PDA

View Full Version : Looking for input on problems in the D&D5e campaign I am in...



Aell
2017-04-18, 03:49 AM
I wasn't sure which forum to put this in, but since it's more of a meta-discussion on the state on the campaign, rather than discussing specific 5e-rules, I decided not to put it in the 5e-sub. I just want some honest feedback on the campaign, and input on some ideas I am floating to (perhaps) make it more smooth. I am not the DM but he appreciates input from his players.

My group started playing the current campaign in February 2016, so we've been playing for a year and two months. We have leveled three times. We are a Fighter Lvl4 (late lvl), Monk Lvl4 (me, late lvl), rogue lvl4 (mid lvl), and druid lvl3 (early lvl), and the DM.

My DM puts a lot of emphasis on the RP aspect of the game, favoring encounters and dialogue over fighting. Sometimes whole sessions are without fights. I have no problem with this, since I love going into character, and without treating the game as wishfulfilment, or using my monk as a Gary-Stu; he sometimes does repugnant stuff because he's Lawful-Evil, but he tries to do good when he can. Also, the DM is good at handing out XP for significant actions and events performed outside of battle. Still, I feel we are taking too long to get anywhere level-wise and the "hamstrung" sensation of most battles feels like a sign of it.

The campaign has some overt problems due to several factors:

we are low level and half the party (rogue and druid) drop dead from three solid hits to either one of them, by mere trash mobs

the Fighter-player is well-meaning but has no feel, facility, or instinct for the game mechanics, he forgets all of his character's powers between sessions, never takes any initiative unless the DM presses him, usually preferring that someone else suggests his actions for him, and doesn't know what tanking is (literally, he doesn't understand what the word means in an RPG context). When someone tries to explain concepts to him ("tank", "glass cannon", "mobs") he listens intently but starts yawning in reflex. I think he feels "put on the spot" when the battle-round goes to his character, so I consciously try not to look straight at him when it's his turn, or suggest actions for him, or point out where on the character sheet the number is located that he is looking for, preferring that he learns by himself and doesn't use me as a crutch. This requires extreme restraint on my part.

the Rogue-player is the DM's 15-year old son who uses his characters for wishfulfilment, which mainly means being anti-authority; despite all of his three characters (two of which are dead) being different people of different race, age, and origin story, they spend 50% of the playing time making snide, mocking remarks at others, and literally laughing (in-character and out of character) when other players fumble a roll. He knows party-members can't hurt other party members so there is no consequence to his actions ("Win-Win situation"). In some ways he can be a bit of a caustic energy thief, it depends on how good his day was and if he took his ADHD-meds. Outside of D&D he is cheerful, though.

I try to encourage dialogue and cohesion in the party, that we talk before fights and have a rough strategy instead of charging in half-cocked and fighting individually. The druid-player is a very good, recent addition to the group, because he is experienced in D&D and he thinks outside the box with powers and spells. The problem is that neither he nor I are tanks (his panther beast shape has 12 HP or so) so neither of us can "lead" a fight (I lack Mobility feat so I can get bogged down by trash mobs), our Fighter doesn't know how to drive a fight, the rogue has no interest in any cohesion and in the last session he left the party and the territory after a fight, before the location had even been 30% explored, nor the mission objective fulfilled, citing "RP reasons", which stopped our exploration dead and forced a return to base whether we like it or not.

I don't in any way pretend that I am perfect or all-wise. I mostly have experience with D&D through computer games from 1992-today, I've played pen and paper D&D for a year and (all of) 15-20 sessions. I still have a lot to learn about high-stakes, improvisational D&D asymmetrical battle, and it's sometimes a big challenge to look at a deadly situation with a cool head and find exit strategies, contingencies, and tide-turning solutions while being pummeled by trash mobs and trying to keep people alive. I have been getting better at using all the resources in my dungeon pack, and creative uses of my Inspiration-points, though. Still, the lack of cohesion in the group does not help. We have survived most times without permadeaths through sheer luck, and the character deaths that have happened have usually been plot-driven and not fumble-based (except for the time my Fighter-friend's earlier barbarian character thought it was a good idea to charge a Mind Flayer while unarmed, and getting his head ripped open in one turn as a result).

We've gotten this far on luck, but luck runs out, and if I start losing chars (I still have my first one) my motivation for the campaign might suffer (if everyone loses 2 characters due to crap tactics, the campaign might turn into a "Ship of Theseus" paradox for me)

Anyway, I had some ideas for how to give the campaign more meaning and survivability.

First of all, the druid was an addition to the party only two sessions earlier, and the DM made him Lvl 3 despite the rest of the party being level 4, because he thought the rest of us were lvl3. So I was thinking he could give the Druid a free 1-level boost to put him in line with our chars, which should have been done in the first place. He will get the haste spell and will thus have at least one (1) spell that can help the group, which currently is 0.

Secondly (and especially if DM won't agree to giving the druid his 4th level): maybe the DM could add a DMPC? He has himself confessed that it sometimes gets monotonous to be DM when he's played D&D for 40 years ("this was your first Ogre you met, it was my hundredth"), even though this campaign was his idea and initiative, which is greatly appreciated. And since our group severely lacks cohesion and direction, an ever so slight nudge from the DMPC now and then could kill two birds with one stone: lessen the sense of the "headless chicken" party, and give our DM some much needed character development opportunity, and some more agency in the world, apart from voicing all the NPCs. This could give him more entertainment out of it, and more motivation for keeping this campaign going. Honestly, I worry almost once every two months that the final "Sorry, I don't think I can do this anymore, Real Life demands have risen, etc" chat message will appear, though so far DM has been in good spirits, despite sleep and work issues often postponing playing dates.

Do you have other suggestions? I am open for everything. Have any of you had a similar situation to my party? How did you improve upon it?

PS. Despite what some may think, my "ultimate goal" is not to be a Lvl20 god character, I don't play just to level, nor do I avoid RP just to get to the next fight, I just want our party to leave the squishiness of Lvl3-4 and get into the intermediate stage of lvl5-10, when you get more options, viable new playstyles, and opportunities, that simply weren't realistic earlier due to everyone having basically only one or two ways of playing their underpowered char. I want our party to get to swim up to the surface and breathe, find our bearings. DS.

Technaton
2017-04-18, 04:24 AM
I have been experiencing a situation like this as a DM. While it helps to introduce an NPC who nudges the party in the right direction or gets them back on track, what helped most is talking to the players and telling them how unhappy you are.

Basically, its the real-life diplomacy check you're facing.

Before the next session starts, ask the group if they have a few minutes, and if they agree, flat-out tell them that you are unhappy with how everything is going so far. Don't go into all the details and what you think is causing your feeling of unhappiness with the group, but focus on the two general issues: Meaning of the campaign and its survivability. Find a positive way of phrasing and suggest a solution instead only stating how unhappy you are. Tell them how great it feels to have three, four, five sessions with real progress instead of punning, snide remarks, and laughing. Tell them how cool it is to be a group that works together and is successful. Ask them whether they would like to watch a movie full of anti-heroes who only quibble together over and over again, or whether they would like to watch the Lord of the Rings (or something similar). Usually, players agree that LotR, in the long run, is more fun than the 3rd installment of 'Hangover'.

I know a DM who flat-out demands of his players that they know the rules, or have their characters perish.

Lo'Tek
2017-04-18, 04:31 AM
First you should recognise the social situation you are in.
You are playing with a teenager and a person who lacks a connection to his character.
About the later: talk to him and find out what he would like to do. Help him to get into a character.
About the former: kid needs some consequences to learn. Let GM Dad make clear rules: No harming his son. Find a way to teach the little bugger something about life.
About the dice: have you tried: Declare what you do and what roll you need, Roll dice, Describe what happens - as a players turn
It focuses the attention to the character / player who uses the dice as a tool. The player has to admit to a failure by decribing the likely consequences. DM should interfere if roll and roleplay do not match.
Do not avoid looking at people taking their turn.

Darth Ultron
2017-04-18, 06:25 AM
Well, this is normal. Not everyone will play the game the same way you do. And sure you can talk to them, and maybe they will suddenly listen to you and do whatever you say. Maybe.

Otherwise, you might want to try to avoid combat in the game. Try and talk your way out of things and don't just kill, loot, repeat. Try to go around foes if you can and such.

If you really ''must'' do ''group tactics'' where ''everyone does your plan'', and some players won't listen to you...you just need to make that part of your plan. Like ''ok, Tork the Mighty will stand in the middle of the combat area and occasional swing at the bad guys and be confused'', as that is what the player will have Tork do, no matter what. You want to make them ''doing nothing'' part of the plan.

And if you feel your group ''needs'' a tank or whatever, then you might need to step up and be that yourself. Either redo your character or let the character die and make a new one.

Aell
2017-04-18, 06:33 AM
About the dice: have you tried: Declare what you do and what roll you need, Roll dice, Describe what happens - as a players turn
It focuses the attention to the character / player who uses the dice as a tool. The player has to admit to a failure by decribing the likely consequences. DM should interfere if roll and roleplay do not match.

I am interested in your train of thought here. My DM allows us to describe our attack *after* we roll the hit-die (so we don't go into sophisticated descriptions of an attacking motion and then roll and miss, having wasted a lot of time talking about something that just turns out to be egg on our faces). But we do have to state our intention before the roll, which leads to me saying "I attack with my main weapon, and...I miss", and the DM then describes *how* I miss. If I do hit, *then* I go into a colorful description of just where I store my silver spear on the body of the pinned Sharkman (in said case it was in his Cloaca).

Aell
2017-04-18, 06:37 AM
Usually, players agree that LotR, in the long run, is more fun than the 3rd installment of 'Hangover'.

That is a hilarious comparison, and while not as bad as H3, it's about a third of the way there. There is still a good rapport among the partymembers, and we do have fun, but your suggestions sound sensible, and I do think sober, constructive discussion is the way to go. It is good also to have everyone voice their opinion on the state of things, to see if our priorities are aligned, and if some people have had similar thoughts, even.

Aell
2017-04-18, 06:45 AM
maybe they will suddenly listen to you and do whatever you say. Maybe.

Otherwise, you might want to try to avoid combat in the game. Try and talk your way out of things and don't just kill, loot, repeat. Try to go around foes if you can and such.

I have no intention of strongarming or browbeating the group, but I will want us to have lucid tactical discussions so we go forward with at least the semblance of a plan. The times where we have been close to snuffing it and total-wiping have been the times when the party was split up in two's in different rooms, fighting.

Your advice of avoiding binds instead of breaking them is interesting, I will definitely look for those options when our group seems disoriented.

Speaking of, there was an instance last session where I sent our druid around a sharp corner as a white mouse, where he spotted a cellar ahead, full of battle-ready Grimlocks with hardons, and we ended up backtracking and taking the high road instead (this was when the party was split up 50/50, during infiltration and recruitment into an enemy army. Our latter fight came about because of a freak-appearance of a Bearded Devil catching us in the kitchen, because the Mage who summoned the Devil on an upper floor lost control of it and it roamed the halls. We survived, just barely, because of my Silver spear being the only weapon piercing the Bearded Devil's immunities).

90,000
2017-04-18, 07:19 AM
I would emancipate yourself from these clowns.

hymer
2017-04-18, 07:41 AM
First a nitpick:


So I was thinking he could give the Druid a free 1-level boost to put him in line with our chars, which should have been done in the first place. He will get the haste spell and will thus have at least one (1) spell that can help the group, which currently is 0.

Presuming this is a Grassland druid, he'll get Haste at level 5, not 4. Any other sort of 5e druid doesn't get Haste. But spells like Entangle and Heat Metal should make it possible to do a lot for the group by hindering the opposition. At spell level 3, the druid also gets Conjure Animals, which is a much stronger spell than Haste when he gets it.

That said, if your group becomes stronger, what makes you think the opposition won't also become stronger? Talk to your DM about this. It may be a deliberate act from him to have fights be very hard, perhaps to encourage you all to avoid them when possible. You could suggest that the difficulty is turned down a notch or two and see what he says. Maybe you could also ask his advice in dealing with the son in a constructive way.

Aell
2017-04-18, 11:57 AM
Presuming this is a Grassland druid, he'll get Haste at level 5, not 4.

You are right. I think that last time we spoke we said "if you could jump a level, you might get Haste soon", referring to a level jump putting him within more of a spitting distance of level 5.


That said, if your group becomes stronger, what makes you think the opposition won't also become stronger? Talk to your DM about this. It may be a deliberate act from him to have fights be very hard, perhaps to encourage you all to avoid them when possible. You could suggest that the difficulty is turned down a notch or two and see what he says.

I will definitely talk to him about the balance, see what he says. He might very well throw enemies with a higher challenge rating our way if we level the druid, but our problem so far has mostly been that we have very little "buffer" to make allowance for hiccups or incapacitations of party members. Rogue, monk, and warrior are damage dealers, and if just one of them is taken away the entire situation becomes a crapshoot. We have no healer. In one big battle the rogue was unavailable for the whole duration, and even though we got support by two guards who became off-DPS and damage soakers next to me, the warrior and my monk survived the encounter with 2 in health each, and I had gotten bashed down to 0 and then healed up.

PhoenixPhyre
2017-04-18, 01:07 PM
As a note, playing for over a year and only leveling up 2-3 times seems off, unless you're only playing every 6 months.

The DMG guidelines are that levels should take only a few "adventuring days" each. As the table down in the spoiler shows (XP needed/EXP per adventuring day), this is constant after level 5 at about 2 (2.2 or so). Before then, it averages less than 2. While an adventuring day is emphatically not necessarily a session, I can't imagine an adventuring day (either with social encounters or combat encounters) lasting more than 3-4 sessions.

My parties tend to level from 1-2 after the 1st session (or two at the most), and then spend about 2 (maybe 3 at the most) sessions per level on the others. And I don't run full adventuring days either.

Early level characters are squishy. Very squishy. This changes a lot once you hit higher levels.

Overall, I think your DM is underestimating how much XP you should be getting for social and combat events. After more than a year of playing even monthly, you should be much higher than that (and thus less squishy).


This data comes from pg 15 of the PHB (experience per level, note that this is cumulative experience and does not reset to 0 each level) and pg 84 of the DMG (table labeled "Adventuring Day XP"). Even if I'm off by a factor of two here....you're way behind the curve.


Next Level
Adventuring Days to next level


2
1


3
1


4
1.5


5
2.2


6
2.1


7
2.25


8
2.2


9
2.3


10
2.1

LordCdrMilitant
2017-04-18, 01:36 PM
You keep saying "trash mobs". I disagree with the sentiment expressed, but that's because I don't like approaching it like a video game. They're not "trash mobs", they're Goblin Warriors defending their village from your party. They're civilians swayed from the Emperor's light attacking you with pistols, being treated as cannon fodder by the CSM's. They're the line soldiers of the Drow military, fighting for queen and country to take over yours. And they're not supposed to be non-threatening.

I'm not sure what I'd recommend withe regards to the fighter, because the fighter is clearly disengaged, but I'm not sure how to engage him, and I'd say it's at your discretion on circumstance.

On one hand, you can get into character more, with dialogue and descriptions and such, and see if he catches onto your lead. Trying to involve his character in this way might allow him to flesh him out and and enjoy it more.

But, on the other hand, being more in character and enthusiastic about roleplay could drive him away. I know at least one guy who was uncomfortable with the whole in-character thing, and left a group because of that. He still plays the game, but he wants something else out of the game.

With regards to the snarky, sarcastic 15 year old, ignore him, or have your character react to his in character things appropriately in-character. It might even bring more life to the fighter's character.

And with regards to tactics, if your party is interested in the tactical discussion and combat optimization, then go ahead, otherwise dive in and make up your battle plan in character as you go along. Talking is a free action, after all. There's no need to be super tactically efficient. If efficiency is more important than roleplay, you might want to talk to the GM.

Geddy2112
2017-04-18, 02:06 PM
I will mostly just echo advice said above

Before level 4, combat is very swingy. The phrase "Fantasy Vietnam" applies to almost every D&D edition except 4th until you are level 5+. In AD&D, you joke about not even naming your character before level 5 because they were that fragile. Likewise, there are no trash mobs in 5th-in 3.5 etc you can get to a high enough level where a horde of goblins is a joke and can't even touch a PC, but that is not the case in 5th. Even a few goblins with a bow and some hot dice can threaten a higher level character.

Remind your DM that you should get experience for things other than combat-namely avoiding potential combats. Certainly a lot of problems can be solved by force, but overcoming encounters(whatever the hell they are) should give XP. You says your DM is doing so, but if they were and each session had encounters of some kind or another for a year, you should be much higher level. That of course depends on how many times you meet, which would be good info to know. I have a suspicion that you are playing far less than once a week.

The fighter player has been playing in this campaign for a year(however many sessions), so even if they are not the sharpest around and not paying attention, they should have some grasp of the system or they really just don't care. Some people play ttRPG's with no intent to actually play-it is just their social event each week where they pizza/beer/chips/socialize/etc. Not much you can do if they don't care at all, but find whatever brings this player to the table and try to encourage this. Divert him from situations where this does not happen, and anytime there is a chance for this player to do his thing, turn em loose.

The rogue is a bit tricky, mainly because he is the DM's son and anyone with a relationship with the DM that ensures that they play/could get special treatment/can't be approached or dealt with directly is problematic. As far as the character concept, even mature professional adults will play chaotic stupid spoony bard angsty antihero absurdist comedian prankster. A lot of these times it is pushed from funny to annoying very quickly. The best way is classical conditioning- levity, cynicism, and snide comments all have their place, but only acknowledge them where you want them. Once he realizes that nobody(including the NPC's) give a flip that he is dancing on the table during the feast, he will stop doing it. Give him some so he can have his angsty teenage fun, but don't encourage him to run roughshod. This includes him laughing at the misfortunes of the rest of the party(although I am sure he has seen his fair share of natural 1's too).

I would push for the druid to get bumped a level, particularly for an honest mistake. At level 3 a druid should have plenty of useful spells, particularly if you don't fight a lot of combats each day. If the rest of the party wants to forgo strategy and planning, then let them run to their foolish deaths. Eventually they will stop doing it.

Most importantly, voice your concerns to the party as players. Be nice and keep it positive:instead of chastising others or dragging on about what sucks, talk about what awesome things keep you coming to the table, and what you would like to see more of. You might just be in a group that does not want the same things and that is okay, but I am fairly certain you can reach an agreement that makes the game better for everyone.

Aell
2017-04-18, 02:52 PM
You keep saying "trash mobs". I disagree with the sentiment expressed /.../ they're not supposed to be non-threatening.

Aah. I don't use the word the way you mean. When I say "trash mob" I don't mean guards, gnolls, or orcs, those can be intimidated or talked with (on some level). I mean giant hornets, zombie hands, rats, skeletons, vehicles of animated death that must be crushed into mush quickly before they overwhelm you and you wake up dead. Things that don't react to intimidation, persuasion, or sleight-of-hand. I say "trash" because they often are abominations or mockeries of life, to be stamped out. I do not think they are insignificant or non-threatening in any way. The first time I met a horde of zombie hands, the only thing that saved me was the incredible luck of having found a Bag of Plenty, and pulling out two furry balls in a row that both turned out to be friendly brown bears, and then my level 1 monk could just about survive and kill one or two of the hands, side by side with bears.



otherwise dive in and make up your battle plan in character as you go along. Talking is a free action, after all. There's no need to be super tactically efficient.

Yes, that's it. I am not seeking a football huddle every 20 steps with the party, I just mainly want everyone aware of escape routes, eventual plan B:s, and to be ready for things potentially changing real fast.

Aell
2017-04-18, 03:09 PM
The phrase "Fantasy Vietnam" applies to almost every D&D edition except 4th until you are level 5+. In AD&D, you joke about not even naming your character before level 5 because they were that fragile.

"Fantasy Vietnam", I love it.


Certainly a lot of problems can be solved by force, but overcoming encounters(whatever the hell they are) should give XP. You says your DM is doing so, but if they were and each session had encounters of some kind or another for a year, you should be much higher level. That of course depends on how many times you meet, which would be good info to know. I have a suspicion that you are playing far less than once a week.

Yes, we have played at most 12-18 times the past year, with the schedules of four people needing to match, and one of the party having severe sleep problems, and two of the party catching colds very easily, there are lots of postponements.


The rogue is a bit tricky /.../ The best way is classical conditioning- levity, cynicism, and snide comments all have their place, but only acknowledge them where you want them.

Yes, he does light up when there are things to do and we talk to eachother about current events and plans, so he has been getting more interacting over time, but he needs stimulation to not get bored. It will work out, I think.


I would push for the druid to get bumped a level, particularly for an honest mistake. At level 3 a druid should have plenty of useful spells, particularly if you don't fight a lot of combats each day. If the rest of the party wants to forgo strategy and planning, then let them run to their foolish deaths. Eventually they will stop doing it.

I will see how we can get a strat working that uses his spells, that would be nice. So far he's only done an illusion trick to let me win a martial arts duel once, which was nice.


Most importantly, voice your concerns to the party as players. Be nice and keep it positive:instead of chastising others or dragging on about what sucks, talk about what awesome things keep you coming to the table, and what you would like to see more of. You might just be in a group that does not want the same things and that is okay, but I am fairly certain you can reach an agreement that makes the game better for everyone.

I think so too, I am sure they want to make the most out of these meetings as well, especially since our meetings are so far between.

LordCdrMilitant
2017-04-18, 04:10 PM
Aah. I don't use the word the way you mean. When I say "trash mob" I don't mean guards, gnolls, or orcs, those can be intimidated or talked with (on some level). I mean giant hornets, zombie hands, rats, skeletons, vehicles of animated death that must be crushed into mush quickly before they overwhelm you and you wake up dead. Things that don't react to intimidation, persuasion, or sleight-of-hand. I say "trash" because they often are abominations or mockeries of life, to be stamped out. I do not think they are insignificant or non-threatening in any way. The first time I met a horde of zombie hands, the only thing that saved me was the incredible luck of having found a Bag of Plenty, and pulling out two furry balls in a row that both turned out to be friendly brown bears, and then my level 1 monk could just about survive and kill one or two of the hands, side by side with bears.

Yes, that's it. I am not seeking a football huddle every 20 steps with the party, I just mainly want everyone aware of escape routes, eventual plan B:s, and to be ready for things potentially changing real fast.

Well, the differentiation between mobs and bosses is more what I was getting at disagreeing with. But, if that's the way your GM runs it, then that's what it is.

With regards to battle planning, having as much a plan as your characters would expect to have is the best way to go. The fighter probably is planning to shove his axe through skulls, but the INT20 wizard probably has a different plan, and might try shouting some quick directions to her friends, but they might not listen, because the Barbarian is already enraged and can't comprehend language, much less tactics.

Lo'Tek
2017-04-18, 09:14 PM
I am interested in your train of thought here.
The idea is that a player should have maximum control over her or his character.
This is first and foremost given by the declaration of intention which must be spoken by the player.
Success is then determined by the player with a roll of a dice.
Everyone with perfect knowledge about the chance of sucess can determine the outcome.
It is then the players turn to describe the characters action in a way fitting the roll.

So the focus of attention goes: Player > Dice > Player

Perfect knowledge should be established by the DM before the roll.
Player (intention) > DM (chance of success) > Player (acknowledges and rolls) > Dice (decide) > Player (describes)
Knowledge of the propabilities gives the player a last chance to avoid doing something extremly stupid.
Laying out the propabilities gives the DM the option to describe the obstacle in detail and mechanics.

Example: Balancing < 16 on d20
T : I balance across the chasm on the uprooted Tree.
DM : It is an old, dead tree, overgrown with moss and propably rotten, -2.
S : I stop Toni.
DM: -4 but you only fall with 18.
T : I step on the tree <rolls 12> (prevented success) backwards, spin around and start walking.
T : How do you stop me?
S : I grab you by the girdle and pull you back to safe ground.
T : Hey I could have totaly done that.

S introduced a risk and hindrance: beeing stopped for the benefit of entering the scene and possibly save a teammember.
Note that entering a scene means expecting the turns player to interact with the player/character.
If a player / character mistreats other players / characters: reintroduce them with DM as moderator of a dialog.
If a player is beyond hope, assassinate character and ban player.

Giving modifications and tresholds to the player in advance gives two people on the table perfect knowledge: the player, and the DM, because they can read whats on the characters sheet. In this environment the players are first to solve simple mathematical problems to judge their plan based on an expected curve of outcomes which they mentally prepare to describe as variations of a story. Other players must learn to judge the skills of their party based on what they experience. They are memorizing what to expect in terms of risk and storytelling. One could say: they get to know the character.

DM has a lot more to keep track of and often makes up things on the fly. Giving more information to the players follows the "let the players do the work" principle: Let the fighter manage enemy mooks in the immediate environment. Let your players describe them, equip them, give them names and funny voices. Then either slaughter or adopt them, depending on style.

An advanced fighter should be able to solve for chance to hit based on a single number and chance to kill with another (per monster) and can easily manage multiple monsters without supervision. Experiments show however that players are often unwilling to hit their own character with the monsters so this still falls to the DM. There is an interesting approach to let players who were mistreated admister punishment. Or players who enjoy it. Or dice and tables. Depending on style.
Playing a fighter character will get random and gory. A player must be aware of this and like it or might be better equipt with a selection of usefull spells or skills. If you are left with no fighters roll one from the List of bad hirelings (oh i see you already did that).

A DM may inquire number crunching at any time which will reveal the raw numbers to all in hearing distance as the player defends the told story against revision. This can be a learning experience for those who struggle as number crunching should always result in a distribution of story modification over possible dice rolls.
Players will often try to discuss the chances openly in advance, doing math and story predictions as a group. The DM should not give numbers in this phase but expand on the environment and "modify the plan" when it is announced as a sequence of actions.

The DM is advised to replace rolls with high chances of success by automatic successes so dice are mostly only required for taking risks or deciding on story development. Players may take a risk instead of an automatic success to gain benefits.

By changing risk and reward the DM can teach behaviour: players repeat what works and avoid what does not.
Advanced players should be encouraged to interact with less experienced players. However if they take over the turn of another player, punish them with a turn loss, and reintroduce the turn holder to the basic rules by asking "What do you want to do?"

Success can be adjusted but should favor the characters core abilities. For simple failures multiple attemps, additional ideas or teamwork can increase the odds. Players describing bad/critical failures are a must: it teaches humility and empathy.
Making the players do the work of inventing and describing their actions connects them to their characters and to each other.
Moreso the other players remember their own experiences. Some will start to know what can go wrong. Others may need suggestions.

Giving more control to the players decentralises the focus of attention, reduces stress for the DM, improves groups hive memory of numbers and story elements, strengthens social behaviour, boosts mathmatical intuition and creative thinking.

Lots of talking to each other is highly necessary.

May explode. Violently.

Aell
2017-04-19, 03:09 PM
Thanks for the reply. Very dense information, but I think I understood what you meant in the different aspects.

Just had a long talk with my DM an hour ago, I mentioned the value of thresholds and variables aiding the player in making decisions based on things his character might be seeing but that the player has not. All in all, it was very productive. I think he agreed to boosting the druid to lvl4, and while he didn't agree with my assessment regarding XP progression and "adventuring days", he saw my point about the frustration in spending an entire year in what had been described as "Fantasy Vietnam".

Regarding the progression, and references to the DMG on XP and "adventuring days", his view was that blank XP-gain at the end of a day was illogical and too static and mechanical. He gives it for achievements, whether it be battle victory or a long conversation ending in a deal or persuasion, whatever the case may be. And regarding the cohesion (and lack thereof), the Rogue is a schizophrenic psychopath called "Jack and Jill", who flips whenever she sees blood and becomes manic, while my Monk admittedly is romantic about death and fascinated by corpses (even though not belonging to the Monastery of the Long Death, but to the Yellow Rose), the Fighter is a burly sailor who swears profusely, and the druid is a 400-year old gnome who has lived in a treestump the last 120 years. So cohesion does not come naturally to this group. I will keep doing my best at communicating with them before and during fights, to see that there is at least a semblance of a common way to go.

Anyway, I look forward to Sunday, I think the consequences of where we left off last time: we had just slain a roaming, masterless Bearded Devil in the kitchen of a mansion secretly being used as a staging grounds within its walls, for an impending attack on the city council. The project is masterminded by an Illithid, the same Illithid that ate the brain of my partymember's former Barb. Our group had approached this place in two's and infiltrated it under the guise of unemployed guards and maids, and at the end of the fight with the Devil, Jack/Jill split out through the door and onto the streets, so I assume we will just have to follow suit, since we can't keep fighting when I am at 50% health, the fighter (sans splint mail) is at 7%, the Druid at 5%, and we have no rogue, or place to take a half-rest. The camp is likely up in arms since I torched one of the tents as a misdirection while the Fighter and I snuck into the kitchen, where the **** hit the fan.

Thank you people for your input, I won't hesitate to ask your judgement in future conundrums. By the way, hypothetical question: what would you do if you had just killed two ogres, your party had survived but was at about 25% health (except one person out of 3, who was full), and when you turn your back, the ogres rise as zombies, and a door you just left starts shining with a green light? Your whole party is Lvl4, a monk, a barbarian, and a rogue.