing you or not considering your opinion of what is fun?

4.) Last one, I promise. I get the attitude from my players, more often than not, that the game is them vs me. Not the characters against the monsters, enemy, or even the challenge. I, the DM am targeted alot with snide, offensive, or even generally mean comments. Which I usually tack up to them just meaning to aim thier comments at the villians in the game and not me. But it goes beyond comments or name calling. They expect me to skrew them at every turn and they expect me to try to kill them every chance I get. This is generally not my intention, I write and perform every game, whether they realize it or not, with plenty of chances for them to get out of every bad situation they put themselfs in. An example of this is a paticular player who continously makes bad decisions and gets himself killed often (once every 3 games on average). He gets mad at me that "I" kill him or that my games are too tough.

Now don't get me wrong, I have had a million fun times with these same people but I feal heavily underappriciated and generally abused as a DM. I feal that it is harder than people think to write a game and even hard to write a GOOD game. I feal that there is more to just throwing together some story and plot line. You want everyone in the group to have a good time and be entertained therefore you have to manage the tastes and concerns of everyone at your game table including you.

Granted there is alot of whinning in here and those who know me best will even say that I am just whinning. So give it to me straight! Is this me or has respect for the DM gone the way of the dinosaur?

It is clear to me your only choice is to move back to Michigan.

 

[Lanefan]

It may or may not be too late to fix this particular go-around, but for future reference:

1. If you put together any sort of introduction to your game that you give to the players at time of initial roll-up (I highly recommend you do this), make good and sure it states clearly that Bad Things Will Sometimes Happen To Your Characters because well, that's just how it goes. Then later, when bad things do happen, they've been warned.

2. In the same introduction, clearly state what books and expansions are allowed and that *no* others will be allowed, period. (you as DM also have to stick to this; if some wow-whiz-bang splatbook comes out halfway through your campaign, do NOT adopt it in midstream; wait for your next campaign)

3. As for the one player who goes through characters like Spinal Tap goes through drummers, there's not very much you can do without some serious fudging; not recommended. We have a player like that in our crew...no matter what the situation, if someone's going to die - even if it's completely random - it's going to be *his* character. (and I don't mind this, mainly because I've spent more than enough time in that role and it's someone else's turn)

Lanefan

 

[Urbannen]

It may or may not be too late to fix this particular go-around, but for future reference:

2. In the same introduction, clearly state what books and expansions are allowed and that *no* others will be allowed, period. (you as DM also have to stick to this; if some wow-whiz-bang splatbook comes out halfway through your campaign, do NOT adopt it in midstream; wait for your next campaign)

Lanefan

Oh God, if only it were that easy.

DMing my first 3.5 campaign has made me realize what it must feel like to wheel a five-year-old through the cereal aisle.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Not every set of players even want a reasonable challenge. Some of them just want to be uber gods and basically waltz through their encounters leaving huge trails of dead creatures in their wake while collecting treasure that makes them even more godlike. If the balance of your group wants to play this way, running a different game is not going to make them happy, that's unfortunately just how it is.

Yet another group of players may want to explore the world they are in and the story that they are helping build with the fights as a backdrop. It's often a mistake to assume that someone with different motivations than you really has the same ones but is pursuing them immaturely.

"Gabe" of Penny Arcade had an interesting blog once on what he looks for in a video game, and it isn't a challenge. He enjoys the "new art" of a game, seeing what it can do and what can be done within it. Some players enjoy rpgs in a similar way. They aren't at the table to be challenged, but that doesn't always mean that they just want the stereotypical rewards of a "challenging" game without the work, it can mean that they want something different from the game experience.

 

[Mamacat]

Just a suggestion, but....why not have one of THEM run the game for awhile? They may get a better appreciation for what goes into being a DM/GM. And you may appreciate the break, the chance to play, and time to recharge your batteries, as it were.

 

[DestroyYouAlot]

I agree with a previous poster on this...it's hard to give advice without knowing if you really were fair with the ruling or if it was pretty half-assed. With 3e, I've learned to stay very close to the rules with very very little house rules. 3e gave birth to all kinds of new rules lawyers in D&D and it's just too hard to please everyone with custom rules. I had to learn to be a rules lawyer DM just to keep players from arguing with me during the game. 3e players are sticklers for the rules and that's just the way it is :\

See, I can't get behind validating this tendency. I'm far from a proponent of d20-based D&D, but I do believe it can be used to good effect - if the first thing you do is to rip this particular canard (that "this is 3e so we, the players, get to call out the DM if he changes something") out by the roots.

Overall, assuming the OP is on the level, I'd say it's about one more bad session until find-a-new-group time. I have a real problem with the idea that somebody'd turn up for a game - presumably one they're not paying the DM for, but rather one he's prepared on his own time out of a desire to show the group a good time - and straight up bitch about it.

Granted, I'm from the era of "DM as dread ruler of the table, fall before him and weep", but all the same the social contract goes both ways. I don't see most players spending a week's worth of lunch hours and TV time to provide 4 hours of fun for the group, so if I want to change the way something works, you can damn sure bet you're going to give it a shot - and if you have concerns, there are 164 hours during the week when I'm not in charge to bring it up. NOT at the table.

On the difficulty issue - well, while I'm not, as a rule, all that sympathetic to folks that want D&D on "easy mode", that is some peoples' playstyle, and it's a valid way to play the game if that's what rings your bell. However, that doesn't mean that you're obligated to run it that way just because the players want it. (FWIW, even players who want a challenge will usually ask for more than they get; it's the nature of the human animal.) If you're not going to be fulfilled by running a game that hands the world to the players, they need to find somebody that will be - you're not a trained monkey, it's not your job to jump through hoops for their amusement. Likewise, you may need to find a group of hardcore roleplayers that wants the kind of challenge you're ready to provide.



Here's what I'd suggest - take from it what you will: Cheat on them. Not like fudging dice rolls cheat, but tell them there's no game for a week; you're running a one-shot for some other gamers that day. (If you can actually find people you'd like to game with, even for a day, you may be in better shape if you end up dumping the group. Or just get in touch with another group and give their DM the chance for a night off, and to actually play for once!) Run a game for these other folks, the way you want to run it. Give yourself a change of scenery, so to speak; shake the dust off. See what kind of feedback you get from the other group. If the reviews are rave, you know it's not just you that's the issue. And if the experience is better for you, maybe that's a sign you'd be better off with more appreciative players. Meanwhile, your regular group gets to cool their heels for a night and think about how great it is to have a dedicated DM. Maybe, just maybe, the next week they're docile as kittens, buy you pizza and carry your books and stuff. You never know.

YMMV.

 

[jdrakeh]

Yet another group of players may want to explore the world they are in and the story that they are helping build with the fights as a backdrop. It's often a mistake to assume that someone with different motivations than you really has the same ones but is pursuing them immaturely.

This is the interweb! Away with you and your well-reasoned logic!

 

[pogre]

Pass the DM hat and have a sit down about why you are doing so.

 

[haakon1]

These are interesting issues. I've either encountered complaints of each of these types, or thought about it myself and decided I didn't want the appearance of this, so I designed my DMing around not causing offense in this area.

1) "Unfair encounters". Use a published module. That way, there's no arguing that you were screwing them -- it's WOTC's design. Then go back to yours, which is probably not that different.

2) "Rule change for a particular encounter". Don't do it. Use consistent rules, and keep it as simple as possible. For me, the only rules are the Core Books, plus the Greyhawk guide, the gods book, and the WOTC monster books. Limited crunch might limit rules arguments. Also, the rules that apply to PC's must also be applied to monsters, which cuts both ways. No made up magic beyond PC crunch is important for some players too.

3) "Requested items". My answer again is just say no to crunch. I banned all non-WOTC and non-Core sources, so no problem. Of course, some of my players bring me stuff anyhow, but it's more often feat ideas than anything else. My rule of thumb is it needs to a) make sense in the Tolkienesque feel I am for and b) get a netbook of feats rating of 4.5 or higher. For items, it has to be historical. Also, I NEVER let PC's just buy magic items, except from one magic shop, where I determine the inventory, which turns over very rarely. No picking magic items works because of another rule I have -- every character starts at first level. You can use ECL's, but you have EARN every character level and every bit of loot beyond starting wealth.

4) "Them v. me". Lots of people assume this. One counter to it is NPC party members/DMPC's joining the party. There's nothing like the DMPC getting Coup de Grace'd by evil halflings to show folks it's not "against" them, it's just a tough world, unforgiving world! Yes, I really did do this one!