Help! My players want to fight everything!

[jleonardwv]

Second phase of an AP. Town council tells players to sneak into enemy stronghold, do recon, find out strengths/weaknesses and report back. Small party, just three PCs-Ranger, Fighter, Monk/Cleric MC.

First encounter I altered to make the giant lizard less threatening. Ranger used animal handling to calm it and get past. Check.

I had a DM-PC cast invisibility on herself and sneak down the hallways for a while looking in open doors, etc. One guard heard a noise and investigated. PCs had ways to hide/avoid conflict, but attacked! Wound up "clearing" four opponents. Buried them in mud to avoid discovery.

Then the whole party starts wandering the hallways with no stealth checks. They listen at a door and hear voices. What do they do? Bash the door down, shove the first guy backwards and attack! They are in over their heads with nine guards and enemy spellcaster in the room; maybe this will be TPK.

In the first phase of AP, they had a similar situation and I rescued them with NPC help. Even then, I had them captured instead of killed and they used time in jail cell to short rest and use resources to escape and then attack and kill most baddies.

How can I make them role play more and roll play less? Or should I just give in to their ways and TPK them? I could capture them again and put them on trial by the enemy at which point they'd have to negotiate or try to escape.

[Sigreid]

Sounds like you and your players want a different style of game. IMO, you can kill the characters, but that won't change that the players seem to want an action oriented kick in the door game.

[The_Jette]

It sounds like a conflict idea of what the players want right now. They might not want to play a high role play game, and are more interested in kicking in doors, and gathering loot. Those games can be fun, in their own way. But, since the PC's were instructed to go in and do reconnaissance, and they've chosen to smash in doors and get into a fight with everyone they come across, I'd let the dice do the deciding. If they manage to overcome the enemy, good for them. If they don't, that's what happens when you kick in a door and attach whatever is on the other side without verifying what it is first. After the fight is over, talk to the players and figure out what they want from the game. You may end up having to set your campaign aside, and build something else for them, if all they want to do is kill things and take their stuff.

[2D8HP]

Seems most DM's these days set it up so there is nothing to do but fight.

If your different, it will take awhile for your players to learn that your adventures have other options.

Maybe have the "bad guys" flee and shelter somewhere the PC's can't get at them?

[Beleriphon]

Seems most DM's these days set it up so there is nothing to do but fight.

If your different, it will take awhile for your players to learn that your adventures have other options.

Maybe have the "bad guys" flee and shelter somewhere the PC's can't get at them?

Or maybe the players don't care, and this is the kind of game they want to play. I don't play FIFA 2016 and complain the Edmonton Oilers with Wayne Gretzky circa 1988 aren't an available team. They're both sports games, but come with very different expectations. If you're a fan of one, it doesn't mean you'll like the other.

[NNescio]

Second phase of an AP. Town council tells players to sneak into enemy stronghold, do recon, find out strengths/weaknesses and report back. Small party, just three PCs-Ranger, Fighter, Monk/Cleric MC.

First encounter I altered to make the giant lizard less threatening. Ranger used animal handling to calm it and get past. Check.

I had a DM-PC cast invisibility on herself and sneak down the hallways for a while looking in open doors, etc. One guard heard a noise and investigated. PCs had ways to hide/avoid conflict, but attacked! Wound up "clearing" four opponents. Buried them in mud to avoid discovery.

Then the whole party starts wandering the hallways with no stealth checks. They listen at a door and hear voices. What do they do? Bash the door down, shove the first guy backwards and attack! They are in over their heads with nine guards and enemy spellcaster in the room; maybe this will be TPK.

In the first phase of AP, they had a similar situation and I rescued them with NPC help. Even then, I had them captured instead of killed and they used time in jail cell to short rest and use resources to escape and then attack and kill most baddies.

How can I make them role play more and roll play less? Or should I just give in to their ways and TPK them? I could capture them again and put them on trial by the enemy at which point they'd have to negotiate or try to escape.

Either design adventures to cater to the "kick-the-door-down and loot" playstyle, or TPK (nothing heavy handed here, just let the dice roll as they should) them and hope they'll learn.

(AP encounters tend to be a little bit too hard especially if the players fight every single encounter possible. As DM, however, you can always choose to scale things down.)

If you go for the latter approach, drop hints like reminding your players of unfavorable odds, asking them if they're sure, etc. etc.

Having them be saved by DM fiat again and again just conditions them to their current Leeroy Jenkins approach because they don't feel the risk anyway. Players don't feel their characters' actions have (meaningful) consequences, well, they are just going to continue doing the same.

(Bear in mind that this isn't an excuse to "punish" the player. There are differences, often subtle, between the game world and NPCs reacting in a realistic manner to PC actions and the DM forcing players to play in a certain style he wants.)

Also try to have an OOC chat with them before doing all this. Some player groups just want a heroic fantasy or simple 'murderhobo' game, and wouldn't be interested in cloak-and-dagger and intrigue games, or even roleplaying, really. You can't exactly force them into playing a game that they don't want.

Of course, neither should you force yourself to DM the type of game you're not interested in either. Feel free to hand over the DM reins to somebody else, or DM for a different group.

('though really, for me, DMing for this kind of party can be refreshing sometimes. My players are all the paranoid types who would check everything with a 10-foot pole even on a time limit.)

[Sigreid]

And, of course, sometimes you have just had a rough week and want to fantasize about killing anyone who looks at you cross ways.

[GlenSmash!]

What expectations for the game did you and your group discuss and set in your Session 0?

[Temperjoke]

I'd let the dice fall where they may this time, no interference or extra assistance for the players. Do this for the rest of this adventure. Anyone who survives to make it back to the town that dispatched them gets royally chewed out for not following instructions and setting off the entire base, who start a manhunt for the survivors. Let them deal with the consequences of their choices. Then, in the future, make sure everyone is clear in the understanding that your games have options beyond fighting.

[monkey3]

With very little data, I have to go back to my personal bias. As a player, my problem would have been the DMPC. According to what I read in the second scenario, you had the DMPC cast inv on himself, and do a bunch of actions in stealth. If I were there as a player, my inner monologue would have been: "Hey! I want to play as well. This DM is playing by himself! He is controlling the good guys AND the bad guys!" And from then on, I would ignore stealth, trying to beat the DMPC to the action.

I could be way off, but I don't have all the facts.

[Breashios]

IF the situation is hanging at the beginning of the battle you described AND you want to salvage the campaign, here is one option - Start by saying to the players "Your characters have the awareness that" (or have them make some type of DC10 roll) "they have picked a fight they are likely to lose. You know a way out (supposedly back the way they came). If you disengage now, you believe you'll have a good chance at succeeding. Mr. Monk/Cleric, you remember you have caltrops (if he does - if he doesn't try to find something they purchased or a spell they have memorized that you can somehow twist into delaying the pursuit)." That character can use that after creating separation.

On your side, take AoO if a character in range doesn't use the disengage action, but otherwise have the guards pause a few rounds. From the guards standpoint, they don't know the whole picture. Is the whole complex under attack? Where should they report? Would pursuit of the foolish attackers actually lead them into a trap? There are various reasonable reasons for the guards to let the party escape. If the NPC is with them still, he/she can encourage good actions, but don't have the NPC say "Let's run away" until the characters have the opportunity to begin that discussion from their own knowledge or the contrarian side of any players might discard this as an option.

After they have the separation, make it clear the alarm has gone up and the mission has failed overall (unless you want them to go to the other side of the complex and try again, in which case the NPC will suggest they make it look like they left), but when they get back make sure the NPC leaders don't harangue them. They should be happy for the little information they did gain and that they got out alive given whatever story they tell them when they return. (Encourage them to explain their failure in the best light. Maybe the NPC will say "We should tell them a patrol caught us midway down a hall. We were lucky to get out." I can give you a million motivations for any NPC, even one that doesn't like the PCs, to lie for them.

I would stay away from capturing them again. If you do have to capture them again, make sure their freedom costs a hefty ransom. Whatever benefactor pays it will "own" the PCs for quite some time.

[Bahamut7]

Second phase of an AP. Town council tells players to sneak into enemy stronghold, do recon, find out strengths/weaknesses and report back. Small party, just three PCs-Ranger, Fighter, Monk/Cleric MC.

First encounter I altered to make the giant lizard less threatening. Ranger used animal handling to calm it and get past. Check.

I had a DM-PC cast invisibility on herself and sneak down the hallways for a while looking in open doors, etc. One guard heard a noise and investigated. PCs had ways to hide/avoid conflict, but attacked! Wound up "clearing" four opponents. Buried them in mud to avoid discovery.

Then the whole party starts wandering the hallways with no stealth checks. They listen at a door and hear voices. What do they do? Bash the door down, shove the first guy backwards and attack! They are in over their heads with nine guards and enemy spellcaster in the room; maybe this will be TPK.

In the first phase of AP, they had a similar situation and I rescued them with NPC help. Even then, I had them captured instead of killed and they used time in jail cell to short rest and use resources to escape and then attack and kill most baddies.

How can I make them role play more and roll play less? Or should I just give in to their ways and TPK them? I could capture them again and put them on trial by the enemy at which point they'd have to negotiate or try to escape.

Ok...drop the DM-PC first off. It sounds like you are not on the same page with them and your PC should reflect that.

Two, punish them for making rash decisions. Maybe that room they busted in and killed everyone had innocent people. Indentured Servants, captured people, entralled people, etc.

Three, consequences. If they burst in and kill everyone in sight. Inform them ahead of time that there was a spy or informant and now they killed them. Or that by going full blown murder hobo, they have disgraced themselves or got a sizeable bounty on their head. Have the world react to them accordingly.

[2D8HP]

From the description it does seem like that after the DM-PC acts, mostly all that's left is combat.

[Fishybugs]

Options:

1) Have them brought up on murder charges.

2) Have a great prize available that they can't access because one of the people they killed was the only person who could dispel the protections. They may start thinking a little more before they kill.

[jleonardwv]

As for the DM-PC I offered to let another player run her. He sort of agreed and we sort of ran her together so I wasn't railroading.

[Beelzebubba]

Lots of adversarial replies here.

How about, before the game one day, talk about it?

"I designed the adventure to be recon, but you're attacking everything. Would you rather have that style of play? Because, usually you do recon when you don't know how powerful the opponents are, I designed it with the idea that you'd be trying to do recon, and you might get yourselves in over your heads. Is this the game you want?"

I think you might be surprised what comes out of it.

I've had a Trail of Cthulhu game turn into a noir-with-horror style adventure, with much more personal intrigue, rather than the overt grotesque cosmic horror the adventure had. The players loved it that we all adjusted.

Maybe some expectation leveling is in order?

[StorytellerHero]

The simplest thing to do is to ask the players what kind of gameplay style they enjoy the most and what they would like to try in the future (ex. mystery, dungeon-crawl, political intrigue, underwater, etc.).

[Bahamut7]

Lots of adversarial replies here.

My response was based on this being past the point of discussion and that it seemed like they were going to do this anyways.

[Breashios]

The simplest thing to do is to ask the players what kind of gameplay style they enjoy the most and what they would like to try in the future (ex. mystery, dungeon-crawl, political intrigue, underwater, etc.).

And if you've done this and they don't really have a clear consensus or even if they do, still be careful. I have real world experience giving a group of people exactly what they asked for and it being something they then realized they did not want. You are allowed to have input into what kind of game will be right for everyone (you are a member of that set). If you are going to put the effort in, to some extent the game must also be something you are interested in exploring. It may be just something as simple as changing their expectations, or they may admit they got out of hand without thinking.

Also if you are comfortable with your decisions using the DM-NPC, own it. There has been valid comments about what might have happened. Those should be considered. After considering those comments and making appropriate adjustments, move forward. I would not make drastic changes. Allowing that character to be run by another player during combat makes good practical sense, but you have veto rights on everything (try not to use, but do use when necessary to keep the game going in the right direction). You should remain the exclusive voice of the NPC however, and should feel comfortable with the NPC giving input when necessary (in character). Otherwise, she should remain shy and reserved, (only making rare snarky comments if that is her personality, for instance.)

[JakOfAllTirades]

This again? There's a technical term for adventuring groups who don't understand the meaning of the word reconnaissance: we call it the TPK. This bunch signed up for a reconnaissance mission then went completely berserk, and now they're going to die. Sounds like a typical Saturday night. I say kill 'em all and let 'em roll up some new characters. Try telling them it's a scouting mission next time; fewer syllables that way so they might not get confused. And wash, rinse, repeat if they screw it up again. OTOH, if they don't like reconnaissance/scouting missions, they shouldn't be signing up for them, which others have noted above. That way everyone's on the same page about what they're doing or not doing. Then again, there's something to be said for "reconnaissance in force" because if you kill absolutely everyone in the location you're scouting, no one will spot you leaving. It's hard to fault their logic on that score, but the butcher's bill is hard to pay.

[Hrugner]

I sort of feel for them, their invisible ally got spotted so what chance do they have of sneaking around. And, once the alarm has gone up, is escaping an option or is completing the spying too important. Then of course, what's the purpose for the spying? If it's only to assault the place later, then they are motivated to sack the place while snooping anyhow. I'd be setting fires after being caught.

Make it clear to them that they've walked into an encounter not designed for their victory. If they've escaped from these people before then execution should follow any combat. Sacrifice the DMPC, she holds off the group somehow so that they can report back that "X" is here, some important or powerful thing or person. Usually I like to leave a creature that's invulnerable to normal attacks and impassible in places I want to require recon to. Golems are always a good way to go at early levels.

[KorvinStarmast]

There's a technical term for adventuring groups who don't understand the meaning of the word reconnaissance: we call it the TPK. This bunch signed up for a reconnaissance mission then went completely berserk, and now they're going to die. Sounds like a typical Saturday night. I say kill 'em all and let 'em roll up some new characters. Try telling them it's a scouting mission next time; fewer syllables that way so they might not get confused. And wash, rinse, repeat if they screw it up again. I agree. Sometimes it takes bruising the nose to realize not to walk into a wall.

[The Vanishing Hitchhiker]

Well, here's my idea if you want to extract the characters without a TPK: Assuming the party doesn't wipe them all out, the bad guys need to split because their base of operations has an adventurer infestation. Then have the council give the party a dressing-down for botching the stealth assignment.

Meanwhile, discuss what sort of game you'd all like to have with your players. If they want to kick more doors in, the council slaps 'em on the wrists and sends them on wetwork missions (or toss them in the brig if your players think a jailbreak sounds fun). If they want to try the espionage again with everyone on the same page, the council gives them another chance.

[Psikerlord]

Second phase of an AP. Town council tells players to sneak into enemy stronghold, do recon, find out strengths/weaknesses and report back. Small party, just three PCs-Ranger, Fighter, Monk/Cleric MC.

First encounter I altered to make the giant lizard less threatening. Ranger used animal handling to calm it and get past. Check.

I had a DM-PC cast invisibility on herself and sneak down the hallways for a while looking in open doors, etc. One guard heard a noise and investigated. PCs had ways to hide/avoid conflict, but attacked! Wound up "clearing" four opponents. Buried them in mud to avoid discovery.

Then the whole party starts wandering the hallways with no stealth checks. They listen at a door and hear voices. What do they do? Bash the door down, shove the first guy backwards and attack! They are in over their heads with nine guards and enemy spellcaster in the room; maybe this will be TPK.

In the first phase of AP, they had a similar situation and I rescued them with NPC help. Even then, I had them captured instead of killed and they used time in jail cell to short rest and use resources to escape and then attack and kill most baddies.

How can I make them role play more and roll play less? Or should I just give in to their ways and TPK them? I could capture them again and put them on trial by the enemy at which point they'd have to negotiate or try to escape.
Implement some kind of formal "Party retreat" rule (flee with a cost, good chance of escape but not automatic). Throw whatever makes sense at the party instead of "balanced" encounters. If they continue to fight everything, they will TPK, but it's on them if they dont take advatnage of the party retreat mechanic.