Help me come up with motivations for our party to stick together.

[Talakeal]

The game I am running is on hiatus due to a Covid outbreak leaving half my players out of commission.

We decided to do an off week game. Despite my warnings, nobody wanted to do a session zero or plan out anything beforehand.

We have three characters.

I am an alchemist who focuses on healing. My ultimate goals are unlocking the mysteries of the human body and ultimately achieving immortality and trans humanism.
The other two are a wild mage who, afaict, has no motivation except gaining XP, and a fighter who is extremely min-maxxed to the point where she is played like an even more extreme version of Thogg; reckless, angry, and with (literally) the mind of a small child, despite being twice the age of either of the other two characters.

Nobody was interested in working on a shared background or tying our characters together, and we don't seem to share any goals or interests.

I feel like adventuring with these two is actively dangerous and downright irresponsible, as they are just going to get themselves killed, and probably me with them, and the DM has done nothing to give us a hook; instead wanting us to play a sort of self motivated sandbox where we just explore the wilderness killing monsters and looting dungeons.


Anyone have any ideas how I can justify adventuring with these two or find a thread to actually tie our characters together with?

[Batcathat]

Getting the alchemist and the wild mage to work together shouldn't be that hard, since both of them are basically motivated by learning (at least, that's what I assume "wants XP" translates to in-universe), so them traveling together with some vague idea about exploring magical mysteries could work (assuming the wild mage's hunt for XP isn't just "find the biggest monster around, kill it and repeat"). The fighter might be trickier, though I suppose "We need a body guard, want to direct your anger at some deserving people?" might work. Depending on the morals of the alchemist and the mage, I suppose they might also trick the childlike fighter into helping them with some sort of ruse.

Admittedly, none of it is exactly great, but if the other players have no interest in working together on the characters and the GM have no interest in providing a hook, I suspect you have to aim pretty low to start with.

That's not to say a game can't start like this and still be really fun. A recent game I was in was fairly similar, with characters created more or less in isolation and that worked out well.

[Spore]

You have two options:

You either declare before a session that you have a social contract and your character's motivations should make them interested in the plot and in sticking together.

Or you let the reroll and force them to do a session zero.

I feel nothing good will come of you playing with one invested player, and two people who are just there to throw dice (which is nice, but not when they are the major party). Basically one person came to play a roleplaying game, the other two want a tabletop RPG to murder some stuff.

[Yora]

You could still use the character sheets, but create new backstories and personalities for the PCs to be people who want to adve turr together.

[KorvinStarmast]

Anyone have any ideas how I can justify adventuring with these two or find a thread to actually tie our characters together with? The reason that you are adventuring is that you have a terminal illness, the treatment for it is insanely expensive (I mean how many hairs from an aboleth's{1} nostrils have you seen at the local drug store? That's a bespoke/custom distilled item...) and you need money (lots of that) to afford it.
If you have down time/ crafting time, you'll spend your money on your own researches to arrive at a better treatment or a cure.
And if you survive long enough, you may be able to get your hands on a few aboleth{1} nose hairs to keep you going while you come up with the better cure.

But you can't do any of that without money. In the concept of high risk high reward, only adventuring gets you money that fast. (Since you all don't seem to want to play a game of illicit drug dealers or art thieves, that is).

That is why you join forces with these two. Your life depends on it and there are no other adventurers around that you could join up with.

{1} = (For aboleth, substitute in any very dangerous and hard to defeat monster)

[Wintermoot]

The game I am running is on hiatus due to a Covid outbreak leaving half my players out of commission.

We decided to do an off week game. Despite my warnings, nobody wanted to do a session zero or plan out anything beforehand.

We have three characters.

I am an alchemist who focuses on healing. My ultimate goals are unlocking the mysteries of the human body and ultimately achieving immortality and trans humanism.
The other two are a wild mage who, afaict, has no motivation except gaining XP, and a fighter who is extremely min-maxxed to the point where she is played like an even more extreme version of Thogg; reckless, angry, and with (literally) the mind of a small child, despite being twice the age of either of the other two characters.

Nobody was interested in working on a shared background or tying our characters together, and we don't seem to share any goals or interests.

I feel like adventuring with these two is actively dangerous and downright irresponsible, as they are just going to get themselves killed, and probably me with them, and the DM has done nothing to give us a hook; instead wanting us to play a sort of self motivated sandbox where we just explore the wilderness killing monsters and looting dungeons.


Anyone have any ideas how I can justify adventuring with these two or find a thread to actually tie our characters together with?



Doesn't seem like the other two have any justification issues, so the problem is only with you. Remember that you are there to play a game with others and that its YOUR job to provide your character's motivation and justification, not anyone else's.

Seems like they knew what they were doing. "oh its an off week game, where we want to get to playing as quick as possible, so let's just make some characters and go". It seems like the only person with a problem here is you. So fix it. Just play your character and play the game. Stop trying to cause problems where there aren't any.

[Thrudd]

They are obviously in for a goofy comedy game. If you can't convince them to reconsider the type of characters they want to play, you might need to compromise on yours. Maybe you can think of this as a "Three Stooges" situation. You're the straight man who's coming up with the plans, and gets frustrated with your partners all the time, but you stick with them because maybe they're your actual siblings, cousins, or childhood friends.

Maybe your character is actually not as clever as he thinks he is, and he's with these jokers because they're the only two he could convince to join him. Embrace your silly side for this game, and think of the party as a comedy troupe getting into fantasy shenanigans. Selfish people who lack concern for others, think they are smart but are actually ridiculously ignorant, can be a great source of comedy, see "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia". Just be willing to make a fool of your character, make rash decisions on clearly faulty information, which your character of course believes are completely reasonable. Occasionally display unreasonable confidence in your party members' abilities to accomplish things, let them try stuff that are clearly bad ideas. Always speak as though you have a vast amount of information about a situation, even if you don't. Go along with the recommendations of your partners sometimes, even when it's stupid, but hang back and let them be the ones who get themselves into trouble. Try to make the most of whatever shenanigans occur.
If you all do something that will get you killed- well, them's the breaks. If the GM is embracing the silly, as well, they likely will find a silly way to keep you alive to keep the fun going. If the GM doesn't like what you're doing, then maybe you'll all get killed pretty quickly, and maybe the other players will agree to characters that are a more serious adventuring party.

[Xervous]

Given that your character seems like the odd one out why not shelve the concept and drum up a similar (to the rest of the party) throwaway character that fits the party?

[Jay R]

Unlocking the mysteries of the human body requires a lot of experience with how bodies work. To achieve immortality you must first observe death in its myriad forms. I suspect that you will see a lot of examples while traveling with a wild mage and a fight-focused fighter.

Until you have a specific research hook, going out and looking at bodies in danger of their lives to learn more about the subject makes sense.

Not to mention the fact that research costs money, and the fastest route to money is adventuring.

You need experience.
You need money.
You need data.

All three of these are found in an adventuresome life.

------

During the filming of the 1950s show The Adventures of Superman, there was one scene when Perry White, Lois Lane, and Jimmy Olsen visited Clark's sick bed. [Clark had lost his powers and had amnesia.] He wasn't wearing his glasses in bed, and somebody asked, "OK, why don't we recognize him as Superman now?"

Noel Neill, who played Lois Lane, answered, "Because we don't want to lose our jobs."

Similarly, the real reason you will stay with this party is that you don't want to lose your game. So grab any vaguely reasonable motivation. The one above works, but anything will work. Because in the end, what your character does is entirely your decision.

It would be easy to simply decide that your character wouldn't travel with these characters. But that would be simply your decision, and it would end the game (or at least your participation in it).

I urge you to make the decision to play the game, not the decision to refuse to.

[Batcathat]

Similarly, the real reason you will stay with this party is that you don't want to lose your game. So grab any vaguely reasonable motivation. The one above works, but anything will work. Because in the end, what your character does is entirely your decision.

It would be easy to simply decide that your character wouldn't travel with these characters. But that would be simply your decision, and it would end the game (or at least your participation in it).

I urge you to make the decision to play the game, not the decision to refuse to.

While I mostly agree with this, it's worth keeping in mind that making the decision to play the game only makes sense (to me, at least) if the end result is still enjoyable. If it requires too many compromises, it might be better to bow out than suffer as the square peg in the round hole. That said, I've occasionally made a lot of compromises myself and still had some fun games come out of it.

[kyoryu]

instead wanting us to play a sort of self motivated sandbox

You have a motivation. Are the others willing to join you? If so, no problem.


where we just explore the wilderness killing monsters and looting dungeons.

Find a reason to want to explore the wilderness, killing monsters and looting dungeons. If not, make a character that can.


Anyone have any ideas how I can justify adventuring with these two or find a thread to actually tie our characters together with?

You need money and data, and exploring the wilderness, killing monsters, and looting dungeons is a good way to get that. These idiots may be idiots, but they're idiots that for whatever reason are willing to also accompany you. Three is better than one, even if the other two aren't the ones you'd choose.

It sounds less like the issue is that the party doesn't have a reason to stick together, and more that you don't see a reason to stick with the party.

[Satinavian]

Don't see much problem. Adventuring with those two gives you rare ingredients from monsters for cheap. And as the fighter is going to regularly be wounded and the wild mage is in search of easy way to power, they both are likely to take your experimental mixtures and contribute to your knowledge.

[Talakeal]

Doesn't seem like the other two have any justification issues, so the problem is only with you. Remember that you are there to play a game with others and that its YOUR job to provide your character's motivation and justification, not anyone else's.

Agreed. Which I why I am asking for help coming up with motivations rather than asking for help coming up with motivations rather than asking for ways to talk the other players into re-rolling.




Seems like they knew what they were doing. "oh its an off week game, where we want to get to playing as quick as possible, so let's just make some characters and go".

The idea wasn't a one shot. It was a side game to play every time the others are sick. They have three school aged children and one of them has a compromised immune system, so at this point we actually end up cancelling more often than not.


It seems like the only person with a problem here is you.

I honestly doubt it. I am pretty sure one of them is going to get sick of the other's antics sooner or later, and the DM is going to have a hell of a time providing them with motivation to adventure.


Just play your character and play the game.

What does this actually mean? I am trying to find a way to play my character and the game.

Are you suggesting I just not RP and just sit back and go along with whatever they want and occasionally roll dice to heal them? That's not really playing a character, and its not really even playing a game in all but the loosest sense.


Stop trying to cause problems where there aren't any.

Not sure how being un-invested in a game is "causing" problems.

You know what will cause problems though? I can 100% guarantee that their characters are going to get someone else killed, and I have never seen such a situation not spill over into bad blood IRL.

Heck, in the one combat we did run in the first session, they did more damage to one another than the monsters did.


They are obviously in for a goofy comedy game. If you can't convince them to reconsider the type of characters they want to play, you might need to compromise on yours. Maybe you can think of this as a "Three Stooges" situation. You're the straight man who's coming up with the plans, and gets frustrated with your partners all the time, but you stick with them because maybe they're your actual siblings, cousins, or childhood friends.

Maybe your character is actually not as clever as he thinks he is, and he's with these jokers because they're the only two he could convince to join him. Embrace your silly side for this game, and think of the party as a comedy troupe getting into fantasy shenanigans. Selfish people who lack concern for others, think they are smart but are actually ridiculously ignorant, can be a great source of comedy, see "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia". Just be willing to make a fool of your character, make rash decisions on clearly faulty information, which your character of course believes are completely reasonable. Occasionally display unreasonable confidence in your party members' abilities to accomplish things, let them try stuff that are clearly bad ideas. Always speak as though you have a vast amount of information about a situation, even if you don't. Go along with the recommendations of your partners sometimes, even when it's stupid, but hang back and let them be the ones who get themselves into trouble. Try to make the most of whatever shenanigans occur..

That's certainly an idea. Although I am not sure if it is something I actually want to play. But still, thanks.



If you all do something that will get you killed- well, them's the breaks. If the GM is embracing the silly, as well, they likely will find a silly way to keep you alive to keep the fun going. If the GM doesn't like what you're doing, then maybe you'll all get killed pretty quickly, and maybe the other players will agree to characters that are a more serious adventuring party.

I don't think the DM has any intention of running a silly comedy game.


Given that your character seems like the odd one out why not shelve the concept and drum up a similar (to the rest of the party) throwaway character that fits the party?

Honestly? Because I am sick of doing that.

Every single game I bend over backwards begging and pleading to get the players to make compatible characters, and end up re-rolling multiple times trying to please them.

The last three games I played in I made a character specifically to please the rest of the group, and I was, respectively:

A: Threatened to have my character killed and robbed by the rest of the party.
B: Threatened with a real life beating.
C: Made fun of to this day for being overly brutal in interrogation when the Pookha who was unable to tell the truth decided it would be a good idea for my were-alligator to be the party face.

I am just really tired of making characters to please everyone else, never getting to play what I want to play, and still ending up on being bullied and crapped on. I am really tired of being everyone else's mom.


You need money and data, and exploring the wilderness, killing monsters, and looting dungeons is a good way to get that. These idiots may be idiots, but they're idiots that for whatever reason are willing to also accompany you. Three is better than one, even if the other two aren't the ones you'd choose.

It sounds less like the issue is that the party doesn't have a reason to stick together, and more that you don't see a reason to stick with the party.

I legitimately think that I would have better odds of survival playing solo than adventuring with these two.

As I said above, they are 100% going to get someone killed. Whoever gets killed is going to get mad at them OOC, and I am going to feel really bad both in and out of character I if enable them getting themselves killed. It is not fun or humorous to me to talk someone who is mentally handicapped into going into dangerous situations that will kill them sooner rather than later.

Edit: You know, in writing this, I realized I had a lot more pent up hostility than I thought. I think I am really sick of thirty years of dysfunctional groups and horror stories and just want to relax and play a normal game for once.

[Telok]

I am an alchemist who focuses on healing. My ultimate goals are unlocking the mysteries of the human body and ultimately achieving immortality and trans humanism.
The other two are a wild mage who, afaict, has no motivation except gaining XP, and a fighter who is extremely min-maxxed to the point where she is played like an even more extreme version of Thogg; reckless, angry, and with (literally) the mind of a small child, despite being twice the age of either of the other two characters.

This is easy. You seek alchemical immortality through the perfect healing potion.

1. You need a test subject for new varieties of healing potion. They need to A) get hurt a lot, B) be gullible enough to drink anything you hand them, and C) stupid enough you can weasel out of any potential problems like a potion making their face fall off. Ur-thogg is perfect.

2. You need a constant supply of new and interesting ingredients. Wild magic transforms stuff randomly and mages need spell components (at least in most d&d style games). By buying the mage lots of different magic sensitive/adjacent components you can A) have a reliable source of wild magic effects, B) keep an eye on your source and stay safely the heck away as much as possible, and C) by helping the mage keep their components "fresh" (most wild magic users not being really up on actual magical theory to know you're BSing them) you can keep a steady flow of freshly transformed bits coming your way with minimal danger.

Always have an escape plan. Always have a backup excuse. No remorse if they charge in & die or you accidentally poison them with an experimental potion.

[Altheus]

Not your problem, get the players to do it.

[icefractal]

Not your problem, get the players to do it.In this case Talakeal is a player, not the GM.


I am just really tired of making characters to please everyone else, never getting to play what I want to play, and still ending up on being bullied and crapped on. I am really tired of being everyone else's mom.I feel you on that - but if these are the same players you usually talk about, I don't really expect them to get better, when they haven't for this long.

Like, you could do this with your current character - decide that the reason you're sticking with them (for the time being) is that they're good subjects for your experiments, do things the way you want to do them - which may mean separate from the rest of the party for things that you know/expect they'd **** up. Use as much teamwork as practical, but ultimately if they're going to Leeroy Jenkins it, let them do so - and let them get killed if that's how the dice fall; just have a personal escape plan.

However, based on all prior evidence - they will whine, hard, as soon as this proves disadvantageous to them in any way, including that you didn't stop them from shooting themselves in the foot. Of course you can and should ignore that whining, but you'll have to decide if the game remains a net positive with them griping at you.

[Thrudd]

I don't think the DM has any intention of running a silly comedy game.

Then these characters might have a pretty short lifespan, and I guess that's a good thing? Maybe the best thing is to just go all in with these guys, if they kill you or each other, so be it. Roll up new characters, life goes on.

I'm sorry, this all sounds very frustrating. I don't know what you can do, at this point, but resign to the fact that your friends just don't want to play D&D the way you do. At least you get to run the game you want, when the larger group is together.

Maybe asking from another angle would help- what is it you think the other two players expect your character to be/do? What is their expectation of you, that they would get upset IC or OOC with you? They seem to have created characters that both have IC excuses for PvP happening (even if the wild mage can claim it's all random and they don't mean to, you don't choose wild magic if you aren't willing to occasionally blow up the other PCs, or at least be a hindrance to them). Do they get mad OOC when one damages the other, even if they both know that it is "what their characters would do"? What part of the game is actually important to each of these players (not their characters)?- they must be taking something seriously if they actually get mad OOC sometimes.

Alternatively, can you recruit some NPC followers to fill some of the missing roles? It would make good strategic sense, since the party is so small, and having something more closely approaching a functional adventuring party might help give your character enough of an excuse to tolerate the other two (and conveniently also will provide extra targets for their inevitable PvP/wild magic)?

[KorvinStarmast]

Honestly? Because I am sick of doing that.
Every single game I bend over backwards begging and pleading to get the players to make compatible characters, and end up re-rolling multiple times trying to please them.
The last three games I played in I made a character specifically to please the rest of the group, and I was, respectively:
A: Threatened to have my character killed and robbed by the rest of the party.
B: Threatened with a real life beating.
C: Made fun of to this day for being overly brutal in interrogation when the Pookha who was unable to tell the truth decided it would be a good idea for my were-alligator to be the party face.

I am just really tired of making characters to please everyone else, never getting to play what I want to play, and still ending up on being bullied and crapped on. I am really tired of being everyone else's mom. Bad RPG play is not better than no RPG play.


Edit: You know, in writing this, I realized I had a lot more pent up hostility than I thought. I think I am really sick of thirty years of dysfunctional groups and horror stories and just want to relax and play a normal game for once. As I suggested months ago in another of your threads: make new friends may be your better solution.

Good luck, maybe it won't turn out to be a train wreck.

[Jay R]

While I mostly agree with this, it's worth keeping in mind that making the decision to play the game only makes sense (to me, at least) if the end result is still enjoyable. If it requires too many compromises, it might be better to bow out than suffer as the square peg in the round hole. That said, I've occasionally made a lot of compromises myself and still had some fun games come out of it.

Yes, of course deciding not to play is always an option, and often the best option.

Back on the subject, we have been asked to help with the choice of motivations for the character. I am recommending making the choice to play a motivation that lets the character travel with this party (so the game can continue), instead of making a decision to play a motivation that prevents the party from traveling together, which stops the game.

[Bulhakov]

I'd say it's much more of a DM problem, than a player problem, so he's the one to talk to.

Some tricks I've used to railroad the party a bit to stick together:
- shared background (e.g. military or family)
- shared destiny (shared prohpecy, birthmark, etc.)
- forced by magic (e.g. the characters find out they cannot damage each other - like no friendly fire, or they can't separate by more than 100 yards or their slave collars explode)
- secret outside contracts that force them to be friendly (e.g. one player was hired to serve as a bodyguard for another, or to spy on them to get some vital private info, or to use them as bait to catch a specific villain)

If you're looking for some motivation for yourself for the specific situation:
- one of the PCs raises some positive feelings in you (maternal instinct? fits a healer character)
- maybe healing a single character many times gives you much greater insight into "the mysteries of the human body"? (could be a nice houserule to talk your DM into to grant some XP/knowledge bonuses)
- you're starved for attention and they gave it to you?
- you had a vision that one of your party members is pivotal for some great event in the future

[kyoryu]

I legitimately think that I would have better odds of survival playing solo than adventuring with these two.

As I said above, they are 100% going to get someone killed. Whoever gets killed is going to get mad at them OOC, and I am going to feel really bad both in and out of character I if enable them getting themselves killed. It is not fun or humorous to me to talk someone who is mentally handicapped into going into dangerous situations that will kill them sooner rather than later.


See, now this is an OOC problem. And as such, it should be dealt with OOC. "Look, you guys seem to want to play really recklessly, and I'm pretty convinced that a character is gonna die, and somebody's gonna get upset about it in real life."

The problem isn't "the characters don't want to work together". The problem is you don't like the characters and how they're being played. And that's what needs to be addressed.

[KorvinStarmast]

The problem isn't "the characters don't want to work together". The problem is you don't like the characters and how they're being played. And that's what needs to be addressed. And if I may pile on a bit here, since your diagnosis strikes me as a good one, the further problem is that the players (or at least the other two) are not interested in forming a team in the same way that the OP is.
For our OP:
Help me come up with motivations for our party to stick together.

We can't. You are asking strangers on the internet to help you motivate RL people to play in a style more to your liking. Well, that's not what we can do. Only you can persuade them to do so. And that means you and those two being on the same page. Right now, you are not.

How do you intend to get onto the same page with the other two players?

[Talakeal]

Thank you to everyone who responded, even if I didn't reply in turn.

I think what I am going to do is embrace my OOC frustrations and use them as IC motivation.

They come to me almost dead by one another's hands, I patch them up, and try and talk them out of their reckless ways. But they don't listen, so I exasperatedly follow along trying to keep them alive, and ultimately find a cure for the fighter's mental state* as well as the sorceresses' curse.

Of course, that still doesn't address the inevitable OOC issue that is going to happen when someone's character gets another player's killed; any advice on that?


Maybe asking from another angle would help- what is it you think the other two players expect your character to be/do? What is their expectation of you, that they would get upset IC or OOC with you? They seem to have created characters that both have IC excuses for PvP happening (even if the wild mage can claim it's all random and they don't mean to, you don't choose wild magic if you aren't willing to occasionally blow up the other PCs, or at least be a hindrance to them). Do they get mad OOC when one damages the other, even if they both know that it is "what their characters would do"? What part of the game is actually important to each of these players (not their characters)?- they must be taking something seriously if they actually get mad OOC sometimes.

Good advice.


Alternatively, can you recruit some NPC followers to fill some of the missing roles? It would make good strategic sense, since the party is so small, and having something more closely approaching a functional adventuring party might help give your character enough of an excuse to tolerate the other two (and conveniently also will provide extra targets for their inevitable PvP/wild magic)?

Agreed.

You know, Bob was originally going to play a summoner because that is one of the few caster types he has never played before and the extra summons would help a lot in a small party, but at the last second he swerved and changed his class saying nothing but a wild mage would satisfy him.


As I suggested months ago in another of your threads: make new friends may be your better solution.


I appreciate the sentiment, but its really hard. Especially in the time of covid.

Many of the players in my current group are new(ish) and I have never PCed with the fighter's player before.

It also doesn't always help; the situation where the DM threatened to beat me up that I alluded to involved an entirely new group and it was significantly worse than my existing group in every way.


Some tricks I've used to railroad the party a bit to stick together:
- shared background (e.g. military or family)
- shared destiny (shared prohpecy, birthmark, etc.)
- forced by magic (e.g. the characters find out they cannot damage each other - like no friendly fire, or they can't separate by more than 100 yards or their slave collars explode)
- secret outside contracts that force them to be friendly (e.g. one player was hired to serve as a bodyguard for another, or to spy on them to get some vital private info, or to use them as bait to catch a specific villain)

This is what I had hoped for.

So what happened was we spit-balled character concepts and pitched them to the DM. Then I ran out to print up character sheets, and when I got back everyone had fully created a character in isolation and nobody, including the DM, was interested in tying our backgrounds together.



See, now this is an OOC problem. And as such, it should be dealt with OOC. "Look, you guys seem to want to play really recklessly, and I'm pretty convinced that a character is gonna die, and somebody's gonna get upset about it in real life."

The problem isn't "the characters don't want to work together". The problem is you don't like the characters and how they're being played. And that's what needs to be addressed.

Its both.

For example, if I was playing an amoral enchantress this would be a great party for me. I am just tired of swapping my character to fit with the rest of the party, especially when that inevitably means me creating an evil character and then people using "evil party" as an excuse for further IC PvP or OOC bullying.



*: Does anyone know the proper term to refer to someone with a sub seventy IQ? When I was a lad we used the "R-word" but I am aware that it is now considered a slur.

[Mordante]

How I normally start a new party, everyone starts at level 1 as a newby. Have them spent a few days together as a group (forced or voluntarily). Then try and give them a common goal if that is even needed. We never create our characters as a group or write the back ground story as a group. We just work it out as we develop as party.

IMHO there is no need to work out too much before playing has even started. I tend to keep my characters personality fairly neutral and see how things develop. Just assume the role play role which is required for the party and fits you as a player.

[meandean]

How I normally start a new party, everyone starts at level 1 as a newby. Have them spent a few days together as a group (forced or voluntarily). Then try and give them a common goal if that is even needed. We never create our characters as a group or write the back ground story as a group. We just work it out as we develop as party.

IMHO there is no need to work out too much before playing has even started. I tend to keep my characters personality fairly neutral and see how things develop. Just assume the role play role which is required for the party and fits you as a player.Agreed. "Why would such different people even be together?" isn't a problem at all; it's actually a well-worn trope. The DM comes up with the conceit of the campaign that is supposed to unite your group: you're all threatened by the same thing, you all agree that a certain wrong needs to be righted, you just want to make money, etc. The classic endgame of the trope is that this "found family" of misfits ends up being just as much a family as any other.

Now, if you're playing with people who are threatening to physically attack you in real life when they don't like what you do in-game, I would not expect to get to the point where your inspired collaborative storytelling reaches its tearjerking conclusion. That's not a roleplaying problem, that's a "don't play with these people" problem.

[KorvinStarmast]

I appreciate the sentiment, but its really hard. Especially in the time of covid.
True.

It also doesn't always help; the situation where the DM threatened to beat me up that I alluded to involved an entirely new group and it was significantly worse than my existing group in every way.
Sorry to hear that. :smallfrown: I guess that group's out of your rota at this point.

[Satinavian]

This is what I had hoped for.

So what happened was we spit-balled character concepts and pitched them to the DM. Then I ran out to print up character sheets, and when I got back everyone had fully created a character in isolation and nobody, including the DM, was interested in tying our backgrounds together.

You are only one player. No matter how much you like to use stuff that you think would benefit the game, if the other players are not interested, then that's it. No one (inho including the GM, but we have many threads on that already) can decide the kind of game alone or force it against the rest of the group.


If you are not happy with the way your group works and you hav brought it already up and your ideas have been ignored/shot down, there is literally nothing left you can do. Either leave or play along.

[Talakeal]

If you are not happy with the way your group works and you hav brought it already up and your ideas have been ignored/shot down, there is literally nothing left you can do. Either leave or play along.

That’s totally silly. There are tons of things people can do to change the flow of the game or a group dynamic. Not all of them might be successful or wise, but there are a multitude of options besides passively going along with the group.

And even within your binary choice of playing along or leaving, there is a huge spectrums of ways in which I can do so.

[Satinavian]

That is why i qualified it with "brought up and ignored/shot down". Certainly people can change stuff. But not without buy in or when the others are happy with how it is and don't want the change.
Trying to get your way anyway in such a situation will only result in disappointment and strife.


You can't impose a group dynamic you like on your group. Not as GM and even far less as player.