When Players just want to hurt things

[Thealtruistorc]

This is a problem that has been growing worse and worse in a campaign I am DMing, and it pertains to the fact that several of my players just want to turn it into a murder spree.

For months, me and one of my players (a longtime friend of mine) have been working together to build a rich multilayered campaign setting, and while some of the group members get a lot out of exploring it and building upon it, there are several members who want nothing from the game beyond to feel powerful and act obnoxious.

There are three of them, and they all possess highly optimized builds with intent only to smash whomever and whatever they please. The scant bits of backstory they provide is used only for Henderson-style godmodding, and their character's personalities can only be described as insecure schoolyard bullies with a smorgasboard of magic.

What's worse is that they spit on our intricate campaign world in a manner that even The Gamers would balk at. I introduce a new antagonist entity, and one of the problem players responds by making a knowledge check and yelling "Skip the lore, just give me its resistances off the stat block!" Not only this, but the way they handle any social situation is "I take the surprise round and hit him in the face." Any attempt by me to curtail them just leads to a huge fight about the rules.

As a DM, I've tried everything in my power to get them to shape up. I've had lengthy conversations about why what they are doing is unacceptable, talked with them extensively about the lore and how hard I've worked on it, and even killed all three of their characters following a particularly disastrous game. Nothing has worked, and no matter what I try it just keeps getting worse.

For me and the players who are trying as hard as we can to enjoy the role-playing aspects of this adventure, it is an immense pain trying to keep these guys in line. I'm thinking that the best approach would just be finding a new group of players to DM (I have plenty of smart friends whom I think would enjoy the setting I concocted). What do you guys suggest in dealing with irreconcileable power gamers?

[Doctor Awkward]

No gaming is generally better than bad gaming, but it sounds to me like you've already made up your mind.

[Grod_The_Giant]

So, uh, kick the disruptive players out of the group and just play with the guys who are on board with your gaming style?

If you're worried about real-life friendships or something, propose a compromise. Alternate between your intricate setting (with the good players only) and a high-difficulty dungeon crawl (for the disruptive players).

[Seruvius]

Seeing as you have tried to talk sense into them and they are intent on being twits, either as you said find a new group, taking the decent players along with you, or just run 2 seperate sessions, one for the fun people and one for the dungeon kickers by just throwing randomised dungeon craws at them so they can feel all powerful n shizz.

personally as a DM, if the players disrespect the DM and are just ruining all my work despite me talking with them about it, i tell em to bugger off. It is your game, they are at your table because you let them. If they are intent on ruining your fun and the fun of the others, out the door with the munchkins.

[endur]

I'd let one of the Munchkins gm for the Munchkins, and you go off and GM for people who appreciate your game.

[Yahzi]

As everyone has noted, you have incompatible styles. Time to bail.

If you want to keep gaming with them, change the rules. Alternate between your campaign (potentially without them in it) and another campaign which is straight up banditry (read The Barrows by Mark Smylie for inspiration). The bandit campaign should be dice-as-they fall, so that when your PCs die it's just fate and not you. The best move would be to make one of them run this campaign, but failing that you can just indulge them in the slaughter until they get bored and quit.

Or, you can go full madman on them.

I once had a band of players who were particularly murderous (it didn't help that they had a flying boat and could escape the authorities). After a long while of watching them act out crudely, I decided to show them why I was DM. I sent them to an underground orc fortress run by demons, and I proceeded to describe the most horrifying cruelties imaginable. By the time they escaped they were so traumatized they actually behaved for a while. :D

[Tohsaka Rin]

I suggest trying the opposite.

Throw at them nothing but CR1 stuff. Nothing hard, nothing elaborate. Never raise your voice, just speak in a monotone.

If they comment/complain, ask them why it bothers them? They clearly wanted nothing but a murder-frenzy, with no detail or depth. You're giving them exactly what they asked for.

A bunch of cardboard cut-outs to smack for lulz.

That should at least give them pause.

If not, then you can literally play video/computer games while you DM, consider it a night off.

[Crake]

or alternatively start them at level 1, that way they can't get away with all that stuff, because someone will just come and smack them over the head.

[Sliver]

Preference of play has nothing to do with logic. You can't 'talk sense' into someone to make them enjoy playing the game the same way that you do. If you can't present them the game that they enjoy without ruining your own enjoyment, and they aren't enjoying the style that you are willing to DM, then you aren't the right DM for them, and they aren't the right players for you.

They aren't playing it wrong just because they aren't playing it the way you want them to. They aren't crazy or out of line for liking different things.

Neither side has an obligation to cater to the preference of the other party, but a game can't work if you aren't willing to work with each other.

[Coidzor]

As a DM, I've tried everything in my power to get them to shape up. I've had lengthy conversations about why what they are doing is unacceptable, talked with them extensively about the lore and how hard I've worked on it, and even killed all three of their characters following a particularly disastrous game. Nothing has worked, and no matter what I try it just keeps getting worse.

For me and the players who are trying as hard as we can to enjoy the role-playing aspects of this adventure, it is an immense pain trying to keep these guys in line. I'm thinking that the best approach would just be finding a new group of players to DM (I have plenty of smart friends whom I think would enjoy the setting I concocted). What do you guys suggest in dealing with irreconcileable power gamers?

Either you're just that bad at talking to people that you've actually made the situation worse or they hate you and are hate-playing your game. Trying to control them probably hasn't helped, though it does bring up some questions about your interpersonal relationships outside of the game as to why they dislike you enough to harbor this vendetta despite associating with you and not having tried anything more drastic than being a **** in a tabletop RPG.

Anyway, seeing as how if it's the former, trying again with different wording won't help any because that ship has sailed and if it's the latter nothing you could say would ever have an effect, there is only one move left, the most obvious one. Stop playing with them.

You said it yourself you have several players that actually enjoy playing with you, so just play with them. That's easy as pie and yet you don't mention this for some reason. Quite conspicuous and suspicious.

Granted, it's kind of implausible in the first place that you'd be in a situation with such an obvious solution and yet not take it and also lack a reason for not taking it without telling us about it in the OP.

[atemu1234]

Get a spray bottle and lay out newspaper?

[prufock]

For months, me and one of my players (a longtime friend of mine) have been working together to build a rich multilayered campaign setting, and while some of the group members get a lot out of exploring it and building upon it, there are several members who want nothing from the game beyond to feel powerful and act obnoxious.

There are three of them, and they all possess highly optimized builds with intent only to smash whomever and whatever they please. The scant bits of backstory they provide is used only for Henderson-style godmodding, and their character's personalities can only be described as insecure schoolyard bullies with a smorgasboard of magic.
It sounds like you have a large group - some members playing the same style as you, three playing their own game. So cut the group in half, run the game for the ones you want, don't invite the others. You aren't obligated to run a game that isn't fun for you.

[Flickerdart]

There's a word for their behaviour - Chaotic Evil. I think the DMG even suggests a "no Evil characters" houserule somewhere, so you would not be out of line in saying "violent sociopaths don't belong in this party" or calling down the King's Guard on them. And when I say King's Guard, I mean the stacks of angels the king's Archbishop has called to help deal with this threat to the kingdom.

[Lightlawbliss]

In my experience, giving murder hobos some massive wave of individually weak enemies will help them calm down. If that doesn't work... I would fall into the use your legs camp.

[Curmudgeon]

Fully 5% of all encounters should be of overpowering difficulty: i.e., run away or die (see Table 3–2: Encounter Difficulty, page 49 of Dungeon Master's Guide). If these guys aren't paying any attention and want to fight everything, let them see what happens when they're too feeble to live. The smarter players will get to save their characters when they flee (i.e., react appropriately to the details of the encounter), and the bullies will have to start over after their characters die. I would hope that those players would learn something from the experience (namely, there are always bigger bullies).

[Galen]

I suggest a divorce. Losing three players may look bad, but it's not the end of the world. You'll get new ones.

[Curmudgeon]

I suggest a divorce. Losing three players may look bad, but it's not the end of the world. You'll get new ones.
I'd give them a chance to learn a lesson first. Having their characters all killed because of overly aggressive play style may teach them something useful. If not, then the divorce.

[Barstro]

Great ideas on how to teach a lesson to the problem players. But, you cannot teach what one does not want to learn. Sadly, I think you need to walk away from the problem players.

The only idea that it sounds like you have not tried is;
Party hears of a completely Overpowered Weapon that would work great for one of the problem players. All clues point to it being in another dimension that can only be accessed by one particular portal that is guarded by The Star Guardian. Group goes to the portal and the all powerful guardian stands in their way. Since the guardian is, for whatever reason (and unknown to the party), only level one, the player's attack kills him instantly. The portal is tied to his life force (they would have known that if they listened to the rumors or looked at his chest) and the portal automatically closes and will not return until a new Star Guardian is born.

But, that won't work either. It's just a big FU to the players from the DM that will not go over well.

[Sliver]

I'd give them a chance to learn a lesson first. Having their characters all killed because of overly aggressive play style may teach them something useful. If not, then the divorce.

Teach them what lesson? On how to play a game the right way? :smallconfused:

[TheIronGolem]

As a DM, I've tried everything in my power to get them to shape up. I've had lengthy conversations about why what they are doing is unacceptable, talked with them extensively about the lore and how hard I've worked on it, and even killed all three of their characters following a particularly disastrous game. Nothing has worked, and no matter what I try it just keeps getting worse.

For me and the players who are trying as hard as we can to enjoy the role-playing aspects of this adventure, it is an immense pain trying to keep these guys in line. I'm thinking that the best approach would just be finding a new group of players to DM (I have plenty of smart friends whom I think would enjoy the setting I concocted). What do you guys suggest in dealing with irreconcileable power gamers?

You want to run one kind of game, and they want to play another kind. Neither of you are wrong to want what you want, but your desires are fundamentally incompatible.

They need to find a DM who wants to run the kind of game they want to play. You need to find (more) players who want to play the kind of game you want to run.

[Curmudgeon]

Teach them what lesson? On how to play a game the right way? :smallconfused:
Not at all. The beginner's lesson, in two parts, is:

There is more than one way to play the game.
Playing only one way doesn't guarantee success/fun.

[aspekt]

Cut them loose now. No need to further their own pleasure at ruining the fun of others.

You can just kick them. But if they are folks you need to get along with split the table and start a second game with one of them as DM. Then just optimize the hell out of your own character and enjoy a silly bi-weekly game of murderhobos.

[Sliver]

Not at all. The beginner's lesson, in two parts, is:

There is more than one way to play the game.
Playing only one way doesn't guarantee success/fun.


Just because they enjoy this style of play doesn't mean that they aren't aware of another's existence, only that they enjoy this one the most, compared to their previous experiences. Sure, they might enjoy another style more than their current one, but they are clearly not interested in trying, as evident by the DM already talking to them and killing their characters before that. It's their choice. They don't have to try things that they don't want to, and it's not the DM's job to force them to either.

They aren't interested in the style that the DM is offering. There is no point in having them continue playing, ruining the game for the DM and the other players, while potentially missing out on an experience more appropriate for them.

[Barstro]

They aren't interested in the style that the DM is offering. There is no point in having them continue playing, ruining the game for the DM and the other players.

This is the biggie. Sure, they have as much right enjoy and, thus, play whatever kind of game they want. They have been advised of how that is hurting the game for the DM (I can only assume such they have been told that it hurts the other players as well). However, the players are acting like their PCs and ignoring all that. While you or I might take that to heart and either change play style or walk away, they have chosen to stay and play in a way that is disruptive.

[Coidzor]

Not at all. The beginner's lesson, in two parts, is:

There is more than one way to play the game.
Playing only one way doesn't guarantee success/fun.


And where does actively antagonizing and disrespecting the DM and other players OOC after several attempts to resolve the interpersonal issues between them enter into your equation?

[Galen]

I'd give them a chance to learn a lesson first. Having their characters all killed because of overly aggressive play style may teach them something useful. If not, then the divorce.
Well, according to the OP, he tried to talk to them, and their characters actually did get killed as a result of their playstyle. Which is why I think there's no other way ...

[Curmudgeon]

Well, according to the OP, he tried to talk to them, and their characters actually did get killed as a result of their playstyle. Which is why I think there's no other way ...
The OP said "killed all three of their characters following a particularly disastrous game", which doesn't qualify that it was because of their play style as opposed to something else: unfortunate rolls, traps, a party spellcaster who failed to provide a necessary defensive spell, or whatnot.

Let's take the ambiguity out of this issue, and throw them up against something that will kill them as a consequence of the way they play.

[Thealtruistorc]

The OP said "killed all three of their characters following a particularly disastrous game", which doesn't qualify that it was because of their play style as opposed to something else: unfortunate rolls, traps, a party spellcaster who failed to provide a necessary defensive spell, or whatnot.

Let's take the ambiguity out of this issue, and throw them up against something that will kill them as a consequence of the way they play.

This was in no way due to bad rolls. They got the firing squad (quite literally) after using their "surprise round" approach during negotiations and then leaving several allied NPCs for dead.

[Coidzor]

The OP said "killed all three of their characters following a particularly disastrous game", which doesn't qualify that it was because of their play style as opposed to something else: unfortunate rolls, traps, a party spellcaster who failed to provide a necessary defensive spell, or whatnot.

I read it as the DM rocks falling those particular players' characters after they'd been particularly egregious in a given campaign.


Let's take the ambiguity out of this issue, and throw them up against something that will kill them as a consequence of the way they play.

Well, I mean, actually putting the DM's money where their mouth is and no longer playing with them after having tried to reconcile their differing playstyles would be less ambiguous than continually trying to use in-game actions to fix an out-of-game problem, wouldn't it? :smallconfused:

[Turk Mannion]

They need to learn the lesson that there is always...ALWAYS...someone bigger and badder then they are. Word of the rampaging, murdering trio reaches the ears of some powerful LG ruler, let him deal with the situation. With an entire city of guards, supported by magic and everything else. Let them learn the consequences of their actions.

And if that does not work, time to move on and take those whose game style matches your own. No crime to leave an unfulfilling game...many have done it and the biggest regret is that you waited so long to make the move.

[Platymus Pus]

Have a druid who is tree token based.
Attack them with a billion trees in various ways.

[Meth In a Mine]

This is a problem that has been growing worse and worse in a campaign I am DMing, and it pertains to the fact that several of my players just want to turn it into a murder spree.

For months, me and one of my players (a longtime friend of mine) have been working together to build a rich multilayered campaign setting, and while some of the group members get a lot out of exploring it and building upon it, there are several members who want nothing from the game beyond to feel powerful and act obnoxious.

There are three of them, and they all possess highly optimized builds with intent only to smash whomever and whatever they please. The scant bits of backstory they provide is used only for Henderson-style godmodding, and their character's personalities can only be described as insecure schoolyard bullies with a smorgasboard of magic.

What's worse is that they spit on our intricate campaign world in a manner that even The Gamers would balk at. I introduce a new antagonist entity, and one of the problem players responds by making a knowledge check and yelling "Skip the lore, just give me its resistances off the stat block!" Not only this, but the way they handle any social situation is "I take the surprise round and hit him in the face." Any attempt by me to curtail them just leads to a huge fight about the rules.

As a DM, I've tried everything in my power to get them to shape up. I've had lengthy conversations about why what they are doing is unacceptable, talked with them extensively about the lore and how hard I've worked on it, and even killed all three of their characters following a particularly disastrous game. Nothing has worked, and no matter what I try it just keeps getting worse.

For me and the players who are trying as hard as we can to enjoy the role-playing aspects of this adventure, it is an immense pain trying to keep these guys in line. I'm thinking that the best approach would just be finding a new group of players to DM (I have plenty of smart friends whom I think would enjoy the setting I concocted). What do you guys suggest in dealing with irreconcileable power gamers?
As one of the players in question, I find these accusations to be either exaggerated or false.
Paragraph 2: Low blow, dude, low blow. I only turn to fight when the situation becomes untenable, which is awfully fast when our every encounter with one of your more favored players turns into us getting threatened unless we do whatever he wants.
Paragraph 3: Insecure? Is that all you see us as? We are involved in a war, being hounded by a PC/quest-giver hybrid, and getting assailed by an invulnerable enemy we know jack diddley squat about!
Paragraph 4: Asking for weaknesses in a creature is 100% legal with a knowledge check, and for what it's worth, you didn't give me any lore either.
Paragraph 5: You never talked to me about these problems. All you did was grumble a bit about it and moved on. I will point out that this is seems to be a noteworthy issue among us, is that you are not open to talking about the problems that you see in the campaign.

If you want to work this out, try actually talking to us. And don't insult us behind our backs. I do not appreciate that.

[YossarianLives]

As one of the players in question, I find these accusations to be either exaggerated or false.
Paragraph 2: Low blow, dude, low blow. I only turn to fight when the situation becomes untenable, which is awfully fast when our every encounter with one of your more favored players turns into us getting threatened unless we do whatever he wants.
Paragraph 3: Insecure? Is that all you see us as? We are involved in a war, being hounded by a PC/quest-giver hybrid, and getting assailed by an invulnerable enemy we know jack diddley squat about!
Paragraph 4: Asking for weaknesses in a creature is 100% legal with a knowledge check, and for what it's worth, you didn't give me any lore either.
Paragraph 5: You never talked to me about these problems. All you did was grumble a bit about it and moved on. I will point out that this is seems to be a noteworthy issue among us, is that you are not open to talking about the problems that you see in the campaign.

If you want to work this out, try actually talking to us. And don't insult us behind our backs. I do not appreciate that.
This is why you don't complain about your friends on a forum that you know they frequent.

[Blackhawk748]

This is why you don't complain about your friends on a forum that you know they frequent.

Ill be honest thats Rule 1 about complaining on the internet. So you two gents go grab a beer (or whatever your drink of choice is) and go hash this out like civilized (or barbaric) people.

[justiceforall]

If you want to work this out, try actually talking to us. And don't insult us behind our backs. I do not appreciate that.

Irony-overload... <boom>



I would suspect this thread just resolved itself one way or the other.

[Meth In a Mine]

Ill be honest thats Rule 1 about complaining on the internet. So you two gents go grab a beer (or whatever your drink of choice is) and go hash this out like civilized (or barbaric) people.

I wish that we could've defaulted to something like that, I can be quite reasonable, but not when I cannot trust people I try to have fun with.

[jjcrpntr]

I'd find a new group.

The guys I DM frustrate me because I almost always have some backstory or lore behind stuff and they are never even slightly interested. It's more like "knowledge check is this important or should I know anything about it? Yes? Ok move on." But at least they rp their characters out.

My biggest gripe is that my players seem to be 99% treasure hunters. They care very little about the story it seems to be more about loot, loot and more loot.

But ya, if you have other friends to game with I'd take the good RP player and start another group.

[Flickerdart]

I'd find a new group.

The guys I DM frustrate me because I almost always have some backstory or lore behind stuff and they are never even slightly interested. It's more like "knowledge check is this important or should I know anything about it? Yes? Ok move on." But at least they rp their characters out.

My biggest gripe is that my players seem to be 99% treasure hunters. They care very little about the story it seems to be more about loot, loot and more loot.

But ya, if you have other friends to game with I'd take the good RP player and start another group.
There's such a thing as loot with a story behind it - legendary weapons that must be properly awakened to unlock their legacy will have PCs moving heaven and earth for that extra +3 vs dragons.

[Vrock_Summoner]

Well, this is realistically the end of the OP posting here anymore. They'll take their fight out with each other IRL. It'd probably be too embarrassing and obviously antagonistic for him to continue to exacerbate the problem online. So let's move along, people.

(Though for whatever minor defense this is worth, he knows you frequent the site and didn't call out your name despite the obvious fact that if he were actually against you he could've used this to pettily attempt to disparage your rep. His refraining from doing so is worth... Something. Not much, but something.)

[Galen]

As one of the players in question....Popcorn time!!

[Honjuden]

Seems like there might be some ongoing issues.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?387379-How-would-psions-fight-summoners&p=18505526
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?387261-DM-playing-PCs-against-each-other

[Sacrieur]

I'd find a new group.

The guys I DM frustrate me because I almost always have some backstory or lore behind stuff and they are never even slightly interested. It's more like "knowledge check is this important or should I know anything about it? Yes? Ok move on." But at least they rp their characters out.

My biggest gripe is that my players seem to be 99% treasure hunters. They care very little about the story it seems to be more about loot, loot and more loot.

But ya, if you have other friends to game with I'd take the good RP player and start another group.

How involved with the story are they? Do they feel part of it? Is the backstory actually relevant or interesting in some way? How is it presented?

This is about storytelling abilities. You know that shows like Naruto have very rich backstories too. And I couldn't bloody care less because they're boring, irrelevant, and presented in a way that makes you want to gouge your eyeballs out. I prefer not to tell my players backstory during a game unless they roll some knowledge check. I do write short stories, but these are usually bursting with delicious world knowledge my players have been deprived of, they may want to read it because the characters involved are interesting.

[goto124]

I usually go with 'bits and pieces of backstory only when relevant in main story'.

[jjcrpntr]

How involved with the story are they? Do they feel part of it? Is the backstory actually relevant or interesting in some way? How is it presented?

This is about storytelling abilities. You know that shows like Naruto have very rich backstories too. And I could bloody care less because they're boring, irrelevant, and presented in a way that makes you want to gouge your eyeballs out. I prefer not to tell my players backstory during a game unless they roll some knowledge check. I do write short stories, but these are usually bursting with delicious world knowledge my players have been deprived of, they may want to read it because the characters involved are interesting.

I'm sure it's a combination of the two honestly. I'm an "ok" story teller, so I'm sure that's part of it. But also they seem pretty uninterested in lore. I'm not trying to complain about my players, they are good people and i have a lot of fun. I just wish they'd take a little more interest in backstories/lore sometimes.

[Sacrieur]

I'm sure it's a combination of the two honestly. I'm an "ok" story teller, so I'm sure that's part of it. But also they seem pretty uninterested in lore. I'm not trying to complain about my players, they are good people and i have a lot of fun. I just wish they'd take a little more interest in backstories/lore sometimes.

Make it more relevant to move forward. Make puzzles and situations where the answer lies in some back-story you've written. It's part of the world, not just something that stays in books.

[Platymus Pus]

How involved with the story are they? Do they feel part of it? Is the backstory actually relevant or interesting in some way? How is it presented?

This is about storytelling abilities. You know that shows like Naruto have very rich backstories too. And I could bloody care less because they're boring, irrelevant, and presented in a way that makes you want to gouge your eyeballs out. I prefer not to tell my players backstory during a game unless they roll some knowledge check. I do write short stories, but these are usually bursting with delicious world knowledge my players have been deprived of, they may want to read it because the characters involved are interesting.

You mean One Piece. Naruto doesn't have that much backstory going on. One piece on the other hand presents a bit of back story every released chapter instead of something long winded.
So it's more of a case of the example being picked poorly, I'd be a case of backstory being done wrong in such a way it's pretentious.
So when doing backstory remember, the characters IC aren't going to usually search for backstory unless they are a character like Nico Robin.

[Sliver]

Naruto doesn't have that much backstory going on.

A flashback nearly every encounter might disagree with you...

[PlatinumVixen]

It seems very obvious that there are deeper issues in this group that they need to talk out. The general subject is still an interesting one, though.

On the subject of players not being interested in lore, I know I've started trying to take the approach of just littering the campaign with small details and letting the players' pursue or ignore it at their leisure without hampering them too much if they're uninterested in a detail. While that's mostly worked so far it can definitely hurt to have your players be disinterested in the setting itself when it does happen, but the way I see it...Well, not everyone in real life is necessarily interested in history and culture, and so not every hero (or villain. Or creature born of cosmic neutrality) is going to be terribly interested in the history of the world around them.

As far as getting players' interested in the first place...The other thing I've been doing is having players help me develop the setting out of session, or at least parts of it. I'm not sure if it's smart but it certainly made them invested.

[GreyBlack]

At this point, this is a popcorn thread, but I would just like to post a quick story on how I solved a somewhat similar problem.

My players, for lack of a better word, are usually somewhat uninvolved with any narrative provided beyond a basic "Rescue the princess!" style narrative, so I decided to play with that assumption a bit.

I sent them on a seemingly straightforward dungeon crawl to rescue a MacGuffin with the power to rewrite time. At various points, I introduced PCs who would all ask if they knew why they were doing this, with each being summarily executed. At the end of the crawl, they recovered the book, only to have a seemingly unnecessary npc show up, defeat them all in a single round, and steal the book for herself, cackling, "Thank you for this. Now I can rewrite time myself!" Suffice it to say, they all pay attention to my lore now.

[NecessaryWeevil]

I sent them on a seemingly straightforward dungeon crawl to rescue a MacGuffin with the power to rewrite time. At various points, I introduced PCs who would all ask if they knew why they were doing this, with each being summarily executed. At the end of the crawl, they recovered the book, only to have a seemingly unnecessary npc show up, defeat them all in a single round, and steal the book for herself, cackling, "Thank you for this. Now I can rewrite time myself!" Suffice it to say, they all pay attention to my lore now.

Sounds interesting but I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean NPCs in line two? And who was doing the executing?

[Peat]

A game which has devolved to the point of GMs posting complaints on forums they know one of the PCs use either needs immediate cancellation, or a long and frank talk between all involved face to face about everyone's complaints. Teaching lessons IC just won't cut it.

[Coidzor]

I sent them on a seemingly straightforward dungeon crawl to rescue a MacGuffin with the power to rewrite time. At various points, I introduced PCs who would all ask if they knew why they were doing this, with each being summarily executed. At the end of the crawl, they recovered the book, only to have a seemingly unnecessary npc show up, defeat them all in a single round, and steal the book for herself, cackling, "Thank you for this. Now I can rewrite time myself!" Suffice it to say, they all pay attention to my lore now.

Sounds like you almost went Circle Chief on them. :smalleek:

Granted, there's some form of obtuseness on one or both sides of the DM screen with that line of summary executions that seems... fishy to me.


The guys I DM frustrate me because I almost always have some backstory or lore behind stuff and they are never even slightly interested. It's more like "knowledge check is this important or should I know anything about it? Yes? Ok move on." But at least they rp their characters out.

Have you tried selling them on a game where they're not setting out to play dungeon crawling adventurers?

And if the backstory or lore isn't actually relevant (and it'll never be as interesting to the players as it is to you, so you'll just have to get over that component), then they're not going to have a reason to remember extraneous bits of fluff.

[Platymus Pus]

A flashback nearly every encounter might disagree with you...
Backstory =/ flashbacks

[GreyBlack]

Sounds interesting but I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean NPCs in line two? And who was doing the executing?


Sounds like you almost went Circle Chief on them. :smalleek:

Granted, there's some form of obtuseness on one or both sides of the DM screen with that line of summary executions that seems... fishy to me.

Sorry, clarifying statement.

I would, at various points in the dungeon, introduce an NPC to the PCs who would try to talk and ask the PCs about their quest and provide some bits of insight about their quest, or would be attacked by the PCs (I sort of Batman Gambited that they would attack rather than accept help or questions). These NPCs would usually try to surrender the fight and offer some aid to the PCs (e.g. a clockwork army to fight the cult, some Demonic aid against the big bad, etc.). Rather than listen to the NPCs, the PCs would usually execute the NPCs, which was fine and dandy until they realized all they did was get the MacGuffin into a more powerful villain's hands.

Granted, all of the characters had a low wisdom score, so 10 points to Gryffindor for accurate roleplaying, but still made for a memorable gaming experience that the PCs enjoyed.

[SangoProduction]

Most things don't really work with combat. Use logic puzzles and what have you. But really, if they are intent on being *****, and you've talked to them, then the only option is to kick them.

[Coidzor]

Sorry, clarifying statement.

I would, at various points in the dungeon, introduce an NPC to the PCs who would try to talk and ask the PCs about their quest and provide some bits of insight about their quest, or would be attacked by the PCs (I sort of Batman Gambited that they would attack rather than accept help or questions). These NPCs would usually try to surrender the fight and offer some aid to the PCs (e.g. a clockwork army to fight the cult, some Demonic aid against the big bad, etc.). Rather than listen to the NPCs, the PCs would usually execute the NPCs, which was fine and dandy until they realized all they did was get the MacGuffin into a more powerful villain's hands.

Granted, all of the characters had a low wisdom score, so 10 points to Gryffindor for accurate roleplaying, but still made for a memorable gaming experience that the PCs enjoyed.

Ahh. That's... I misread you initially a bit there, then. That's kind of amazing. OK, more than kind of. :smallbiggrin:

[tadkins]

To be fair, some people (like me) are more engaged by the combat and character building than the RP. Personally I find it tough to get into the RP aspect of the game, as I'm nowhere near a skilled actor to pull it off.

[Zweisteine]

I suggest trying the opposite.

Throw at them nothing but CR1 stuff. Nothing hard, nothing elaborate. Never raise your voice, just speak in a monotone.

If they comment/complain, ask them why it bothers them? They clearly wanted nothing but a murder-frenzy, with no detail or depth. You're giving them exactly what they asked for.
I approve of this plan.

You could also allow them to ruin the setting, then see if they're surprised when the armies and champions of the world descend on them for their crimes.

But seriously, you seem fully incompatible with these players. Maybe follow some of the other people here's advice and split the group.

[GreyBlack]

Ahh. That's... I misread you initially a bit there, then. That's kind of amazing. OK, more than kind of. :smallbiggrin:

Thank you! Right now, I have them allied with the BBEG of the entire setting, unbeknownst to them, because I love playing with their ideas of the role of the Questgiver in an RPG.

[PlatinumVixen]

Thank you! Right now, I have them allied with the BBEG of the entire setting, unbeknownst to them, because I love playing with their ideas of the role of the Questgiver in an RPG.

You sound like a very delightfully devious dungeon master and I commend you for it. Out of curiosity, how do your players respond to this stuff? I've done some minor Batman Gambit...ing here and there but I've always been afraid to go Full Batman on the basis that I'm concerned some of them would take it the wrong way instead of having fun with it.

[GreyBlack]

You sound like a very delightfully devious dungeon master and I commend you for it. Out of curiosity, how do your players respond to this stuff? I've done some minor Batman Gambit...ing here and there but I've always been afraid to go Full Batman on the basis that I'm concerned some of them would take it the wrong way instead of having fun with it.

To be honest, very well. The key is to not do it too often. Sometimes, a quest is just a quest ("Go here, do X, profit.") Sometimes, though, you play with their expectations to keep them on your toes. However, always be cautious. A well-timed reveal, like "You've been working for the bad guy the whole time!" only works if you don't do it all the time. I can only pull this stuff because I know their play style and their characters (specifically, a Summoner, a Bloodrager, and a pyromaniacal Alchemist, all with 8 or lower wisdom). If they were to be more attentive to story and such, then the games would go much differently.

The moral of the story is the Three Commandments of DMing: Know thy players, Know thy world, and Know thy endgame. Everything else will come together as long as you know those 3 things. If the players react differently than you'd think, use your world to nudge them towards the endgame you want.

[Dimers]

Granted, all of the characters had a low wisdom score, so 10 points to Gryffindor for accurate roleplaying ...

That phrasing is beautiful. :smallsmile:

[Vrock_Summoner]

Thank you! Right now, I have them allied with the BBEG of the entire setting, unbeknownst to them, because I love playing with their ideas of the role of the Questgiver in an RPG.

I wish I had you for a DM...

[goto124]

Maybe I'm unreasonable, but I've felt cheated when a puzzle requires knowing something from the plot to proceed in the game. 'Wait, what was his name again? Must I dig through 5 pages of lore to find out? Erm, is the lore even neatly summarised like that, or must I backtrack, ask every random NPC and read every book just to solve a puzzle?'

Perhaps make the puzzles easy at first. Tell them beforehand, that they'll be NPCs asking them about the story. The questions they ask will be similar to 'why are you doing this', the answer being 'to retrieve the MacGuffin from the BBEG to free the princess'. Simple and easy stuff they'll probably know anyway.

Also, I've been in situations where the MacGuffin gets stolen or whatever. My reaction: Okay that was supposed to happen, plot continues, let's continue doing things. I'm curious, if your players' reaction was more like mine, where they just played as if nothing special happened, what would you do?

[GreyBlack]

Maybe I'm unreasonable, but I've felt cheated when a puzzle requires knowing something from the plot to proceed in the game. 'Wait, what was his name again? Must I dig through 5 pages of lore to find out? Erm, is the lore even neatly summarised like that, or must I backtrack, ask every random NPC and read every book just to solve a puzzle?'

Perhaps make the puzzles easy at first. Tell them beforehand, that they'll be NPCs asking them about the story. The questions they ask will be similar to 'why are you doing this', the answer being 'to retrieve the MacGuffin from the BBEG to free the princess'. Simple and easy stuff they'll probably know anyway.

Also, I've been in situations where the MacGuffin gets stolen or whatever. My reaction: Okay that was supposed to happen, plot continues, let's continue doing things. I'm curious, if your players' reaction was more like mine, where they just played as if nothing special happened, what would you do?

What would I do? Continue with the plot. The truly great DM tells a story in the context of the world, not a world in the context of a story. You may have this incredibly intricate world written up, but if it isn't an engaging story, then nobody will pay attention. Comparatively, you can tell an incredibly engaging story without writing up any world information. Story first, world second.

[Bohandas]

If you hadn't already planned out a campaign I would say to change it to a blood-war campaign, demons' army, wherein mindless destruction is roleplaying the character.

[icefractal]

With the other threads as context, I think a lesson that can be taken from this is that appointing an IC leader for the PCs to follow (in a more active roll than 'give general objectives') often doesn't work well, and that goes doubly so for appointing one of the PCs as said leader.

Yes, sometimes a leader emerges among the players naturally - usually more dependent on who people are willing to follow OOC than who's technically higher ranked IC. So wouldn't it be appropriate, even more appropriate, for that to happen IC? Simply put - no. This is a case where the OOC enjoyment of the players trumps the IC logic of the setting, in that most players don't want to be bossed around by NPCs or another player, regardless how much sense it would make in-setting.

YMMV, of course. But in the OP's case, that certainly seems to be part of the issues.