CLAWs Forums

Forums of the Cape Union of Adventurers and Wargamers

CLAWs Forums » Tabletop RPGs

1. Morgalahan
   Member

   Hi Claws,

   I'm a relatively new DM, GM, whatever. I'm running a Mage campaign, a D&D campaign set in Sigil and I started another low level D&D campaign for the fun of it.

   I have a very difficult player, his attention span wanes as soon as things arent going his way or he feels that he's not having enough effect on the world. I as a player like to have a very detailed in depth storyline so that I feel like I have a part in the world and I like to have an npc that I can feel close to.

   Now, I like this player in general. When he starts playing well he's really good. He tends to do silly things when he's bord though. His favorite line is "I wee on it" This line is said when meeting the ancient white dragon god, to finding the powerfull artifact of doom, it doesnt matter the situation, if he's bord he'll try to get attention by being silly. What should I do. Clearly he's more of an action player. My other players like the storyline though, and so do I. I like twists and being clever. How the hell do I balance things out?

   Posted 17 years ago #

2. Dirk_Sinister
   Member

   Hi Stacey,

   I would suggest that you talk to him nicely (not in front of everyone) and point out that when fools around he spoils the game. Also remember to reward him when he is playing in character and adding to the story. However, sometimes even though you like someone or they are a close friend otherwise, they are terrible in a rpg group; and if after talking to him and encouraging his positive contributions to the game doesn't help - and he still mucks about, then you should consider not inviting him to game at all.

   It will be better for the game, better for your friendship with him, and better for you fellow players, believe me.

   RPGs are like playing in a band, the best groups are in tune with each other and play as a team. Everyone realises that they are there to have fun and respect the boundaries you set as GM.

   Also, in the past when I have had a troublesome player its often because they didn't really want to play at all but where just coming along for the company or not to offend you by turning down the invite. The key is to find players who are genuinely into role-playing and take it ‘seriously’ without being ‘serious’ :)

   Hope that helps,
   Chad

   Posted 17 years ago #

3. Dirk_Sinister
   Member

   Oh yes, I almost forgot - another thing that causes munchkinous behaviour is player boredom. If you are getting bleary nods and glassy eyed stares then you know your pacing is off. You are dithering on non essential things that are, well, boring.

   Remember you don’t have to role-play everything that happens between important scenes. You as GM are like a movie director you can snip, and cut to the juicy stuff. Instead of having the players role-player a trip somewhere that doesn't add to the story substantially, rather frame a new scene. Summarise quickly and BAM! your onto the next thing.

   Also when ever people are getting bored, randomly attack! ! I'm serious - have bad guys jump out the wood work and attack. If you make it seems like threats can leap out of every corner even a trip to the library can be interesting. Players start becoming more attentive.
   Also try not make your plots too linear ABC style. Rather have multiple threads running - if there is one bad guy that wants the uber magic thing your players have, make sure that there is another faction that wants it too. Keep them guessing. Remember, they are making the story not you - you are just giving the raw materials for the story.
   Prescript the plot too much and your players will feel like they are being led around by the nose, and will start getting up to all sorts of things to entertain themselves.

   Geez that was longer than I was planning...
   :)

   Cheers
   C

   Posted 17 years ago #

4. confluence
   Administrator

   Agreed -- I don't think this can be solved by anything you do within the game; it can only be resolved by speaking to the player outside the game about his conduct.

   There are plenty of ways in which he can address things about the game which are making him unhappy -- he could email you suggestions and complaints, or talk to you in person. (Maybe this hasn't occurred to him; in some groups people just don't discuss campaigns in this way.) Acting like an idiot inside the game, however, and making it unpleasant for the other participants, is not cool.

   It's possible that the situation can't be resolved to everyone's satisfaction -- if what he wants out of the game is vastly different to what everyone else wants -- but maybe if he actually tells you what he wants you can work something out...

   Posted 17 years ago #

5. Morgalahan
   Member

   It helps, thanks. The problem was that there was a scarcity of players up there in Stellenbosch. He's a very good player, when he's in the mood. He's been playing for 9 years, a lot longer than I have. He has also had the annoying habit of doing other things while we are playing recently, and not really listening to me. He said it was because he did not feel like people, but then he should have told me and I could have re schedueled. Its just as frustrating as hell to have players that arent paying attention to you when you reaveal the main bad guys plot or some such.

   I'll see him this saturday, so I'll have a really nice and civil conversation with him about whether he wants to contniue playing at all. We're playing Starwars together in another friends campaign. My 1st time with that setting. Hopefully he'l understand and be polite, but I may have to eject him as youve suggested. It would be best for the other players too. I wouldnt be distracted by him.

   Posted 17 years ago #

6. babyacid
   Member

   OR...the next time he says "I wee on it" you take it as his action and describe the consequences. Nothing focuses a player like an angry white dragon god with piss on his shoes. Nothing says "Don't fuck around in my game." like drawing up your 7th character sheet.

   All joking aside, I have seen this kind of behavior before and there is a good chance that he is simply bored with the current storyline. Nine years is a long time to become jaded. There are only so many times you can rescue that princess from the tower.

   Talking to the player is always the better option.

   Posted 17 years ago #

7. hodgestar
   Administrator

   I've also found the lesser-known Electric Dragon to be a useful in these cases.

   Posted 17 years ago #

8. Morgalahan
   Member

   Well, wouldnt that be a blue dragon god? Oh well, the character got his most prized weapon frozen for the duration, if you know what I mean. I WAS pissed of so I actaully took that to be his action.

   I'll see him soon so I'll geta chance to talk to him. I'm still fresh as a player and a DM, so my ideas may be something that he's seen many times before. It was an interesting storyline and I tried to keep it flowing. He got to improvise his little heart out for several hours before then. Making tree houses on the shoreline of a jungle and such. Useless stuff for my storyline but he had fun. *sigh* I need new players...

   Posted 17 years ago #

9. dystopia
   code monkey

   babyacid most certainly means angry white dragon (search urban dictionary for angry dragon - not for the faint hearted)

   i think if the players are building tree houses, then you aren't giving them enough direction. i had the issue come up, but then that was the sort of game i was running. the players decided to go to the beach. if i had given them more of an idea of what they needed to do and how to do it, then that wouldn't have happened. try railroading them a bit more, it could do wonders for your game. just try not to lead them too much, or you will have other problems

   Posted 17 years ago #

10. Morgalahan
    Member

    Well, thats actually my problem. The player I'm talking about likes the treehouse building thing. He's the one who did it. It was an experiment. They were supposed to follow the river into the jungle to find some people. They were attacked by lizardmen on the beach, by giant wasps, short from a giant finger pointing downwards from heaven in the direction they needed to go, what should I have done?

    Posted 17 years ago #

11. Dirk_Sinister
    Member

    Hmmm...I am inclined to disagree. Railroading is never fun for players. What is fun, is having a sense of agency - if players feel that their choices are shaping the imaginary world they are inhabiting. For me, its about the players story, and their characters. Sure, give them a plot, but don’t script it and demand that they thing A before they can get to thing B.

    Your facilitating a game, not prescribing it. If you have this whole story worked out in your head and you are getting frustrated because players aren’t doing what you want them to do, you probably have a frustrated gaming experience for the rest of you life. In my experience players NEVER do what you expect them to. Ever.

    Best to embrace it and develop a style GMing that is responsive to what players are getting up to in that moment. The object is fun, if you want to play out a story you have scripted in your head then writing fantasy fiction might be a better idea.
    However, if you do go with a looser dynamic approach you might find that the stories spontaneously become really awesome - often a zillion times better than if you had scripted them!

    But that just my personal GM philosophy :)
    C

    Posted 17 years ago #

12. Oliver
    Member

    I think it depends.
    There are players who enjoy being railroaded. But then the GM is the sucker. A GM who has to railroad all the time plays the entertainer for the whole group. He is responsible that the players are entertained.
    Sometimes I even enjoy it myself, especially when the GM is so good that you do not notice that you are railroaded.

    What helped me in the past was the following thinking:
    1. Make a frame - This is the background story like "Count Black wants to take over the country and kidnaps Princess Flowerpower to do this".
    Nothing else for now.
    2. You put in some colour in the frame. Let us call them hardpoints. These hardpoints are situations which the players have to absolve. Don't make a too rigid definition. The players will eventually have their own ways to get through these hardpoints so it will be only frustrating for you and a lot of work to keep them on the line.
    3. Create situations which can happen but don't need to happen. Settle them between the hardpoints. This can be situations like a burning barn in a village while the PCs are escaping from a group of bandits.

    It helped me a lot to enjoy the game and the players liked it as well.

    Posted 17 years ago #

13. Oliver
    Member

    Forgot something:
    When you want to make them go into the forest why not attracting them? From what I read you wanted to push them by forcing them to go into the forest via attacks.
    Make it more subtle!
    For example I would have tried to concentrate on one player. So he is lured from the group (e.g. by a dryad) into the forest. The other players will eventually come to look for him.

    There is no need to put the character into danger right away. So the dryad can be very friendly and needs some help maybe.

    Oh, and don't use fights. PCs don't flee very often and are even very often attracted to fights ("Hmm... the enemies are becoming tougher. So there must be somethings. Maybe a treasure.).

    Posted 17 years ago #

14. confluence
    Administrator

    Yup. Lots of bad guys attacking rarely translates into "don't go this way" in players' heads.

    Was the thing in the forest a totally new adventure that you wanted to lure them into?

    If you don't give the characters a good reason to pick a particular direction, they're likely to pick one randomly for superficial reasons (they like the beach, because it's sunny and has palm trees). The trick is to put something they actively want in the place where you want them to go. It should be possible to nudge them in the right direction without resorting to blatant railroading (making it impossible for them to go the other way), or relying on them to use OOC reasoning (this is a game, and the DM wants us to go this way, so we should go this way for the sake of the game).

    If your adventure is in area A, and your players reeeeally want to go to area B:

    * Does the adventure really need to be in area A? Could you move it to area B instead?
    * Let the characters go to area B either way, if they're determined. Put something there which will give them a reason to check out area A:
    ** Is there a recurring villain or situation that they're investigating? Give them a Clue which implies that it's connected to area A. It could be a total red herring, but your players may eventually become jaded and suspicious if you keep doing that, so give them something that furthers their long-term goal, if only slightly. Maybe the bad guy bought some weapons from the bad guys in your adventure, and they'll reveal which way he went if the characters question them.
    ** What kind of things do your characters care about? Is one of them known to be kind to peasants? Insert an NPC who was captured by the bad guys in area A with the rest of her family, and escaped to try to get help. Is one of them always in search of new magic spells? Insert a rumour about a wizard in area A who is happy to trade spells for components. Does one of them need to get his sword fixed? Unfortunately, there's a serious shortage of iron in area B, but there's a really good smith in area A... and so on.

    Posted 17 years ago #

15. dystopia
    code monkey

    i tend to agree with Oliver. when i run a game, i create the world and the people that fill it. then i decide what these people want out of life, and how they intend to get it. to this end, i have hundreds of scenarios and setting snippets that will never see the light of day. i also have a myriad of potential npcs that won't fit in anywhere, as they weren't required. however, different groups need different amounts of guidance. some groups want the dm entertainer, some just want a setting where they can be awesome. most groups fall somewhere in the middle

    and the sort of railroading that i was talking about was something along the lines of what confluence was talking about. and you should listen to her advice, she is my dm and i am enjoying her game. at least i would be, if i wasn't stuck in texas

    Posted 17 years ago #

16. Morgalahan
    Member

    OK, I get it. Here's the situation as it happened, so you can understand more fully

    - They were all travelling by sea in two separate ships, both on opposite sides. There was a REALLY big storm, brewing initailly, and aggravated as the two ships fought, summoning elementals to do the fighting. The battles escalated (PC's were not involved, they were lvl 1 passengers) and was stopped by a loud voice from the heavens. The PC's woke up on the beach together, no sign of the ship or most of their possesions, only what they had on them. There was dense jungle behind them, as far as the eye could see in either direction, and blue troplical sea in front of them. They had about a mile's worth of sand between jungle and sea.

    -3 players

    - 1 the ranger, heads off on her own down the beach and is gone for hours

    - 2 The war wizards starts building a shelter and fishing and skinning and collecting water in leaves (This was the problem player BTW)

    - 3 The Knight starts helping him and proves more adept at catching fish (she has a spear and a higher BAB)

    - They do this for two to three days.

    - The ranger finds the river, amazon style, which runs out of the jungle, as well as some sign of ruins, follows the river (without telling the other party members) and gets attacked by 2 giant wasps from MM3) She runs back to the others after being soundly defeated. Takes several more hours, a day even.

    - Meanwhile the other have built a sturdy shelter, with a small wall, and are being raided by a small band of lizard folk.

    - Eventually they get together, learn of the river, and head that way.

    What I wanted in the begining was that they stuck together and followed the river. This whole thing took most of the session and was supposed to take 10 minutes.

    Posted 17 years ago #

17. confluence
    Administrator

    Hmm. Sounds like the deeper problem here is a fractured party. :/

    How did the players create their characters? Did they generate them completely separately and have them meet for the first time at the beginning of the game, or did they have previous history together?

    I think at least 50% of party cohesion issues stem from separate character generation. Sometimes the only thing holding a random party together is the players' OOC knowledge that the characters are supposed to be working together because they're the PCs in the game, and that leads to all kinds of difficulties. It's frustrating when the PCs spend a long time not trusting / liking each other and doing separate things -- but it's entirely in character for them to do that if they don't know each other from a bar of soap...

    In my most recent campaign I got people to link their characters together, and it's really helped. I highly recommend this to anybody starting a new campaign. Not everyone has to be linked to everyone else, but it's good if some characters have a history of friendship or cooperation, or family ties, or something.

    It's hard to fix a problem like this once the campaign has started, but it's possible. Characters are theoretically supposed to bond while having adventures together -- but sometimes not much inter-character interaction actually happens, and sometimes not much game-time passes during play, so this is a slow process. (Also, sometimes what happens in the game makes the characters trust each other less.)

    If all else fails, a fast-forward between story arcs gives players a good opportunity to narrate some new links between their characters, even if there were none before.

    The game I play in (which started off with separately-generated characters) got a fast-forward of one year after the initial arc. Two players put in a year's worth of manly buddy-movie bonding. :)

    Posted 17 years ago #

18. confluence
    Administrator

    Aha, on a totally unrelated note: if your players are doing something which you think is really, really stupid in-character (*cough* like us in Hodgestar's game last week, apparently), make them roll some kind of strategy skill check.

    For example, in the case of your players hanging around the beach for ages, a forced "survival in the wilderness" check (I forget the D&D skill) could have told them: people need fresh water; if there are settlements here they'll be up the river. An forced intelligence check could have told them: you should probably find out who lives here -- if there are dangerous people around, you should find them before they find you.

    They may just not have realised something which you think is obvious. If they persist in doing ill-advised things after their DM has pointed out -- via their in-character voices of reason -- that they're ill-advised... then they're probably being annoying players. ;)

    Posted 17 years ago #

19. Morgalahan
    Member

    *sigh* that WAS the original topic of the thread...

    Forced int rolls are all good. They happened to get crits, at least once, on the survival rolls.

    Yes, it WAS separate character gen. I just made the mistake of expecting them to have as much common sense as I do when playing. I get along, work together, that sort of thing, to the limits of my character. I also dont go into play with a fully developed personality for them, I prefer to let that develop as the game progresses. They seemed to enjoy the pointless stuff, the problem was more that I didn't. I'd created a neat setting for them, npcs and all and I wanted to introduce them. They just sat there on the beach. Bugger. *grumbles to herself about the stupidity of players in general*

    Posted 17 years ago #

20. dystopia
    code monkey

    i think that there isn't really a problem with the players, or the dm. i think that the problem is that you wanted something different to what the players wanted. that is something that needs to be decided before character creation, but isn't always that easy to do. if there is a shortage of roleplayers, dms and players, then that can become impossible. i think in that sort of situation, you need to get them where you want them with some gentle nudges. then they can mess around where the story is and they are bound to trip over it at some point. my favourite is kidnapping them and then letting them get out or their captors realise that it was a mistake

    the separate character generation isn't necessarily a problem, as long as the players want to work together. also, you should ensure that the character concepts can work together. that means that you need to veto loners, unless they are willing to work with others or their is a character that will try to lure the loner out of his shell. i had a character that was supposed to be a warrior/bard and the rest of the party were stealth assassin types. she really didn't fit in, socially or in tense situations. the social situations problem was fine, that lead to some interesting roleplaying. however, not being able to flit from shadow to shadow or hide in any way was a major problem. if i had designed a character that could absorb more damage it might have been fine, but she was a little too soft. so i decided to retire her. if the players aren't willing to do that sort of thing, to make the game work then you have problems

    Posted 17 years ago #

21. Yancke
    Member

    Just my 5 cents worth:

    Just because they have played for 9 years doesnt make them good........
    I for example can be a dm's worst nightmare on most days, but rhat's cuz im a git.
    Id like to think i have my upsides :). But honestly i was a better roleplayer 5 years ago. If become soft and impatient.
    Im very goal oriented when it comes to gaming so when people start fart arsing around and completely destroy the pace of the primary narrative it drives me crazy. Some of my fellow players probably have a thing or two to say about that. Maybe he is a little like that? And I always appreciated it when the GM shoots straight with me.

    Posted 17 years ago #

22. Dirk_Sinister
    Member

    Agreed. I have been playing for roughly 17 years now, and I dont think of myself as being a better player/GM. Sure you can learn good habits and stuff, but often good roleplayers are just people that know how to play well with other people in a group. It's not frickin rocket science! In fact many of the problem players I have had have been people who have played for many years, and bring attitude to the table because they have had X amount of level gazillion mage/paladin/whatever and have puffed up ideas about their role-playing coolness. Years playing does not equate to awesomeness as a player - an imagination and sense of cooperation are the most important.

    Also I find some players bring bad habits from other games, usually competitive games, to the table. There is a tendency by these players to want to beat the system, the GM, or the other players because they believe that’s how you play a game. Often this adversarial atmosphere is perpetuated by an inexperienced GM if the GM gives impression that he is playing ‘against’ in them in some way.

    This is why it is important to me, in my games, to try an foster the sense, that I am always on the players side. This comes down to body language, erring on the side of player if there is uncertainty in outcomes and generally making sure that their fun levels are higher than my ego levels.

    my 2c

    Posted 17 years ago #

23. Oliver
    Member

    @Stacey
    From the situation you describe it seems to me that some players assumed that there are on an island or at least shipwrecked in the wilderness.
    Hmm... why not building on this? If they enjoy it you can bend your story a little bit to work this in.

    As a GM you have a story in your mind which you want the players to play. To see that it works out is a lot of fun.
    But to avoid frustration you need to create a flexible story so that they have room for their own character play.

    When I create a story I try to keep the backgrounds of the involved PCs in mind and work this in the story. So suddenly it becomes more personal.

    Another method which was very useful to me to hook players to the game is giving them more responsibility. One thing which always worked to let the players describe the results of their rolls.
    In a fight the GM only says about the opponent of the PC how bad he was wounded. The player can even describe how the opponent reacts (but it doesn't have any influence on the game mechanic).
    Another method which is an absolute must for me is that the players don't need to ask wether an item or something like that is available. It is just there. Where is the need to ask the GM wether there is a mug of beer available in a tavern?
    The only rule to this is that the item has to find in the situation. A mug of beer in a tavern fight is ok. A loaded gun is a no.

    These methods have three advantages:
    1. The players got the feeling that they have more responsibilities and nearly most of them liked this a lot. Sometimes I even had to interrupt them because they were carried away.
    2. You have less work to do.
    3. Fights and the actions of the players have more flavour.

    I think there are two kinds of longterm-players:
    1. The first kind has played his favourite system and don't want to play anything else or in a different way. These guys complain when you try something different.
    2. The second kind are the players who are fed up with the typical adventures and system. They are looking for different ways of roleplaying.

    To my mind since I believe that your player belongs to the second kind you should try something different.

    Posted 17 years ago #

24. Dirk_Sinister
    Member

    This is excellent advice from Olli. Try some of those techniques - you wont be disappointed, Stacey. Especially letting players describe the outcome of their rolls I find jazzes my players no end. For instance, when they finish off a tough opponent and you let them describe what happens - you will see the enthusiastic responses this gets!

    Also try 'declarations' when they make a knowledge, or research roll - let them state a fact of their own invention (you get veto right if its too much), rather than info-dumping on them. This really lets players get involved.

    So for instance, the PCs find a strange trap door with alien markings on it, and they do a investigation or similar roll - if they succeed well, let them declare a fact themselves: "Oh Prof Cullis remembers seeing these markings on an ancient Zoombalian artifact - it can only be decoded by a descendant of Khan the great". Boring or stupid facts can be vetoed but cool, dangerous or fun facts can and should be incorporated into the story.

    You will be amazed at the cool stuff players will come up with themselves - often complicating matters, making for juicy story material.

    Posted 17 years ago #

25. Oliver
    Member

    @Dirk
    That is so true. I let players even describe failures. The results were often worse than the stuff I thought off.

    @Stacey
    Since you are a very new GM I have a simple advice which might help you:
    Never be too exact in your description!

    Who needs to know that the ceiling is 2.14m high or that a PC is following the evil wizard at a distance of 31m?
    Although these figures are exact it is not improving the vibe at the table.
    Instead it is very useful to be vague.
    So instead of describing the numbers of torches at the wall you say that the dungeon is dimly lit by the fire of torches.

    If players ask for measures just say something like "You two can walk comfortably side by side" instead of saying "The dungeon is 3 meters wide".

    What I found also very annoying in a former group was a player who asked things like "How wide is the chimney?" (so that her character might jump in it) or "How far can I go until the guys I am following discover me?". Discourage the players of asking these questions. It is not good for the atmosphere.
    I tend to answer these questions either with evil looks or with answers the players don't really like "The chimney is not wide enough for you to climb through."
    They should just say "I am climbing through the chimney" or for following let them roll another check to see wether they can come closer.

    Posted 17 years ago #

26. StormMaker
    Member

    Wow

    I have been away from the Forum for a while (new job and the fact that little was happening) and I log on and read... Wow a in depth discussion with well thought out posts

    Well done guys

    Posted 17 years ago #

27. Morgalahan
    Member

    Thanks everyone.

    This should help, especially since I plan on running my high-ish level campaign for this player and other old ones. The problem at the moment seems to be in gathering the players together.

    Different storyline, developed characters. Its a fun campaign since I allowed them to take any character from any world that they had created (novel, game, whatever) and convert them to d20 and use them in this campaign. Very epic. But loose and fun. The things the player have come up with in the campaign, sheesh, rather crazy. They're all 20th level at the moment, and the story will only now get more interesting. It's set in Sigil, the city of Doors. Great place. I love the multiverse, mostly because I can use character's from every world possible, even worlds that were'nt actually D&D. I'll try the suggestions that everyone have given me here.
    1. Letting players describe their own roles
    2. Changing the story to fit the players
    3. Making it fun for both me and the players.
    4. being vague ( I was already)

    Posted 17 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.