They brought it on themselves.

[Droopy McCool]

I really don't know what to do. I enjoy D&D, I enjoy DMing, but consider the following:

All my friends make silly characters. It's funny, but it gets old. And I don't mean they all like funny stuff, I mean EVERY PC is a joke. Bunch of selfish, greedy murderhobos who IC make jokes about peoples lives, killing npcs when they stop being profitable, and regardless of alignment spit on everyone in the world!

They also don't care about a story. My worlds are sandbox style, I've got running economies, kingdoms, intrigue, dungeons, continents, all available to them. I have villains and heroes, lore galore! They OOC ignore it all and don't pay attention unless they're fighting something. Straight up do other stuff at the table.

Obviously, this isn't one set of PCs they made, this is every. time. Everything is a big joke. After tonight's session, one of them commented that the best part (after playing for 5 hours real-time) was something another player did being goofy.

They don't appreciate anything I do. So guess what Playground. I'm done. They can go play their video games, they don't deserve my commitment.

Edit: I guess I'd like input. Harsh? Rash? What? Thanks.

McCool

[A_S]

It sounds like you want to play Look At My Cool Worldbuilding, and your players want to play Fight Monsters And Make Dumb Jokes. Neither of these things is inherently a problem; they are both potentially fun games. But, as you've learned the hard way, if there's disagreement at the table about which of those games you're playing, somebody is gonna have a bad time.

Without knowing more about the situation, we won't be able to say whether you're going overboard with how harsh you're being. Maybe your players were perfectly honest about the kind of game they want to play, and it's unfair of you to hold their different tastes against them. Or, maybe they gave you every reason to believe they wanted the same kind of game you did, then ruined it by not taking it seriously, in which case it'd be more reasonable for you to be a bit mad at them.

But, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter much. If you aren't having fun DMing the kind of games your friends want to play, don't DM for them. It's that simple.

[NichG]

Harsh? Rash? I'm not sure why it should matter...

You were in a situation where you weren't enjoying a social activity but it still used a lot of your time, so you stopped doing that thing. That makes sense. Other people here would do different things, would empathize with different participants in your story, but even if someone here empathizes with your players that doesn't change whether or not you were feeling good about playing with those people.

[PaucaTerrorem]

Present the issue to the players. Let them know that you have a whole world for them to explore. If they don't want it, understand that this is not for them. Build for them. It's as much a game for them as it is for you.

[Tvtyrant]

Present the issue to the players. Let them know that you have a whole world for them to explore. If they don't want it, understand that this is not for them. Build for them. It's as much a game for them as it is for you.

If the DM doesn't enjoy a certain play style they are no more required to play it then players are required to play the DMs style. The OP is right to quit, players are not entitled to a DM.

[Inevitability]

If there are irreconcilable differences between the players' and DM's playing style, either party is free to quit. It's as simple as that. The players are free to create their own group with one of them as the DM, and you are free to look for a new group.

[Ganorenas]

I'd do the same thing in your situation, being a Dm isn't especially easy, and many players take the effort you put into planning a game for granted.

It's said a lot around here, but no game is better than a bad game.

[fishyfishyfishy]

It sounds like you just enjoy different aspects of the game than what your players enjoy. Maybe have a group chat and talk about it with them. Explain why you feel the way you do and inform them that you'd like to try something more serious so that you can have more fun. Maybe offer to alternate between two different types of games? Or maybe one of the players can GM a new game so that you can RP a character the way you want.

[Droopy McCool]

I understand all your views. I appreciate the difference in tastes, but there are several thing that made this happen.

We had a thorough discussion before starting our last campaign to play in a scarier suspense/thriller world. No jokes, no silliness. I delivered, and they said 'nah' after we had agreed. We had that discussion, then one guy brings a Paladin with a COW for a mount, a rock bottom Int and Wis, and proceeds to play going "Hyuk hyuk what do you mean it's a cow? This is my horse hyuk hyuk!"

I don't mean I'm done playing with them, they are my good friends, but I'm done DMing for them. I don't mind that kind of play, but not when we decided to do something else and then deliberately being ridiculous. They play my games like a video game, 'press A to skip the dialogue' then 'spam A to kill the monster'. I said so in the first post, but they literally sit on their phone or walk away if the game isn't focused on their character immediately. Meaning the group is searching the building, but that's not interesting to a couple of them, so they do something else then come back when I say a monster jumps you.

Tell me that's OK, and I'll stop being mad.

McCool

[Theobod]

It sounds like you just enjoy different aspects of the game than what your players enjoy. Maybe have a group chat and talk about it with them. Explain why you feel the way you do and inform them that you'd like to try something more serious so that you can have more fun.
This, the important thing is open dialogue, just tell them in no uncertain terms that you would like to run a game that is less about goofiness and more about story, discovery, intrigue and with a serious tone, let them start with new characters if they want more serious ones and maybe start the game afresh from another part of this world. However point out, diplomatically, that this isn't a request, this is the game you will be running from here on in. If they agree, give them a couple seshes and reevaluate, being open and honest about your perceptions, it may only need a slight tweak in behaviour from each of them to make the game satisfactory for you. If they refuse, say that in that case you don't find the experience fun anymore and will be withdrawing from DMing.

[Aegis013]

Even in a serious game, some goofiness can be acceptable. For example, in a game I got to play in, we were visiting another nation, which was like an Eberron level steam-punky magitech nation. When the warforged told my gnome wizard that what the newspaper was, he said it "lets you know everything going on in the area" and my wizard misunderstood, taking that to mean it was a powerful divination item like a constant mass-scry device and became determined to obtain one, only to be sorely disappointed after spending 15 minutes trying to find someone who would convert my gold coinage into the nation's paper money so I could buy "The Newspaper".

The tone of the game didn't suffer, it was still a continent spanning serious, high adventure. But the group got a few laughs and it became one of the most memorable moments of the campaign.

[Theobod]

The tone of the game didn't suffer, it was still a continent spanning serious, high adventure. But the group got a few laughs and it became one of the most memorable moments of the campaign.

This is also an important point, its hard to have a game that runs for any length of time without the occasional humorous aside or insert, even in a horror game, infact its quite healthy, comic relief is called exactly that for a reason. So if you do convince them to give the game a go without the constant goofiness be prepared for the change to be gradual and not complete, occasional humor WILL occur, especially if the group is used to it being always on, dont jump down their throats over it when it happens, especially if its only once or twice a session, give it a couple seshes then make your satisfactions and grievances known in general terms.

[martixy]

This is the simplest and most clear-cut case of mismatched tastes I've ever seen.

I know how you feel. I am currently in the same situation.
Many friends I have, some of which will also be roommates in the near future flat out said they want nothing to do with my game once I explained what it is about.
They merely seek a wholly different experience from what I'd ever care to offer and I have to accept that since there's nothing I can do about it really.

Just seek a different group.

Many here suggest you adapt to their taste, but people seem to forget DMs are also people who have their own tastes and have the right to just as much fun.
If the differences between DM and players are small, perhaps this could work, but this is not the impression I'm getting from this thread so far.

[Droopy McCool]

I could live with "once or twice a session". I'm talking about constant jokes and never taking it seriously. We have talked about the lack of seriousness, but they don't care. They want to play what they want to play. Fine, but I'm not playing the same game anymore, right?

McCool

[Theobod]

I could live with "once or twice a session". I'm talking about constant jokes and never taking it seriously. We have talked about the lack of seriousness, but they don't care. They want to play what they want to play. Fine, but I'm not playing the same game anymore, right?

McCool

Then by all means back out :) no gaming is better than bad gaming. You guys seem hopelessly mismatched I'm the current setup

[Droopy McCool]

I'm just gonna tell them I'm not gonna DM anymore. I don't mind their style of play, but not when I have to work for it. Thanks everyone.

McCool

[Psyren]

Meaning the group is searching the building, but that's not interesting to a couple of them, so they do something else then come back when I say a monster jumps you.

Tell me that's OK, and I'll stop being mad.


While I agree with the rest, this part isn't that uncommon. Often you'll hit a section where not every player at the table can participate. Searching for clues when some players don't have Search/Perception, a social encounter where some players don't have Diplomacy or Sense Motive, a research encounter where some players are missing the Knowledge skills required, a stealth/scouting section where some of the players aren't any good at that etc. These should be minimized and cut short wherever possible, but are very tough to eliminate entirely without reducing the game to just being the one thing every PC class can do (pure combat.) In these cases, I think it's fine to have the non-participatory players check out briefly. If you want them to use the time constructively, have them start planning what they'll do with their characters on level up, or have them use the time to tally up new loot or polish their campaign notes or something.

Again, I do agree that your playstyle is incompatible with your group from what you've said above, but at the same time, this particular complaint will likely come up in any new group you get too. In a diverse team like most adventuring parties, keeping every single PC fully invested in every single event taking place in a gaming session is a daunting and dare I say unrealistic task.

[Honest Tiefling]

You told them politely how you wished to play. They agreed. Then, instead of communicating that they had no interest in changing, they did what they wanted anyway, knowing it wasn't fun for you.

Are you sure these guys are your friends? Or are they people who turn off their brains when DnD is near? (That's not an insult, I know plenty of people who do that for whatever reason.)

[Droopy McCool]

I don't know, I believe it's rude when someone is talking, you are a part of the "conversation", and you whip out the phone or something. I was taught to pay attention, and I do give my full attention to the DM, even if I'm a BSF and the Wizard is rolling Know() checks in a library. Maybe that's just me.


Are you sure these guys are your friends?

I made my Knowledge(Local) check, I know they aren't the most considerate people, but they're good guys. We enjoy each others company, but different interests are common.

McCool

[ZamielVanWeber]

I don't know, I believe it's rude when someone is talking, you are a part of the "conversation", and you whip out the phone or something. I was taught to pay attention, and I do give my full attention to the DM, even if I'm a BSF and the Wizard is rolling Know() checks in a library. Maybe that's just me.

It can depend on duration. I can be a little distracted in my friend's Tuesday Marvel game, but I try to always keep one eye minimum and make sure I am ready to go if called on.

One time though? My character was useless and to make it worse one PC was going around doing everything by herself. I sat doing nothing for over 10 minutes until my character was called on to make an Observation check. Literally he was told to look for something, a task that could have been done by most of the other characters. I was so annoyed I almost refused.

Okay the example went overly long but the point stands. A couple of knowledge rolls is one thing, but if your wizard is on a 15 minute library binge the non-scholarly types may get bored.

[Psyren]

I don't know, I believe it's rude when someone is talking, you are a part of the "conversation", and you whip out the phone or something. I was taught to pay attention, and I do give my full attention to the DM, even if I'm a BSF and the Wizard is rolling Know() checks in a library. Maybe that's just me.

But that's just it - how can you expect them to be "part of the conversation" in such a situation, if they have nothing to contribute? A conversation by definition is a two-way street; it requires both parties to have something to say, or in this case do.

If you can't cut it short, at the very least you should try to come up with something for the other players to do while the main ones are moving the plot forward. Even something as simple as holding the ladder so the wizard can reach the tomes on the topmost shelf, with success reducing the number of checks they have to make, or uncovering a side-quest, or something.

[Honest Tiefling]

I am only on my phone during RPGs if:
1) My character is not present. I don't mean, not contributing, I mean in a completely different area and wouldn't really know what is going on. I can't very well meta-game what I haven't heard.
2) I need to check or brush up on some rules. I have the memory of a leaky sieve, so sometimes during other people's turns I go over my spells. (I at least try to make sure I am aware of the battlefield enough to use said spells.)

Else, yeah, I find it terribly rude. I've had to enforce no technology bans at my table because of it. A lot of people say they can handle it, but then they forget massive parts of the story. Like where they currently are.

[Droopy McCool]

OK, well, last night, guy is with party, party finds old building. Party goes in, he says, my character sits outside. They say why, and he says he doesn't care about this PC they're looking for. Guy starts playing phone game. Out of the blue.

I understand what a lot of you are saying, but in this case they just don't care about the adventure, but want to play anyway. :smallconfused:

McCool

[martixy]

Might I suggest you try making a lan party instead of a D&D game?

[Psyren]

OK, well, last night, guy is with party, party finds old building. Party goes in, he says, my character sits outside. They say why, and he says he doesn't care about this PC they're looking for. Guy starts playing phone game. Out of the blue.

I understand what a lot of you are saying, but in this case they just don't care about the adventure, but want to play anyway. :smallconfused:

McCool

Well obviously that's bad, but you didn't exactly give us that detail before either. :smallconfused: We can only give opinions based on the situation at hand.

[Âmesang]

In a similar case the last time I took out my tablet was when my character was unconscious or dead; not a whole lot to do, right? This is also more of a "kick down the door and thrash everything" kind of game, so not a whole lot of story to follow (heck, even the referee doesn't know what's going on anymore).

Sknurt: "Dothal, are you okay?" Dothal: "…" Sknurt: "Do you need a potion?" Dothal: "…" Sknurt: "Yeah, I guess that's a stupid question."

Now depending on which character I'm playing as a "technology ban" could momentarily hurt, since I've a couple of characters posted up on my own forum instead of being written down on paper; makes it easier to edit things on the fly and I like having them up as public record for any player or referee to examine, especially since I reference any non-core aspects in a footnote at the bottom of the post.

[Droopy McCool]

Well obviously that's bad, but you didn't exactly give us that detail before either. :smallconfused: We can only give opinions based on the situation at hand.

Understood, and I tried to explain the situation without getting overly detailed, and I volunteer more information based on input. I'm not angry at anyone for giving an opinion, but I fill in the blank when the opinion stretches past the facts. :smallsmile:

McCool

[Garktz]

Then be ruthless with them, you say you built a full universe? give live to that universe, make it fight back....

If they go around killing npcs for no much reason, get paladin squad to hunt them down for their crimes
They go around spiting on everybody, have 1 guy make a deal with some obscure entity to spit back on them

Just make the world react to their acts in a proper (and, in my opinion, as ruthless as you can) way. They either take your world seriously or die because they cant fight back serious and careful planning from bbeg.

[oxybe]

First, good job on the session 0 to set the desired tone/genre/etc... not enough people do that.

Second, if someone isn't adhering to those, bring it up with them. That's the game you all signed up for. If they continue, you are well in your right to uninvite them them thereon.

Third, if you're the only one putting effort into keeping the desired tone/genre you initially agreed to and brought it up with them, you have 3 options:

1) keep running it as you did
2) change the tone to match what they want
3) stop running because this isn't the campaigned you signed up for

Replace "Playing D&D" to "Watching the Football game" or "hosting a fancy dinner party with the tiny little sausages". Any other social event, really.

You all agreed to the terms of the event and they're not holding up their end... you're not forced to continue hosting them. They can have their spraycheese+cracker fest, but it has to be somewhere else as you're holding a fancy dinner party.

not gaming is better then bad gaming, so tell them "we agreed to [describe your game] kind of game, if you're all interested in it and will make the effort, I'll keep running. If not, one of you are free to pick up the reins and run the game you want."

I've stopped running games because it stopped becoming fun for me. I've quit games because people were jerks. I've left games because it turned into something I didn't care for. no reason to stay in a game that you're not having fun in.

[Psyren]

Understood, and I tried to explain the situation without getting overly detailed, and I volunteer more information based on input. I'm not angry at anyone for giving an opinion, but I fill in the blank when the opinion stretches past the facts. :smallsmile:

McCool

Detail aside though, you should hopefully get the underlying premise of where we're coming from. A player who wants to participate but can't (because their character lacks the capability to do so) can understandably become bored, and this is a game problem. A player who can participate but chooses not to, even to the point of blowing off the other people he's playing with, is an attitude problem.

For the game problem, you should try to keep them engaged - but if that's not possible or it's too much work, you should learn to be okay with the inactive players' attention wandering a bit. Just say something like "Listen up" when you want to relay something everyone at the table needs to know, or better yet, have the active player relay it to the others, which is how it would happen in-character anyway. The wizard doing research would emerge from the library, robes rumpled and hands smudged with ink, to begin excitedly relaying his findings to the fighter who was lounging outside and beginning to drift off.

For the attitude problem, that's a completely different issue entirely. That person may have something going on that's keeping them from focusing on the game and as a good friend, you should find out what that is and how you can help. Or they may simply not be cut out for social gaming, in which case you should disinvite them from D&D (or at least just the table) while maintaining the friendship as best you can.

[Droopy McCool]

@Garktz
I thought about doing this, and maybe I will. I'm imagining their faces when their characters hang for their crimes... :smallamused:

@oxybe
All good suggestions, probably what I'll end up doing is letting them run a game if they want.

@Psyren
Glad we understand each other, and you've made me realize something. They are the most anti-social people I have ever met. Social gaming is really not for them.

McCool

[prufock]

Many of your problems can be solved by playing Paranoia! instead.

[phlidwsn]

Many of your problems can be solved by playing Paranoia! instead.

Many? Many? Are you treasonously implying that Friend Computer is incapable of solving all problems, Citizen?

[Droopy McCool]

OK so I told them I didn't want to DM anymore, we had a discussion, and they said it was fun what we did. I asked them what parts were fun and all the stuff they said were player things, not my stuff. So I told them that, and one guy says:

"If we agreed to try a serious campaign would you want to DM?"

:smallconfused::smallmad::smallfurious:

So I said "We agreed to do just that for THIS campaign."

And the excuses flew "we forgot" and "oh yeah". I laughed and told them if they really wanted to try I would DM. But, I mean...what the heck?

McCool

[Aegis013]

And the excuses flew "we forgot" and "oh yeah". I laughed and told them if they really wanted to try I would DM. But, I mean...what the heck?


Queue Demon's Souls' Crestfallen Warrior: "Can't you see, you've fallen for their trap?"
(Couldn't find a good link in 1 minute of searching)

[Nightcanon]

OK so I told them I didn't want to DM anymore, we had a discussion, and they said it was fun what we did. I asked them what parts were fun and all the stuff they said were player things, not my stuff. So I told them that, and one guy says:

"If we agreed to try a serious campaign would you want to DM?"

:smallconfused::smallmad::smallfurious:

So I said "We agreed to do just that for THIS campaign."

And the excuses flew "we forgot" and "oh yeah". I laughed and told them if they really wanted to try I would DM. But, I mean...what the heck?

McCool
How about suggesting that he DM for the serious campaign, and you will play. There's then one additional person invested in making it work (and putting in the prep work outside the game), and they have you as a player to try to keep things on track.

[torrasque666]

Queue Demon's Souls' Crestfallen Warrior: "Can't you see, you've fallen for their trap?"
(Couldn't find a good link in 1 minute of searching)

Agreed. They're just going to "forget" again.

[Droopy McCool]

As far as forgetting again, I'm unsure, they seemed pretty sorry. I figure I will run one more session, and if the silliness continues, I'll stop. I want to be the DM, but not for that.

I told them my problem was mainly that they didn't care IC or OOC. Their characters weren't people with aspirations and appropriate reactions to situations. I told them to live a life through their character. We'll see.

McCool

[prufock]

http://1un1ba2fg8v82k48vu4by3q7.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Admiral-Ackbar-Its-A-Trap.jpg

[Droopy McCool]

I was just reading the DMG, and I found this interesting and relevant section on page 137.


Player Characters out of Control
...Players should always remember one fact: There's always someone more powerful. You should set up your world with the idea that the PCs, while special, are not unique. Other characters, many of them quite powerful, have come along before the PCs. Institutions of influence have had to deal with individuals of great power long before the PCs. . . . The point is that NPCs with resources will be prepared for great danger. The sooner the PCs realize this, the less likely they will run amok in your campaign world.

So the suggestions that my world spit right back at them is encouraged by the creators. I hadn't really though of doing this until now though.

Funnily enough, I remember one time my friend attacked an NPC that was the same level as them (and helping them). When the NPC knocked him out, he was very upset that his 4th level fighter couldn't "totally pwn that newb." All I told him was that he had similar skill. Apparently my friend was under the impression that his guy was 'unique'. :smalltongue:

McCool

[Incorrect]

If you want them to experience the world you have created, then just start the railroad.
These guys wont mind that you steer the story in the direction you want, they are happy if they can hit stuff and make jokes.

I feel bad for suggesting railroading, but for this particular group it might work.

[Droopy McCool]

If you want them to experience the world you have created, then just start the railroad.
These guys wont mind that you steer the story in the direction you want, they are happy if they can hit stuff and make jokes.

I feel bad for suggesting railroading, but for this particular group it might work.

I think this is the first time railroading has been advocated.

Hey everybody, Incorrect said we should build the railroad! Let construction commence! :smallbiggrin:

Joking aside, If they stop progressing the story on their own, I'll just drop the campaign at that point. See my previous comments on why.

McCool

[Kelb_Panthera]

If you want them to experience the world you have created, then just start the railroad.
These guys wont mind that you steer the story in the direction you want, they are happy if they can hit stuff and make jokes.

I feel bad for suggesting railroading, but for this particular group it might work.

This is a valid option. While railroading is generally frowned upon by the community, it -does- work for some groups. I understand if you'd rather just call it quits but you could give this a try. Hell, you could probably get away with a main-character type DMPC with the party as his bumbling, snarky companions.

Yeah, though, your feelings about this utter misalignment of taste are well warranted. If you're not enjoying running the game, regardless of the reason, you're under no obligation to continue running the game.

[Eldan]

I'll be frank: while the NPC arms race sometimes works (you attacked the king? Well ,he has guards. And a court mage. And wards.), it doesn't work for a campaign. At some point, the players will have enough. You can't solve OOC issues ingame.

SO, you talked to them. Maybe they'll try for a while, in which case, good. You shoudl also think, however, about what to do if they dont.

Giving up is an entirely valid option. You don't enjoy a game, you quit it.

You could also try meeting them halfway, if you think that works. They want to play silly and without much story, oblige them. Play murderhobos with them. Literally. A few campaign suggestions (mostly story-light sandbox) that work with that:

-Barbarian marauders
-Conquistadors on a newly discovered continent
-Defending a frontier outpost
-Building a criminal gang in a lawless city

[Droopy McCool]

Hey Frank,

If this next session doesn't work out per our agreement, I'm not going to DM. As far as meeting them halfway, I'll just let a different guy DM, and he is willing to, but not great at it. I figure I'll help him along, then cut him loose, because how hard is it to run a murderhobo/no story campaign anyway, right?

McCool

[Droopy McCool]

OK, session is later today, but I'm hitting a snare. My one player has a problem with being serious, and I don't mean in the game. Which will translate into the game. But let me explain.

I'm currently texting this player, and I asked him what his character was going to be. He told me he would continue play his Paladin (same as before) with the cow mount and certain magic items that allow it to fly briefly. I'm fine with that, but I asked him for a reason for everything and also why he would want the cow to fly at all.

His answer was "I can just make some backstory, and a flying cow seems fun, which is the point of dnd as I see it."

What do you say to that? I told him I'm not trying to ruin anyone's fun by asking them to take the game serious, and if he wants to play a stupid mess-around character we can get our other friend to DM. All the other guys made characters with great backstories and goals, while he just wants to fly his cow around. How do I explain that his one mechanical ability won't make D&D "fun", rather "funny"?

And if I'm being perfectly honest, I think he shouldn't play at all. He never appears to be having fun. (This is the player who sits on his phone and ignores stuff the most.)

McCool

[Theobod]

Point out the other members are on board and set the baseline, if he persists say: then I will continue without you for now and see how it goes.
He either gets in line or steps out, seems easy enough, you have enough players without him and it seems like he won't really miss it.

[AnimeTheCat]

OK, session is later today, but I'm hitting a snare. My one player has a problem with being serious, and I don't mean in the game. Which will translate into the game. But let me explain.

I'm currently texting this player, and I asked him what his character was going to be. He told me he would continue play his Paladin (same as before) with the cow mount and certain magic items that allow it to fly briefly. I'm fine with that, but I asked him for a reason for everything and also why he would want the cow to fly at all.

His answer was "I can just make some backstory, and a flying cow seems fun, which is the point of dnd as I see it."

What do you say to that? I told him I'm not trying to ruin anyone's fun by asking them to take the game serious, and if he wants to play a stupid mess-around character we can get our other friend to DM. All the other guys made characters with great backstories and goals, while he just wants to fly his cow around. How do I explain that his one mechanical ability won't make D&D "fun", rather "funny"?

And if I'm being perfectly honest, I think he shouldn't play at all. He never appears to be having fun. (This is the player who sits on his phone and ignores stuff the most.)

McCool

I'm not entirely sure that Cows can be trained as warmounts which, as I understand it, carries penalties when the character tries to ride it in to combat. That being said, the standard mount is a Heavy Warhorse. If he insists on having a cow, let him know that his mount is not going to like combat and that will adversely effect him. Its not railroading or ruining fun, its preventing him from ruining his own fun. As the DM you are obligated to follow the rules and if the rules say cows aren't combat trained well, that's what the rules say. If he still chooses to go through with it and the cow bucks him off and runs away, maybe he'll change his mind. Compromising the rules of the game for the sake of the fun is sometimes warranted, but in this case, I doubt it.

EDIT: ok, quick look, no war training just means the cow won't use hoof attacks, but all the ride checks though...

[Âmesang]

Is anyone else suddenly reminded of Grandma Ben from Bone? :smalltongue:

[Eisfalken]

I think the players are being pretty jerky about it all. They promised to fly straight the first time, then deliberately broke the promise. One's playing on a cellphone because he's bored with everything. Another seems bound and determined to be a jerk about his flying cow paladin.

Sounds a lot like people being garbage, and a lot less like "miscommunication" or whatever the thing is now...

[Droopy McCool]

So, we played. And it worked. Very well I might add. The whole session did not revolve around sillyness, but was handled smoothly by the players in character, and they are now working towards several personal goals and one group-centric goal.

However, I regret to announce that "cow guy" has quit. After quite the argument, he decided we had already labeled him as the problem person, and didn't even stay. For whatever reason, he just could not bring himself to play a serious character, or at least one that didn't goof around all the time. Perhaps it's for the best though.

McCool

[Theobod]

So, we played. And it worked. Very well I might add. The whole session did not revolve around sillyness, but was handled smoothly by the players in character, and they are now working towards several personal goals and one group-centric goal.

However, I regret to announce that "cow guy" has quit. After quite the argument, he decided we had already labeled him as the problem person, and didn't even stay. For whatever reason, he just could not bring himself to play a serious character, or at least one that didn't goof around all the time. Perhaps it's for the best though.

McCool

100% for the best, couldn't have hoped for better, if he is a friend he will get over this and stay a friend, if he isn't he won't and wasnt to begin with, either way your table is saved, hurrah :)

[Efrate]

I have had a couple of those in my games. My best friend who I run a game with cannot for the life of him play a serious character. But one of the games I am running now that he is in is a LOT more tongue in check. I have no problem with this. I will never have him, nor this 17 year old kid, in my "real" serious game. And thats perfectly valid. I don't mind Dming silly, and I don't mind Dming serious. I just don't want both ends of the spectrum in a single game.

Sometimes the pcs use a window for cover in a desperate firefight to save people in a house thats being swarmed. Sometimes they try and fail, multiple times, trying to jump through that same window, but keep on trying after everyone in and our of game makes fun of them. Just don't have both in the same session and it works out fine.