PDA

View Full Version : Dealing with players with different play styles?



Shator
2013-01-01, 03:52 AM
I have a sizable group (actually have stopped allowing new players to join up), and have been noticing that people have very very different play styles and interests. Now, I expected some differences, but it's gotten to the point where some players are complaining about how other players are playing.
A few are very hack and slash oriented, to the point where they've attacked NPCs whom way way outmatched them (and at least a few players realized immediately they were outmatched). These NPCs actually gave the party the option of coming peacefully so that the party could prove they weren't a member of a group of invaders whom the NPCs had a good reason to suspect the party was indeed in league with. A few players decided fighting them was stupid and ran away or hid instead of attacking, but even with diminished numbers the other players decided to take the NPC group on (they could have tried to calm down the situation, or flee or done something more creative but nope).
So I have hack and slashers, and I have others whom are very into just role-playing their character and the whole storytelling aspect of the game, and these two sides are starting to come into conflict.
At least one of the hack and slashers has been really helpful to me in some regards and he's a nice guy, but I've set this game up so that people have to think before acting, and can't just lash out at every NPC that is "suspicious" of them, or "looks threatening". He's had his moments where he's come out of his hack and slash mode, but I'm not convinced he's really enjoyed it.

So I'm not really sure how to best deal with this situation.

NichG
2013-01-01, 04:01 AM
I'm not even sure this is because they're Hack & Slash players. I guess the question is, when there is combat, do the Hack & Slash players have good tactics or do they do things like charging in heedlessly?

It may just be that those players don't have much experience with the game yet, and will gradually improve as they realize that certain things get them killed and certain things work really well.

Vitruviansquid
2013-01-01, 04:09 AM
Why not split up into two groups? This way, you also have room to absorb the new players who you rejected before.

edit: alternately, pit your players against each other in gladiatorial combat. Winner decides what type of game you run

Shator
2013-01-01, 04:15 AM
I'm not even sure this is because they're Hack & Slash players. I guess the question is, when there is combat, do the Hack & Slash players have good tactics or do they do things like charging in heedlessly?

It may just be that those players don't have much experience with the game yet, and will gradually improve as they realize that certain things get them killed and certain things work really well.

That's the thing, they have a huge range of experience, from little, to a lot. The one whom was the primary instigator of the above mentioned situation, has also been the most helpful to too because he does know the rules better than I, and he makes it a point to help me out in this regard.
They've been kind of back and forth as far as their tactics go, sometimes they impress me, and other times they just rush in like fools and expect the same outcome.


Why not split up into two groups? This way, you also have room to absorb the new players who you rejected before.

edit: alternately, pit your players against each other in gladiatorial combat. Winner decides what type of game you run

I'd like to be able to do the first of those options, but I'm not sure how to make it work from a time management perspective. I'd be more tempted to separate the more RP heavy group from the more hack and slash group, but think I'd just get bored with the more hack and slash group (unless being in a smaller group somehow changes their play style, which is also possible).

Edit: But maybe this isn't such a bad thing, as it does give me an opportunity to have some real consequences for their actions become apparent, and show how for good or ill whatever they do affects the game world as well as themselves.
I also figure that eventually people some people will just find they don't like the style of the game, or the play style of the other players enough they'll leave for (what is at least from their perspective) greener pastures anyhow. I am debating on having a before game discussion on the direction of the game as well.
Still if anyone has stories on how they've handled similar situations I'd like to know.

stainboy
2013-01-01, 09:50 AM
Sounds like the hack n' slashers are getting bored with the talky parts. Usually PCs get into IC-stupid fights because they want more combat and less exposition, not because they don't realize the consequences of their actions. Remember if you want more combat, negative consequences like "everyone hates you" are actually in your best interest.

Do you have room to include more combat without completely cutting out everything else?

valadil
2013-01-01, 10:34 AM
I've been in games where I was the only roleplayer. Everyone else was there for hack and slash. The GM took the kindergarten teacher approach and made us share the game time. I got some RP time. Everyone else got some fight time (and there was certainly more fight than RP because there were more hack and slash players). Everyone had to be respectful about sharing the GM's time. Ideally we'd get loot right before RP time, so the hack and slashers could divide loot and update their character sheets while I was talking, but that wasn't always possible.

Anyway, as long as the players know that they'll get some time to do their thing so long as they're okay with the other players getting their time, it should work out. If they aren't interested in sitting through an hour of fighting to get to the hour of roleplaying, they can leave. If they have to have the game their way all the time, they're probably not a good fit for any group. Let them compromise.

Jay R
2013-01-01, 10:58 AM
Talk to them. Ask what they're doing. Tell them what you're doing.

Ironing this out is at least as important as any other of the introductory work of starting a campaign. The last time I ran a game, I sent out a four page description of what kind of background and play would be involved, after a couple of months of talking to the players to find out how they wanted to play.

Talk to them. Really. There is NO other fix.

Shator
2013-01-01, 01:38 PM
Yeah I'm thinking I'm going to talk to them, that sounds like the best course of action really. The game is so full that I could lose half the players and it still wouldn't be game ending. If I lost more than half it might still be able to continue because of other people whom want to join up. In some cases a compromise might be possible, in other cases I just think unless I totally change the direction things are going in they won't be happy.

One player did bring up the point that it seems like some of them get bored or even resent the non-combat aspects of the game. If I try too hard to please those guys (the hack n' slashers) the players whom like the game for the story, and to investigate things, and do other non-combat stuff will get bored and leave, they all ready are getting impatient with the players whom are getting impatient with the aspect of the game that they prefer. I'll end up getting bored and leaving eventually too, which will obviously end the game unless someone else decides to continue it as the new DM.

Raimun
2013-01-01, 03:03 PM
There's nothing wrong with enjoying a fight but fighting just for the sake of fighting can really disrupt a campaign. Let them know this.

If they keep getting over their heads, attacking the city guard or something like that, make it clear there are consequences. Perhaps remind them of their mortality? :smalltongue:

Also, are the non-combat parts always risk free? Is there no interaction in combats? If the game is 50% Hercule Poirot (during the quite parts) and 50% Diablo (during the fights), people who enjoy the one and not the other, will be bored half the time.

Mix it up. Just because they are investigating and interacting with the NPCs, doesn't have to mean it's always peaceful time. Also, you can and should roleplay during a fight.

Shator
2013-01-01, 05:42 PM
Yes they definitely could role-play during a fight, and some actually do, others seem to get impatient with that sort of thing.
The consequences of their actions are definitely starting to come to fruition, they just haven't reached their full ugly extent just yet. But their last action has basically gotten them on the bad side of the powerful group/authority in an area they are questing through.
Another situation they were in their actions have caused something very bad to happen which they will likely be confronted by next game (one of the players saw that this would be the case and even tried to push the group to think a bit more and investigate the situation better).
All of these things come with the possibility of them redeeming themselves, and maybe fixing the world (though some damage cannot be undone) but they will have to work for it. Otherwise they will be going down a darker and more bloody path which leaves the world in a worse state, and makes them a lot of very dangerous enemies (I want them to be able to have a real impact on the storyline, and that means what they do makes the world a happier or a worse off place).