The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Getting a D&D group to wake up and get involved in the game
DirtyDirtyVagrant
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I'm trying to run a D&D game for my friends, but it's not working out as well as I thought it might.
I introduced the players to my own fantasy setting, tweaked the rules a bit to reflect certain changes (nothing significant), and changed some monster stats in order to pace encounters a little more to my liking.
I put a lot of work into building a very elaborate world for this campaign, and I don't think they could be less interested in it. I tried to come up with ways to introduce the characters to the group, motivations for adventuring, etc etc and the responses I've gotten amount to "whatever I guess."
"Hey. Why don't you tell the group a little about your character? Not so much a biography, but what do they see?"
"Ehhh, I'm basically a ranger. So I have a bow. And leather armor. And I guess I'm an elf, so pointy ears or whatever."
There's no roleplay or emotional investment at all. Never is an interaction between two characters assumed to be in character. They are just going through the motions and rolling the dice when necessary. As it stands, we're just playing a combat game. It's really a disappointment.
Help me? I have no idea what to do here.
I introduced the players to my own fantasy setting, tweaked the rules a bit to reflect certain changes (nothing significant), and changed some monster stats in order to pace encounters a little more to my liking.
I put a lot of work into building a very elaborate world for this campaign, and I don't think they could be less interested in it. I tried to come up with ways to introduce the characters to the group, motivations for adventuring, etc etc and the responses I've gotten amount to "whatever I guess."
"Hey. Why don't you tell the group a little about your character? Not so much a biography, but what do they see?"
"Ehhh, I'm basically a ranger. So I have a bow. And leather armor. And I guess I'm an elf, so pointy ears or whatever."
There's no roleplay or emotional investment at all. Never is an interaction between two characters assumed to be in character. They are just going through the motions and rolling the dice when necessary. As it stands, we're just playing a combat game. It's really a disappointment.
Help me? I have no idea what to do here.
DirtyDirtyVagrant on
0
Posts
But it seems to me like they aren't interested in playing the game so much as they are in getting together.
The main problem with homebrew settings is unless the players are also invested in the setting, they are essentially just playing in your sandbox. Even if the sandbox is totally hip and cool, it's still your sandbox. Give them opportunities to change the world, and NOT just in-game, but out-of-game as well. Let them create some of the towns and NPCs or develop some of the background in the world. There's "I'm a generic ranger" and then there's "I am the long lost heir to the throne of man"... let them take artistic liberties with your baby. Of course, don't give them "homework assignments" like journal entries or town building exercises unless this is what they really want to do.
It's also completely okay to run Dungeons and Dragons as a glorified tabletop war game. For some folks, this is the entire appeal of the thing. It may not be what you want, but it's all about what the group wants as a whole.
Are they new to DnD or RPG Pen and Paper games in general? You might have better luck with an existing setting that they are already emotionally attached to, like Lost, or Farscape, or Star Trek, or Game of Thrones, or something. You don't have to buy RPG books for those games, just adapt the rules that you like to the setting that they want.
My experience with D&D has unfortunately almost always been people either putting in minimal effort or playing Chaotic Stupid "look at how wacky my character is!" Good role-playing is hard fucking work, and requires training and practice.
IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
I would start by pitting them against something that WILL kill them if they go at it head-on, and work from there.
As long as everyone is having fun, my recommendation would be to try to ease them into it a bit. If they rescue a prince (assuming all men here, trying to play a female character for one might weird them out, and you don't want to tear them out of their comfort zone), have him thank the party personally. Reward anything remotely resembling roleplay with a minor bonus now and then, like a +1 on their next combat roll (but not all the time, spread it out so it's not obvious that you can be gamed for a nigh permanent bonus just by acting up a little).
It's a fine line to walk, but that sounds a lot like my old group as well. There was some in character interaction at times, but a lot of it was just enjoying hanging out together and being badasses. It's not always easy to feel badass whipping up an impromptu speech to rally an army's wavering morale, whereas rolling a 20 and cleaving an ogre in twain is usually pretty straight forward instant gratification.
That might be another way; try to keep combat swift but descriptive to make such things commonplace for them.
I'm not sure I agree. No win situations have been discussed at length in Critical Failures, and it can be very hit or miss as to whether the group appreciates what's going on (in game and out) or if it just rips them from their enjoyable shared fantasy.
Edit part deux: and yeah, I agree heavily with Hahnsoo1 and Quid. I'd kill to have things back like in high school; getting together to play Rifts or 3rd Edition for an entire afternoon/evening, snack/dinner breaks, seeing the whole group regularly. After HS we spread out amongst the province and while we've played Maptools in the past and whatnot, it's just not the same.
Alternatively, they may loosen up over time and just decide to start roleplaying. I'd just roll (haha) with it for now and have fun.
It's a fun review of the session, people pay more attention while it's happening, and they remember it better when you start up next time. It takes a hefty chunk of time depending on the size of the group, but it tacks on another dimension to the game.
One thing that I've seen in some games (not my current one, since it's on an online virtual tabletop) is a totem or other object, typically something soft that can be thrown without hurting anyone. The first player to do "something cool" gets the totem and earns a small amount of XP. He can then choose, at a later point, give the totem (typically by tossing it at the person) to someone else who does something cool, and that person earns a small amount of XP, or they can throw the totem at someone who did something dumb or stupid (trying to hit them in the head, of course) and that person earns a small amount of XP. Basically, it's a sort of "pay it forward" mechanism for XP gain that is player-controlled.
Basically ask what your players would like in D&D session... you should know what kinda stuff they are into if your players are your friends... and even if they are strangers you could throw a few things at them and see what they respond well to.
It's nice for you to create a world and go into a lot of details into it but if the players don't care then it's not fun for everyone. My Current DM have been playing with us for years and know what each of her players likes... One is a max/min guy that have pretty good builds but gets upset when he's in a situation where his build won't be effective (Beguiler in a zombie fight) and since then the DM tries to avoid undead or other mindless creatures. His GF happens to like playing a male character that gets into a lot of debaucheries but that's okay because she can even turn the most mundane thing into uncomfortable sexual references... The DM's boyfriend is a pretty lovable guy that just do things for the rule or cool, but he isn't very effective at it for the most part. The other guy that comes just wants to feel powerful.. and tends to pout when things go sour...
and she still managed to make it a great experience for us because she knows what makes the game fun ... putting something seemingly challenging in our face, and then fudge roles to make us win when we start sucking.
the party spend hours trying to solve it and was bored... At the end they called it a night and the next session I joined up the party and solve it (despite being a Barbarian Orc with the int score of 11). Since then we haven't encountered a single puzzles and everyone was pretty happy.
Surely there must be something that you are doing right that makes the players looking forward to D&D ever session. If you do observe that they like players interaction with each other... then congratz! You have a great bunch of players that can entertain themselves. Play that to your advantage and create situations where they can interact with each other more and then you'll have a great campaign. If they like hack and slash, then throw some interesting monsters at them or use terrain and weather to make the fight interesting... if they like conflicts between party members then throw a situation where you know it'll divide the party's opinion... if they like the fame and glory then have villagers cheer then and bards singing their names... etc.
P.S. Did you have your players write a background story before they make their character? It'll help them get into their characters. A well written background story can have a PC comes alive... it gives them a cause, a motivation, and personality. As a good DM you should also try to incorporate they background story into your own... (If their character want revenge from a lord.. you should have that lord show up in the campaign at some time.)
Some players would hate this. If they don't want to roleplay, taking away the parts of the game they're enjoying isn't necessarily going to make them have more fun.
I thousand-times-yes this.
They want to advance and hang out, so make their advancement contingent to their ability to be somewhat in character. Every successful game I've run or played in I've seen a variant of this system. Make it fun and exciting with the encounters, but also make it known that they will get more XP for roleplaying. Pretty much textbook carrot 'n stick.
The trick is to not take anything away from the parts they like, and given them incentive to get into character. Don't subtract XP, but award bonuses. We used to run a L5R campaign in which the "MVP" got a free reroll in the next session as voted on by the players. This was huge! Everyone wanted it! So give them something they want non-roleplaying for roleplaying. Totally optional and generally a 1-2 person bonus. Make them fight and compete for it and you'll see people get into character more and more.
The other really obvious suggestion is to run a few sessions, here and there, that are RP-centric. That's touchy, so good luck.
GM: Rusty Chains (DH Ongoing)
Then, when you wrap on that adventure, shift the focus to a new player. Rinse, repeat. Maybe even ask them if they want to guest DM a little dungeon crawl of their own afterwards. This also gives you a chance to play from time to time instead of just watching from behind your screen.
[e] This is what our DM does, and I love it. I had a sense of my character before we ran his adventure, but he was still an abstract on a lot of levels. The adventure (and planning phase) filled in a lot of holes and made him a real (pretend) person.
In the past, I was pretty heavy handed about this kind of thing, but I'm trying to work out a solution that's more based in positive-reinforcement. They're skillful players, but they tend to just do the bare minimum to describe their actions or otherwise create a niche for their character to plausibly exist in. Everyone is a mercenary or an ex-soldier, and they all just kind of meet up, hem and haw, shake hands, and then get to the killing.
I guess I'll have to get them together and ask them what they're interested in playing. I'm not interested in molding the game to suit my own vision of what it should be. I just want to make sure that I'm doing the best I can to bring the setting to life for them. If that makes any sense.
One: Try to draw them into the role-playing. Give NPCs distinctive voices so they know when you're talking to them through a character and carry on a conversation without dropping out of character even if they do.
Two: It's incredibly important for the players to be invested. If they're all just mercenaries with no sort of back story this is going to be harder but is still doable. In my most recent campaign we started out by having the PCs rescue a lost child and compete in competitions at the local fair. It not only let them meet the townsfolk and develop an attachment to them, it also gave me a valuable weapon. Need to motivate the PCs? Just torture some townsfolk. Muahaha!
Give them someone to be invested in. An orphan or widow makes a good target for their affection. If they're the shoot-first-ask-questions-later type then it might be more dangerous to give them a villain to hate but that can work too. Someone in the village who's a huge douche-bag without quite pushing it far enough for them to be willing to brave the consequences of killing him. If he is later revealed to be in cahoots with the big bad and they finally do get to kill him it will give them a feeling of satisfaction far beyond the three crits they rolled on him.
Three: One of the biggest things you can do is to let the players see that their actions have consequences. If they do just kill the douche-bag in town then the local law enforcement should be after them. The townspeople should be scared of them. Be careful. This kind of thing can quickly derail a campaign and make it no fun. If they're actually likely to just kill the guy, don't even bring him into it. But you can still show the players the consequences of their actions in a less campaign-killing manner by having the back room of the kobold caves be the nursery. Or having a group of clearly-outclassed goblins surrender instead of fight to the death. If the only question they have to think about is "Which sword should I use to kill these guys?" then they're not going to put a lot of effort into role-playing. Present them with situations that make them stop and think about what they're doing.
This is not directly related to the question at hand, but just a friendly piece of advice: Don't stick too hard to your game plan. Even if you have a clear idea of where the story is going the players need to feel like they're in control. If they're being rail-roaded that adds to the feeling that they're just riding along, swinging their swords at monsters as they pop up. You don't have to relinquish control of the story, but you have to make your players believe that they are in control. For instance, in the campaign I was talking about before the players had a choice early on of trusting one of two NPCs. Keep in mind that the game world, like Schoedinger's cat, is not set till the players observe it. Whichever NPC the players trusted was always going to be the wrong one because that's what the story needed in order to advance. Similarly, when players go off on tangents rather than yanking them back to the story you have to quickly figure out a way to bring the story to them, or make it so immediate that they are compelled to go back. When my players were about to go do something silly that was going to draw them further away from the story they heard that their home town was being occupied by a mysterious army. Don't work too much detail into your story because you're going to have to change a lot of details to get the players to where they need to be when they need to be there. Either their choices can disrupt your details or their choices don't actually matter in which case you're encouraging them not to role-play.
0431-6094-6446-7088
With the moral grey area stuff, these guys tend to be rather black with their decisions. They are frequently executing unarmed prisoners, collecting trophies (heads, ears, fingers), and just generally being really carefree about what they do while hiding under a neutral (unalligned) alignment.
What can I do about this? It's seriously getting on my nerves.
Well, if they're continually doing evil things, then you should change their alignment to evil. As far as dissuading them from doing that kind of stuff (and I would only do this if it's messing with the game, otherwise if they want to be evil, let them), just have there be repercussions, same as in real life. I bet if they find out their actions are making things more difficult for themselves, they'll reign it in a little.
You're the DM, so it's all up to you. When I run games I'll roll dice behind a screen and fudge/make-up the result if I'm looking for something specific. The same goes for alignment. An Orc can pretend and genuinely believe that they're an Elf, but that's just the Orc who is still an Orc. If the characters are doing evil stuff and refuse to have their alignment changed, then that's fine. Just craft experiences and encounters that reflect their less-than-savory nature.
Hell, if you want to go along for the ride, make them into a nasty, brutal merc company and start sending them on adventures to do things like "kill the (good-aligned) princess of the rival royal house" or "collect debts".
One of the big things I've learned from being a DM is that you have to let the players do what they want. If you start saying "No, you can't do that" then they will resent you for it. Don't get upset that your players are black, take it to the ultimate conclusion and revel in the fact that your players just became the villains of the current story arc.
What you should do is send the government after them. Leave them as "unaligned" since it doesn't hurt you at all. What should matter is how the world sees the players, and if the world sees the players as criminals, then the world should react accordingly. You have this giant list of what they've been doing, so the next time the players are in a village or town, have the peasants hide and flee from them. Have them stumble across wanted posters and the like. Then send a Paladin order after them to arrest them. If the players win the fight, then they've just slaughtered a bunch of law enforcement officers and you have a good setup for an evil campaign. Start sending more law enforcement after them and nudge them into attempting to take over the kingdom.
If the players lose the fight, the Paladins arrest them and drag them to trial. They're found guilty and can either serve the kingdom or be hanged for their crimes. They'll choose to serve and you can have the paladins lay down the law that if the players continue their previous crimes, then they'll be executed. They'll either need to shape up or, again, switch to an evil campaign and try to take over.
Let it sink in that their actions have consequences and reprecusions.
That said, one of my last characters had a habit of collecting a tooth from each dragon we slayed... slew... killed, so maybe I don't have a lot of room to talk.
The Crow is absolutely right here. This is what's called "rolling with resistance." If your player refuse to get involved one way, make them get involved in another by changing tactics. To build on this suggestion, when the next bit of the campaign is finished you could have someone come to them with a contract to kidnap or kill someone. When they get to their goal, try to make the victim the type of character that they will not want to harm so that they have to make the decision.
Voila! Role playing!
Build on it from there.
On the other hand, they're probably a lot like the two groups I've gamed with an pretty much just get together to roll dice and swear at each other. As has been said above me, there's nothing wrong with that, it just changes what you have to do to make the game fun for them.
But it's your world, I'm sure you didn't come here to debate imaginary moral grey areas
Here's a notion that might avoid upsetting them:
They are mercenaries? Have their next employer lay down a code of conduct because they're out there representing him, and he won't have tales of their perversions and a mass grave of mutilated corpses sullying his good and reputable name. Or, rather than change their alignment, just have reputable people stop hiring them; maybe have an offended employer arrange for the city watch to throw them in the dungeon in lieu of payment.
What I've found is the quirks of the characters can lead to a lot of hilarity and fun. Try to find a way to turn it back around on your players. An example of a recent adventure my group got into:
We were traveling to a gnomish town when we stumbled upon a kobold cave. We went in guns blazing, slaughtering everything in our path. Halfway through the carnage we started to notice we were only coming up against women, children, and the elderly. We shrugged our shoulders, figured the gnomes would be thankful there were less kobolds around, and finished our business. One of the members (a gnome) even went so far as to break the eggs we found. When we got to the town, expecting to be welcomed as the great heroes, we found out the gnomes had a mutually beneficial agreement with that kobold tribe. The warriors were currently out raiding but were due back any day now. Whoops!
It also led to the motto of our group currently being "You Can't Make an Omelet Without Breaking a Few Hundred Kobold Eggs".
So they *are* roleplaying, just not how you would like. It sounds to me like they are expressing their "evil" side because you are afraid to let it fall into evil. You keep trying to make them good, and when they push the bounds, you don't push back. I don't mean be mean...but let them be evil. Set up a situation where someone is going to pay good money to eliminate an opposing competitor's Children. Then (if they accept...) the mother begs and pleads with them not to do it when they go to the house. If they kill everyone, set up a situation where they're fighting the local law enforcement. Effectively, call their bluff, allow them to experience evil in the world, and if they keep choosing it, then they really won't be able to argue with you that they're evil. Of course, this could backfire and you may find yourself running an evil campaign...but at least you know (and they know) that the session can take a turn for the darker.
If they're acting like the all-powerful, the DMG has a few recommendations for that (at least in 3.5, not sure about 4e)...but basically if they're doing things that would annoy powerful people...constantly send assassins and things of that nature after them. Your world, like the real world, has consequences.
Edit: wow, beat to the bunch a couplefold.
If they want to be evil bastards, let them be evil bastards. It might be a problem if you have a paladin in the group though.
You can use this. Do they mention any wars, family killed, etc? I had two guys give me generic "My family/community was attacked and now I have amnesia" stories. Then someone suggested I have one of them be responsible for the other's misfortune. Worked perfectly and made for a good story.
Also, if they want to be evil in everything but name let them. And like others have pointed out let there be repercussions for their evil or set them up to do evil things.
This. Alignment is much less central in fourth edition than in earlier editions. Nine-hundred ninety-nine people out of a thousand aren't going to know or care what your PCs have written on their character sheet. You can identify a tree by the fruit it bears; if your PCs do evil stuff then people will see them as evil regardless of what they have written on their character sheet. Do try to be realistic about this though. NPCs aren't omniscient. A wizard might have been watching when they killed all the little kobolds in the nursery, but the townsfolk will probably never know.
Don't try to stop them being evil if that's what they want to do. It may not be the campaign you wanted to run, but this is the kind of thing that should have been worked out before you began. At this point you can only quit or try to get on board with where your players are going. You can have a campaign of evil characters if that's what the players really want.
If you think they're just killing everything out of convenience though, make them have to think about their actions. Look for something they like* and see as an anchor in the game then clobber them over the head with it. Maybe the quiet, innocent, pretty girl from their home village is so repulsed by the stories reaching home about their deeds that she trains in secret to hunt them down and bring them to justice. Find someone or something close to their character and let this person or group or place hold a mirror up to them and make them come to terms with what they've done. Don't just make up a character from whole cloth though. Make sure that you give as many people as possible names as you go along. You want to build up a stable of NPCs so that you can make it look like the whole thing was planned from the beginning when you pull a character completely out of your ass and it turns out to be someone they've met before.
But make sure they have a way out. Make sure that the assassin girl isn't just hell-bent on killing them, or as AspectVoid said, that the paladins offer them a way out other than the hempen jig. If their only choices are death or more evil then this will not solve the problem.
edit: I also like the suggestions about getting to them through their employers if this campaign has been mostly contract driven so far. Another idea is to make it appear karma-driven. When one of their employers double-crosses them have him try to justify it by saying they're just a bunch of murderous bastards anyway so he doesn't feel too bad about it; or maybe even sees it as a service to the community.
*edit 2: It needs to be someone or something they like because otherwise it's just another enemy. Look at it this way: What's the difference between someone just walking up to you on the street and telling you "You're being a dick" and your best friend telling you "You're being a dick"? When it comes from someone you don't care about it just means that you're going to see that person as an enemy; if it comes from someone you care about then it draws you up short and makes you look at things.
0431-6094-6446-7088
We never finished this campaign for various reasons, but I think the idea worked pretty well.
We have this in our current campaign, a female adventuring group called Mother's Milk. They screw us out of good jobs, show up at the worst time to interrupt or mock us, and generally make us hate them. When one of our players moved away, we had his character join up with them (not out of spite, to keep him in the game, in a way, though mostly for spite). It can create a fun dynamic and another method for a hamfist being a little less hammy.