Am I the problem?

[Scorpiomoth]

I'm currently playing in a campaign with some good friends of mine, including one of my closest friends who I've known for years. In this campaign we are part of an adventuring guild and we just took a quest to investigate the failure of another party; they had been assigned to guard a cart delivery to another town and never arrived at their destination. We spoke to the NPC about the delivery and I got the name of the cart company and information on the item being delivered. When asked what we wanted to do next I said I wished to follow up on my leads before we left the next day and I invited the rest of the party, who decided to instead go shopping. Whenever it cut to me, I went and spoke to others, tried to figure out if it was an inside job and checked every avenue of information, eventually finding nothing.
At the end of the session, we had a brief chat in a group message (we play online) and the friend I have known for years says my investigation was over the top, and it turns out he thought I was wasting time when everyone else just wanted to get going. I spoke with the DM who said I was playing fine, but probably should have cut my investigation short because the others wanted to move on. My question is: am I the one in the wrong here? Should I have not played out the investigation (something I think suited my character and that I personally enjoy in a game) and just done what the others wanted to do instead?

[The Kool]

Well, if you can ask this question honestly, then you're not doing too bad. However, I'd like to point out the following that you kinda picked up on:

something I think suited my character and that I personally enjoy in a gameversus
what the others wanted to do

What I'm seeing here is a slight difference in expected campaign. You enjoy one style of play, the rest of the party enjoys something different. I don't want to tell you to run off and find a different group, but you could at least have a chat with your current party about how much they want to focus on that kind of thing. Then in the future you know whether to keep it short, or encourage the other players to participate if they express interest in doing so. If they do prefer you keep it short, you can try checking with the DM whether there's anything worthwhile to be learned before doing the investigation, or check after a short one to see if he says that's pretty much all you're expected to get out of it. I've seen players that can drag on trying to explore some avenue that's a dead end for entirely too long, so just ask the DM to make sure you're not accidentally doing that.

[Zhorn]

The Kool has pretty much hit the nail on the head, it's not a case of problem players, it just different play styles and game expectations.

Me personally, I love some good in depth rp investigating. Fleshes out the world, the story, motivations. Other like to follow a simple linear path with direct goals.

My lmop group has roamed a fair distance off the rails for pursuing tangent and side leads rather than the direct go to locations A then B then C (lmop is a little sandboxy, but it still has an intended order of dungeons). As things stand, they're about level 5 and still have not been in phandalin long enough for any redbrand interactions. Had some of my players been like your group, that shopping trip would have kept the adventure on course with what the book intended, but that would have been a reactive event rather than an active one. You're investigation is active, seeking out a story. Their's is reactive, going where they were told to.

Neither is more right or wrong than the other, just different.

[KorvinStarmast]

There is a thing called My Guy Syndrome (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/37103/22566); take a look and see how it fits with your experience. You may have crossed that line, or may not have.

[Galithar]

There is a thing called My Guy Syndrome (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/37103/22566); take a look and see how it fits with your experience. You may have crossed that line, or may not have.

In my experience, the 'My Guy Syndrome' is usually in reference to things like a rogue stealing from the party, or a Paladin ratting out the party. Basically something negatively impacts the party because of their action and they say "It's just what my character would do".

I don't see this as that kind of situation, but rather just a difference in playstyle. My suggestion for this would be continue to do your investigating, but if the rest of the group isn't participating, keep it short. Check out one or two leads and then get back with the party and move on. This is the kind of compromise you can talk to them out of season. Tell them you want to do these things and if they don't, you'd still like the opportunity to hit on it a little bit. Just make sure you don't hog up too much screen time doing it.

It can be difficult being the only one in a group that wants something like that, and some times it might be better to just let it go past. Maybe even suggest to your DM to have some 'expedited roleplay' prepared for you. Instead of acting out the whole scene you 'go question the company boss to look for signs of foul play' and they quickly give you 'the boss is confident that it wasn't an inside job, but make a Wisdom (Insight) check' the result of which depends on how he deals with insight, but in my group I generally run low rolls have no reason to doubt them and high rolls either 'You think there's more to it' or 'your're confident he's not involved'.

It may not satisfy your roleplaying itch,l completely, but it lets your character do what they'd do with minimal down time for the others who just want to find the bad guys and smash skulls.

[Grimmnist]

Whenever it cut to me, I went and spoke to others, tried to figure out if it was an inside job and checked every avenue of information, eventually finding nothing.


I think the real problem is that after spending significant time you turned up nothing. Some groups are fine role playing events that don't progress the story, but in this case it seems they got impatient. No one is to blame since 1st sessions are supposed to help you work out a group dynamic.

One potential solution that may work for your group is to have your DM fast forward through investigations that won't turn up anything. In this case, since none of the townspeople knew anything about the missing cart your DM could have just said "After questioning the townspeople you turn up nothing." There is absolutely still room to roleplay investigating clues, but without what your group may consider wasting time on things that can't possibly succeed.

[Malifice]

I'm currently playing in a campaign with some good friends of mine, including one of my closest friends who I've known for years. In this campaign we are part of an adventuring guild and we just took a quest to investigate the failure of another party; they had been assigned to guard a cart delivery to another town and never arrived at their destination. We spoke to the NPC about the delivery and I got the name of the cart company and information on the item being delivered. When asked what we wanted to do next I said I wished to follow up on my leads before we left the next day and I invited the rest of the party, who decided to instead go shopping. Whenever it cut to me, I went and spoke to others, tried to figure out if it was an inside job and checked every avenue of information, eventually finding nothing.
At the end of the session, we had a brief chat in a group message (we play online) and the friend I have known for years says my investigation was over the top, and it turns out he thought I was wasting time when everyone else just wanted to get going. I spoke with the DM who said I was playing fine, but probably should have cut my investigation short because the others wanted to move on. My question is: am I the one in the wrong here? Should I have not played out the investigation (something I think suited my character and that I personally enjoy in a game) and just done what the others wanted to do instead?

Just sounds like you failed to read the room, and the fact the other players wanted to get a move on and do other stuff.

It's a two way street. You should be respectful of other players when they want to roleplay or do stuff, but you dont want to be the guy that spends the whole session wasting everyone elses time and hogging the DM.

If you sense that the other players want to cut the scene short, then you should generally do so.

[NecessaryWeevil]

Just sounds like you failed to read the room, and the fact the other players wanted to get a move on and do other stuff.

It's a two way street. You should be respectful of other players when they want to roleplay or do stuff, but you dont want to be the guy that spends the whole session wasting everyone elses time and hogging the DM.

If you sense that the other players want to cut the scene short, then you should generally do so.

And I'd suggest that, if you fail to read the room in future, it's their responsibility to politely ask for what they need.

[Nightgaun7]

So you were supposed to go and investigate, and nobody else actually investigated?

What was their plan? Wander around until the cart falls out of the sky into their laps?

[ProsecutorGodot]

My take, in the context of the campaign, is that neither party (yourself vs your allies) as both groups were accomplishing a relevant goal. The leads had to be followed up on and logically the sooner the better makes sense. However we have the power of hindsight telling us that the expedience was unnecessary and the knowledge that one (or both) parties may have left with a sour taste in their mouth.

My solution: If you invite people to join you in a course of action and no one joins you, it's best to drop that lead for a moment and follow your group. I don't think you were wrong to prioritize chasing down those leads, as the shopping could wait and the investigating might have proven time sensitive. I would have reminded the party that the longer it takes to follow up on these leads the shoddier the resolution might become, if that reminder doesn't get them to reconsider then you'll reach the potential consequences of that as a group.

To be clear, I don't think you were wrong in wanting to chase down your leads as soon as possible, I do think that none of your allies taking your offer to investigate right then should have been taken as a sign that it could be done later.

[Yunru]

I think there were several at fault here, but they can be boiled down into two groups:

The DM. At the end of the day, the DM determines the pacing. If the others are growing tired of the investigation, or the investigation isn't going to turn up anything, then the DM should wrap it up rather than drag it out. Further, the only reason the other players feel it's a waste of time is because it was. Had the investigation turned up something tangible they retroactively wouldn't of thought it a waste.

The other players. Claiming that you're wasting time is highly hypocritical, considering that they spent that valuable time... shopping. Especially when your assignment was to... investigate.


TL;DR: The DM is at fault for not cutting the investigation short or giving it a reward. The players are justified feeling it's a waste of time because the DM made it so. The players are also at fault for saying that investigating the thing you're supposed to investigate was a waste of time when they were just shopping.

[Contrast]

So you were supposed to go and investigate, and nobody else actually investigated?

What was their plan? Wander around until the cart falls out of the sky into their laps?

OP can feel free to correct but my impression was they had been given leads about the disappearance which led them out of town and the other PCs were shopping in preparation of leaving town to go follow up these leads. OP thought there may have been more to uncover in town and continued to ask questions. There wasn't.

[ad_hoc]

This is the sort of thing that should be handled like a montage.

The rest of the party goes shopping - all they need to do is go through books and pick out things they like.

You want to investigate so the DM says:

What do you do/how do you go about it?

Then make a roll

Based on that roll get answers to questions.

There. Done. Because it isn't a group thing the process should be streamlined like the rest of downtime.

[Laserlight]

My CoS character was a diplo/espionage type, and I gathered a LOT of information.
Generally I invited other people along and nudged them to come up with questions to keep everyone participating.
Some things I did in sessions when half the players didn't attend.
Sometimes I said "I'll spend the evening talking to A B and C and then hitting the bar. Do you, Mr DM, want to do that now or handle it by email?"

And we had some players who would go off on tangents with side projects. Generally if two or more people wanted to go in on it, we'd play it out. If only one did--the rogue's burglary, the ranger's mad schemes--we'd resolve it quickly or deal with it outside the session.

[Fat Rooster]

I'd put it on the DM, though wouldn't go as far as calling it an unforced error because it is a difficult situation to handle and you could have helped. You didn't know that your investigations were going nowhere, but they did. If it was running long they probably should have cut it short, and just said "you spend the rest of the evening chasing down leads, roll investigation... you find nothing useful, can we get on to the ambu- exploration".
It isn't a 'My guy' problem in my opinion, because you are not hamstringing the rest of the party's actions. You are not avoiding a combat or interaction that they really wanted. You are doing something different while they play shopping simulator. Your actions took a long time real time, but you are not responsible for pacing; ultimately that's part of the DM's job. It's your job to assist though, so if you notice that you are losing the rest of the group you can say something like "My character spends the evening doing his diligence thing, should I just roll investigation so we can move on?".

It is hard to read the room when playing online, so 'mistakes' like this happen. At least you know about it to do better next time.

[darknite]

Are you the problem? Yes and no.

You took prudent steps that would be realistically followed in this case. The other players just wanted to get on with it, especially when your efforts were seen to be inconsequential. As a player you have to be ready to acquiesce to the party from time to time in the spirit of doing what the majority wants. If this happens too often, you're probably not in the right game with the right people. That happens.

[The Big Bear]

I personally don’t think it is on OP for wasting time. It seems the DM had already decided an investigation would turn up nothing. He should have just told you that after a few hours of searching you turn up nothing; no rolls needed. If he did require rolls, then the party should realize that there was a potential to find more info.

As a DM, when someone asks to do investigations like this I always allow for more information to be gathered. It is important to reward players for interacting with the world so that the game is more than “follow plot hook, fight ensues.” I find it incredible you couldn’t find any additional info by investigation; it seems like lazy DMing.

As OP mentioned, it could have been an inside job or any number of things and an investigation should provide some info, even if it ends up being mundane and unimportant when you find out the cart was simply victim to an orc/bandit raid.

It makes sense that an adventurer would want to learn more about the cart/cargo/escorts/etc instead of simply following the path out of town and hoping to find out what happened to the convoy. PCs should be interested in learning more about what they are getting into. IMO, the DM missed a good opportunity to flesh out the world.

Tl;dr
If there was nothing to be learned, the DM should have streamlined the investigation by not asking for any checks. If there was something to be learned, then the party should understand that maybe you just rolled low. It’s lazy DMing to give a player nothing when they ask questions that seem pertinent to the quest at hand. A player shouldn’t be made to think that interacting with the world is a waste of time.

[Keravath]

I think it depends on the DM here.

It could be that the OP wanted to investigate and the DM left some clues to follow up. However, why did the OP character decide there were clues to be followed and every other player in the party decided that there weren't any clues that were worth following? My guess would be that the DM did not give any indication that there was anything else to know and the OP character decided that there might be something so they started asking questions anyway.

However, if there is nothing to find then it is the DMs responsibility to make this clear (So they don't waste the time of everyone else at the table) and it is up to the player to notice. In general, it isn't much fun for one player to go off asking questions while the rest do something else. If there is something to find then the effort may be worthwhile. However, if the DM already knows that there is nothing to find then it is up to the DM to hint (sometimes very obviously) that there is nothing more to find. Spend a few minutes working with the character role playing a bit of fruitless investigation and then make it clear to the player that there isn't anything else to be found.

This is especially true when the rest of the party is essentially doing nothing. "Going to shop" is a generally a euphemism for "Sitting and being bored", especially if there is no real reason to go shopping and the other characters are simply doing this because they think that further investigation is not a useful investment of effort. Somehow, all of the other players interpreted the DMs comments to mean that there likely wasn't anymore additional information available in the town regarding what happened. One player did not. At this point, it is up to the DM to get that character back on track by indicating that their efforts don't turn up anything new. After a few minutes of role playing the investigation, the DM can narrate the lack of findings from all the investigative efforts and then the game can move on. Basically, the DM knows that the actions of the character in this particular situation are not going to turn something up so they play it for a while in order to see how comprehensive the investigation will be, allocate a total time spent, and then reveal the lack of results. The DM needs to spend some time on the investigation since they don't want to telegraph to characters when investigations might be worthwhile and when not. However, the DM needs to keep the game on track so give it a few minutes then narrate the rest of the fruitless investigation and get the party back together.

Sometimes, in order to keep the bored shopping characters involved, the DM might introduce a random encounter for them to deal with while the investigation drags on. This can alleviate some of the lack of involvement from the folks who are shopping but it doesn't help the players move forward which is usually what they want to do. As a result, it is usually best to narrate the end of the investigation and get things moving along if it is pretty clear that there is nothing to be found.

This needs to be particularly blunt in online games where it is quite possible for players to miss the tone and body language that might indicate there is nothing to be found. Sometimes the DM needs to be explicit in their description in order to get things moving along.

[Kurt Kurageous]

The DM is at fault for not cutting the investigation short or giving it a reward. The players are justified feeling it's a waste of time because the DM made it so.

Yep. And never never "because that's what my character would do." Your character should/would first talk to their co workers and say, "I think we should do this because..." Your choice is remain with the party or quit. Because if you do your own thing, then you are not really in the party, are you?

Ever heard the fable of the frog and the scorpion?

[Yunru]

Because if you do your own thing, then you are not really in the party, are you?

And then the party heroically found a spot to go to the bathroom? :P

[willdaBEAST]

I think finding ways to include party members in moments like this are important. Are you playing a character who is smart and charismatic? You’ll probably need the help of the big strong PC, or the wise PC who can tell when someone is lying, also don’t forget about the less relutable PC who a bit more flexible about what laws they follow.

I wouldn’t micromanage your party, instead assist in giving them moments to shine. If they aren’t interested in participating, I would have your character express that it’s important to them and then give the DM the opportunity to summarize the investigation if it’s tangential or will take up too much time.

[The Kool]

One potential solution that may work for your group is to have your DM fast forward through investigations that won't turn up anything. In this case, since none of the townspeople knew anything about the missing cart your DM could have just said "After questioning the townspeople you turn up nothing." There is absolutely still room to roleplay investigating clues, but without what your group may consider wasting time on things that can't possibly succeed.

This is very solid advice, and you can totally ask the DM to help out. You still get your roleplay, no one feels frustrated with you chasing meaningless leads.

Also: Splitting up is very much a valid tactic. Different characters are good at different things. Now, going 'lone wolf' or working against the party isn't helpful in the slightest, but doing something by yourself that's for the benefit of the party? Nothing wrong there, as long as the party is cool with it.

[Jamesps]

I have a rule of thumb when I'm running a game as a GM:

Never let one player take more than 1/3 of the table time. No matter what, doesn't matter what the scenario is. If I need to cut from a major plot point to ask how a less spotlighted character is enjoying their ale at the tavern, I'll do that. More often though I will just quickly narrate a drawn out scene involving a single player if they've already had a few in that session.

If you don't have a GM that regulates that sort of thing though then players are going to have to regulate it themselves. This doesn't necessarily mean you won't get to do what you want your character to do, but it does mean you might have to figure out ways to streamline it. Instead of roleplaying out every scene consider what your character wants to accomplish and then quickly summarize how your character is going to accomplish it. Then let the GM narrate how successful it is. This can turn reduce a 20 minute investigation to 2 minutes, allowing you to play your character as they would act without drawing the focus of the game away from what the other players want to focus on.

[Man_Over_Game]

If they had a problem with it, why didn't they say something? A Barbarian would definitely have been bored with sitting around, waiting for "Investigations to run dry". Why was it okay to lie then and then tell the truth later? Because they didn't want their characters to appear impatient, and basically made the game worse for it?

You can only blame people for information that they already knew. You didn't know it was a problem, and they decided to blame you the same time they informed you. Don't wait until AFTER the damage has been done. That's some garbage teamwork right there.

[The Kool]

If they had a problem with it, why didn't they say something? A Barbarian would definitely have been bored with sitting around, waiting for "Investigations to run dry". Why was it okay to lie then and then tell the truth later? Because they didn't want their characters to appear impatient, and basically made the game worse for it?

You can only blame people for information that they already knew. You didn't know it was a problem, and they decided to blame you the same time they informed you. Don't wait until AFTER the damage has been done. That's some garbage teamwork right there.

Some people would consider it very rude to interrupt someone else's roleplaying, and may not realize how irritated they were until after the fact.

[Keravath]

Some people would consider it very rude to interrupt someone else's roleplaying, and may not realize how irritated they were until after the fact.

I agree. In addition, from a role play perspective, the character doing the investigating is off on their own and there is no way for the other characters to tell them IN CHARACTER to stop wasting time and get on with it.

The others can only say it out of character which becomes a player interaction. On top of that the DM prolonged the interaction by allowing it to continue in the first place. Most of the others didn't know that it was a complete waste of time until after the investigation was done and all the time was wasted. At this point they are blaming the player for wasting the time when the issue has more to do with the DM. If the investigation had actually turned up something worthwhile then the other players might wish it had been faster but it did progress the plot.

There is no real way for the other characters to tell the investigating character to stop the investigation in town and get on with the mission without it being players griping.

... and if there is fault to be allocated it goes mostly to the DM who didn't make it clear there was nothing to find and instead allocated too much time to a fruitless investigation that only involved one person at the table. The player could perhaps have realized sooner that there was nothing to find if the DM provided sufficient hints and comments (which the other players might have picked up on but the OP missed) but without being there it is impossible to say.

[Man_Over_Game]

Even if the characters were separated, it still got resolved OOC.

If the team simply said "Damn, Scorpiomoth sure is taking a friggin' long time", OP would have gotten the message, even if his.character wasn't around. That'd still be better than doing it after the fact. They certainly didn't complain IC, so why does it matter if the party's together or not to hear the feedback?