My DM is making it hard to have fun?

[lawfulgay]

So, I'm not quite sure how to go about this, but I'm currently in a campaign that, despite having all my friends in it, is more stressful than it is fun, and I'm not sure if it's my fault or the DM's.

Let me start by saying this is the 2nd campaign I am in with the same DM. However, the other campaign I've never had problems with, as the other players make it fun and exciting, despite the fact that the game has been going on since last September and we are still unsure what the main plot of the campaign even in.

When the DM decided to start up another campaign, I was pretty excited. This campaign was going to include me and some of my closest friends as players. We have done 3 sessions so far, and the last session really made me angry and frustrated. We have been given no plot or anything to go off of, so we have been going between the same two towns because the DM hasn't actually told us anywhere else we can go. One player spent the entire session wanting to "train" AKA shooting squirrels in the woods with fire all night, which the DM actually roleplayed out, so we all just kinda sat there for 10 minutes while a PC made roll after roll hitting squirrels.

Another frustrating aspect is the DM wanting to have everyone be these amazing role players. I get this feeling he wishes he was Matt Mercer and had a party to RP with, but we aren't professional voice actors so we just get these long awkward silences. He has said multiple times that he wishes he could DM for a party like Vox Machina, but that is hard to ask of your normal ass friends who play D&D as a hobby and not professionals doing it for their job.

The biggest frustration I am having is him refusing to allow me to play my character the way I wrote her. I won't go into too long details, but all I really asked was to be a warlock who was in a romantic relationship with her patron. I totally get not wanting to RP romance and tbh I super don't want to RP romance with this guy, but her relationship with her patron is vital to her character and her motivations and personality. Since I was not given that, I've had difficulty roleplaying this character and it really sucks because I like this character so much.

Some of the other players are not happy either, so I don't think it's just me.

TL;DR, my DM is frustrating me and I'm not having fun and I can't play the character the way I want and basically I am unsure if I should just drop out.

[JNAProductions]

Talk to your DM. You're friends, you should be able to have a calm, rational, and mature discussion about how to make the game more fun.

If it's still not fun, or especially if they don't listen... Don't play. No gaming is better than bad gaming.

If you had merely said "I feel like I could be having more fun" that's one thing, but you said "the last session really made me angry and frustrated." That is NOT how you should feel after playing a good game.

Edit: Oh, and best of luck with this! I hope you're able to work it out and have a good time.

[CTurbo]

As always, the very best way to approach this is to sit down and talk to the DM about your concerns. D&D should be fun for everybody. If it's not fun, then stop playing. Give him a chance to change things of course.

As far as your character, maybe you should shelve this character idea until a later time. Ask the DM if you can make a new character for now.

[Sigreid]

It sounds like the DM is trying to run a sandbox game. That means he's relying on the party to set some goals and objectives.

Talk to him on the roleplay. Let him know that it'll take a while before people get into it and they may never be that comfortable with it.

Let the one player know that training by hunting squirrels does nothing but exclude everyone else.

You could still have your warlock be all fatal attraction with her patron.

[Shadhael]

+1 to talking to your DM about this. Just talk to him and explain where you're coming from, much like you have in this post. It also sounds like you have no hook. What is it that's brought all of the PCs together, what is it that is keeping you all together? You have no direction to go so why go anywhere? I've you're going somewhere, you can find other interesting things along the way

[JNAProductions]

It sounds like the DM is trying to run a sandbox game. That means he's relying on the party to set some goals and objectives.

Talk to him on the roleplay. Let him know that it'll take a while before people get into it and they may never be that comfortable with it.

Let the one player know that training by hunting squirrels does nothing but exclude everyone else.

You could still have your warlock be all fatal attraction with her patron.

Speaking from experience, sandboxes are HARD to run.

I've failed at them a lot-I should know.

[Sigreid]

Speaking from experience, sandboxes are HARD to run.

I've failed at them a lot-I should know.

It's basically all I run. Once the party settles on a goal or set of goals i prepare more, but I dont generally set their goals for them.

[lawfulgay]

It sounds like the DM is trying to run a sandbox game. That means he's relying on the party to set some goals and objectives.

Talk to him on the roleplay. Let him know that it'll take a while before people get into it and they may never be that comfortable with it.

Let the one player know that training by hunting squirrels does nothing but exclude everyone else.

You could still have your warlock be all fatal attraction with her patron.

That makes sense. I GM Call of Cthulhu and I tried running one sandbox session. It ended pretty poorly and was probably the least fun session I've had.

It's been hard since all the PCs don't really have any motivation to be in the party in the first place? At one point one of the PCs threatened to leave the party and just go home since we weren't doing anything.

[Guy Lombard-O]

That makes sense. I GM Call of Cthulhu and I tried running one sandbox session. It ended pretty poorly and was probably the least fun session I've had.

It's been hard since all the PCs don't really have any motivation to be in the party in the first place? At one point one of the PCs threatened to leave the party and just go home since we weren't doing anything.

Yeah, it really sounds like you need to talk to the DM. Specifically, tell him that the lack of direction in this campaign is slowly killing it, because the players don't seem able to come up with a sufficient objective on their own. Maybe ask him to introduce a couple of potential options of adventure for the PCs to bite at?

You've played with this guy before, and you had fun. Maybe before giving up on this warlock, see if things might improve in the patron department once there's actually some sort of an objective to pursue?

[Sigreid]

That makes sense. I GM Call of Cthulhu and I tried running one sandbox session. It ended pretty poorly and was probably the least fun session I've had.

It's been hard since all the PCs don't really have any motivation to be in the party in the first place? At one point one of the PCs threatened to leave the party and just go home since we weren't doing anything.

Before the next game I suggest you reach out to all the players and the DM and say something like "I want to go find the ruins of an ancient city, temple, whatever and loot it so I can fund a cult dedicated to my patron.

[JackPhoenix]

Sandbox games are harder to run. When you're running pre-planned storyline, players have railroad to follow (how wide it is varies) and you have some idea what they'll do next. You don't need to bother much with the rest of the world. In sandbox, you have to run the world even where the players aren't directly looking, because they may decide to go anywhere, any time, and the world *should* seem more alive. You may have to prepare 10 adventure hooks, knowing the characters may only be interested in one of them. Even if they set up their own goals, and you know what those goals are, they may change plans or act or react in less predictable ways.

I'm actually joining sandbox game tomorrow as a player. While I do have a goal, given the... disparate... characters, I fully expect a disaster.

[Skadi]

The biggest frustration I am having is him refusing to allow me to play my character the way I wrote her. I won't go into too long details, but all I really asked was to be a warlock who was in a romantic relationship with her patron. I totally get not wanting to RP romance and tbh I super don't want to RP romance with this guy, but her relationship with her patron is vital to her character and her motivations and personality. Since I was not given that, I've had difficulty roleplaying this character and it really sucks because I like this character so much.

To be honest I am mostly interested in this little tidbit, give us the juicy goss gurlfriend! Is your patron a good kisser? Kind of interested in finding more about this character and her patron?

In all seriousness, depending on what you had in mind I can see why a DM might be a little reluctant to have one of their players play this one out. If I were the DM with a warlock in my group I would probably insist on playing the role of the patron as the patron really should not be a force that the player can control but rather one that imposes on the player to do their bidding, and if I were to play the role of the patron I might feel a little awkward having to make kissy faces at your PC.

I don't think I would be totally against it depending on the circumstances, but it would really depend on the circumstances and I would probably prefer to only introduce the romance hook if there were interesting ways I could use it to mess with the player character a bit, like an unrequited romance between a warlock and his vain swamp hag patron with a major jealous streak or something like that.

[Sparky McDibben]

Another way to approach this is to tell your DM what is fun for you. Are you super big into RP? Combat? Puzzling out the motivations of the sinister Mr. White? Let your DM know what you like, if you haven't done so already, then get all the other players to do so.

[Keravath]

I’m a bit confused about how the DM is preventing your background story element of being romantically involved with your patron.

Unless you expect the DM to role play the patron showing up and things happening (which I think would be unreasonable since the patron might not fit the campaign as an NPC) .. I don’t see what impact the DM can have on that particular aspect of your character. You decide how your character feels about their patron, it may be an important motivating factor for your role playing decisions .. but all of that has nothing to do with your DM.

I have a rogue/warlock character who is romantically involved with their fey patron. The character left their patron to perform some quests for them. They still communicate and the character may “consult” on significant decisions. However, this is all role playing and has nothing to do with the DM. The DM can’t really prevent you incorporating such background elements but if you are expecting the campaign to be adjusted so that the patron becomes an NPC, I think that is a bit much.

[Honest Tiefling]

In all seriousness, depending on what you had in mind I can see why a DM might be a little reluctant to have one of their players play this one out. If I were the DM with a warlock in my group I would probably insist on playing the role of the patron as the patron really should not be a force that the player can control but rather one that imposes on the player to do their bidding, and if I were to play the role of the patron I might feel a little awkward having to make kissy faces at your PC.

Maybe I am extrapolating too much from the username, but I think this issue might be compounded by the player or character being 1) female and 2) a lesbian. Roleplaying romance for a male in front of a lady can be embarrassing or awkward, especially for the first time. Adding other factors might just make the DM feel more awkward or concerned about offending others.

One idea might be for you to brainstorm ideas to incorporate your romance with the NPC without the NPC being present. For instance, your character might be a champion of your patron, and seeks to do their will within the world. What do they want done, and how can you tell the other characters about it? Your character should also consider a quest to get a nice gift for your patron, and well, treasure vaults often have multiple bits of loot in them. If people are interested in non-combat, maybe try to encourage a duel, commission a song, or investigate magic to offer as tribute to your patron.

Going to assume that neither you nor the patron are terribly interested in poly, but with the fey thing I gotta ask. It'd be one way to involve other players?

And I am not really familiar with the DnD shows...But I wouldn't be surprised if they have worked together before or edit heavily. Is it possible the DM is trying to get a group together to make their own show?

[Nightgaun7]

You as the players should be self-directing, not just waiting for the train to pull away from the station.

[lawfulgay]

I’m a bit confused about how the DM is preventing your background story element of being romantically involved with your patron.

Unless you expect the DM to role play the patron showing up and things happening (which I think would be unreasonable since the patron might not fit the campaign as an NPC) .. I don’t see what impact the DM can have on that particular aspect of your character. You decide how your character feels about their patron, it may be an important motivating factor for your role playing decisions .. but all of that has nothing to do with your DM.

I have a rogue/warlock character who is romantically involved with their fey patron. The character left their patron to perform some quests for them. They still communicate and the character may “consult” on significant decisions. However, this is all role playing and has nothing to do with the DM. The DM can’t really prevent you incorporating such background elements but if you are expecting the campaign to be adjusted so that the patron becomes an NPC, I think that is a bit much.

Let me explain that I wanted the romantic aspect to already be apart of her character when she was first introduced. Like just a quick "Oh yeah btw I'm totally smooching my patron." I had talked to the DM about this before we started, but when we started the campaign he made it so I had just met my patron for the first time, and my patron seems uncaring towards my character so my attempts to actually romance her have failed.

[lawfulgay]

Maybe I am extrapolating too much from the username, but I think this issue might be compounded by the player or character being 1) female and 2) a lesbian. Roleplaying romance for a male in front of a lady can be embarrassing or awkward, especially for the first time. Adding other factors might just make the DM feel more awkward or concerned about offending others.

One idea might be for you to brainstorm ideas to incorporate your romance with the NPC without the NPC being present. For instance, your character might be a champion of your patron, and seeks to do their will within the world. What do they want done, and how can you tell the other characters about it? Your character should also consider a quest to get a nice gift for your patron, and well, treasure vaults often have multiple bits of loot in them. If people are interested in non-combat, maybe try to encourage a duel, commission a song, or investigate magic to offer as tribute to your patron.

Going to assume that neither you nor the patron are terribly interested in poly, but with the fey thing I gotta ask. It'd be one way to involve other players?

And I am not really familiar with the DnD shows...But I wouldn't be surprised if they have worked together before or edit heavily. Is it possible the DM is trying to get a group together to make their own show?

Nah u rite I am a lesbian and my warlock character is bi. I totally get it being awkward to RP which is why I wanted the romantic aspect to be established at the beginning of the campaign. Just a quick "oh yeah I'm kissing my patron" and it didnt really need to be brought up again, just that she is in love with her patron and why my character is motivated to serve her.

Instead, he made it so my patron just met me, and she has rebuffed all my attempts at ACTUALLY romancing her. In fact, he kinda plays the patron like she doesnt really care for my character, so idk how to actually play her out, if that makes sense.

[ImproperJustice]

Nah u rite I am a lesbian and my warlock character is bi. I totally get it being awkward to RP which is why I wanted the romantic aspect to be established at the beginning of the campaign. Just a quick "oh yeah I'm kissing my patron" and it didnt really need to be brought up again, just that she is in love with her patron and why my character is motivated to serve her.

Instead, he made it so my patron just met me, and she has rebuffed all my attempts at ACTUALLY romancing her. In fact, he kinda plays the patron like she doesnt really care for my character, so idk how to actually play her out, if that makes sense.

That’s unfortunate, and kid of a strange choice as a GM to take ownership of a PC patron like that.
Maybe they are concerned about some form of game / balance abuse?


On the flip side, I run a Cleric and the GM and I roleplay out private conversations with her deity all the time, especially as my Cleric has risen through the ranks.

[Tangleweed]

There seems to be two different problems going on here. One is how the GM is introducing, or failing to do so, plotponints and one is how your characters background was handled. I think they are separate problems but they should be solved the same way - talk about it. You are telling the story together and you need to understand each other to be able cooperate.

1. Tell your GM, after a session, that you feel like you as a player don’t know what you should be doing and, if it is the case, your character also feels a bit lost. Also, if possible and the GM don’t have any specific plans, be pro-active. Suggest things you character would like to do to the DM. Like “My Character really like and care about kids. May they try to set up a sort of evening time playgroup for the local orphans?”. Also, you could state that since you are not already involved you are interested in playing out romantically perusing that patron, or the other way around if that fits better, and ask if and how the GM wanna play it.

2. Talk to your GM whenever convenient about the misunderstanding about your characters background and relationship with their patron. Just explain that you were under the impression that they already was involved, but now they just met and that the patron is rejecting advances and how that does not align. Ask how you can merge the ideas. Maybe the GM is portraying the patron as plying hard to get? Do they want to play the seduction out? No? How bout you discuss what happens but don’t act it out?

I like to talk a LOT with my GMs when making characters. I try to make characters and backstory that my GM enjoys and like to work with. I often shelf ideas until the correct GM comes along.

Also, as a side note, a warlock who is romantically involved with their patron sounds, to me, like something I would absolutely love to have in a game I GMd. Just so much one could do with it.

[Skadi]

That’s unfortunate, and kid of a strange choice as a GM to take ownership of a PC patron like that.
Maybe they are concerned about some form of game / balance abuse?


On the flip side, I run a Cleric and the GM and I roleplay out private conversations with her deity all the time, especially as my Cleric has risen through the ranks.

I dunno, personally I feel the relationship between the warlock and the patron is often an underused potential story hook in many campaigns, in most campaigns the patron is simply just there as an explanation for how the Warlock got their powers and does not really do much to effect the flow of the narrative (or the character's personal narrative) beyond that. The concept of an otherworldly patron does present the opportunity to add an interesting NPC character that could potentially have a much more significant impact on the narrative and the party dynamic, however in order to utilize that potential the GM does need to play the role of the Patron and thus needs to take a little bit of ownership of the patron to play them in an interesting way that fits within the narrative they are trying to tell, then again I suppose that is true of all supporting characters in a player characters backstory (such as criminal contacts and whatnot), probably why it is a good idea to work with your GM when trying to flesh out characters in your backstory.

Then again I guess there is nothing wrong if you just want your patron to merely be background fluff that has no impact on the story beyond giving your character their power and being a motivating reason for your character doing the things they do, unfortunately if you want them to be more than that however you may need to give up a little control of your Patron's personality to the GM.

[Skadi]

Instead, he made it so my patron just met me, and she has rebuffed all my attempts at ACTUALLY romancing her. In fact, he kinda plays the patron like she doesnt really care for my character, so idk how to actually play her out, if that makes sense.

You can still play out your character as being in love with their patron, but it is more of a one sided love that leads to fanatical devotion to her patron in the hopes that senpai will one day notice you.

[Unoriginal]

Nah u rite I am a lesbian and my warlock character is bi. I totally get it being awkward to RP which is why I wanted the romantic aspect to be established at the beginning of the campaign. Just a quick "oh yeah I'm kissing my patron" and it didnt really need to be brought up again, just that she is in love with her patron and why my character is motivated to serve her.

Instead, he made it so my patron just met me, and she has rebuffed all my attempts at ACTUALLY romancing her. In fact, he kinda plays the patron like she doesnt really care for my character, so idk how to actually play her out, if that makes sense.

Have you asked your DM why? Changing your backstory without talking to you first is pretty iffy.

[Zhorn]

Another frustrating aspect is the DM wanting to have everyone be these amazing role players. I get this feeling he wishes he was Matt Mercer and had a party to RP with, but we aren't professional voice actors so we just get these long awkward silences. He has said multiple times that he wishes he could DM for a party like Vox Machina, but that is hard to ask of your normal ass friends who play D&D as a hobby and not professionals doing it for their job.

The Matt Mercer effect is real, and it can be a scary beast.
I admit to being a huge Critical Role fan, and campaign 2 is my poison of choice, but I'm under no delusion that I or anyone at my table has to chops to role play to that level, nor should they feel forced to push themselves to do so.

If your DM continues to bemoan that their players are not Vox Machina, or keep putting the pressure of expectation on everyone to push themselves to that level, please point them towards Matt's own response on the subject
https://www.reddit.com/r/DMAcademy/comments/a999sd/comment/eclht66/
Granted, this article is more to do with players having that expectation of their DM, but the general rule of thumb applies.
"EXPECTING that immediate level of comfort and interest is unfair and absurd"
"sit down and just have fun finding your own path"

[Damon_Tor]

The biggest frustration I am having is him refusing to allow me to play my character the way I wrote her. I won't go into too long details, but all I really asked was to be a warlock who was in a romantic relationship with her patron. I totally get not wanting to RP romance and tbh I super don't want to RP romance with this guy, but her relationship with her patron is vital to her character and her motivations and personality. Since I was not given that, I've had difficulty roleplaying this character and it really sucks because I like this character so much.

That one sounds like an error on your part: if he's not comfortable doing romance (and it sounds like you aren't either) then why did you make that such an important part of your character? You could handle both ends of the roleplay yourself if you wanted.

As a compromise, how about a retcon: the entity you love isn't the patron herself, it's another subordinate entity, and there's some conflict between the patron and this subordinate. When you hit level 3 the subordinate is banished to the material plane in a form not of her choosing, and becomes your familiar as your character takes on the pact of the chain feature. As your familiar, you have control over this other entity, and can roleplay the romance between the two of you without major implications to the cosmology of the setting. Eventually (approaching 20th level and the endgame) the goal will be to overthrow your patron and replace her with the subordinate, and you'll rule beside her.

EDIT: flipped some genders. Apologies for my various biases.

[MeeposFire]

Also depending on the patron it could be possible you are romancing one aspect of them or part of their psyche and other aspects of the same entity may not be on the same page. So you could be romancing a portion of the entities subconscious but the conscious mind would not be on board with the idea consciously. Reminds me of an episode of Little Witch Academia where Akko goes into Sucy's mind.

[suplee215]

Overall I suggest talking these problems out like everyone. In regards to the patron and meeting them at the start of the game and not before I feel like that is a DM not realizing a player's story might start before the game. Either that or the DM decided to veto your backstory due to not wanting to do romance (which is a bad move on their part if they didn't just say that). Also the love story with a patron is suggested in the PHB so not like it's that weird of one although this could be a case of the DM having an older idea of what warlock patrons are supposed to be.

[Samayu]

I wanted the romantic aspect to be established at the beginning of the campaign. Just a quick "oh yeah I'm kissing my patron" and it didnt really need to be brought up again, just that she is in love with her patron and why my character is motivated to serve her.

Have you asked him why he did that? Some groups role-play a patron relationship and many don't. So it should have been just a character-background thing to enable role-playing. And it's funny that if there wasn't going to be any of the romantic role-playing, he changed it in a way that caused you to try it.

What level are you now? Is it too late to retcon it? Otherwise you should ask him how he expects you to play the character now. No, I'm kinda being sarcastic about it, but ask him why he changed a fundamental part of your character without your agreement.

But really, if you can't make the character work, you should think about making a new one. Or given the undirected nature of the current campaign, sit it out until the next one starts up.

[lawfulgay]

Thank you everyone for your advice!

In terms of my warlock character, I actually played her in another friend's campaign who was more open about my warlock being in a romantic relationship with her patron. He and I talked for a good while about her patron and their backstory, and I finally got to play her the way I had wanted and she was a lot of fun, possibly the most fun character I've ever played!

In terms of this DM and campaign, I've decided that I'm going to see about playing another character. Hopefully my DM understands where I'm coming from and let's me play something else.

[Unoriginal]

Have you asked him why he changed your backstory? Maybe you could still play the way you want after you've both explained your points.