So -- Here are my players... What should I do?

[Mordane76]

Here's how I feel...


My players are always rearing to go, chomping at the bit, so to speak. They never want to stop, never look towards game downtime, and usually try to solve situations with violence without attempting other avenues. It's always complete one objective, move immediately to the next -- even if I would like to work downtime into the story. No one evers says anything along the lines of "Wait... My character needs to spend a few weeks doing this or that."

Most of the party (all but one) are neutral. The only good member of the party is CG, and while he is often troubled by the bloodshed, he is not actively trying to stop it. Even when they do atttempt other avenues, they usually tinge their diplomacy with veiled threats of violence.

Much of the campaign pits the group against the establishment -- they are presently envoys of a newly-forming empire. This will make them part of an establishment, but not part of the status quo...


It's hard to plan for this group, because I would like to run more RP-heavy storylines, but I always find myself dulling the RP because I know what the players will do -- they'll try and kill it. I fear that my cleverly crafted plotlines will be shredded by arrows, swords, spells, and fists because the players generally approach all matters with a thinly-veiled "Kill it and Take its Stuff" attitude.



Should I just run a hack-n-slash for this group? Am I trying to re-invent the wheel? Is there possibly something I'm doing wrong that's feeding this behavior?

 

[kengar]

First, try talking to the group. Explain that, while you don't want to bore them, you'd like to have fun too and constant Hack & Slash isn't all that fun to DM. YMMV on this, but it's true for me. This was a difficult point for me to make to my group. They couldn't belive I found DM-ing melee after melee dull. Most groups are pretty understanding that different folks find different things fun.

Second, try splitting the possible XP awards between RP and combat. If there is a "carrot", sometimes the stick isn't necessary. The split doesn't have to be 50-50, but if you start making the combats a little less rewarding XP-wise, and giving some XP out for other things, you might see a shift in playing style.

Another thing is to simply have situations in your adventures where violence and threats simply won't get them what they need/want. Convincing a high-level paladin to loan them an item they need, etc.

Thirdly, it is possible that this group just isn't one that is going to give you that kind of campaign. At that point, you have to decide whether it's a group you want to keep playing with or not.

Good luck!

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

Depends. If they're happy and you're happy, don't sweat it. However, it sounds as though you're not happy with the situation.

So, based on many months of ENworlding, I suggest the following:

Simply have them reap the consequences of their actions. If they go around threatening and killing everybody, let the word spread about this group of raving lunatics. Let rumour build on rumour until they start hearing about themselves as the evil villains.

If they're going against the establishment, why not have the establishment hit back harder? I'm sure you have some powerful groups in your campaign world - would they put up with this?

I'm not advocating killing the characters, merely letting them see that "Kill It And Take It's Stuff" isn't always the most rewarding thing to do.

And don't forget, what they've got written on their characters sheets under alignment is only what the player thinks it is. As a DM, you could certainly view their actions as evil, and have the world treat them as such.

 

[justfisch]

One of the most rewarding adventures I have ever played has been one in which an ogre turned out to be good. It goes like this:
Ogre family has moved into an area near an isolated town, food is scarce, and the ogre has taken a small goat or something to feed his family for a bit. He has left a small purse of coin to pay for the goat, but the farmer fails to mention this when he tells the PC's of his goats disappearence. The PC's then of course head into the forest see an ogre. The ogre runs instead of fights(not typical for an ogre). The party hopefully talks with the ogre at some point to figure out that he is not evil and out to do harm. If not, and the party kills the ogre, have the ogre's body turn into that of a typical human. The ogre and his family is infact polymorphed. You could have just about any reason for why, but I use the fact that they were cursed by a witch, who's sister was killed by a Paladin. This ogre is the brother of the Paladin. There is more to the story, but I think that you get the general idea.
I usually use this type of addventure on a low level party to set the tone of a campain. If the party ends up killing any of the ogres, you can play on the emotional distress that this causes, don't let your players off easy, let them know that they killed an obviousely good person and that repercusions are going to follow. If the party learns of the truth, or by some means even removes the curse, there are a number of benefits that should be given to the PC's.

hope you like,
cheers,
justfisch

 

[MarauderX]

Puzzles. Give them puzzles, mazes and mysteries they need to solve themselves, not the PCs but the players. Allow their abilities to give them hints, but take them on several wild chases that lead nowhere if they jump at their first instincts. Example: They murder a neutral medusa for turning people to stone when the actual blame was an evil cleric looking to frame the medusa and give the PCs a bad name. City adventures slow up hack-n-slash players usually, and when they do get to fight they are so much more into it than normal, and if they get too frustrated they don't play.

 

[dreaded_beast]

in my opinion, things like this are better solved out of game than in game. i think that players may miss the point of what you are trying to do unless they are blatant told.

sit down and have a "heart to heart" with your players and let them know how you feel and what type of campaign you want to run. like a previous poster mentioned, all that matters is if both sides have fun. if the players understand what type of game you want to run, then you could possibly come up with some sort of compromise.

this is a 2-way street, players need the dm and vice-versa. the game is only fun for both if both are in some semblance of harmony.

 

[Sholari]

It sounds like this group has never faced any enemy they couldn't overcome with combat. I'd recommend building more fear of the enemy into the game. This is not saying send hordes of dragons against them, but put them up against an elusive and unknown faction. Start out with them taking out a couple plots run by lower level members of the faction. The PCs overcome these flunkies with no problem. This gets the attention of the faction and they send a couple assassination groups to take out the players when they are most vulnerable. Give the squad enough power and intelligence that it will be a close fight. The key is to only reveal slight hints and just how big and powerful this faction is. But what the players find out they do not like and the problem is they do not know enough about the enemy to know where their base of operations is. This forces them to roleplay because the only way they are going to find out about their enemy is to start asking around. Brute force will get them no answers. (An excellent example of this is the "preamble" to 2nd edition Queen of Spiders that is very portable to any campaign by the way). Have the enemy frame them, turn their friends against them, and use all sorts of tactics they can not fight with sheer combat. Heck, the enemy could even include people who they currently think are their friends. If done correctly they will start to feel that the safest solution isn't always brute force because indescriminant brute force brings with it consequences.