[Any] DMs who have had Players walk away

[Oracle_Hunter]

Recently, I quit a 3.5 game I had agreed to play. This is unusual for, as a rule, I see games through until they end or break up. Here, several factors weighed in me leaving the game but one predominated - I wasn't having fun, and didn't think the situation would improve.

Now, there are dozens of threads on players with problem DMs and the usual advice (and good advice at that) is for the player to speak with the DM and leave if things don't improve. However, I have yet to see a thread about a DM who has just lost a player because the player had complaints about the campaign.

Anyone have this happen? How did the player walk out? Did they offer constructive criticism before or after? Did you take it?

[Tyndmyr]

It hasn't happened. Ive had players leave due to moving, or due to schedule conflicts(moved onto a shift where they were literally working during the game), but that's it.

Likewise, it's rare for me to leave a game...though there have been games I've declined to join because they played in a way that I thought would be un-fun.

[Oracle_Hunter]

I'd like to note that having a player walk out of your game, even justifiably, does not make you a bad DM - provided that you learn from the experience.

Spoiler

Show

For example, I've asked one player to leave after I realized her disruptive play style was due to a conflict in our desired games (she wanted a socializing game; I wanted an adventure) and I ended a game after noticing a general conflict in our desired games (they wanted a dungeon crawl; I wanted a game of political intrigue).

The first case taught me to carefully enunciate what the "point" of a given game was to be. If I know someone just isn't up for that kind of game, I either don't invite them in (it can be hard to say no) or I keep an eye on them to see if they are working well within the party.

The second case taught me that I needed to roll better with the players. Instead of trying to bait them with a plot they didn't care for, I should have just reworked the story to focus on what they wanted to do (crawl some dungeons) and put my plot desires into the background. Instead, the game reached the point where the players were making suicidal decisions to avoid my plot hooks - and I (wisely, IMHO) shut down the game when we reached a good stopping point rather than allowing things to escalate.

[valadil]

Anyone have this happen? How did the player walk out? Did they offer constructive criticism before or after? Did you take it?

From what I've seen, there's rarely a big event made of a player leaving. Instead they become repeat no-showers. Eventually you expect them to ditch. Then you stop thinking of them at all because it's been so long. They don't give a reason for dropping, so much as simply make themselves absent.

I've only left one game that I can think of. I explained that I needed a break from roleplaying and that I wouldn't have fun gaming unless I took one. The GM could have taken it badly (sounds a lot like an "it's not you it's me" cliche even though it was legit it my case), but didn't so far as I'm aware and we continued to game together once my sabbatical was over.

I've had two players leave games I was running. One had to move. The other had anxiety issues. Neither had anything to do with the game itself, so I never really fussed over it.

[valadil]

The first case taught me to carefully enunciate what the "point" of a given game was to be. If I know someone just isn't up for that kind of game, I either don't invite them in (it can be hard to say no) or I keep an eye on them to see if they are working well within the party.

More GMs need to do this. I don't withhold invites though. I invite powergamers to my political intrigue games, but explain why I don't think they'd like it if they treat it like every other D&D game.

The second case taught me that I needed to roll better with the players. Instead of trying to bait them with a plot they didn't care for, I should have just reworked the story to focus on what they wanted to do (crawl some dungeons) and put my plot desires into the background.

I only agree with that to a point. I'd rather not GM at all than run a mindless hack and slash dungeon crawl. I will cater to the players' interests within the scope of the game I want to run. The key is communicating that scope to the players, as indicated in your previous comment.

[Aetolus]

I had 2 LARPers join my campaign. They were very awkward, and they didn't really fit in.

They didn't have a very good experience because my campaign was mostly about problem solving and plot complexity, as opposed to acting and silliness and time wasting.

They left for lack of interest, I was more than happy to see them go.

[dsmiles]

I was stationed overseas in Korea, and had quite a few players quit. I ran a game with about 12 players, and approximately half of them quit when their characters died. Didn't hurt my feelings any, 6 is still too many players to be effective, but 12, seriously? And they wanted to split the party?

[Dziadek]

One of my players walked out of my game because he gave up to early... his character got arrested and he didn't even THINK of trying of escaping (I would make the escape easy for him).

Aside from that, few other players walked away because they didn't have enough time to play regulary.

My regular group now consists of four players.

[Umael]

I have been the player who has walked away, and I have been the GM who has made a player leave. I have also been the one who watched as a player walked away, both as another player and as a GM.

In some of those cases, it was just a difference of opinion, and those are regretable, but they might also be completely unavoidable.

In other cases, it was because of a breakdown in communication, and those suck.

As a GM, the first thing you should do is communicate. Make sure the players know that if you are open to listening to what they have to say, and that you want them to listen to what you have to say.

Storytime.

Spoiler

Show

Something like four years ago, while running my d20 Rokugan game, I had up to ten players at one point. Two of them were a couple, let's call them Nathan and Francine. Another player, let's call him Kim, was going away soon, and I was working on an extra-special game just for him.

Due to character interaction, I wanted Nathan's character to do something. It was something in-character and plot-reasonable, but naturally, I wanted his okay first. Unfortunately, just a few hours before game was to start, Nathan gave me a call. Francine was not up to going to game, and he needed to be with her.

This is where the communications broke down.

Wanting Kim to have a bash of a going-away game, I pushed him to see if he really needed to be there with Francine, if Francine couldn't just come over, and finally if he could just come over long enough to drop off his character sheet. What I DIDN'T tell Nathan was that I wanted his character to do something in-game because it would help make Kim's last game with us incredible.

What Nathan heard is that I was saying that my game was more important than his wife.

Now, before I get villanized, here is where Nathan screwed up (remember, communications is a two-way street). Instead of confronting me about this, Nathan drove by, dropped off the character sheet, and stormed away after telling one of the other players that both Francine and he were done playing in my game.

When I found out about this, I was upset and angry. Upset, because I had just lost two very good players who seemed to be having a good time, and angry because I was accused of something that I, in no way, meant, nor was I given a chance to defend myself or even apologize.

(You will note that in all of these problem threads, one common advice is "talk to the GM/player". Nathan skipped that step.)

Quite some time later, Nathan and I talked. We both admitted we screwed up and apologized to each other. Whenever I see Nathan, I tell him that there is still a place at my game for his wife and him. He thanks me, but he never accepts. I don't think he ever will, no matter how many years go by.

Lessons learned:

* Always keep in mind what's important. Don't every let the game divide the group. Stop and keep your perspective from time to time.
* Communication is key. In-game and out-of-game. Make sure you clearly explain yourself and give the other person a chance to do likewise.
* Screw-ups aren't excuses for other screw-ups. Two wrongs don't make a right. Treat your problem player or problem GM as you would like them to treat you, if the situation was reversed.

[JadedDM]

I've had a number of players walk out on me. Most of them are silent drop-outs. They don't say anything, they just stop showing up.

Those who do say something rarely are honest about it. They usually make up some excuse, like they are too busy with real life. But then a few days later I'll spot them signing up for a different game.

[Balain]

There was one campaign we were playing where one of the players who is a rules lawyer and the DM who plays loose with the rules sometimes got into a huge argument and the DM threatened to punch the player. We all said to calm own and relax and take a break. We ended up stopping for the night. That campaign basicly died.

Not the exact same, but it just wasn't fun night and since then I refused to play if both of those two were inviolved. I would play with one or the other but not both.

[Lord Vampyre]

The last group of players to leave one of my games was due to logistic issues. I tend to live quite a distance out of town, they simply weren't able to make the trip on a regular basis. And unfortunately, I wasn't willing to run a game in one of their small apartments, where everyone was struggling for elbow room.

The other issue I had was that they tended to be repeat no shows. I don't hand out xp to people that don't show up to game. A lot of complaints all around. All in all they had fun, they just didn't like the way I tended to manage things. Gaming is a cooperative experience, IMO, and if your not there you're not contributing. Eh, sometimes it just doesn't work out.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Lessons learned:

* Always keep in mind what's important. Don't every let the game divide the group. Stop and keep your perspective from time to time.
* Communication is key. In-game and out-of-game. Make sure you clearly explain yourself and give the other person a chance to do likewise.
* Screw-ups aren't excuses for other screw-ups. Two wrongs don't make a right. Treat your problem player or problem GM as you would like them to treat you, if the situation was reversed.

Absolutely solid advice.

I'm not terribly surprised to hear that most people who've had players leave have had them do so under mysterious circumstances. The no-shows, the thin-excuses - it can be very hard to speak with a DM when you have trouble with their game.

I always ask my players to be up-front with me about what they like and dislike about a campaign. Perhaps out of insecurity I tend to doubt it when they say "everything's OK" but to mitigate against that I try to frame the questions in a "did you like A or B more? Why?" manner. I've had mixed results, but it's a lot better than sitting around not asking.

Anecdote

Spoiler

Show

In the game I left, I originally left with a non-descript note saying that I didn't think it was a "good fit" for myself. Now, I had very specific reasons for not liking the game, but I felt like it would poison the relationship to offer these up unasked: this was the second game of his I'd been in (the first was a OD&D Dragonlance Module) but I enjoyed him as a player and a friend. This particular campaign was set in his "baby" of a campaign setting that he was finally trying out; he did not seem very receptive to in-game concerns about the plot.

He replied with a warm "I'm sorry to hear that but OK" and then asked if I had any specific complaints - and so I gave them to him in as constructive a manner as I could. The minor stuff he agreed with and claimed that he wished I had brought them up before quiting; however, he remained steadfast on my major complaint - railroading.

I have mixed feelings on how this turned out. On one hand, the game really wasn't a good fit for me, so it was best that I got out before I poisoned the game - either by subverting it via lampshades (a process I had already become) or by post-game complaining sessions with other disaffected players. Plus, I was able to communicate my problems to him in a diplomatic way and, hopefully, the fixes he makes will be enough to keep everyone else in the game.

On the other hand, he refused to address the major complaint - one shared by at least one other player than myself - and I am now no longer in a position to influence the game. While it is true that you should never try to indirectly fix a game, I worry that the game is headed towards ruin as a result. To be true, this is now the other players' problems (and I'm not talking to them about the game - well, unbidden anyhow) and if they don't like it, they can do something about it. Still, I feel like I've left a friend to be hoist by his own petard; I feel certain that a Player Revolt is in his future.

So, what are peoples' thought on getting player feedback? On offering it to a DM? I think we can all agree it's important, but there must be a time and a place, no?

[AtopTheMountain]

It wasn't a big deal or anything, but one or two other players in a group I've been in (though playing, not DMing) for around 3 years left because they didn't like 4E (which we switched to after it came out).

[gomipile]

As a player, I have walked out on two different campaigns, both of em because I was not having fun anymore.

The first time, it was because all of the other players and one in particular were very annoying to be around, and in the last session they did several things that ruined the roleplaying experience for me. The DM in that case is a friend of mine, and we have talked about it several times, in fact the history of that campaign is a running joke in our circle of friends now.

The second time it was a combination of the DM's "players vs. the DM" style, the group as a whole's herd-of-cats mentality, and some recurring situations hat made me feel as though there was no point to me being there, in game or out. I have not talked to that DM about it because I don't want to offend him. Also, the reason I left was that I just was not having fun, and nothing short of nearly every person involved's attitudes towards the game changing would have helped that. I was the one who didn't fit in, and I recognized that, so I just stopped going.

[Gnomo]

I have never walked out of any game as a player, and never have found good reason to do so, this has a lot to do of how I see the game, I think it's mainly your own fault if you don't have fun playing. Most of the times when I see a player posting how terrible their DM was to their poor little character I refrain from posting cause I would probably just write "Whiner".

[Earthwalker]

So, what are peoples' thought on getting player feedback? On offering it to a DM? I think we can all agree it's important, but there must be a time and a place, no?

Player feedback is of course important.
Of course it doesn't just have to be a list of things that need fixing, saying what you enjoyed about the last session and telling the GM he did well at X is also a good idea.

Same goes the other way with the GM saying what he liked and voicing any concerns.

When GMing I am usual a wreck by the end of the night as most of my players default mode is complaint mode. Wanting more....

More xp, more money more power and so on, this is usually just joking so the times when I get someone thanking me or saying they liked a certain encounter is always helpful

[Oracle_Hunter]

I have never walked out of any game as a player, and never have found good reason to do so, this has a lot to do of how I see the game, I think it's mainly your own fault if you don't have fun playing. Most of the times when I see a player posting how terrible their DM was to their poor little character I refrain from posting cause I would probably just write "Whiner".

I suppose there's some truth to it - I mean, it's not like "having fun" is an objective state; everyone has fun for their own reasons.

Still, I know from experience as a DM that there are right ways and wrong ways of running a RPG. Certainly it varies from system to system, but within a system there are some clear Do's and Don'ts that need to be adhered to.

I'm glad to hear you've always had fun in RPGs - you are most fortunate.

[skywalker]

I don't think I've ever had a player quit. I'm almost certain I've had the group say "we'd like to not play that anymore."

I have quit a couple of games, but I've never told a DM in any way that I was dissatisfied. Just kind of drifted away, because I didn't think it would help them in any way to hear from me.

That's also because the first game I quit was over me being burnt out, and the second one was over me wanting to punch the DM in the face. That just wouldn't have ended well had I offered criticism.

[Yora]

Once our dm decided to play the Tomb of Horrors, but was about the only one who thought it was a good idea. At some point during the second session of constant dying, we told him that there's really no reason why our characters should be in the dungeon anyway, and that we'd not continue to amuse him by running into traps we couldn't possibly have anticipated.
I played that campaign to the end, but when they started a new one, I told them I'd not be with them for this time. We played a lot (often twice a week) and I had enough D&D for now. However, I kind of did quit the group, because their style was really anoying me and not much fun. However, I wited for a convenient moment.

[potatocubed]

I've had a guy throw a tantrum, tear up his character sheet and storm out, after I assessed a (fatal) penalty on his Fortitude save against some dust of sneezing and choking because he stuck his nose in the bag and took a deep sniff.

He came back the next week with a new (appallingly broken) character, though.

[Roga]

I touched on one of the reasons I've dropped a game before. It's actually caused me to drop from 3 separate games. Kenders and the people, GM and player alike, that love of using them to infuriate the the other players.

Repost from the Best idea ever shot down thread, spoiled so as not to spam.

Spoiler

Show

Situation: Party has your stereotypical Klepto Kender, which I despise. I'm been in 5 games with them and they've always been the reason the game collapsed. I was determined to Kender-proof my character.

My Solution: I'm playing an Oozemaster, and had commissioned a Special Bag of holding that was a Small Iron flask. The nozzle was 1 inch across so I could squeeze anything I wanted in there from a Canoe to a potion using Malleability. So I was the only person who could get things out of it. I paid for it, and it's cap, to be immune to Acid. And I would swallow it when I didn't need it, and could reach in and pull it out as a full round action. I would sleep myself in a larger Urn (also immune to acid) and coated myself in my Con damaging slime.

GM Response: I wake up in my urn and find that despite my defenses the Kender had unintentionally stolen my flask. To compound the issue, he had put a note in it and threw it in the ocean to see if anyone would ever read his message. I hate kenders, that's the game that made me refuse to ever play in a game with one again.


ME: How exactly did he "accidentally" Open my Urn, reach down my throat without taking at least 1d6 Con, and pull out my flask?
DM: He's a Kender
ME: But explain how, I put a lot of investment into protecting myself. You knew my intentions when I commissioned those items.
DM: I already said, He's a Kender.
ME: *Incomprehensible Rage*

This partially derailed the previous thread to ranting about Kender. While I appreciate comments, I politely ask you to continue with the subject at hand.

[Sjet]

Joined a game that consisted of several long time friends and a long running game. I meshed pretty well with everyone except one player. We got along well till the game started, but we had very different styles of play. Stuck with it for 7 months before letting the DM know I wasn't going to be coming back.

[BlckDv]

I have been in many seats relative to this issue.

I've been a bad DM who had a player walk out on me because he could see that the group was headed for ruin (he was right)

I've been a good DM who has had players storm out or just vanish because I refuse to cater to their unreasonable whims or spotlight hogging (and I've had players thank me for standing up when they felt it wasn't their place to complain)

I've been a player who let a DM know that his game and what I was wanting for my fun time were not matching up, but I didn't think he was a bad DM.

I've been a player who let a DM know my concerns, then quietly left the group when the DM went all frothy mouthed on me.

Key things I have learned from this are:

I ALWAYS have a pre-session for any campaign I run. I set down what style of DMing I am looking to do, we talk about what players desires and goals we can work into it, and what level of rules vs. from the hip style play we want, among other things. Having a night when you get to know everyone OOC before you start to play can really help to let the players keep PC and player issues separate in their heads.

I have a firm "Argue later" rule. If I make a bad rule call during game, you can ask me "Are you sure it isn't ..." and I'll double check in my head, but if I say "yes, I'm sure" or if looking it up will take too long, we run with what I said, even if I am wrong. AFTER the game, we look it up, see if I was right or wrong, and if I was wrong, I send out an email letting folks know what I was wrong about and how it will work in the future. My players accept that an occasional bad rules call is made up for by exciting fast paced play, and talking about it later when the scene is already set and done takes a lot of emotion out the rules debate if a point is grey. Your PCs life does not depend on it; he is already dead or saved.

I try to make things right. If I make a bad rules call and it does cause a PC death or long term harm, I try and do something for that player to make up for it; I might allow a character concept I know they have wanted that I didn't want to do the work to let in, or I might let their replacement PC come in with IC knowledge that the party has been wanting for sometime, but I always make the fix something going forward, not backwards.

I'm going to stop now before this post becomes Gargantuan and I take another penalty to Dex.

[Jarawara]

I hate Kender with a passion bordering on insanity!!!

*~*~*

But, back to the topic at hand...

I probably have had more players walk out on me, quit my game, tell me they'll never play in my game, refuse to play my game, tell me they pity the poor saps who are stuck in my game, and at least in one case, one guy offered to let me send my players to him, as they clearly could not be having fun in my games.

Of all of there, there is exactly one defining trait that they all share:
None of them have ever actually played in my game.

I believe in explicitely telling people what my game is about, and what it is not. I get them talking about what they want; I tell them what I am looking for in a player and what I am presenting in my game. Invariably, they start looking to compromise. "Jar, you don't allow Half-Dragons in your game? What if I had a really compelling backstory? No? What if we re-crunched the Half-Dragon template, weakened it a bit? No? What if we made the Half-Dragon look mostly human, more like the Dragon-blooded. You mean, you don't allow Dragon-blooded either? You do realize that in the definition of Sorcerer, it actually describes them as having Dragon-blood in their ancestry. What? You don't allow Sorcerers either? What do you allow? Wizards?" (long pause) "You don't allow Wizards???"

And that's just one example. They then try to negotiate on any of the other thousand restrictions and stipulations, and they find me unwilling to negotiate on much of anything. As one of them said: "So it's your way or the highway?" To which I replied: "Of course, why wouldn't it be?"

Then I describe limited nature of the setting, the seemingly raidroaded pre-plot of the game, including the stipulation that if your characters wander out of the campaign area, I won't follow. They simply 'leave', and must be replaced with new characters so as to follow the storyline.

And NPC's! Gah, I love 'em. Call them DMPC's if you will, expect to have multiple NPCs traveling with the party for extended periods of time, and I *will* be tracking what they are doing and how they are developing within the plotline throughout the whole of the campaign.

Somewhere around there they all realize I must be the worst DM in the world, and often they also conclude that I don't have any actual DMing experience, and really should just be writing stories to myself in the dark of my room.

They tell me they quit! (Even though they've never played.) They tell me "Fine, I just refuse to play then!", even though often we were only chatting up each other's games, and I had never actually offered to DM for them. They tell me they'd never want to play in my games! Fine, I can accept that. I offer what I offer, if you don't want it, don't buy it.

One of them stated outright: "You will never find anyone to play in your games!"

WRONG. What he should have said, is "You'll only ever find a *few* people to play in your games."

And those few, whom I occasionally find, when presented with all my crazy restrictions, see them and say "Great setting, great roleplaying opportunity, just what I was looking for." (Actual quote from one of my players)

So I have probably the highest percentage of players who have 'quit my game', all without ever actually having played in my game. But of those who have played... over 30 years of running my game... NONE of them have ever walked away.

(Technically, a few have moved away, and some no longer have the time, but they still pine away for the good ol days when we could play, and their characters still exist in my world, ready to take up the sword and spell and fight the good fight once again.)

*~*

By telling my players what to expect, and finding out what they are looking for, I am able to avoid most of the issues that seem to come up often in groups. I only ever have the players that want the very type of game I am providing, though I am sure that there's still people out there who feel sorry for us. After all, I must be the worst DM ever.

[Tyndmyr]

I have never walked out of any game as a player, and never have found good reason to do so, this has a lot to do of how I see the game, I think it's mainly your own fault if you don't have fun playing. Most of the times when I see a player posting how terrible their DM was to their poor little character I refrain from posting cause I would probably just write "Whiner".

I've had bad DMs. OOooh, have I had bad DMs. I don't generally quit games over that, though. I just screw with them. Granted, I'll voice my concerns first. But when the entire party is listening to someone drone on and on about his railroad plot, well, screw it. You make your own entertainment. Come up with "Wouldn't it be great/fun/amusing/awesome if..." ideas of things you can do, IC, and just go with it. If everyone is having fun, there's a limit to what the DM can practically make you do. I don't know why people act like the DM is all powerful, sometimes. It's still a community game.

[true_shinken]

My 2-year long campaign has seen a lot of players come and go.
The first two were my ex-girlfriend and her best friend. Then, two other players left because they didn't like the way I settled things on the whole 2-PCs-turned-NPCs-thing.
Then, I had a casual gamer leave the game because it was 'too complicated' and a dedicated gamer leave the game because of time constraints.

[Cheesy74]

I've had a very serious problem player who seemed to want roleplaying simply for the sake of roleplaying. He was good at his class and excellent at playing his character, but became very angry when opportunities for roleplaying were glossed over because the players screwed up, or because he perceived some kind of injustice. After a few discussions about the issues (which failed to produce results), I gave him an ultimatum: shape up next session or leave.
It worked. Usually if people stay more than a month or so, they like your campaign enough to want to stay. To stay in a good game, players will change a lot. I know that because I've been a problem player in other campaigns and have been threatened in the same way. I'm not saying use threats to keep your players in line, but make guidelines and their consequences very clear.

This guy eventually left to start his own campaign, but that's neither here nor there.

[Tyndmyr]

By telling my players what to expect, and finding out what they are looking for, I am able to avoid most of the issues that seem to come up often in groups. I only ever have the players that want the very type of game I am providing, though I am sure that there's still people out there who feel sorry for us. After all, I must be the worst DM ever.

While I feel you have a lot of improvement to do in GMing, given your "my way or the highway" approach, you've hit on the main way to prevent disappointment. Set the expectations accurately.

I point at the wall, containing almost every 3.x book printed, and tell them to go nuts, we'll be sandboxing. The only things I ban are infinite combos and tainted casters. Thats it. I have more people that want me to DM for them than I can possibly deal with. It's a popular way to game, and more importantly, they know in advance, so nobody ever has to bicker about exactly what build options they can select, or what settings they can draw from.

[arguskos]

I've been deposed as DM once (for good reason, I was being a terrible DM and needed to walk away from the table, and when I didn't, they took the table away).

I've also had a player ragequit D&D a few times (yes, it's possible, no, it wasn't fun). When they're about to throw a table at you cause they died from a random crit, it's a bad situation. I don't really feel bad about it, since going into games I am VERY CLEAR about this: I always run worlds that are dangerous, lethal almost, and you might die to random bad luck. If that's an issue, please say so before we begin play so I can address it and we can work something out.

I've also had players just vanish. I try and find out why, and to this day, it's always been legit stuff like they need to work more hours and can't play, or they're just not having fun anymore, or there's issues at home, or whatever. I don't worry about such things, since they happen, and I try hard to have contingencies in place in case of player drops.

EDIT: As a player, I've never dropped out IRL. I did it once online, cause I wasn't having fun and time was an issue. Otherwise, yeah, I stick things out.