Selfish playstyles and other newer issues with the game

[Bleys Icefalcon]

How is no smart phones at the table not a rule?

The lesser of two evils? When I enforce the phone ban they get very bored very fast. The gaming equivelent of are we there yet? All kinds of out of game cross-talk ensues (and when it gets to the Marvel cinematic universe, I invariably get sucked in). I have been working on my double standard when it comes to the offspring. Up until roughly a couple years back I would put up with more from them, than from my other gamers (something that was causing a bit of irritation for them). I have finally come to the realization they (the offspring) bascially want World of Warcraft on paper. My game is collaborative storytelling all the way, which really requires a more comitted investment into the process. They have both happily and sadly begun to drift away. Sniff, empty nest syndrome...

 

[Bluenose]

I have seen this problem, mostly with older players who get jaded at "just another fight". But I've also seen something that works as an antidote - playing one of those cooperative adventure games, like Descent or Zombicide. These games have very clear synergies built in, and the action is fast and lethal enough that players feel there's a point in using such abilities. Also, because it is "just a boardgame", gameplay can be much more dangerous, even lethal. When you die in an RPG you lose your connection to the story, when you die in a boardgame its just a smudge in the evening's fun.

If people try this, pick one that matches the genre, and don't say that it's to teach cooperation. The people for whom that's a dirty word will not appreciate it. Tell everyone it's to get them into the mood for the genre.

 

[Lanefan]

In my experience it's often more character-level dependent than anything else. Low-level types stick together because they have to but once characters start getting to mid-high levels they've often got enough going for them to make it on their own, and so off they go.

One small way to fight this is to be really really harsh on multi-classing (or in other words, ban it outright), and on abilities that cross over into other classes' niches. A character that can do a little bit of everything often doesn't need the rest of the party. A character that provides strengths in one aspect (let's say fighting) but has glaring weaknesses in another (can't heal itself) usually ends up far more party-oriented.

That said, I'm not on board at all (either as player or DM) with the idea that everyone has to be team-first all the time. Am I not allowed to play a selfish character, for example?

I've only played with a few groups of players. They've almost always fought together as a team. Often they cannot work together outside of combat. (I don't allow that in any game I'm DMing.)

Let me get this absolutely straight: you don't allow characters to do anything other than work together??? Please clarify.

Lan-"besides, if I adventure alone who's gonna haul my sorry corpse back to town and raise it when I die"-efan

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

So computers are killing it? Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised. The more connected everybody is with computers & social media, the more distant people become. It's a contradictory quandary.

Not related to your point, but I must say--I love your avatar! That's the Great Goblin, right?

 

[Mishihari Lord]

I'm sure a lot of factors contribute, but I think the rules are an important one. There has been a shifting focus on group vs individual action across editions. In 1E cooperation was critical. The party's nukes were the magic-user's spells, but he was extremely vulnerable, with spell interruptions, low hp and lousy AC. The most important strategy was protect the mage so he could get his heavy hitters off. In 2E, 3E, and 4E, PCs, especially mages, have been progressively less vulnerable, frex through the nerfing of spell interruption and nerfing save or die spells, decreasing the need for group cooperation. Then along comes 5E, and while I haven't played it yet, my impression is PCs are more vulnerable than in 4E. Players aren't used to this and some of them probably just aren't adjusting to it, especially those who haven't played the early editions.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Let me get this absolutely straight: you don't allow characters to do anything other than work together??? Please clarify.

Lan-"besides, if I adventure alone who's gonna haul my sorry corpse back to town and raise it when I die"-efan

I do a session 0, where the characters are discussed before gameplay, and not just in mechanical terms. Expectations are given (eg in my current campaign, all PCs are evil, but usually it's the opposite. They're usually told they're all friends who trust each other at the beginning. I've had a campaign or two fall apart because the PCs were total strangers at the beginning and after a few sessions still refused to trust each other). If someone is refusing to play a cooperative game, then they're not playing a character in the cooperative game.

 

[howandwhy99]

Read up on Cooperative game design. It's how D&D was originally designed. Every player for themselves and rewarded individually, but learning how to work together and slowly trust each other. Cooperative games are trust games after all. "Don't Split the Party" was play advice. So was how to divide treasure. These were the players learning how to work together. Compare this to contemporary "collaborative" designs where no game play occurs at all. Just showing up is collaborating and lots of folks like to show off by doing the coolest thing they can think off (usually without regard for consequences).

Of course these are unfair descriptions. There are problems that can creep up in the tightest of cooperative boardgames. And joint collaboration for creative endeavors have all kinds of upsides. But the middle ground of waiting to go and then operating solo has meant all kinds of player reliance on group play or storytelling cooperation isn't supported.

 

[Fedge123]

I've played RPG's for almost 40 years, and while circumstances, technologies, systems, etc., have changed, the one constant that hasn't changed is Human Nature. It's been pretty constant for thousands of years, and it's fundamental human nature for people to look out for their own best/self interest first. Nothing wrong with that, that's how people have survived.

But, if you want to encourage cooperative and team play in an RPG then as a DM you have the responsibility to reward that style of play. Make it in their best interest to work/play as a team. A few thoughts:

- reward and give incentives for good role-play over maximizing individual game-play and character optimization
- create obstacles and traps that require more than one person to overcome/get out of
- larger numbers of weaker monsters rather than one tough monster - where single PC's (no matter how powerful) can be overwhelmed by sheer numbers without help from the rest of the team
- orient your adventures towards the strengths of the 'weakest' player on the team
- If your player party is made up of 'optimized killing machines' - create adventures and challenges that are non-combat
- don't allow smartphones at the table
- take a 10 minute play-break every 45 minutes (numerous studies have shown that the human mind can optimally maintain concentration for only 45 minutes without a short break)
- maintain interest by mixing things up so there's something for everyone - combat-heavy, RP-heavy, mystery, social interaction, humor mixed with deadly serious, etc.
- find your groups ideal speed of level advancement and dial it back a little - try to keep it low, but not so low players lose interest. High level characters will eventually split off to do their own thing, it's inevitable. Try and make levelling up a real achievement.

There's lots more you can do. As a DM you are responsible for creating the environment that players play in and setting the tone and handing out rewards.

 

[Fedge123]

Reading my own post above, I realize now that a lot of that advice is the similar to the advice I give and get at work. I've manged people in business for almost as long as I've been a DM. Who knows, maybe those aspiring to be a better DM should pick up a business people management book? Being good at an RPG may help you in your career!

 

[Starfox]

- take a 10 minute play-break every 45 minutes (numerous studies have shown that the human mind can optimally maintain concentration for only 45 minutes without a short break)

I feel it is kind of implied that a hour of game time consists of 45 minutes of play and 10 minutes of break... a total of 55 minutes. The last 5 minutes are impossible to account for.