When Worlds Collide ... Different Play Styles and Gamer Rage

[Retreater]

A little background. I am the DM for a large group (seven players and one DM) of various gaming (and lifestyle) backgrounds.

We have 3 that are in their 20s and are relatively new to gaming. These are the ones who are interested in trying new things and are still learning what works and what doesn't. Their strategies haven't really developed at this point - but they bring excitement and energy to the table.

We have 3 that are in their 40s and have been gaming for decades. They are very cautious players who scold the young 'ens for reckless behavior and try to dictate their actions. When the younger players proceed with their actions, the older players call them "stupid." Things get uncomfortable.

The remaining player and me (the DM) are both middle-of-the-road, in experience, gaming style, and age.

After a particular debaucle last session, the three younger players have confided in me that they want to kill off the characters of the older players and kick them out of the group, or they don't want to play anymore. The older players - while not being so bold in their demands of what to do with the younger players - criticize the game for not being as fun.

I told the younger players that under no circumstances should the fight happen at the gaming table and that all of these issues should be addressed and discussed outside of the game.

If you were behind my DM screen, how would you proceed with this situation?

Retreater

 

[Diamond Cross]

Well it does seem to me that it is the older players that are making things hostile for the new players.

You can always threaten to just stop the entire game if they all don't stop it.

 

[JoeGKushner]

In my opinion, you made the right call of trying to have the people talk things out.

However, if the gaming styles are so vastly different that no compromise can be met, the GM has to go with the people whose playstyles he enjoys more.

Doesn't mean the other group is filled with 'bad people', but there's nothing like being prepared for some hack and slash when someone else wants to check every five feet of three hundred foot coridor and have the mules and henchemen cover the front and back just in case and hey, throw in some canaries and .... Sometimes different play styles don't mesh and that's okay. It's a vast game and with the right players and GM can accomidatem any styles, just not necessarily all at once.

 

[Dykstrav]

First off, you're doing the right thing by handling it out-of-game. Anyone who is worth playing with can be addressed reasonably and will hear you out and work towards what is best for the game.

However, I would caution you to be impartial. The older players may or may not be more overtly hostile to the younger players, but if the younger players are coming to you about their problems with other people instead of directly talking to them... Passive-aggressive behavior is a form of hostility as well. It's just more neurotic and whiny/emotional than the people who are flat-out jerks. They are telling you that they don't believe that they can work things out, or maybe that they shouldn't. Not good signs.

I used to play in a Vampire: the Masquerade LARP where hostility was almost mandatory, and I've seen too many games lately devolve into the same territory. It's one of the major factors that has made me become far more selective about who I play with these days.

The best advice I have to offer is 1) Remain impartial. Don't take a side until you've heard both sides of the story, separately and with both parties present. Establish up-front that you're a DM, not a counselor or a mediator. Presumably, you're doing this to have fun. Let the parties involved know exactly how far you're willing to work with them and at what point you're going to use the nuclear option. Stick to your guns. Don't let people try to push you around by insulting you or manipulate you with emotional outbursts.

2) Don't do anything based on anonymous, generic, or second-hand information. Require specific, first-hand accounts of a perceived offense. "Todd tries to keep all the best magic items for himself and complains when he doesn't get his way," is a legitimate concern. "Todd is a smelly jerk who is ruining the fun for the whole group and you should kick him out," on the other hand, is opinion. Usually, if you make people list specific grievances, they either realize that they're overreacting or you have a basis for a legitimate concern.

If people aren't willing to sit down with the offending party and work it out, you can't help them. Furthermore, let them know that you're going to talk to the other person about it, and that you're going to make sure that they know who is accusing them of what.

3) Don't take it personally. Realize that player disagreements are not an indication of your skill as a DM--you shouldn't be expected to make players get along in addition to running a great adventure and an ongoing campaign. If you haven't read the Five Geek Social Fallacies, they are remarkably insightful. GSF #4 seems particularly relevant to keep in mind.

Hope this helps, and good luck!

 

[AngryMojo]

You've also got enough people in the game that even if talking it out won't fix the problems, you can split the group into two. I don't know what kind of time your schedule has for such a thing, but it may be an elegant option to a difficult situation.

 

[fba827]

"seems like you guys want different game styles and it's starting to aggrivate some of you" (without mentioning anyone in particular or specifics) so let's try some different things ...

1) is it possible to just have two game nights, one for each group?

2) are any of your more experienced players interested in DMing?

3) are any of your more experienced players interested in being assistant DM (i.e. running NPCs and companions and monsters rather than PCs) ?

4) are any of your less experienced players interested in being assistant DM (i.e. running NPCs and companions and monsters rather than PCs) ?

bottom line: if people aren't having fun, something needs to change. either they stop coming (those who aren't having fun if in th minority), or find a way to resolve it like adults (not via ingame rage), or find a way to have an amicable split in the group...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mmmmm....another game of Whippersnappers & Whitehairs!

There's lots of good that can be had by talking it out, especially if the Old-not-so-Bold-Gamers can explain to the Leeeeeeeroy Jenkinses why they game like they do, and vice versa.

Personally, as a 43 year old, I could probably play with either group, and either style and have a blast.

And despite what everyone says about taking care of this out-of game (which I agree with), I also think the mix could make for some fun storytelling if the players were in the right mindset. I'm envisioning wise old adventurers trying to pass along their knowledge to their apprentices...who remain impervious to their tutelage, much to their elders' exasperation.

Yes, that's exactly the situation you have in your game...but done in character, its a cool storyline. Maybe even more fun if you get the players to play opposite of their own preferred style.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Mmmmm....another game of Whippersnappers & Whitehairs!

Umm, I thought they were playing D&D: Diapers & Depends...

Dystrav says wise things, imho. Keep it out of game, because you really don't want this to explode at the table.

If your schedule permits, I'll second suggestions to just split the groups. They get out of each others' hair, and you get twice the gaming! (And twice the GM prep. )

 

[Olaf the Stout]

Personally I don't see the current group working going forward. It doesn't mean that one group is playing the game "wrong". It is just that their playstyles are too different to work together in the same group and I can only see bad things happening (like the party attacking each other) if it continues.

So I think your 2 options are:

1. Split the group in two and run different campaigns for each group.
2. Get rid of either the old guys or the young guys and find new players that will mesh with the preferred playstyle of whatever group you choose to go with.

From your perspective, what style do you prefer? The cautious approach of the oldies or the wild abandon of the young un's?

Olaf the Stout

 

[Lanefan]

Much depends on the style of game you as DM are looking for and whether you made this at least somewhat clear to all involved going in.

It sounds like your younger players are intent on bringing the gonzo, to which I give high praise and suggest you enjoy it while it lasts; sooner or later they too will become jaded and cautious...and in the process much less entertaining. If you as DM also want this more gonzo style then I hope you've told your older crew long before now...

But if you as DM are after a more serious game then you're going to have to have a chat with the gonzo faction and get 'em to tone it down some.

The sad fact is that you can't have both at once.

And while I'd usually be the first to say "split the game" as it's my preferred solution to just about everything except fireballs, in this one case I'd go with that only as a last resort. Both groups could stand to learn some from the other - the gonzo guys can learn some caution, and the older lot can learn to lighten up and just give 'er a bit more - and all would benefit as a result.

And if you do split the game, keep the "neutral" player in both parties if at all possible, to provide continuity and overlap and give media coverage of each game to the other. If each group sees the grass as greener they might reunite sooner than you'd expect...

Lan-"bringing the gonzo since 1982"-efan