EdgarofFargo
2014-04-10, 06:27 AM
I apologize in advance for the wall of text. If you want the TL;DR, skip to the end.
I'm running a game that has 5 players who all seem to want something different from the game, expect different things, and value different parts of the experience differently from each other. we're 11 sessions in, and although I feel interest in the game slipping for the PCs, when I ask them how they like the game, it's always, 'oh it's fun except X player/X mechanic.' To make things more complicated, my views on these things also differ from some of theirs. I find myself trying to focus on so many things that it's difficult to keep the game session going.
Since the problems people have with the game are so specific, I'm going to list out the PCs play styles as well as my own as the DM.
The power level of the campaign is sub-optimized. I encourage players to make a character that is fun, but not based on numbers and not be the only person who matters in the room. Before the game started I warned each person in private that if they're build was too strong I would Veto it and encouraged them to walk me through it so they didn't waste time buildings something too op.
Obviously the following summations of opinions are potentially bias. I'm going to leave names out to keep things anonymous. The players are listed in no order.
In my opinion a D&D's plot has to make sense. NPCs and setting provide context for the conflict within the plot. Subplots/dungeons/encounters can either lead to the development of one or more player characters or to the advancement of the overarching story. I envision the plot as a starting point from which everything diverges in many possible directions which all collapse upon itself. I keep NPCs as a possible resource, not in gold or exp, but influencing the characters should influence the plot. I try to provide the illusion of choice when the party seems invested in the plot. I try to provide a setting that is rich enough that when the party is not particularly invested in the plot, they can explore/interact with the world in ways that do not service the plot. I like puzzles. I think they provide a difference in kind that helps to break up the action and role play elements of the game. I think role play is immensely important. D&D seems to promote working through conflict through combat, which personally is fun for me and breaks up the role play. When things are too easy, I ramp them up in subversive ways mid combat, when they're too hard, I pull some of my punches. I try not to kill people's characters unless they, despite all in game warning, screw things up completely. I think a game in which a character dies every session/every other session makes for a flimsy story. In that kind of story, are the characters supposed to believe the goals of the party are important despite the fact that none of them was even there for most of the plot? I know that avoiding killing off characters makes a game less challenging and makes it more difficult to feel that the stakes are high when the worst that generally happens is someone gets knocked out. I want to make the combat at least feel challenging, so I inflate stats that help to make the combat last at least a few turns(probably a faux pas, I know). I love making characters. This game has 125 NPCs at the moment, many of which are not important in general and just provide a fuller setting, and many of which are not yet important. As far as NPCs that influence the story heavily, the game has a cast of ~25. I know that many characters can be difficult for players to remember and distinguish, and I do my best to make them stand out. I'm not great at voice and tone modulation; generally I just talk in my own voie when role playing NPCs. My biggest weakness as a DM in my opinion is impromptu: working with what happens when things don't go a way for which I planned.
This person is opinionated about most things and has a role play style that is technically good but not always productive. I've known this person for a really long time, and despite the fact that I get along with them, they don't always get along with my friends. This person generally likes being in the front of the party during role play and in the back during combat. They are a bit elitist about role play, and while they have a well developed character, this character is focused on himself to the point that choices he makes hurt the party. These situations put me in a situation where I have to either punish the character in game for being dickish to an NPC or a PC at the wrong time or let the role play work itself out in which the rest of the party feel like they got away with something they shouldn't have. This person always has criticism, though it usually is constructive. This person responds well to individual roleplay with NPCs
This person is extremely opinionated and can be completely tactless. This is the type of person who is happy when doing well and mad/sad when not. They can be a sore winner and a sore loser. This PC when I voice my concerns goes out of their way to do what I asked of the PCs for a while and then when they forget just go back to the way they were. An example of this is when I said people should be playing their alignments and that if they wished to play another alignment I could shift them. For 1 session they were as neutral good as someone can get, then next session wanted to coup de gras some random people that were presumably with the enemy the wizard had slept without any knowledge. This is the type of player who always roles behind something and always roles well. Most of the players thinks they cheat when rolling, and I recently told them that I didn't care either way and they should just roll in the open like everyone else and it shouldn't be a problem. This player told me that all of my NPCs have the same personality, though they don't pay a lot of attention anyway during the game. This player asks nearly every NPC for something, commonly something they don't even have and almost always something they have no reason to give them. When playing an undead character they wanted a cloak that gives turn resistance and they were really mad that the magic shop character wouldn't just give a level 1 they had never met a 16K gold cost item for free. This is the type of player who agrees when I veto other players op build choices, but throws a tantrum if I veto any of theirs. This is the type of player who will gear up for one skill and expect that one skill to work on everything, even if that makes other skills useless. They lose their character sheet every other session or so and just make up numbers until someone notices. Unless I run down their character with them they have an assumed max in any skill they could have and about 2 feats that just came out of nowhere. This person is more worried about doing well in a particular situation than learning how the game works or even how their character functions. They want to be the center of attention and end up competing for face time with player 1. Whenever I ask if they can actually do the thing they try to do it's always 'yeah I got that last level.' and I have to look up the class to make sure, because generally the class feature occurs later in the class and sometimes isn't a thing the class gets at all. This person responds well when they feel important, particularly more important that everyone else.
This person likes making characters that are strong. This person is the type to look up and follow a build even for sub-optimized characters. This player has a general idea about a character in their mind. they are not the strongest role player; generally their characters come off as one-dimensional or based on a gimmick. This persons play style is the type of person who wants to carry the party. If this player were the only relevant player through most of the campaign they would be happy. It feels as if this player gets distracted easily. Likely to build a one-trick pony in order to claim that their build isn't broken and get indignant when that one trick isn't effective. This is the type of PC that if their own tricks were used against them, they would claim that it was unfair. Generally builds save-or-lose casters. They make roleplay choices that are so outlandish that they can be hard to take seriously, like calling a king a 'bitch.' This person almost always plays chaotic neutral. This person responds well when they put down a boss or enemy group with a save-or-lose like sleep.
This player is new to the game. they are my significant other and I'm pretty partial to them in general. They don't generally like puzzles and aren't comfortable enough roleplaying yet that they would be willing to interrupt someone like player 1 or 2 who are already competing for face-time. This person is skilled in writing, but new to the tabletop RPG thing. I help this person learn the game, help explain possible choices, but once they understand the situation I try to let them make their own choices. Their criticism is that the NPCs don't approach the party enough(they're generally just there to be talked to and usually don't come to the party or characters to role play) which is true.
This PC is interested in the story in how it pertains to them. Otherwise they're just sort of there for the ride, which isn't the worst. They have a habit of mixing rules and real world physics. After arguing I about how it would actually work, I just say, 'show me where in the books they have that mechanic and we'll talk.' He's argued for water pressure dealing damage, summoning a shark in mid air above someone to crush them, and other physics based shenanigans. Because of this mentality, they are generally more interested than the rest of the party when it comes to puzzles. This person is also always pushing the limits of the game, asking to be an intelligent item who is also a player character or to have infinite vampire spawns all controlling one another in a pyramid with them at the top. This player has a habit of derailing the party's train of thought to make the situation either about them or just distinctly not about what it is people were paying attention to. This person does not seem to have a gauge of what is too strong for the general power level of a game and what is not. They seem to have fun playing what they built either way though. This person responds well to lore and information about the game world in general.
TL;DR In the past I've ran games that had better synergy. I'm wondering how to make my game more enjoyable for everyone and how to run more smoothly. What can I do differently? what should I try? What should I say to them or ask them to help them and me understand how to make things better?
I'm running a game that has 5 players who all seem to want something different from the game, expect different things, and value different parts of the experience differently from each other. we're 11 sessions in, and although I feel interest in the game slipping for the PCs, when I ask them how they like the game, it's always, 'oh it's fun except X player/X mechanic.' To make things more complicated, my views on these things also differ from some of theirs. I find myself trying to focus on so many things that it's difficult to keep the game session going.
Since the problems people have with the game are so specific, I'm going to list out the PCs play styles as well as my own as the DM.
The power level of the campaign is sub-optimized. I encourage players to make a character that is fun, but not based on numbers and not be the only person who matters in the room. Before the game started I warned each person in private that if they're build was too strong I would Veto it and encouraged them to walk me through it so they didn't waste time buildings something too op.
Obviously the following summations of opinions are potentially bias. I'm going to leave names out to keep things anonymous. The players are listed in no order.
In my opinion a D&D's plot has to make sense. NPCs and setting provide context for the conflict within the plot. Subplots/dungeons/encounters can either lead to the development of one or more player characters or to the advancement of the overarching story. I envision the plot as a starting point from which everything diverges in many possible directions which all collapse upon itself. I keep NPCs as a possible resource, not in gold or exp, but influencing the characters should influence the plot. I try to provide the illusion of choice when the party seems invested in the plot. I try to provide a setting that is rich enough that when the party is not particularly invested in the plot, they can explore/interact with the world in ways that do not service the plot. I like puzzles. I think they provide a difference in kind that helps to break up the action and role play elements of the game. I think role play is immensely important. D&D seems to promote working through conflict through combat, which personally is fun for me and breaks up the role play. When things are too easy, I ramp them up in subversive ways mid combat, when they're too hard, I pull some of my punches. I try not to kill people's characters unless they, despite all in game warning, screw things up completely. I think a game in which a character dies every session/every other session makes for a flimsy story. In that kind of story, are the characters supposed to believe the goals of the party are important despite the fact that none of them was even there for most of the plot? I know that avoiding killing off characters makes a game less challenging and makes it more difficult to feel that the stakes are high when the worst that generally happens is someone gets knocked out. I want to make the combat at least feel challenging, so I inflate stats that help to make the combat last at least a few turns(probably a faux pas, I know). I love making characters. This game has 125 NPCs at the moment, many of which are not important in general and just provide a fuller setting, and many of which are not yet important. As far as NPCs that influence the story heavily, the game has a cast of ~25. I know that many characters can be difficult for players to remember and distinguish, and I do my best to make them stand out. I'm not great at voice and tone modulation; generally I just talk in my own voie when role playing NPCs. My biggest weakness as a DM in my opinion is impromptu: working with what happens when things don't go a way for which I planned.
This person is opinionated about most things and has a role play style that is technically good but not always productive. I've known this person for a really long time, and despite the fact that I get along with them, they don't always get along with my friends. This person generally likes being in the front of the party during role play and in the back during combat. They are a bit elitist about role play, and while they have a well developed character, this character is focused on himself to the point that choices he makes hurt the party. These situations put me in a situation where I have to either punish the character in game for being dickish to an NPC or a PC at the wrong time or let the role play work itself out in which the rest of the party feel like they got away with something they shouldn't have. This person always has criticism, though it usually is constructive. This person responds well to individual roleplay with NPCs
This person is extremely opinionated and can be completely tactless. This is the type of person who is happy when doing well and mad/sad when not. They can be a sore winner and a sore loser. This PC when I voice my concerns goes out of their way to do what I asked of the PCs for a while and then when they forget just go back to the way they were. An example of this is when I said people should be playing their alignments and that if they wished to play another alignment I could shift them. For 1 session they were as neutral good as someone can get, then next session wanted to coup de gras some random people that were presumably with the enemy the wizard had slept without any knowledge. This is the type of player who always roles behind something and always roles well. Most of the players thinks they cheat when rolling, and I recently told them that I didn't care either way and they should just roll in the open like everyone else and it shouldn't be a problem. This player told me that all of my NPCs have the same personality, though they don't pay a lot of attention anyway during the game. This player asks nearly every NPC for something, commonly something they don't even have and almost always something they have no reason to give them. When playing an undead character they wanted a cloak that gives turn resistance and they were really mad that the magic shop character wouldn't just give a level 1 they had never met a 16K gold cost item for free. This is the type of player who agrees when I veto other players op build choices, but throws a tantrum if I veto any of theirs. This is the type of player who will gear up for one skill and expect that one skill to work on everything, even if that makes other skills useless. They lose their character sheet every other session or so and just make up numbers until someone notices. Unless I run down their character with them they have an assumed max in any skill they could have and about 2 feats that just came out of nowhere. This person is more worried about doing well in a particular situation than learning how the game works or even how their character functions. They want to be the center of attention and end up competing for face time with player 1. Whenever I ask if they can actually do the thing they try to do it's always 'yeah I got that last level.' and I have to look up the class to make sure, because generally the class feature occurs later in the class and sometimes isn't a thing the class gets at all. This person responds well when they feel important, particularly more important that everyone else.
This person likes making characters that are strong. This person is the type to look up and follow a build even for sub-optimized characters. This player has a general idea about a character in their mind. they are not the strongest role player; generally their characters come off as one-dimensional or based on a gimmick. This persons play style is the type of person who wants to carry the party. If this player were the only relevant player through most of the campaign they would be happy. It feels as if this player gets distracted easily. Likely to build a one-trick pony in order to claim that their build isn't broken and get indignant when that one trick isn't effective. This is the type of PC that if their own tricks were used against them, they would claim that it was unfair. Generally builds save-or-lose casters. They make roleplay choices that are so outlandish that they can be hard to take seriously, like calling a king a 'bitch.' This person almost always plays chaotic neutral. This person responds well when they put down a boss or enemy group with a save-or-lose like sleep.
This player is new to the game. they are my significant other and I'm pretty partial to them in general. They don't generally like puzzles and aren't comfortable enough roleplaying yet that they would be willing to interrupt someone like player 1 or 2 who are already competing for face-time. This person is skilled in writing, but new to the tabletop RPG thing. I help this person learn the game, help explain possible choices, but once they understand the situation I try to let them make their own choices. Their criticism is that the NPCs don't approach the party enough(they're generally just there to be talked to and usually don't come to the party or characters to role play) which is true.
This PC is interested in the story in how it pertains to them. Otherwise they're just sort of there for the ride, which isn't the worst. They have a habit of mixing rules and real world physics. After arguing I about how it would actually work, I just say, 'show me where in the books they have that mechanic and we'll talk.' He's argued for water pressure dealing damage, summoning a shark in mid air above someone to crush them, and other physics based shenanigans. Because of this mentality, they are generally more interested than the rest of the party when it comes to puzzles. This person is also always pushing the limits of the game, asking to be an intelligent item who is also a player character or to have infinite vampire spawns all controlling one another in a pyramid with them at the top. This player has a habit of derailing the party's train of thought to make the situation either about them or just distinctly not about what it is people were paying attention to. This person does not seem to have a gauge of what is too strong for the general power level of a game and what is not. They seem to have fun playing what they built either way though. This person responds well to lore and information about the game world in general.
TL;DR In the past I've ran games that had better synergy. I'm wondering how to make my game more enjoyable for everyone and how to run more smoothly. What can I do differently? what should I try? What should I say to them or ask them to help them and me understand how to make things better?