A forum for discussing and organizing recreational softball and baseball games and leagues in the greater Halifax area.
Splitting the party from session 1
-
That's fair. I'm really picky with my games.For my personal games I am as well. "Make friends with gamers, don't make gamers out of friends" is an old tabletop adage that took me a long time to really learn. For public stuff the best that can usually be mustered are safety tools and clear guidelines. But (rarely, thankfully) some people are just there to sabotage.
-
I started running games for my wife and her niblings, and the oldest boy is getting into that "I'm such a rebel" phase where they think they're bad ass for taking slightly longer to do a chore than needed and say "no" the first time you ask them to do something. He thought it was hilarious to have a character that refused to join the rest of the group, so I said "okay, you can stay at the inn if you want" and then proceeded to intentionally ignore anything he was saying or doing, leaving him out of rolls, and never addressing him. He's 12 and started literally crying to his mother about how we're all being mean to him. Apparently "he had the opportunity to participate and chose not to" wasn't a good enough response to his mother. I stand by my choice. Although my wife managed to convince me to let him "rejoin" at the next town/session. He doesn't pull that shit anymore though, when he's playing he's playing or he gets shut out again. Genuine question to anyone reading: does that make me a bad DM? If so, suggestions on how to handle it?Tell him "look, this game isn't about being a Total Badass By Yourself. It's about working with your team and overcoming challenges you couldn't otherwise. If you wanna be a Total Badass By Yourself, there are games you can play. But if you wanna play *this*, you're gonna have to work with me here. Because my time and effort is valuable, and I want to have fun just like you do.
-
I learned as a GM to set expectations. "I don't want to have to fight and force you in to making this game work, because even though I'm GMing, I'd like to enjoy myself too. You need to create a character that will want to stick around with the rest of the group. You don't have to all get on, or have deep attachments, you just need a character that I won't have to railroad"
-
Tell him "look, this game isn't about being a Total Badass By Yourself. It's about working with your team and overcoming challenges you couldn't otherwise. If you wanna be a Total Badass By Yourself, there are games you can play. But if you wanna play *this*, you're gonna have to work with me here. Because my time and effort is valuable, and I want to have fun just like you do.I really need to do some kind of team building exercise before a game, something that they'll *want* to do, but requires teamwork, just to demonstrate the point that they need to work together. When my first character did the whole "I'm gonna be all by myself because I'm a lone wolf" thing, the DM let me go off and the *totally unexpected* happened and my character got into a scuffle he wasn't prepared for, but a group sure would have been.
-
I really need to do some kind of team building exercise before a game, something that they'll *want* to do, but requires teamwork, just to demonstrate the point that they need to work together. When my first character did the whole "I'm gonna be all by myself because I'm a lone wolf" thing, the DM let me go off and the *totally unexpected* happened and my character got into a scuffle he wasn't prepared for, but a group sure would have been.Yes you do. The easy way out is "abuse action economy". There are better uses for it, though, and better options here. The other easy way out is to let people roll to see if something happens. Never, ever allow stalled play to resort to this. They have to *search* and *talk*.
-
I have found it productive to make part of the character creation prompt a motivation for the main plot. Like tell me your class and backstory and all that, and then also tell me why you want to be on this adventureThis is a great idea
-
Yes you do. The easy way out is "abuse action economy". There are better uses for it, though, and better options here. The other easy way out is to let people roll to see if something happens. Never, ever allow stalled play to resort to this. They have to *search* and *talk*.> let people roll to see if something happens Oh god so many DMs in the past have done this, and I just roll my eyes every time. Like I'm okay if you want to roll your own dice behind the screen to see if we get attacked overnight, but that should be the only kind of "roll to see what happens" going on.
-
You mean the player character's bomb, right? Also, Cortex bombs are lame and lazy plot- & storywriting. - GM with 20 years experienceMac and cheese for dinner is lame and lazy too, but also fucking delicious. TTRPGS are something your friends put together for you out of love, not necessarily some clinically perfect professional product. And to extend the metaphor, if you go to a dinner party and start bitching about your friend not plating the food like a Michelin star place, you're an asshole.
-
I just don't DM for people like that anymore. Oh god I might when my kids and their friends are older though. This is why you gotta raise em right.Everybody's gotta learn some time
-
I started running games for my wife and her niblings, and the oldest boy is getting into that "I'm such a rebel" phase where they think they're bad ass for taking slightly longer to do a chore than needed and say "no" the first time you ask them to do something. He thought it was hilarious to have a character that refused to join the rest of the group, so I said "okay, you can stay at the inn if you want" and then proceeded to intentionally ignore anything he was saying or doing, leaving him out of rolls, and never addressing him. He's 12 and started literally crying to his mother about how we're all being mean to him. Apparently "he had the opportunity to participate and chose not to" wasn't a good enough response to his mother. I stand by my choice. Although my wife managed to convince me to let him "rejoin" at the next town/session. He doesn't pull that shit anymore though, when he's playing he's playing or he gets shut out again. Genuine question to anyone reading: does that make me a bad DM? If so, suggestions on how to handle it?I think that was the right action, but you could have explained better. Instead of just "Ok, you stay at the tavern" something like "Ok, you can stay at the tavern if you really want to, but you *do* understand that will mean you're sitting here bored all afternoon while the rest of us play, right?"
-
I have been a Dungeon Master for over 30 years. I am also a longtime anarchist, and many of my regular players are not. I have three rules if im going to DM: 1) I pick the game system. Sorry, non-negotiable. I'll play 5e (if I have to) but I won't run it. 2) Party resources are communal. However you wanna work that out is up to you, but if you steal from The Party, The Gods *will* Curse You. And 3) You have to be willing to work in a group. This isn't Skyrim, its a party game. The whole point is social problem solving. If you're not up for that, its cool, I won't make you talk or anything - but you gotta be a part of the team. Part of that is on me to make the initial hook good enough, but part of it is on you not to run a counterproductive pain in my ass. I almost never have any problems if I do my job right and make all this clear and understood off the bat.Sorry for being off-topic, but I don't think I understand anarchism as a political philosophy. Isn't anarchism the absence of imposed rules? Communal resources seems to go against that, (it does make sense that the players get to divvy it up, though) and being cursed by the gods feels like a more theocratic thing than anarchist. Im not trying to be rude or anything, I just like to pick people's brains about this stuff.
-
That's why it's pretty common in Shadowrun to just have everyone be kidnapped and fitted with a bomb in their skull. If their character doesn't want to cooperate, you activate the player's brain bomb.What are we, some sort of Shadowrun?
-
I started running games for my wife and her niblings, and the oldest boy is getting into that "I'm such a rebel" phase where they think they're bad ass for taking slightly longer to do a chore than needed and say "no" the first time you ask them to do something. He thought it was hilarious to have a character that refused to join the rest of the group, so I said "okay, you can stay at the inn if you want" and then proceeded to intentionally ignore anything he was saying or doing, leaving him out of rolls, and never addressing him. He's 12 and started literally crying to his mother about how we're all being mean to him. Apparently "he had the opportunity to participate and chose not to" wasn't a good enough response to his mother. I stand by my choice. Although my wife managed to convince me to let him "rejoin" at the next town/session. He doesn't pull that shit anymore though, when he's playing he's playing or he gets shut out again. Genuine question to anyone reading: does that make me a bad DM? If so, suggestions on how to handle it?Yeah you definitely showed that 12 yr old who is boss...
-
I think that was the right action, but you could have explained better. Instead of just "Ok, you stay at the tavern" something like "Ok, you can stay at the tavern if you really want to, but you *do* understand that will mean you're sitting here bored all afternoon while the rest of us play, right?"I told him multiple times that if he was going to try and do his own thing, he won't be participating with the group, and the group is the entire focus of the game. I suppose I could have made it more explicit that he could join the group or he could leave the game.
-
Meeting people with the inclination and schedule that I enjoy the company of to make a party with is the worst part of d&d. Please don't wake me role play it, too.
-
Sorry for being off-topic, but I don't think I understand anarchism as a political philosophy. Isn't anarchism the absence of imposed rules? Communal resources seems to go against that, (it does make sense that the players get to divvy it up, though) and being cursed by the gods feels like a more theocratic thing than anarchist. Im not trying to be rude or anything, I just like to pick people's brains about this stuff.Yeah. He has a lot of rules and demands for an "anarchist" lol.
-
This post did not contain any content.I actually made this work in a recent cheesy short campaign. My character was an intelligent monkey, although he was still an animal and couldn't speak. After meeting the party, he decided to go do his own thing, which just so happened to be the same thing as the rest of the party. It worked out really well. The rest of the party could navigate social challenges without having to explain the monkey, I could sneak around and grab MacGuffins without having to accommodate huge humans who were terrible at climbing. I doubt it works well for longer or more serious games, but it matched the hectic nature of the campaign and led to some hilarious moments.
-
Sorry for being off-topic, but I don't think I understand anarchism as a political philosophy. Isn't anarchism the absence of imposed rules? Communal resources seems to go against that, (it does make sense that the players get to divvy it up, though) and being cursed by the gods feels like a more theocratic thing than anarchist. Im not trying to be rude or anything, I just like to pick people's brains about this stuff.
-
I told him multiple times that if he was going to try and do his own thing, he won't be participating with the group, and the group is the entire focus of the game. I suppose I could have made it more explicit that he could join the group or he could leave the game.Yeah, in that case I think you did everything that could reasonably be expected of you.
-
I started running games for my wife and her niblings, and the oldest boy is getting into that "I'm such a rebel" phase where they think they're bad ass for taking slightly longer to do a chore than needed and say "no" the first time you ask them to do something. He thought it was hilarious to have a character that refused to join the rest of the group, so I said "okay, you can stay at the inn if you want" and then proceeded to intentionally ignore anything he was saying or doing, leaving him out of rolls, and never addressing him. He's 12 and started literally crying to his mother about how we're all being mean to him. Apparently "he had the opportunity to participate and chose not to" wasn't a good enough response to his mother. I stand by my choice. Although my wife managed to convince me to let him "rejoin" at the next town/session. He doesn't pull that shit anymore though, when he's playing he's playing or he gets shut out again. Genuine question to anyone reading: does that make me a bad DM? If so, suggestions on how to handle it?The fact your seeking feedback suggests no, but it was certainly a bad move, both as a DM and as an uncle. Punishing anyone, though especially children, without explaining why *is* mean. You have a responsibility to clearly communicate problems with others as an authority figure at the table and in their life. I don't necessarily think the punishment was unreasonable, but if it's not explained to them, it just comes across as arbitrary and vindictive. Imo, the best way to handle issues like that is to set the rules and consequences, making them clear to everyone, and to be *consistent* in their application. Letting people off or being vindictive will just exacerbate things.