The Fine Art of Quitting a Bad Game

[jhallum]

So you don't believe a DM should control what magic items the party has access to? Which is what I presume you are referring to when you say I am a control freak lol. I let them choose in the game what path they get to take. If anything, I wish they would roam around and talk to more people. I agree about DM's who totally control the game to the point to where they might as well be telling a story.

At the same time, a DM has to exert control to move the plot along. What happens if the players decide to try and climb a wall, and keep missing the DC over and over and over, and then give up, not realizing they have to go that way? As DM, I never give out DC's, so I can juggle and fudge things. Same with combat. No one wants to die when the wandering monster kobold crits you, backs it up, and scores max damage. This is part of being a control freak IMHO.

The groups other DM used to always write adventures where no matter what you did, you always went from A to B to C to D. We as players pretty much were along for the ride. Then he wrote a great Ravenloft adventure, and instead of us doing some investigating, we pretty much waited around for him to move us along. I felt he was frustrated, as much as we were, because we had been so used to the old method.

In games where we start at a higher level, DMs in the group I've been playing in let players control the loadout, but we have veto power over things that might be overkill. We have had one case in the past three years where one character completely dominated over the rest, and that was in a hack and slash City of the Spider Queen game, otherwise we've been pretty balanced using this method.

We also play that if you die during a random encounter, you're really dead, and each individual group of characters has to come up with a new interesting way to divide treasure (which makes for some fun).

We've been doing this together for about 5 years, in about 7 different campaigns, so for us it seems to work out pretty well.

 

[Keifer113]

I once joined a new campaign for three or four sessions. We all started at level 1. I was a cleric. We had a sorcerer, a druid, and a rogue. After the first session we were all level 3 and had earned about 100 gp in treasure. The DM wouldn't even allow us to sell the morningstars and leather armor from the bugbears we had killed because they were "nasty bugbear equipment." After the third or fourth session of this continuing nonsense and the evolution of a plot involving an epic level necromancer who clearly didn't fit into the Dalelands, I stopped attending. The last session was the first one I didn't attend. Apparently only two of the players showed up, and they both left early. The campaign never continued after that.

It is because of this and many similar games that I now DM 90% of the time. I enjoy playing, but to be blunt, I am a stickler for rules and I simply don't have a good time when I know that the DM knows very little about balancing encounters, creating exciting challenges, and simply good storytelling. I admit I'm hard to please though. I expect my DMs to run a campaign like I would run one and that will never realistically happen so until I pull the major stick out of my ass or find a DM who is totally on my wavelength, I will be mostly sticking with DMing.

I am only going to assume the game itself was not fun, and the reason you quit wasn't because your characters were only earning 100gp. Did that 100GP balance out according to the economics of the campaign? Or were you strapped for cash. Why would a low treasure payout kill a game? Why do players think all monsters are slot machines and cash cows?

 

[Storm Raven]

I am only going to assume the game itself was not fun, and the reason you quit wasn't because your characters were only earning 100gp. Did that 100GP balance out according to the economics of the campaign? Or were you strapped for cash. Why would a low treasure payout kill a game? Why do players think all monsters are slot machines and cash cows?

The game was probably not fun because the treasure obtained was so minimal. If I want to work at making ends meet on moderate income, I don't have to play D&D to do that, and neither do most other people. Players, quite reasonably, expect that the rewards they earn will be commensurate with the risks their characters take. A low payout will kill a game if the players believe this is not the case.

 

[Keifer113]

AO was looking for advice on what to do. Of course everything posted by him's skewed towards his POV, that's only natural. The people responding assumed good faith on either side, you as the DM or AO as the disgruntled player, and offered their ideas on how to politely remove himself from the game. Thank you for clarifying the dues about the gaming club, as its a very curious idea to pay money play in a game group and this puts things in a new perspective.

Simply put, AO needed some outside perspectives to help resolve his internal debate about your game. There's nothing really to angry over except some impolite choice of phrases made by AO. Regardless of the situation, I hope both sides can peaciable conclude this and politely part ways.

I think perhaps had he been more truthful about what he posted then I would feel the outside perspectives would be more helpful. He is very inexperienced at gaming, so his assumption that he was in a bad game does not warrant a post full of insults. I can find dozens of players who can attest that I run a fun game. While you can't please everyone all the time, perhaps he should realize this: that we were going to ask him not to come back because his gaming/social skills were not upto par. One of the other players wanted to try and steer him the right way, so I was going to give him that chance. It rankles me that he feels he is an expert when he is not, and I feel the personal attacks are not needed. If he didn't have fun, he didn't have fun. Walk away from the game and find another one. I can see now from his posts that he is just not only a newbie at the game, but very very immature.

So let me ask you this: You are in what you think is a bad game, but you are not experienced. Should you just quit the game, or ask for help from the DM and other players. I have taught people how to game and never had such a problem before.


I would be happy with an apology. I am sure he will cross my path at the FLGS, as I still go there and have a ton of friends who still play there.

 

[Keifer113]

The game was probably not fun because the treasure obtained was so minimal. If I want to work at making ends meet on moderate income, I don't have to play D&D to do that, and neither do most other people. Players, quite reasonably, expect that the rewards they earn will be commensurate with the risks their characters take. A low payout will kill a game if the players believe this is not the case.

Having a blast at playing the game isn't reward itself? Are DnD players egoes so small that they need to have piles of gold thrown at their characters to make them come back to the table?

One of the best game sessions I ever saw....we had rescued a merchant from some zombie pirates, and he told us he would give us a reward once we reached Dyvers. So the party finished its mission, then took off overland to get to the merchant. He rewarded the characters with a fine dinner. The look on some of the players faces was priceless, and we all still get a laugh from it.

Sure that was an example of a single time. But I play the game to have fun, to have fun with friends, drink a few beers. My fun time is not dependant on my character having or winning gold and magic items. Nor are most of the other players. I guess I am not used to players who feel they are owed magic and gold, and that we must agree to disagree on these issues.

 

[shilsen]

Having a blast at playing the game isn't reward itself?

Not for some people. Generally, it is for me. And I play with some people for whom it is less so. Does that mean I'm right and they're wrong, or vice versa? No. It's just an issue of differing tastes.

Are DnD players egoes so small that they need to have piles of gold thrown at their characters to make them come back to the table?

What does that have to do with ego? It's just an example of different ways of playing the game.

One of the best game sessions I ever saw....we had rescued a merchant from some zombie pirates, and he told us he would give us a reward once we reached Dyvers. So the party finished its mission, then took off overland to get to the merchant. He rewarded the characters with a fine dinner. The look on some of the players faces was priceless, and we all still get a laugh from it.

Sounds like fun to me. And it wouldn't be fun for some other people.

Sure that was an example of a single time. But I play the game to have fun, to have fun with friends, drink a few beers. My fun time is not dependant on my character having or winning gold and magic items. Nor are most of the other players. I guess I am not used to players who feel they are owed magic and gold, and that we must agree to disagree on these issues.

What I think you're missing is the fact that your idea of fun isn't any better or more appropriate for the game than anyone else's. If you end up in a group with someone whose ideas don't match yours, then the two of you have to find a compromise that both are okay with, or one has to leave. Simple.

 

[Storm Raven]

Having a blast at playing the game isn't reward itself? Are DnD players egoes so small that they need to have piles of gold thrown at their characters to make them come back to the table?

Playing in a game in which your character has to scrape by every day just to make ends meet despite facing terrible risks on a regular basis is a game that many people would find not to be "a blast".

One of the best game sessions I ever saw....we had rescued a merchant from some zombie pirates, and he told us he would give us a reward once we reached Dyvers. So the party finished its mission, then took off overland to get to the merchant. He rewarded the characters with a fine dinner. The look on some of the players faces was priceless, and we all still get a laugh from it.

I know some parties of adventurers that would have slit the merchant's throat, though that would be rare (and I don't game with those groups any more). I know most parties would simply refuse to help out those in need in promise of future rewards after such an incident. You seem to think you are big on characterization: why would the characters bother to run these risks if there was no reward in it for them? This isn't a question about whether the players are having fun (although they are related), but why would a character risk life and limb in such a manner with no real benefit to them?

Sure that was an example of a single time. But I play the game to have fun, to have fun with friends, drink a few beers. My fun time is not dependant on my character having or winning gold and magic items. Nor are most of the other players. I guess I am not used to players who feel they are owed magic and gold, and that we must agree to disagree on these issues.

If you say you are playing D&D, new people will generally show up and expect to play D&D. Not "Keifer113's variant no-treasure game". Disappointed expectations can make something quite unenjoyable.

 

[Keifer113]

Playing in a game in which your character has to scrape by every day just to make ends meet despite facing terrible risks on a regular basis is a game that many people would find not to be "a blast".



I know some parties of adventurers that would have slit the merchant's throat, though that would be rare (and I don't game with those groups any more). I know most parties would simply refuse to help out those in need in promise of future rewards after such an incident. You seem to think you are big on characterization: why would the characters bother to run these risks if there was no reward in it for them? This isn't a question about whether the players are having fun (although they are related), but why would a character risk life and limb in such a manner with no real benefit to them?



If you say you are playing D&D, new people will generally show up and expect to play D&D. Not "Keifer113's variant no-treasure game". Disappointed expectations can make something quite unenjoyable.

You missed the point. DnD should be fun, regardless of the treasure award. You seem to fall into the kick the door, kill the monster, get the gold kind of gamer. Which is fine. In the end, thats pretty much what the game is about. What I am saying is, the players shouldn't play for the satisfaction of getting the gold. If your life sucks so much that you need a pretend character earning pretend gold to have fun and make yourself and your character cool and that the game isn't fun and the character isn't good without said reward, well then you need to examine what you can do IRL to bolster your self esteem.

Why not just goto Vegas and put nickels in slot machines? Because thats not why people should play these games. Again, I ask the question...what if the game were a blast every week....would you quit because the treasure pay out was small?

In characted yes, sometimes you would question why you are risking life and limb for some gold. Unless your character was a paladin or altruistic. Remember that 1 GP = what...50 bucks? so players killing bugbears and getting 100 gp is like finding 5000 bucks. To me thats not shabby. DnDers have gotten into this mentality that they are owed piles and piles of gold. I say, don't worry about having a small sword, and concentrate on having fun in the game and making a good character and enjoying the story.

Am I pigeonholing what and how I think people should play DnD? Maybe. But I'll stand by my statement. You don't need large amounts of treasure or magic items awarded to you to have fun in the game, and if its the payout of an adventure that defines whether a game is fun to you, then you need to examine what is lacking in your real life and fix that.

 

[Cintra]

I don't haze players. One of the other players joked about it, and in the session during a lull some of them drew a pic of the player and put funny sayings on the shirt...like, I rolled a 1 for penis size. I let it go cause it was harmless in my eyes. When AO started getting upset they stopped and later apologized.
<shrugs>

I say, don't worry about having a small sword . . . (snip) . . . if its the payout of an adventure that defines whether a game is fun to you, then you need to examine what is lacking in your real life and fix that.
<shrugs>

Keifer113 - You've come in here with a lot of insults ("He's inexperienced" and "He lacks interpersonal skills") and self-justifications. You've now added your own innuendo ("small sword") to the immature insult flung by some other member of your group, from which I can infer the level of behavior you adhere to. You’ve completely ignored the folks on this board who point out that you shouldn't feel the need to justify yourself to a bunch of strangers, and you and the OP should just agree to part ways and leave it at that. You’ve also suggested that everyone who disagrees with you must play “only for the gold” and therefore has personal issues. Please check out the code of conduct for these boards, and stop attributing negative attitudes to everyone you disagree with.

I have to say, if I joined a group and the players engaged in scatological insults, I'd leave the group then and there.

I run a game at my FLGS; half the players are still in high school, the other half are adults in their mid-twenties to later-thirties. If members of the group were to act obnoxious to others, I'd immediately put a stop to it. In fact, I HAVE put a stop to it when it's happened, and as a result, I have a group that is very respectful of others. I expect a certain level of behavior, largely because the game store is a public forum, with many young kids in the area, and I WILL NOT allow anyone in the gaming group to engage in language or behavior which could result in angry parents (whether they're parents of the younger folks at my table, or the parents of any kid wandering through the game room) complaining to the store owners, or otherwise causing the owners grief. Of course, I make the assumption that if I run the game at (or even recruit players from) the local game store, my behavior as DM and the behavior of others in the group reflect on the game store.

I also am aware that the core rules include certain assumptions about the amount of treasure PCs should have at each level. If I choose to deviate from those assumptions, I make sure the players know in advance. Even more important, I make sure that the treasure each PC has is balanced with the others. Expecting in-game financial equity with the other PCs is a perfectly reasonable expectation for any player. You, apparently, are quite willing to introduce inequity from the beginning (no magic items when others have them; rude jokes at new players' expense) and you expect people to trust you to make it right in the end. But if these people don't KNOW you, and you treat them as second-class citizens from the start, why should they TRUST you?

I don't see any need for you to continue to insult the OP for having expectations that don't match yours. Please stop seeking justification here for the way you conduct your game; just enjoy your game, and let others enjoy theirs.

 

[Umbran]

Having a blast at playing the game isn't reward itself? Are DnD players egoes so small that they need to have piles of gold thrown at their characters to make them come back to the table?

No. At least, not for everybody. Yes, for some of them.

Does everyone like the same thing in food? In literature? In film? No. Different people have different wants and desires. And, given that this is an entertainment, no one set of wants or desires is fundamentally better than another. There is no "One True Way" of gaming.

Learn that, and learn it fast, or you will find yourself insulting people around here left, right, and center.

But I play the game to have fun, to have fun with friends, drink a few beers. My fun time is not dependant on my character having or winning gold and magic items. Nor are most of the other players.

And if that's what you want from the game, that's cool. But you'll find yourself a better GM if you internalize the fact that other players may want something else.