Players won't do stuff. Suggestions?

[Wampyr]

I run a game for a group of new players, and I myself am pretty new as well. This is my first long-term campaign, and I'm making it up as I go along, so we make a lot of mistakes. None of us have ever really played with veteran players, so this has been a struggle. I've considered going to a module like Storm King's Thunder because we could all learn the game a deal better but they're invested in the current campaign (which is very railroad-y but they've never played in another game so they don't really realize that this isn't how its supposed to go).

One of my biggest problems as we go forward is that the party doesn't take initiative, largely due to my railroading them through the early parts of the campaign.

An example of this: They cleared a temple basement of its Kobold infestation (they were inclined to do it because one of them worshipped the god that the temple was devoted to) but when they killed the last Kobold, they all mentally disengaged. I waited a moment, then one of them asked, "What happens now?" and I told him, "You decide, you're the player." Again, more silence, until I said, "You could leave the basement." So they went out and I gave them their reward and we moved on, but things like this happen all the time with us.

Another problem I have is their lack of respect in regards to my authority as DM. I'm by no means a strict DM, I let them get away with stuff if its substantially cool, but when I make things difficult or something doesn't work the way they want it to, they get pissed.

An example of this: The party is looking for the crash site of a fallen star, they split into two groups of two, and one group comes across a farm where all the plants are awakened and hungry for meat so they assume that the star must have landed nearby. A group of ten riders comes up, also looking for the star, and I introduce a sort of mini-villain (like a lieutenant of a bigger villain). He tells the two players to go into the farm house and stay there until they leave, but the players don't want to. They spent five minutes arguing with him, until one of them told the mini-villain guy that he would kill him and all of his lackeys if they didn't leave. The mini-villain in response said, we'll kill both of you right now if you don't get in that house. The player's response was to stab the mini-villain's horse, and after he rolled the damage (7 on a warhorse with 29HP)he said, "Now, can I control the way the horse falls so that it knocks another rider down too?" And I said, "No, the horse doesn't fall, it screams and tries to kick you in the teeth." He was very upset that the horse didn't fall and proceeded to break away from the game to argue that the horse should fall if it takes damage. I said that he could try to get the horse to fall with force damage or by tripping it somehow but nowhere in the rules does it say that mounts fall if they take damage. His response to that was, "This has nothing to do with rules, that's just the way horses work." I put my foot down and told him the horse was not going to fall from 7 damage, so he pulled out his phone and clocked out for a bit. The other player luckily diffused the situation by healing the horse and dragging the other player into the house.

What can I do to make them take the initiative and act on their own? Is there something that experienced players know about that I'm missing?

And what can I do to get them cooperate and keep their phones in their pockets? I've told them before, no phones (unless they're using their phones for spells, which only one of them does and he doesn't cause any problems).

[Armored Walrus]

The second question "How do I get them to respect my authority" doesn't have a D&D answer, IMO. It's a "how do I get along with my friends" question, and if I knew you I could sit down with you and talk it out, but on a forum... hard to do. I'll just give you this; How would you handle the situation if you were playing Monopoly instead, and you had a rules dispute with one of your friends?

The first question; They are new players, they will need to be lead a little. Also, they are still learning what they can do. "Anything at all" is a pretty big matzah ball. Give them some options as appetizers before you ask them to digest that thing. Also, this ties in to your second questions. You send conflicting signals if you tell them "you can do anything" and then tell them "you can't do that." I get that the specific example seems fairly obvious. Horses don't just fall over when they get wounded. But for a player that's only ever seen horses in movies, maybe that's a normal expectation, and maybe you could have worked with him a bit on that. Or avoid situations in which the players have to do exactly what you want them to or die. Actually, now that I think about it, that's a pretty good answer to your second question. If you put them in positions where "Clearly your only course of action is to do what I expect you to, and your character will die if you argue with me" is a pretty good way to get into rules arguments every session ;)

Before you put anything in your game from this session forward, I recommend asking yourself "What happens if the players try to kill this?" Because, being new - they will. How many of us killed the chicken as soon as we walked into that first village in Skyrim the first time? Or completely looted the store? The same impulses are in play here.

[DeTess]

Well, first of all if you want them to learn to take the initiative, you should be careful with putting them in situations where their only option is to do as you say (10 dudes lead by your mini-villain bossing them around doesn't exactly leave them much room for initiative). Secondly, since these are apparently all new players, try to get them used to making decisions. "Do you go left or right at the crossroads?" "Do you take the golden statue, even though there is a warning that it is cursed?" "Do you try to cure the werewolf, or do you kill it, even though it hasn't killed anyone yet?" Start with simple choices, like the ones they might have encountered before in videogames, where you pick A or B, and each decision has different results. You also need to be consequent in this regard: if they take a choice you don't like, don't stop them. Sure, the werewolf had this really sympathetic backstory and stuff, but if they decide it needs to die, then that's what happens.

When they stop sitting on their hands, waiting for you to tell them to take the statue or spare the werewolf, you can start chucking more open-ended scenarios at them. "The Baron has kidnapped the princess and retreated to his castle, what do you do?" "The mob boss wants his money back by monday next week. What do you do?"

[Wampyr]

Before you put anything in your game from this session forward, I recommend asking yourself "What happens if the players try to kill this?" Because, being new - they will. How many of us killed the chicken as soon as we walked into that first village in Skyrim the first time? Or completely looted the store? The same impulses are in play here.

So, using the 2nd example as a scenario, what could I have done better? Should I have scaled it down to 4 guys + the boss to make it more possible for them to kill them all? Or should I have made an obvious means of escape, like maybe some of the riders dismounted and now their horses can be stolen?

I'd never really considered that they would have thought the only thing they could do was what they were being told to do by an NPC. What I want from them most of all is to devise solutions other than "kill everything". They've been playing for a little over a year now, and I want to throw situations at them where combat is clearly not the best approach, but how can I do that without tilting the odds against them?

[Iados]

Regarding getting them to do things on their own, it's important to leave things to their initiative. Whenever they say, "Well...what do we do?", you can respond with, "that's up to you." If you want to give the players true freedom with their decision-making, it's important to be overly prepared for whatever course of action they take. If the general plotline comes to a fork in the road, have (at least) three plans: (1) what will happen if they go left, (2) what will happen if they go right, and (3) what will happen if they turn around and abandon the quest? Also be ready to have some random possibilities if they take a path you couldn't possibly anticipate. Don't railroad them down a particular path just because that's what you want them to do. It's not about dictating a story, it's about providing a world in which they can adventure.

Regarding getting them to respect you, I'd recommend letting them know that you're the DM, and that explicitly makes you the arbiter of what happens in the game. If they can respect that, great. If they can't, maybe this game isn't for them. Sounds harsh, but there's no fun playing a game where the PCs can override the DM by having temper-tantrums. If anyone threatens to take their dice and go home, call their bluff. And if they're serious, congratulations; you've just rid yourself of a problem player.

Also, if the players want to try something creative, that's great. That means they are taking some initiative to think outside of the box. When they want to make a horse fall down, ask for another d20 roll immediately after the attack. If either the attack rolled a natural 20, or the character got an Animal Handling roll of, say, 17 or greater, I'd say you could rule in favor of the player's plan to make the horse fall on another NPC. If neither happens, it was a good try, but the horse has been too well-trained for the plan to succeed.

[WolfThndrspirit]

"It's your world, we only play in it."

That's the first mantra of being a D&D player of ANY edition since Gygax and Arneson ran the first game back in the 70's. The respect goes to them, the game, and you for running it. I agree w the other poster in that you weed out your problem players when they want to flip the table and leave. Those players have no respect for the game in general, and should exit, stage left.

But there is something to be said in understanding your players as well, and that will answer your question of what to do when they won't do stuff. Page 6 of the DMG should have answered this entire question for you, but you gotta do your homework on your player's to decide their motivations: Acting, Exploring, Instigating, Fighting, Optimizing, Problem Solving, or Storytelling respectively. And don't forget, you have more than one player, so you'll have to dole out solutions in even share; after all, your Fighting motivated character will get bored with the solutions to sate the Problem Solver. So make sure there is enough flavor to go around. It's a juggling act, but a good DM knows how to juggle like a circus pro.

Railroading isn't even close to solving the problem. Truth be told, the situation you described was a mini-boss and 10 subs vs. 2 PCs. 5:1 odds should have reasonably put the outmatched PCs at cautious, knowing that fighting - in no way - would solve the issue, only clever actions would produce a chance at a favorable outcome. Even the most die-hard Roleplayer running a savage barbarian berserker would know the odds and defer to the brains in the group, if even begrudgingly. Stabbing the horse or taking any hostile action would be tantamount to suicide, and the NPC's should have made them pay for it, if even at a minimal non-lethal way, perhaps leaving them unconscious and stripped of their gold, weapons, and armor on the side of the road - thinking them puny and not worth wasting the time to kill. Maybe even earning the ruthless lieutenant's respect for their tenacity, while punishing them for their insolence. You have to make the flavor feel real, I mean, why spend the time creating NPC's if you aren't going to use them appropriately? There are consequences in the world. If I step in front of a speeding bus, I should expect the impact to kill me. The same is true if a PC picks a fight with his better. Stabbing the horse is picking a fight. And yes, no attack wound was going to drop any enemy that doesn't state so as intent prior to the attack (which then you'd get to rule on, I think this would fall under called shots), isn't part of a specific feat or action (shove, for instance), doesn't reduce its HP to 0, or isn't the result of a impairment of the creature (rolled a 1 on the save) or effect of the weapon used (weapon has the effect of knocking enemy prone), or a fluke resulting from a nat 20, for instance.

In management, when an employee does something in error, a good manager ALWAYS asks the question "What did I do wrong?" first. So when the PCs aren't doing what they are 'supposed to', take a moment and ask yourself What you did wrong. Did you engage them in their style of play? What is their style of play? Ask them from the choices the DMG gives! What's wrong with that? Engage them as a person outside the game session in deciding what will bring them into focus with their enjoyment of the game. Ask them what they want from the game. If they can't decide, maybe the answer is obvious, they don't really want to play, they're just entertaining you - but neither wins in that.

[JoeJ]

When you reach a juncture, try suggesting 3 or 4 things they could do, and always end with or "or would you like to do something else?" as a final option.

[Tubben]

If they attacked the Villian, i would probably have knocked them down, tied them up and get their possessions stripped.
Not every move like attacking a way to strong force has to end with an TPK.
Sure, they have freedom to do what they want, but they also need to learn, that things they do have consequences.
It's also a good opportunity for a small side-adventure, since they have to get to escape and also get their stuff back.

And they need to learn, that you dont discuss during a session. Such things has to be done after a session.

[Armored Walrus]

So, using the 2nd example as a scenario, what could I have done better? Should I have scaled it down to 4 guys + the boss to make it more possible for them to kill them all? Or should I have made an obvious means of escape, like maybe some of the riders dismounted and now their horses can be stolen?

I'd never really considered that they would have thought the only thing they could do was what they were being told to do by an NPC. What I want from them most of all is to devise solutions other than "kill everything". They've been playing for a little over a year now, and I want to throw situations at them where combat is clearly not the best approach, but how can I do that without tilting the odds against them?

I think to begin with you have to discover if they want problems that they can solve with methods other than combat. If they do, then start off by giving them problems to solve that can't be solved by combat - not problems where if they try combat they will die - but problems they simply cannot fight. Like a tornado heading toward the village, and they need to reach safety in time Or a rising river - do they help the village sandbag around it, divert the river somehow, just help get everyone to high ground, abandon the village to its own devices? (Note, that last is the option they are likely to choose, from what you've described so far, so first they need to care about the village.)

Edit: Also consider, the group may just not want what you want out of the game. It may be a situation where you either have to accept the group you have, and run the game they want to play, or, if it bothers you enough and they won't compromise at all, find a new group. Or have one of them DM and maybe your playstyle will give them an example of what's possible in D&D.

[opaopajr]

Less aggro NPCs barking orders at them, more coherent consequences from their actions.

Mini-villain horse situation is funny.

I would have asked, "Does that mean all creatures fall down upon taking damage? Can I use that on your PCs? Do you believe Hit Points are nothing but health, and damage is nothing but wounds?

"The PHB disagrees with you. HP is an abstraction. Your 7 damage is a mix of abstract negatives, closer to spooking the horse with maybe a shallow scratch than plunging your weapon deep into its hide."

Also, mini-villain with ten guys would have been upset with that behavior. :smallamused: He's lucky his PC survived from the quick thinking of fellow party members. I would've rewarded XP for such quick thinking and judicious use of a spell.

But avoid these issues by letting them make their own choices... and then you follow through with coherent consequenses.

Stay in the basement and not get paid? Well, ok, but eventually someone's going to call down the basement to see if they won, or board it back up to prevent further kobold assault. That'd be a natural consequence for loitering for hours down there without a progress report.

[King of Nowhere]

it's failry normal for new players to need motivations. "railroading" is probably a wrong term for what you have to do, since you don't necessary need to force them oon a path. "nudging" is more like it. they can't sit around without somebody coming to ask them help, or something requiring their attention happening nearby. they are free to explore or use different ideas, and even ignore all that is happening and seek different quests - that's why it doesn't have to be railroading - but just make sure they know at least a handful of quests they can do.

it's what i did with my players, until eventually one of them started to take the lead and look for other quests but the ones i dangled under their nose.

as for the arguing, it's a matter of trust. do they trust you to lead the game? if yes, then they can offer suggestions and objections, but they accept that you have the last word. if not, what the hell are they doing at your table? for your part, you have to be consistent in your ruling, and it helps if you have good motivations for your decisions. I can't say more without knowing your friends