how do you deal with a party that constantly splits if you are GM?

>>52045155
could you give us some more info?

is there a pattern? do certain players always split off together? Perhaps having two groups instead of one, if that's possible.

giving incentives to being together, and threats to being apart is a choice. limiting their communication abilities between groups and ambushes and stuff?

>>52045155
Put obstacles in their way that can only be reliably surmounted if they all work together. If they don't, it's a mini-party wipe. Make sure to forewarn this way beforehand of course otherwise you'll just be a dick.

Also, just talk to them about this if them splitting up isn't something you want or can handle.

>>52045203
I am actually a player in our current campaign. The person who GMs is a player who never GMed before and our first session was kind of a disaster. I tried to help him a little bit by trying to keep the party together because I know how much of a horror it is as the GM to deal with 3-4 split players that all do their separate thing. But one of them constantly wants to be the sneaky rogue navy seal super agent.

I wanted to have a talk with our GM and see if we can come up with a solution to the problem.

>>52045155
Adamantium shackles
Curse that causes them to die if more than 500 meters apart
Rape ghosts

>>52045277
world has no magic. It's a realistic medieval campaign.

>>52045290
>implying rape ghosts aren't real

>>52045155
>party splits
>roll dice
>"i'm sorry Team B, you all died. Roll new characters"
I guarantee they won't split again.

Except, maybe, from you.

>>52045290
Regular shackles
Bubonic plague causing Crossbow wielding NPC escort that causes them to die if more than 500 meters apart
Rape peasants

File: Torygg's_War_Horn.png (158KB, 667x247px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 667x247px

>>52045237
That's really considerate of you, OP. Way to look out for your GM.

As far as ways to keep the party together, I don't really have a lot of ideas, but maybe - in the case of the character that wants to sneak around all of the time - your GM could work in ways that they could do stuff like that while still staying with the group. For instance, set up a scenario where certain guards in an area have horns that would put the whole area on alert, so that each area has to be cleared as quickly as possible.

If you use that scenario, then you could easily place guards in places that would be perfect for the rogue (alone on a platform overlooking the others, for instance) so that they can do sneaky shit while staying with the group.

Plus, since the situation calls for coordinated attacks, the group would be forced to work together, with the added bonus of the GM being able to see exactly how much damage the group can dole out in order to set up some more difficult encounters.

I talk to them and ask them to take more focused, concentrated action as a group, explaining how difficult it is to run a game when the group aren't together as it essentially forces me to make people sit out for significant periods of time as I deal with the various divisions of party members. I offer to run out of session solo sessions if people really want them, but otherwise specify that session time should be used for full group activities.

There's an in-universe reason you're a party right? You couldn't solve all the problems on your own. So the GM should just reinforce that- the solo rogue can go off alone, but he stumbles upon a magical barrier that requires the party caster, or a guard monster that will need to fought through. If it's more splitting up in the downtime (i.e. you get to a new city and the rogue wants to go pick pockets), handle it with a few dice rolls and a few sentences of narration before you timeskip to the party reuniting.

The only acceptable time for the party to split for extended durations is if the narrative really demands it. If you have the kind of players who care about RP, they should be perfectly entertained watching the very important scene that's about to play out, even if their character isn't in it; if not, they have no real reason to split up in the first place, throw more goblins at them. If it's the former, just make sure everyone gets a spot in the limelight- not necessarily that session but over the course of the campaign.

What I do is I have a caller. One player who consults with the other players, then tells me where in the dungeon the party goes. The caller is the only player who directs the party through the world map, or through a dungeon.

THe other players can talk in character, but they dont' directly control their characters beyond that unless melee breaks out.

This reinforces the commonly forgotten idea that the party is all on the same side, and playing a group game in which all should participate.

Players don't split the party because they can't split the party. Characters never fight each other. Characters who want to fight don't get to roll dice. They have to settle their differances through discussion. The only time you get to roll dice to attack a player character is if they've been mind controlled by an evil high priest or something.

>>52046115

How bad PvP is depends a lot on the group and the system. A lot of the time it fucking sucks, just creating drama and shitty character deaths, but for some themes and genres of storytelling, the possibility of PvP conflict (with end results other than murder) are a key part of things.

>>52046290
Pvp conflict is fine, I jsut feel as though most dice-based systems are not designed for a good pvp experience, so I alllow pvp roleplaying.