How to Handle Conflict Between Players?

[fluw]

So, I'm DMing a game with a couple of my friends, and along the campaign there's been a huge conflict between two of my players, who don't have the same vision of how adventuring works.
Basically, one of them wants to develop the plot and pursue the main quest at all costs, while the other prefers a more sandboxy approach, sometimes ignoring plot points to go his own way and explore the world.
Personally, I have no problem with either approaches, but it becomes a problem when the first one prevents the second one from exploring.
So far we've been able to keep the conflict in-character, where the two characters simply dislike each other, but stay together for other reasons. However, it's starting to get out of hand, as the exploring player has told me he's considering leaving the game.
I really don't want this to happen though, as we're all friends who picked up D&D, and I don't want to have tensions between us either during or after D&D.
As an inexperienced DM, I was wondering what you would do if that happened to you.
I already considered changing the exploring character, but I feel like that won't change much. Otherwise, I thought of just talking to them about it, but I feel weird approaching such a touchy subject.
Anyway, any help is appreciated :) Thank you very much

[Millennium]

What sort of game do the other players want to play? For that matter, what sort of game do you want to run?

[MrNobody]

Ok, basically here ther is no right - wrong, but just two kind of intending the game. The fact that the conflict was kept in game is good, but that the exploring player now wants to live is totally comprehensible.
You don't say how the plotlinked player stops his fellow from exploring and you say nothing about your setting, but at the moment i see two wayout of the problem.

-The convergence of the sidequests: when the explorer characters goes on his "sandobox mode" provide him clues, rewards, objects, contacts with people that can be useful in the main plot: a book that can be useful to solve a future riddle, some magic item to help all the team in battle, a lost family treasure that a noble elf will pay in gold or personal favors, a new friend that will come when needed (check "Cityscape" pag. 51 for contacts rules).
When the other player will see how usefull this deviation can be he will (probably) start appreciating his fellow's way of playing.

-Non stoppable solo adventure: as i can see, yoy adventuring player is pissed off because the other player stops him in his explorations. A way you have to have both happy is to create really small quest for your player that the other cannot stop. An example (that may not fit your quest but his an example), let the player explore a Plane of Dreams. Once in a while, when the PCs go to sleep, have the adventuring one transported in the Plane of Dreams, which he can explore without being interrupted. Give him no more then 15 min on the clock, keep it simple but full of clues to keep his interest alive and at the same time not take away to much time from the "group play" (and disturb the other player).
You can decide ahead of time when these "dreamtravel" happens but you could roll useless dices hidden from your screen and have the player think it's all random and create suspence.
Create in this way a single sidequest for that PCs

Hope this helps:smallsmile:

EDIT: i almost forgot. The first thing to do would be taking the problem to the table and talk. Explain to both players that each approach is correct, ask them to try to make the others have fun and that maybe they both could "mitigate" their style. Be sure that they understand that you, being the master, will be an impartial judge of what happens and will do your best to keep things balanced.

[draken50]

It might be necessary to look at how your plot works as well.

If your plot has a seeming time-limit, or is of such consequence that the death/failure of the characters will cause the world to end or the like, it's very in character for the first player to want to follow down the lines. Finding other quests and the like is irresponsible because if the characters somehow die running off the bugbears attacking the unrelated village, well then the world ends and that's a very big risk.

Ultimately, I like to have world exploration a primary part of the main quest. Often locating allies, information, and at times even reputation is a necessary part of the achievement of the players goals as well as the main plot.

The most useful and worthwhile step of course is to talk to the players. Every player that comes in to my games has the understanding that I expect them to get along, and work together, and to look for reasons to do so in character. If there's plainly a conflict, it is worthwhile to address it as soon as possible. Work with the characters to develop a reasonable compromise. You may also devise situations or encounters the players need to deal with that may require exploring to resolve.

An illusionist could be causing problems for the party, and they may need to work to track him down, they may need the help of an NPC or group.

[hymer]

I thought of just talking to them about it, but I feel weird approaching such a touchy subject.

You have to talk about this. Do it with the whole group. Start by summing up the two positions and note, as you did here, that you're fine with both or either. But that the group needs to function, and you would prefer if the players can work it out themselves, as this should really be their decision. Then referee the conversation from there. Make sure everyone gives their opinion, and see if they can't come to some sort of agreement.
You may want to set a standard by saying that you're willing to change the way you run things if it will help keep the group working together. If, as has been mentioned, there are excellent reasons for pursuing the main plot exclusively, you should be willing to make some changes to make it more reasonable to spend time exploring.

[Madeiner]

I can only give some advice that i found useful.
IF the reason for which the "main quest" player wants to follow the main quest is time pressure as has been said, and you want to let the party also play a bit of the exploration side, you need to, in character, provide reason to do so.
Give them periods of forced downtime. Lets say your group is trying to find the artifact that can stop the end of the world. Of course, in character, PC don't have time to anything else.
If you however WANT to encourage random exploration every once in a while, you could say that there's a group of NPC that has resources to track down the next bit of information necessary to find the artifact. This is a research to be done by a group of librarians, and they know best how to do it. They know it takes three months however, so the party is free to do whatever they want in those 3 months, as they dont have anything else to do for the main quest.

[prufock]

I feel weird approaching such a touchy subject.
It's just a game, it really shouldn't be a touchy subject. They have different preferences for the type of game they'd like to play. Reasonable people can usually meet a compromise. Every game session, follow 1 plot lead and 1 sidetrack. If they can't agree to that...

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Have you considered pistols at dawn yet?

[Prince Raven]

Grab some popcorn and watch it escalate into PVP, whoever's PC is still alive gets to decide which type of game the group plays.

[Synar]

Have you considered pistols at dawn yet?

I prefer to use swords myself. Gentlemen and all that.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I prefer to use swords myself. Gentlemen and all that.
I suppose it's also more in the spirit of D&D.

Plus, I just considered that a typical D&D party means 2 duelists, 2 seconds, and the GM gets to be referee.