GM Complaints Thread

The fact that it's been seven months, and my players can't even name the capital city of the country they've been in this entire time.

Playing a 5e game where players care only about how much gold they're getting in a game where gold really doesn't matter anymore.

I have a campaign starting in three days - characters need to be presented to me in advance so we can get right into it.

I have one complete character sheet from my group of four.

I lost the will to be a player in bad games. I can not force myself to sit through a bad game to be polite so I made myself forever gm.

>>55425950
As much of a convenience turn based combat is, I hate that every system I've read doesn't really have and answer to players just focusing down an enemy at a time to game the action economy. Adding more enemys often runs risk of overwelming them completely. And using their strategy against them is just asking for them to complain about how you picked on one character the whole fight.

Doesn't help that I have yet to find a workable way to have combat that isn't turn based or boils down to what are effectively turns.

>>55426000
This exact thing happened to me. I'm 6 sessions in now and only half of the players have given me their character info. So the way I see it is that they effectively have no backstory. The other players who gave me their character sheets will have their backstories integrated into the game but those who didn't won't. As far as I'm concerned they essentially just popped into existence into my setting.

Occasionally I'll get one of these players asking if this paladin or druid etc is connected to them through their backstory they never gave to me but I just tell them no. If they ask me about it I intend on telling them that if they couldn't be bothered giving me their character sheets then why should I be bothered integrating them into my world? It's their own fault.

>>55426013
>I couldn't be a consumer, so I became the producer.
deep

>>55425950
Player schedules.
Retail workers are the worst because they not only have no control over their schedule, they also have very little foreknowledge of it.

>>55425950
That less than half of my players ever show up on time for sessions.

I get that they're adults, that they have families and jobs and responsibilities and obligations, and that getting five adults together in the same place at the same time and keeping them there for several hours is an extraordinarily difficult task. I get it! Adulthood is difficult.

It still fucks me up when people are an entire hour later or don't show up at all.

File: 1498174177591.png (194KB, 600x601px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 600x601px

>>55426123
>Schedules
Fucking this. Playing with a couple people in school and one overseas made me want to shoot myself thanks to trying to herd them all together.

The fact that all my players browse /tg/ so I can't talk shit about them behind their backs here because they'll recognize my posts right away.

>>55426159
kek

>>55426033
>And using their strategy against them is just asking for them to complain about how you picked on one character the whole fight.
Then fuck 'em. If your players get mad that the enemies are smart enough to use the same tactics they do, then you have shit players.

>>55425950

More a gripe at me, I wish I wasn't such a flake. I can run a campaign for a few months but then I lose interest in that specific campaign and limp along before canceling.

People never seem to want to play. Everyone is interested when the idea is first pitched but getting them all together or interested after the first session is next to impossible.

Going to run a 5e soon on roll20 and reading these posts is scaring me. I haven't run a game for over 3 years.

>>55425950
My biggest complaint is something of a meta one. A lot of the people I talk to and game with seem to confuse random chance elements and rolling of dice for actual game play decisions. To me anyway, it just seems so wrongheaded and stupid, and I don't like how it seeps into games; it's all well and good to subject players to an arbitrary and stupid set of unavoidable hazards, as long as if they roll well they can get out of them, maybe even richer in character. But heaven forbid you get a good or bad result from just declaring the right (or wrong) set of actions, without chucking some painted bits of plastic at the table. That's just not done. And there seem to be an awful lot of people who complain at the notion that there are right and wrong choices to make at all.

That I can't figure out what to give my players as gifts.

Was thinking dice boxes or dice sets.

>>55426218
I will tell you right now you have a different ideal of what you want from games then your players and unless you learn to cope or change them, you are going to find gaming shit in short order.

>>55426229
> Being this wholesome
Bless you

>>55425950
That my current game isn't going well, but I'm also too lazy to change it, and I can't really set up a good end to the current section.

>>55426168
Eh, it doesn't help the tactic is extremely immersion breaking. I get that people refer to dnd and anything even remotely similar to wargames, but its one aspect i can't get over.

>>55426229
Speaking of my own experiences, I've seen dice sets in every hobby store (low quality, admittedly, but frequently obtainable) and have never found a cool dice box. I'd love that as a gift from my DM or players!

>>55426033
For that, you would need to introduce a mechanic or ability for enemies that makes it so that their death gives a buff to the enemies that are still alive. That would lead to instances where the correct answer is instead to whittle the enemies down to lower health and then wipe them all out at once.

>>55426246
Aw. Thanks anon.

But for real though, I've been with most of them since I was 13, so just over a decade ago, one of them four years ago, and two of them over a year ago now.

Side topic I guess but anyone have suggestions for them? Been trying to find dice that have a bird or some avian symbol on it for one player, but so far only found a set of d6s that have a feather.

File: overhead.jpg (12KB, 582x386px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 582x386px

>>55426240

>>55426260
It's really hard to get players who aren't in character to be in character. If you can get them in character, it should become less of a problem. Also, the action economy in most games is fucked anyway.

>>55426260
Then just houserule it away. Have everyone declare their actions by writing them down in-secret and passing them to you. Then deal with the inevitable clusterfuck. You'll kill yourself after the third round, but at least you'll be immersed!

>>55426148
I agree. I mean, I also appreciate that people have full time jobs, or are in university and are busy, but I also work a full time job with other hobbies. I can still scrounge up enough time to not only prepare the session, but also show up on time.

>>55426270
Man, a lot of those fancy dice sets are complete trash. Way too much noise on them to read them quickly. One of my players bought a set because he loves irish culture, but he used them in one session and never touched them again because he has to get real close to the die and squint to make out what number it landed on.

But yeah, you raise a good point. If I can't find something reasonable, I may wind up making dice boxes for some of them.

>>55426148
I hear what you're saying. Truth be told, I have the same problem, but most of the time it can't be helped. This is a hobby, after all, and real life commitments take priority, as you said. In the instances where we do have to wait for some players, we do what solo stuff we can for the players who arrived early, or just shoot the shit about the week. Talk about news from the past week, funny stuff we scavenged from the internet, conventions, or games.

I mean, we're all doing these hobbies not just because we enjoy the game, but we enjoy the company of our companions, right?

File: $_57.jpg (27KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 300x300px

>>55425970

Oh I know this all so well. Mine would be people never use their character names. My biggest hate though is having to spoonfeed directions and clues to them. Never once do they go on their own initiative. Likewise, they get sidetracked from everything to out-compete themselves on who gets the most kills.

>>55426331
>who arrived early
>early
Strange way to say "on-time".

>we're all doing these hobbies not just because we enjoy the game, but we enjoy the company of our companions, right?
Little of column A, little of column B.

>>55426033
Just needs mechanics which don't allow you to ignore a combatant without suffering for it.

>>55426365
>early
Slip of the fingers. My bad, anon.

>>55426338
>My biggest hate though is having to spoonfeed directions and clues to them. Never once do they go on their own initiative. Likewise, they get sidetracked from everything to out-compete themselves on who gets the most kills.
I can't tell you how much I hate this.

>>55426283
Sorta depends. In the system we use, the players arent any more special than anyone else aside from the camera follows them, so none of the problem dnd has where mooks never land hits. By the same vein though, its not hard to hit your target aside from a few certain enemy types.

I've certainly toyed with the idea of a fight with enemies who if their focus isnt broken (attack attempted on them), they get a buff at end of round or something.

>>55426218
I'm a bit confused. Could you elaborate?
Are you saying you want people to stop using dice when instead they could be making meaningful choices just by stating them?

File: 1492413986108.jpg (40KB, 550x512px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 550x512px

When you've had the same players for many months, and they still do this shit:
>When players don't roleplay.
>When players don't strategize.
>When you ask what they want to play as or role they want to have in this game and they respond "I don't know..."
>When players ask "what skills are actually useful?"
>When I ask what their characters name is and they reply "Uhhhhh..."

I currently run D&D at my college, and for new players this doesn't bother me at all. But I'm still baffled when players who've been in my campaigns for months still don't learn. I've found out that some people just never lose the video game mindset.

>>55426000
>>55426049
I'm sure you've heard this before, but it really is a good idea to have a "session zero" where everyone makes their characters together and figures out how they're connected to each other and the world.

>>55426049
Stop reminding me that I need to write out my backstory. It's all there, I just can't seem to overcome this fucking writer's block for whatever reason.

>>55426558
I'll usually run a session zero with new groups, I've been with this one a while, and gave them three weeks notice of when the game was starting. They've had access to both myself and the other players via Discord for the entire duration of the three weeks for planning and discussion, and I've actively encouraged it, and answered any questions that they may have. I have facilitated everything within my power short of having a session zero, but here we are.

>>55426013
play online, you can join games and ghost after a single session, or even mid session. i do this all the time.

>>55425950
In my last campaign, I had seven players flake out without saying anything. Seven players! I had to recruit new ones constantly, and it still died out from too few players in less than a year.

If you don't like my campaign, that's fine. Different people like different things. I'd appreciate it if you told me why you don't like it, so if I am doing something wrong I can improve it. Or at least tell me you're dropping out, so I can plan accordingly. Instead we had seven fucking people just stop showing up, displaying a complete disrespect for me and their fellow players.

>>55426558
I did run a session zero and they still didn't do it

>>55425950
>When GMing: encourage my players to make backstories and tell them that I'll work them into the game, but they never do
>When playing: no GM has ever even looked at my backstories

>>55425950
The fact that I quite literally start some sessions with "OK we did X last time what are we going to now guys?" and it takes one guy 30 seconds to come up with a plan and the rest a solid hour of shitposting and gaming while playing to actually DO ANYTHING

>>55426218
I know exactly what you mean. Having played diceless games, the biggest issue that I ran in to what that people took all success or failure as direct GM fiat even if it was well within the rules as intended. It seems like dice (or other randomizers) creates a buffer zone between the intentions of the players and the GM that makes them more okay with bad things happening. If something goes wrong because of a deterministic outcome, the players blame the GM. If something goes wrong because someone failed a dice roll (even if the chance of success was extremely low), they blame the dice instead of the GM. Randomization is basically a blame-sponge.

And that bothers me, because clever ideas, character motivations, and strategic thinking are far more satisfying paths to success than blind luck. But randomization seems to perform a (nearly, depending on the quality of the group) essential social role of diverting hard feelings away from the GM.

File: 1502109574808.jpg (20KB, 170x170px)

20KB, 170x170px

>Player 1: I do the combat.
>GM: You do the combat.
>Player 2: I do the combat.
>Player 1: I'm bored. When do I do the combat?

Combat ends.

>GM: Alright, what do you guys want to do next? Player 1, you've got a tinkerer/inventor theme, there's a workshop over-
>Player 1: No thanks. We should rest so that we can go do the combat.
>Player 2: When do I do the combat?
>GM: Does anyone else want to do non-combat things? Go fishing, craft some neat item, talk to merchants, train a skill, find new items?
>Player 3: Sorry, I was on my phone. I can't make it next session. When do I do the combat?

Ad infinitum.

>>55425950
They keep being "busy" and can't make time and hardly ever talk about the game

>>55426706
How much gold did I get?

I loot the bodies, what gibs?

>>55426280
In his defense, I read your post twice and I have no idea what your point is.
Give me a tl;dr

>>55426706
pain.jpg

Stay strong

>One player is consistently late but says he can make it on time this time
>Get text at starting time
>'Hey man I'm gonna about an hour late got something planned'
>Texts me this AT THE STARTING TIME AND NOT EARLIER IN THE DAY
>Other players are consistently on time so decide to run anyway
>Gets mad when he finally rocks up and finds we've all started without him

>>55426905
I've seen this go bad in the reverse as well. Players were breaking into a bandit fortress, they killed the gate guards and immediately dumped the bodies in the moat - the bodies that had keys to the gate on them.

>>55425950
>Players greeted by veteran, noble, king, sorcerer, spy or other notable figure
>Order them around as though they have authority over them
>Genuinely confused when these people tell the players to fuck off and that they're in charge or that they don't obey them

>playing with a group for 2 and a half months
>players reach level 5
>fighter makes an attack
>hit
>rolls damage twice
>b-b-but i have two attacks now!!

YOU SHOULD KNOW HOW TO FUCKING ATTACK AS A FIGHTER GODDAMN

>>55426553
>>55426338
One good way to get people more invested is to actually ask for feedback. My players know I do this and are fine with it, so I just say every so often "Hey, summarize the plot for me," and get a good sense not only of how much attention they're paying and how clear I'm being, but also of how exactly the player is engaging with the game. This is not only useful for me to consider when writing future sessions, it also helps shock players into trying to remember past events and anticipate future events. Moreover, once they become aware that there will be a pop quiz, they start paying more attention.

90% of the time, people "don't care" about something because they assume you don't care about it. Think about every rogue who put all their skill points in tumble and disable device and never had a thought in the world for Forgery or Decipher Script or one of the knowledge skills. It's not just because the player is disinterested in those gameplay features, it's also because they don't think the game will ever feature that content, or that the DM doesn't care. Same with people who don't buy the basic traveling and survival gear, if the DM doesn't care, why should the player? This attitude also applies to much deeper things, like character backstory, setting lore, themes, even things like "realism" and "intrigue", here used to describe aesthetics rather than qualities. A player may assume that the princess needs rescuing and that's just the cutscene they have to deal with at the start and end of the actual game, the dungeon crawl. They assume this because they think the DM doesn't have any interest in roleplaying the princess or exploring a deeper plot involving *why* she needs rescuing.

>>55426905
>I loot the bodies
I actually had a player in my game complain about not having enough money (they do, but he's used to being showered in so much gold he can afford whatever he wants at level one) but at the same time refusing to actually loot the bodies of slain enemies.

This is even after he said they should have money and stuff from fallen enemies. That they're refusing to search for whatever reason.

>>55427006
technically not much difference right? if he misses he misses both. if he hits he hits both.

>>55427025
>One good way to get people more invested is to actually ask for feedback.
All you're going to get is "It's fine".

>>55427032
You have to make two attack rolls

You swing your sword, it cuts into him. You take a second swing, but your enemy manages to parry this swing, and your second attack misses

This isn't hard. Compared to what he s doing which is just rolling like he crit something every time

>>55426000
some player do that voluntarily so that you dont have the time to check the sheets in detail and find the cheat they put in it.

>>55425970
some players play for the mecanics with a video game mindset.

>>55426151
is say the worst of this situation is when there a couple last minute cancels and you have to kill the session entirely at the last minute. nothing kills the day like that.

>>55426173
i have TWO gm like that........fuck you! id say kill yourself but gms are a rare breed so......try to get better.its painfull to never be able to invest yourself in a character because the games keep dying.

>>55426229
you give GIFTS to your players? most players i know should only get fists to the face as gift.

>>55426273
a clever but dangerous idea, i like. could work for an encounter with undead, the essence spread back to the other still active undead.

>>55426338
video game mindset, a lot of people dont get that they can do anything, talk to anyone in a tabletop. so they wait for the npc to fill the quest log.

>>55426558
i personaly dont like session zeros, my character is made like...2 days after the game is announced with a short background that is lore friendly with the setting of the gm and most of the time related to what other players will do. zeroes feel like travel to not play to me. just an opinion of course.

>>55426574
stop giving yourself excuses. just to a list and the gm can use that. a literal bullet point of things, doesnt need to be complicated and the gm can use this to make a compelling story for your character.

>>55426706
i hate murder hobos...

>>55427029
I can understand somewhat him not being used to the difference in the amount of loot getting handed out more directly, but how can you complain about not getting stuff from enemies when you just walk past them?

I tend to avoid putting much of value on foes for that reason, since I find it's just a lot cleaner when the goal is to get past them to get to a bigger chest or stash or complete a mission that would net them a greater reward. I had my players squable over a rather trivial amount of gold once because one of them knocked out a bandit in a cave while away from the others and wanted to keep it for himself.

>>55427025
The most effective solution I've found for this is the one I gave above, ask players to explain why they're there, what they're doing. As I said, I can just ask my players to summarize the game and they will, but if you need to coax your players a bit, just try baby steps. It can be as simple as "Remind me what happened last session," (good for players who don't seem to care about other PCs, or don't seem to care about NPC names, they'll start paying more attention after this) to asking them to summarize how their character sees the story (great way to get players who don't think about backstory to actually consider it).

>>55427047
fucking THIS. i ask players all the time for feedback negative or positive and ive never gotten anything except: its fine, it was ok or it was fun.

i want to get better dammit!

A new person joined the group, and I had his character meet the group at a caravan loading station. He asks to tag along they say sure.


Its been 5 sessions and the other 3 have yet to introduce themselves to the new character. None of them have any idea who he his, where he is from...hes just a guy tagging along for the ride

>>55426338
>Never once do they go on their own initiative.
You know some people are passive or reactive players, right?

>>55427060
I have no idea. It's getting to the point where I stop giving a crap about what's on the enemies because, before, I was thinking that anything even remotely useful would be immediately pilfered like everyone and their mother usually does in these games

For me I suppose it's that my players consistently assume that the enemies they're facing are retarded

>Players tasked with infiltrating bandit fortress and killing leader
>Decide to task friendly spy with starting a fire as a distraction about a hundred ft from the fort
>They think this would cause most if not all of the bandits to run out of the fortress and put it out
>Furthermore they seem to think this wouldn't put the bandits on alert for intruders since the fire was clearly artificially lit
>I explain the problems in their reasoning but they insist it would work or at least empty the fortress a little
>I acquiesce and the players give the spy instructions to start the fires in a few minutes
>They sneak through fortress and get to bandit leader where they fight him
>Fire start midway through fight and I decide that the bandit leader, in his paranoia, thinks they're under attack both within and without
>He roars this to the rest of the now waking bandits and several rush out to put out these flames while others are frozen in terror at the supposed army surrounding them
>Players kill bandit leader and throw his head among bandits in courtyard
>Bandits seeing their leader dead and thinking they're under attack break and flee
>Players cheer and congratulate themselves as if using the fire to break their morale was their plan all along instead of somehow emptying the fortress of bandits
It was just so fucking frustrating. I couldn't for the life of me understand their thought process and tried to explain that it would likely alert the whole fortress but they kept insisting it would work. Eventually I just decided to cheese it and have the fire be of use but not in the way they thought. I'm still mad about it.

>>55427075
yes and they shouldnt stay like that at all time. a gm's job is not herding sheep. its creating an interactive world with players!

>>55427029
some rpgs are good at avoiding this. legend of the five rings kinda discourage players to fuck with monetary business and are not expected to gain strength by looting or equipment upgrade. a great change of pace comparing to dnd.

>>55426615
I had something similar happen, and I was ultimately left with two players, one who was RP focused, and one that purposely was trying to crash and burn the campaign. It ground to a halt eventually. Were you able to keep your plots going in a meaningful way that you enjoyed, or were you just trying to push the proverbial boulder up hill?

>>55427087
>they shouldnt stay like that at all time.
>why do peoples' personalities affect their roleplaying?
>people should only have the personalities I want them to

>>55427102
Not that anon, but could you elaborate how they do that? You got me curious.

>>55427114
>It's your responsibility to lead people around by the nose

>>55426995
I frequently get the reverse, the ones that treat any display of authority as somehow hostile. Yes, guards are going to stop you from trying to dick-slap the king Jon, they probably should be stabbing you but they're trying to be an "are you sure?" buffer. No reason to hunt them down and poison them later.

>>55427133
I have players kinda like that, in that anyone of authority is met with immediate disrespect.
In a game where they start off as the lowest rank in an organization and are assigned a boss from the word go.
They all agreed to this.
They are staying lowest rank possible for quite a while at this rate

>>55427052
>stop giving yourself excuses. just to a list and the gm can use that. a literal bullet point of things, doesnt need to be complicated and the gm can use this to make a compelling story for your character.
Holy shit, anon! I never ever thought of doing that! Oh, wait, I did. That and a shitload of other reasons why getting this shit done SHOULD be a cinch. I know it's irrational, you uppity cunt. That's why it's fucking writer's block.

>>55427128
If you have reactive players, yes, it is your responsibility to prompt them to action. Don't like it? Get some active players instead of reactive ones.

>>55425950
The nat20 meme
>Player tries to ask noble to give him his title
>I ask why
>'I don't know it'd just be cool lol'
>I decide to humor him and make him do a persuasion check
>rolls 20
>OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH OOOOOOOOOOOOOOH NAT TWENNY OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH
>Player literally gets up from chair and is parading around room before sitting back down smugly
>Noble rubs his beard and tells him that he appreciates his services and that if he keeps them up he might consider adopting the player's character into his house
>Players face drops for a moment before he freaks out
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE BUT I ROLLED A NAT20 REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>Pouts for the rest of the session and even writes 'sir' next to his name and introduces himself as one in protest

>>55427072
My GM does this, too, and I do the same. He's a good guy, and there definitely is a bunch of shit about the way he GMs that bugs me, such as his lack of description or the way he just seems to want the players to paint the scene for him, but I sometimes feel that if I do give him my honest opinion, there's gonna go the GM.

>>55427172
I hate that shit. NAT 20 mind control is the worst

>>55427166
Then just throw something together. It doesn't have to be good but at this point you're being an indecisive cunt and fucking up your DM by not giving him anything.
>Dude I really need your character sheet
>B-But my writer's block! Waaah waaaaah my character has to be a masterpiece! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

To all my GM brothers, you don't have to take this sort of bullshit. I've been GMing for 16 years and at some point I stopped taking any BS.

I don't sit and pray my players make character who aren't CN dickbags or split up constantly, I tell them flat out during character creation. Anyone who doesn't agree with me banning obnoxious character ideas like lone wolves can take a long walk on a short pier.

Shit, this extends to anything. If players act disruptive and are ruining the fun I give them one warning so they know they need to shape up. When they don't, I give them the fucking boot. You'd be amazed how many nerds think RPGs are their consequence-free fun land (and not just in game).

My players always trying to describe what happens instead of just what they're trying to do.

Rolling the dice before I ask them to or even saying what they're doing.

Not knowing any of the rules.

>>55427167
a gm is not a tv screen, vomiting entertainment for your pleasure. if you are not going to give anything, at least state that you are using this as free cable tv.

File: 1378753883951.jpg (147KB, 1024x662px)

147KB, 1024x662px

>>55425994
Does gold have weight in 5E? That was always a big deal for my players in olden days out of sheer virtue it was a limitation so they had to be conscious of it. Suddenly extracting thousands of currency from a dungeon becomes a problem, let alone storing and moving it.

>>55427052
>some players play for the mecanics with a video game mindset.
Oh I know for a fact one of my players is playing the game like that. He's upset that enemies flee from a fight they're losing, or that enemies use tactics beyond stand there mashing the attack button

File: 1504409763708.gif (518KB, 500x715px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 500x715px

>>55425970
THIS SHIT RIGHT HERE

FUCKING

I must have described and named the location that the party is in about a dozen times by now. Desolate icy wasteland. First thing a player does when the session starts is describe his character wiping the sweat from his brow as the intense sun beats down on him while travelling through the desert.

Might seem like a minor gripe but this shit happens constantly. Every session they ask me where they are and what they were doing, and either myself or the one player who obsessively takes notes on everything I say has to remind them. Every single session.

>>55427193
>your character sheet
He has my character sheet. I make sure to give him a new version every time something important on it changes, too. It's just the fucking backstory.

>>55427209
50 coins (of any type) weigh a pound.

>>55427166
What's your character anyway?

>>55426033
Next boss battle they get into, have three enemies which cause BAD SHIT to happen if they don't all die within a turn of each other.

I find that the key to making fun combat in turn based systems, is, ironically, to emulate the shit out of MMO bosses.

My players lack common sense, to put it bluntly. The psyker in the party tries to contact Tzeentch in the warp to play a card game a la TTS and is surprised when he experiences a daemonic incursion... from his ass. When the Daemons manifested in reality, someone got the bright idea to play poker with them, promptly betting most of the party's souls and losing them in one hand. So essentially, the Inquisitorial Acolytes decided to chance fate by betting against a being that could change fate itself. I'm probably going to give them a chance to get their souls back by the end of the campaign... probably.

>>55427166
if its bad enough to stop you from doing a bullet list well....id suggest reading books? like get some inspiration and not stress too much about this. anything can help a gm spark a personal adventure. family pet, parents job, etc

>>55426159
Fuck off Jay

>>55427172
I don't know who started the nat 20 skill check shit because I know it was not a rule in damn near anywhere. Nat twenties and ones are only for combat and have only ever been for combat.

>>55427204
amen brother
i like to set what is gonna be allowed before the game. dont like? dont play.

>>55427235
It started on /tg/ with those made up greentext stories

>>55427207
You are not comprehending what I'm posting you brain-dead chimp. I'm talking about players who don't start things of their own initiative, but will deal with problems when given them. Then it is your responsibility as GM to give them problems to solve, not sit there waiting for them to create one and bitch online when they sit there waiting for something to happen. Also learn how to use capital letters you faggot.

>>55426159
My players browse /tg/

I do it anyway.

Fuck 'em

>>55427227
Is there any real way to convey that info to them before the fight itself though? I mentioned earlier the system we use doesnt have a lot of the kinks dnd does as far as ac or pcs being super special.

>>55427206
i call that ''trying to affect the future''. dont say you decapitate him before you actually hit him, you are gonna ridicule yourself.

that is called trying to cheat

i have players who WONT, even under actual torture, open the rulebook. they just make things extra hard on gm.

>>55427214
Personally, I have an insanely hard time remembering names of cities or NPCs. I can tell you exactly what is happening with the plot, or that we met the paladin girl in that city with all the copper piping where we blew up that hidden opium den, but I'm going to forget their names. And I'll feel terrible about it, and apologize to the DM for it.

It sounds like your players are worse than me, my sympathies anon.

File: 317.jpg (37KB, 600x785px)

37KB, 600x785px

The players having no concerns about their property because they have enough money. I don't want to be a dick and take all their money, but if someone STOLE YOUR MOTORCYCLE you don't just SHRUG AND SAY 'I'LL JUST BY A NEW ONE'

>>55425950
It's something easily handled before the game begins, but players who are adamantly stuck on playing a certain type of characters and won't budge no matter how it doesn't fit into the world/ruleset/whatever. This was always weird to me because when I'm not GMing I'm the kind of player who will look at what group needs to function and play as that over.

No Mike, you can't play a cat person and this isn't FF14.

>>55427052
Yeah, I give gifts. Sometimes I draw their characters all professional-like, sometimes the odd dice box. We finished a campaign that took a year and a half to complete, and while they may have some idiosynchrocies and varying levels of roleplaying ability, we still have fun together, and we're friends outside the game to boot.

About the only thing I could truly gripe about is that they roll dice and sometimes it hits the floor. I'm buying a dice tray for them tomorrow. Has some felt at the bottom, which might help one player finally splurge and get that all metal dice set he's been wanting.

>>55427281
To be fair, people do that IRL. Really depends on the scale of money you're talking about. If I had 70 bajillion dollaridoos and someone stole my hat, I'd just have another one bought. Shits annoying, but not worth my time.

>>55425950
>All players are intrested in the world and adventure they are in
>expect one
>always on the phone
>tell him to stop it
>group tells him to fuck off
>sweers he is not and he is indeed, interested
>threatened to kick him out but he says
>what? But am having so much fun stop being a fagot

He is a good friend of mine so its always hard to pull the trigger.

>>55427339
tell him if he's not on his phone then he doesn't need it and take it away

Rules lawyers who don't even know the rules. Make some sort of decision? "I dont think that's a thing" says one player, and tries to grind the game to a halt to look up some rule

>Bard casts a spell on some guy that's following them
>it does enough damage to instantly kill him, even following PC instant death rules
>Cleric runs up, tries to stabilize him but he's dead
>Cleric complains about it, says he should have been knocked out citing the fact that you can opt to non lethally knock people out
>Tell him it must be a melee weapon attack
>Doesn't believe me
>Quote the rule stating it must be a melee attack
>Tell him the page
>He grumbles about it

Meanwhile every other player is fine, including the bard who cast the spell in the first place. He's a good RPer and he's into the game, but it feels like he thinks I don't know anything about the system because I'm a first time DM

>>55427029
I remember 4th ed had no/low money rules where you just get bumps to your attack and damage and defenses that you should be getting through money. I never hear anyone mention it, is it shitty in practice?

>>55426000
Can I join? I can finish a character sheet in 8 hours.

>>55427281
If you really want to push a catch the theif thing, you've targeted the wrong thing. Steal the stuff thats irreplacable. Their father's pocket watch, their died-too-soon friend's car they restored together that one summer.

If your PC's refuse to have attachments to the world at all (anyone/thing they care about), you have a different problem.

>>55427397
That's more a varient rule to make it so you don't need a constant influx of magic items to keep your attack and defense on par with the assumptions of the system math as you level. In practice, the only flaw would be that you wouldn't be able to get as many cool magic weapon or armor effects, but that's solved by simply making actual magic weapons more rare and having them not give any sort of attack or damage bonus aside from the special effects they have.

It's pretty nice if you want a campaign less centered around loot or with less magic in general.

>>55427204
Best feeling is when a player tells em to fuck off

>introduce new player via the Count hiring a rouge to help out the Party
>he is ofc a CN Rouge
>LG elvish cleric tells him a bit about himself
>CN Rouge says some edgy anime bs about how if he, the LG elf, does anything fishy he would kill him in his sleep
>NG Gnome Bard tells him we dont need someone who will back stab us in our sleep
>OOC CN rouge says, b-but why?
>everyone explains that this is not normal
>especially in the count's throne room

>>55427223
Errant noble, family black sheep (rogue in family of wizards), third child of four, fled from home after stealing a treasure map, hoping to find treasure and return home and be respected, also fleeing an arranged marriage. Unknowingly a bastard child of the house matriarch and its armsmaster.

Like I said, I have all the details. It's all there, just every time I actually write out a line, there's a reason that it isn't good enough, or sounds like shit, or sonds special-snowflakey, or, or, etc. I know it's irrational. I have no fucking clue how to just shia lebeouf it.

>>55427485
>I have no fucking clue how to just shia lebeouf it.

You just did

>>55427485
Honestly anon it sounds like you're just making it more complicated than it needs to be. I'd remove two of those points you wrote about your character. You really only need about 3 interesting things about your character. Anything more and of course you can't write it out.

>>55427508
Which ones? The family things are all fairly important to the character, but admittedly the arranged marriage is just my excuse to have her not commit to romantic relationships as well as setting up a new character for when this one dies.

File: Abandon-Reason.jpg (265KB, 750x450px)

265KB, 750x450px

Players who doesn't fill out the fucking doodle.
>needs 3 days to check their "calendar"
>"not sure" if you're doing anything on that day
BITCH FILL OUT THE DOODLE AND COMMIT SO WE CAN ALL MOVE ON WITH OUR LIVES

>>55427529
Personally if it were me I'd take out the arranged marriage bit and the bastard child bit so it becomes:
>Rogue who isn't respected by his family goes off on an adventure to find a treasure and gain his family's respect.

There's a story right there. It gives your character's motivations, background and personality. You really don't need that much to make a compelling character. With so many plot points you wanted your character to have it's no wonder you're having trouble arranging them all together to make a backstory.

>>55427537
>doodle
?

>Player hoards magical items even if they're better suited for other players
The pure selfishness of it just makes me so mad

>>55427543
The arranged marriage can probably go, easy, but the bastard child thing is a bit important, since it's how I'm going to get darkvision and cloudwalking upon my next level up.

>>55427537
At first i thought you wanted people to draw a picture of their character, but now i'm just confused.

File: 1474688457045.jpg (51KB, 247x440px)

51KB, 247x440px

>>55427544
You get sent a link with dates (and times).
You then check off all the boxes with dates where you can play.
This makes is SUPER easy to find a date where everyone can play (or at least the majority)

>>55427544
>>55427579
Not that anon, but something something schedualing nightmare is what i gathered.

>>55427571
Also, to add, it isn't that I don't have the backstory made; I do. It's all there, point to point to point, but I just can't fucking write it. I should be able to; I'm the best damn writer in the group, and I say that with no false pride.

>>55427571
Why not just make one of his ancestors a powerful wizard/sorcerer then and have him having received some of that blood?

>>55427589
Doodle is a synonym for drawing.

>>55427599
Possible, but that's just really swapping one plot point out for another, and I do like the drama that a little bit of infidelity adds to her prim-and-proper upbringing.

>>55427619
Well then I don't know what to tell you, anon. Personally I think you've got way too much crammed in there and that's why you can't write it out but if you think you can make it work, good luck.

>>55427631
Thanks for trying, anyway. If this was an issue so simple advice from 4chan could solve it, I would have done it already, but I do thank you anyway.

File: looking out pixel gif.gif (184KB, 960x512px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 960x512px

My biggest gripe is that I'd like to run two games but don't have the time.

I've had one player who was flaky about showing up and kept forgetting important things about his character. I felt a little bad about it, but I recently kicked him out. Still have 6 other players so not a big deal and the lower player count will make things easier for me.

>>55426033
There are games that use completely different combat systems. Aces & Eights and Hackmaster5e use second based combat that sounds complicated at first but is actually the answer to all your problems. Also balances fast and slow weapons, melee and ranged, and casters vs not.

File: 1478748433484.jpg (17KB, 300x241px)

17KB, 300x241px

Players who don't want to play the fucking game.
>foreverGMing a fantasy game
>players in starting town
>the plot macguffin falls out of the sky outside
>blows an old ruin the fuck up
>smoke fills the air
>villagers starting to check to see wtf it was
>4/5ths of party go with
>that guy sits in the inn
>"dude, shit just fell out of the sky outside."
>"my character doesn't care."
>"... seriously?"
>"yeah. what's on the inn menu?"
He just kept doing this sort of shit, it was like any time adventure could be had he stood on the brakes. Ended up kicking his ass out because he started bitching when I'd just let him sit in an inn while the rest of the party went on a dungeon crawl or investigated the missing person or whatever.

>>55427684
Maybe, but from the sounds of it, it still sounds like ganking one enemy at a time is still likely the 'optimal' route, as its still gaming the total actions being used against the party. Its still psuedo turn based, its just actions have speeds, not just the characters.

I might just have to either do some mechanical shenanigans or just gront with the players who keeps guiding the others into focusing singular enemies at a time.

File: JC.png (247KB, 320x276px)

247KB, 320x276px

Asking players to come with characters ready to go and them showing up with the vaguest idea of some sort of character they might like to play but they're not even leaning in any particular direction.

I was very happy to find that everyone actually did as I asked for the cyberpunk one-shot I did today. We all had lots of fun.

But that doesn't always happen.

>>55427074
My group is in a similar situation, although it's with 3 players
We did the first session with just 3 of us then our fighter got activated so the DM got a couple friends to join and now we have 3 extra people that just appear in the party
I'm going to try and force some role-playing to make it actually work a little

>>55427476
I find it both hilarious and sad that this needs to be explained to someone. An active detriment to the party should be an obvious no-go.

>>55427728
While the rest of the party are out adventuring, you sit in the inn.
Got it anon! You don't need to be present for that. You can go home now.

>>55427764
That's what my strategy became after 1-2 sessions of his coldsteel tier assassin sitting in corners. He gave me a big ration of shit over "not catering to him as a player" on his way out the door. Didn't come back, wasn't invited to the next game.

>>55427798
I had something very similar happen to me with my own player walking out. I told him that I've already got enough on my plate with the rest of the party and wasn't going to cook up a whole new storyline on the spot just for him and that it was selfish of him to both expect me to and rob the party of the aid he could provide them.

I think this behavior stems from a desire to push the boundaries of what they feel they can do or try and hamper what they perceive to be the DM's carefully laid story for shits and giggles. Either way it's just selfish.

>>55427729
>it still sounds like ganking one enemy at a time is still likely the 'optimal' route, as its still gaming the total actions being used against the party

Well, I can tell you I run hackmaster and that this simply doesn't happen unless the players already have a massive numbers advantage to begin with. Due to movement and attacks being 'desynced' so to speak, it's very unlikely anyone could surround an opponent unless that opponent is already alone, or has no room to maneuver due to how the battlefield is set up.

Presumably if two or three people tried to attack they would simply give ground (for a defensive bonus) and fight defensively (for another defensive bonus) in response to the second person moving up on them. This would make many attacks simply miss and thus be pretty inefficient.

What happens most of the time is that each character tends to fight his own opponent until one of them goes down and the balance of the fight changes. More swashbuckling, a lot less 'ganking', though back attacks are as devastating as they should be.

My biggest complaint is that my players cant seem to take notes about things. Like, they're able to put together theories decently and generally know what's going on, but they get mad if I get exasperated for having to remind them of a name for the 15th time.

If my players ever discover a lot of civilians in a bad area, like a village technicality in enemy territory, or refugees in a Chaos outbreak, they immediately try to make the refugees meatshields.

Conversation usually goes something like this:
>Hey your situation is bad, some of you will die but you should just at the enemy and we will win!

We won't do that , we aren't trained warriors

>But all of you will die if you don't fight, so just bum rush them!

That's a horrible idea

>No just do it! Then we won't have to take damage as we can hide behind you!

>>55428044
This can continue for as long as twenty minutes, and if the village continues to refuse, they get really mad like the villagers are stupid.

The idea that something cool has to work.
I recently had a session where the group was facing a miniboss on a train (yes I know) who had a giant hammer - they worked together to try and pin him, then disarm him of his hammer, and try to kill him with it.
Nevermind the fact that the character trying to kill with the hammer had a bad melee score, and that the miniboss had good armor to resist the blunt damage of the hammer. The player trying to hit him got frustrated that repeatedly rolling and missing wasn't working, and starting acting pissy.

>Blaming the DM for the consequences of their own decisions

>5e
>Players fighting guards in mansion foyer
>Rogue wedges a few pikes facing upwards into the floorboards and push a few guards off of stairs onto them for fun
>More guards start streaming in from main entrance and party on ground floor turns to fight them
>Rogue tries to jump from railing and swing from the chandelier to join them
>Rolls 2
>Slips from chandelier towards pikes
>I decide to be merciful and allow rogue to roll DEX saving throw
>4
>Rogue is speared on pikes and dies
>Rogue player starts throwing a shit fit and claims I let him die

>>55427339
>Take him aside at the end of a session
>"Look, you're my friend and I wanna give you a shot, but you're disrupting the group; either you start giving me your phone to look after at the start, or I'm gonna have to ask you to leave"

>>55427614
It is also a website that does (free) schedule polls

>>55425950
The GM serves the players and gently helps them align their characters with the setting, or serves the players by asking intractable troublemakers to leave
Murderhobos? Up the action. Give them crazy chaos and trouble around every corner, never let up. They'll love it and players who are bored by combat are uncommon. Give them their fantasy
Corny "lothario"? Give him wenches, tractable noblewomen, lonely villainesses, make them love adventurers. Give him his fantasy
Party face? Have NPCs totally change their tune when he makes his rolls, act them out as genuinely impressed and eager to please. GHHF
Pyromaniacs? Give them a world owned by the morally gray. GTTF
Indecisiveness? Throw the worldbook at them. An invading army of skeletons rumbles up the trail. Bandits burst into the tavern. An earthquake splits the land, a forlorn spirit passes them by. They are mistaken for criminals. An old foe catches up to them. They reminisce and go into a dream or memory sequence. If they don't have some goal they're set on, it's your chance to try out new things. Give them *anything*
You have to be adaptable. You have to figure out what each player values and give him that as part of the package deal of your campaign. Sitting back and basking in the happiness and excitement of your players is a much greater pleasure than executing the sequence of your story or dungeon just as planned

t. foreverGM who runs 3 games a week and rarely gets flakes

>>55428128
What level is that rogue that died from from an improvised pike trap that is already cluttered with corpses?

File: flumph5.jpg (176KB, 600x613px)

176KB, 600x613px

Players who set out to antagonize or railroad (in game) other players who aren't strong roleplayers/leaders. Seen so many games fall apart because of this. It's hard to Foster a learning environment when one of the players just lampoons everything for newer players.

>>55428696
Guilty as charged. I'm an impatient sort of person if a mechanic has to be explained for the fifth time. I realize that I'm an arse so I usually manage to ignore the impulses, but sometimes especially indecisive players make me blurt out the most obvious move

>>55428656
2. And it wasn't' one trap it was several

>>55425950
I'm a terribly lazy DM who doesn't deserve his PCs, and wish he could eloquently describe the environs, the NPCs, etc.

>>55428736

Not the mechanics just the roleplaying and decision making. If someone isn't understanding the system that is my fault

>>55425950
Lazy players

>>55429031
can you elaborate on this?

>>55425950
My own disgusting laziness. I'd have like five campaigns plotted up if I got off my ass and did anything about them.

>>55429038
players that make their characters with no plot-hooks in their make-up or backstory.

Turn up at games, ignore plot-hooks and do whatever they want and demand the GM entertain them, including ad-libbing whatever they feel like they want to do that day.

>>55426509
>>55426915
Well, first off, I'm not complaining about a specific group, more about the trends in TTRPGs in general.

As for the thrust of the point itself, RPGs are games. Games, almost by definition, are a series of iterated choices which lead to an outcome. Generally, in a well designed game, good choices lead to good outcomes, bad choices to bad outcomes. If you think of a chess game, a series of good moves will be more likely to lead to a win or a draw than a series of bad moves.

A lot of RPG players and GMs don't seem to understand that. Instead of focusing on the choices (How do I build my character? Which faction should we support? Do we want to sneak into the fort to get the crystal or just charge in guns blazing?), they focus on the outcome of the dice rolls once the choices are made. I rolled high, I should win! I rolled low, I guess it's okay to lose.
>>55426662
Which is really stupid if you stop and think about it, since the GM sets the odds, and can make them as arbitrarily difficult as he wants.

>>55427235
Unironically the first place i heard of it was Critical Role

>>55427728
>ROLL THE DICE TO SEE IF I'M GETTING DRUNK! ARE THERE ANY GIRLS THERE?

>>55427204
Whats your radius?

>>55425950
My latest problem has been when combat grinds to a halt because the player didn't have his sheet out and takes 10 minutes trying to find it online.

Which is why I keep a digital one over roll20 and update it occasionally.

>>55430405
Jesus christ, just tell him to use a paper sheet

>>55427082
>Calculator says 2+2=4
>"No calculator it's five! Watch!"
>Inputs 2+2 into calculator
>Hits enter
>Calculator, feeling pity for someone so stupid as to think they know better than the calculator, displays 5
>"Take that, calculator! We knew it! From this point forward we will always assume 2+2=5 and will be more likely to challenge your ruling in the future!"
>Calculator has made a mistake

>>55430428
The paper sheet is usually forgotten in his room or somewhere else, and he sometimes writes notes in places he might not remember later on.
Like I said though, just having a basic sheet available at least removes the issue. If between sessions some stat went up or new gear was acquired and I didn't update it, they'll be quick to remember that at least.

>>55427104
For a while. I had some good players I could rely on, but eventually we reached a point where only three people were playing, which is barely enough to play and it one couldn't make it to a session we didn't have enough to play at all. I ended up getting so frustrated that I didn't want to go through the whole song and dance of recruiting someone new again.

>>55430405
Keep his sheet in your campaign binder.

>>55428326
What are your players like? Age, profession, couples? What's your job? Do you use some sort of program or call them up for sessions? How long are the sessions? How many have you booted and how harsh are your standards?
I suck ass at organizing dates and herding players, and also my pool of IRL friends is dwindling due to work and uni. Feels like the worst times. My games are okay but they usually end up being oneshots due to how busy everyone is.

>>55426173
Run shorter more focused campaigns. Give the PCs a goal from the get go. You'll finish your campaign before you get bored.

File: consider the following.jpg (87KB, 654x539px)

87KB, 654x539px

>>55426033
Assing threat levels to players according to their combat stats or how intimidating they look. Monsters try to attack the players according to their position and their threat levels. Threat levels increase as party members do damage in combat.
For example.

Player A is a knight he has the threat level of 4
Player B is a ranger he has the threat level of 3

Enemy is at a same distance to both of them.
Both players roll a d6 and the difference between threat levels are added to the dice.
A rolls 2, B rolls 2 . A gets a +1 and that totals to 3 , therefore Enemy attacks A.
In the next round of combat aditional enemies have arrived. In the previous round knight did very low damage but our ranger did a lot of damage. Even killing one enemy. He gets an increase to his threat level for the duration of that combat. Making his 3 a 4. Players make additional rolls for the new enemies and now both their threat levels are counted as 4.

That way enemies can focus on the damage dealers and players wont complain as a result of that. Because the enemies would be acting according to the games system not the GM's whim. Tankier chars would benefit from the system too because atleast at the start of the combat they would have a greater chance to tank most of the hits and pull aggro. They have to be carefull to put enough damage during their turn too because if they dont enemies would begin to ignore him.

>>55427963
Oh ok. Neat.

>>55426033
Have your monsters use tactics that make sense for the monster. A dragon isn't going to fight people on the ground until it's wings don't work, a lich is going to find those with high intelligence the biggest threat and go after them while mindlessly cloudkilling mundane shills. All you have to do is find a reason in game to fuck your players.

>>55426159
My players don't browse tg.

So I message them my threads where I make fun of them.

File: 65565656.jpg (31KB, 300x343px)

31KB, 300x343px

>>55425950
>What's your biggest gripe as a GM?
That I'm a shitty GM

>>55427072
Try an announimous servay offer offer a reward if whole party completes with at least one negative written

I wish my players gave better feedback. I end every session asking how it was and always get the classic "it was good". I'm thinking of offering a 10% bonus to xp or gold or something if they answer a couple questions just to get them going.

> What did I do as a gm that was good?
> What can I improve on?
> What does your character think of what's going on?

>>55431031
The issue isnt on my (the GM) side of things, its the players ganging up on a single enemy at a time to game action economy.

For what its worth though, i already do this, just not as a purely mechanical thing. When i have big group fights, i make sure enemies know who is the biggest threat to them is and have them either engage someone else while an ally solves the problem, or attack them if they feel they can take them. Weakness and resistance to damage types are thrown around everywhere in the system, and most attacks have some elemental component. Sorta like pokemon rules, so enemies who arnt complete novices know who is trouble.

>>55427072
Because you're putting them on the spot. Have a box or something and let them anonymously slip their thoughts in.

>>55426218
>And there seem to be an awful lot of people who complain at the notion that there are right and wrong choices to make at all.
These people are toxic and not just when gaming.

That attitude is basically a refusal to take responsibility for their own actions and an expectation that they should always get what they want.

>>55427245
No. It's the player's responsibility to put together a functioning party.

If they're all passive then the party is useless. Someone has to step up and take charge.

>>55426706
Now imagine those players being the only players available in a 100 kilometer range and you have my experience as a GM.

>>55427245
>The person who does the most work out of any at the table now also has to lead all the others around by the nose until they find something they feel like doing.
Once or twice, maybe. If all they're gonna do is wait for me to throw things at them, they can damn well wait.

>>55427245
>your responsibility as a GM
Nice to know that players don't have any responsibility.

>>55425994
My group always tries to haggle with every fucking shopkeeper they meet. And occasionally they'll try to kill the shopkeeper if he's too firm in his pricing and they're high enough level to get away with it.

I'm already pretty lax with my pricing and handing out gold, quit penny-pinching your fake gold assholes

>>55431711
Just start having shopkeepers crack down on even an attempt to haggle. Worked for my group although it did annoy them initially).

>Are you implying my wares aren't worth 15 gold? This shit is PREMIUM. Get out, now!
>Can you brave adventurers not afford 15gp for a pair of boots? What kind of adventurers are you people?
>I think this might not be the right establishment for you. I'm sure there's a cheaper merchant in town. Goodbye!
>The price just doubled. Take it or leave it.

File: _shrieks_in_autism_.gif (1MB, 480x351px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x351px

>something mildly threatening happens
>players spend more time afraid and arguing in circles about what to do than actually doing anything
>even when running is a reasonable course of action
I plan on putting a hard cap on the amount of time they have to make their decision before something bad happens to them before they can choose, but I feel that this will be an awful idea in practice.

File: EC.png (229KB, 487x420px)

229KB, 487x420px

When nobody is interested in games I have a genuine interest in and instead insist I run something based off their favourite anime

Why must my only friends be weebs

>>55431866
Hourglass. I've got a 30 second one that I pull out when I think people are discussing too long. Shit scares them into action. I don't even know what I'd do if it ran down.

>>55425950
>players constantly try to derail my games and "keep me on my toes"
>like to do something wacky and random to throw things off the rails

I don't mind that part to be honest. My only issue is they never deviate from a very few ways of "derailing." They never try to catch me off-guard because they always do the same things, like stabbing their boss and becoming fugitives because they fucked up a job and he didn't congratulate them anyways.

>>55426123
I also find player schedules to be very frustrating.

>>55431866
I liberally apply this method when I see someone can't make up his mind.

>You've got 5 seconds to decide or you pass your turn

It's surprising how quickly they decide what they want to do.

>>55426279
Finding dice with birds on them seems unlikely and if you did the randomness of the rolls might be compromised, i.e. improperly weighted dice and it would turn them into more of a novelty. A dice box with a bird motif might be more feasible and depending on what you wanna spend, you could probably find one relatively cheap or even have one commissioned by an artist. Etsy might be a good place to . I'd wager that for around 30 bucks you could have an artist burn a bird motif on an already constructed box

>>55426706
>>>55425950
>I'm still new as a GM
>In thinking about things to complain about in this thread I realized a lot of the things that have been bothering me, have been me worrying about or feeling bad about my ability in, things I haven't actually done yet as a GM.
>Gah I'm doing so bad at "getting X" or "providing opportunities for my players to get a sense of X" maybe I should quit.
>Now I realize much of that is just because I haven't gotten to a point in the story where it's time to focus on X yet.
>I feel better.
>Thanks OP and everyone else.

>>55432201
How did my post get turned into greentext? I didn't type it as greentext.

people deciding to do "lul randomzzz XD" characters like a kid wearing a chicken suit and having every stat like interests and pride set as chickens while being mad at me for wanting to run a serious game

>>55427082
>and several rush out to put out these flames
So their plan accomplished EXACTLY what they hoped it would, and a bit more that they didn't anticipate. What's your problem again?

>>55427728
>"my character doesn't care."

This is how you respond to that

>"Okay then, [Character] fails to answer the call to adventure and spends the rest of his life in crushing mediocrity, trying to ward away a feeling of missed potential that he is only subconsciously aware of. His life is so mundane that even his relatives and close friends struggle to find anything interesting to say about him on the day of his funeral. Within a year, he is barely even remembered as a footnote in the village of [Village]."
>"Now please make a fucking character who does care, you prat."

File: 11455639472354.jpg (29KB, 485x484px)

29KB, 485x484px

>>55425950
>not posting the superior version of the meme

>>55425950
>Write up campaign.
>Lay out setting notes
>Player says that it doesn't seem like heroes can ascend to divinity
>Yeah, the Gods were around at the start of the universe and will be there until it runs down, and probably beyond. You can't enter the pantheon.
>What's the point of playing then?

This happened on Friday evening, and I still can't wrap my head around it.

>>55432509
Player just wanted a power fantasy he could self insert into.

>>55432509
He wants to play in a very different campaign to what you have planned.

I suggest you leave him free to join such a game.

>>55426192
Just DOIT faggot. Stop being a little bitch and run your game

>>55432509
some players are glory hounds. just tell them they can become lords of their own keep if they play their cards right.

honestly, for every "ascended gods" there's a Ur-Priest rising in power to challenge the new, weaker god and take him the fuck down

>>55427172
Why allow a check at all?

>"Hey fancypants, I want your titles."
>"..."
>"Very funny, peasant. You're lucky I'm in a good mood today, or I'd have your tongue cut out for your insolence. Do not test my patience or your luck any further."

>>55431320
>What did I do that was good.
Everything.
>What can I improve on?
Nothing.
>What does your character think?
He is interested in the plot. Free xp plz

>instead of following the normal, and clearly written out rules we've been following, can I do something that is completely different and beyond retarded to achieve a similar result?
>I.e. A knowledge (Anatomy) roll to hit because my character would know where to hit so I should be able to use that
>"no"
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Shit is non stop, but the REEEE's are hilarious and not too disrupting

File: 1380027513567.gif (9KB, 391x644px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 391x644px

>>55425950
That the players do not understand how much time goes into making the night work. Forever DM here for years and even though I put hours into forming the next session while also working and going to university they just don't seem to care, they treat the session like it's a video game with absolutely no attempts to immerse themselves into the world even after I've tried to let them know to drop that shit at the door and remember that they are playing a living being not a character sheet.

But the biggest thing of all that makes me want to tell them all to go fuck themselves and get new players is the bitching about difficulty. They've completed, almost, everything that I've ever thrown at them but it is almost always at the expense of one or two characters dying before they stop being a bunch of idiots and finally communicate with each other, form a plan of attack, and not do their own things and getting each other killed in the process. I mean ffs there was one time when they all died in a dungeon, bitched and moaned about the difficulty, I then made a new dungeon for next week with the exact same number of enemies with the same CR/DR ratings and just swapped tile palettes around a bit. Before we started I begged, I mean legitimately fucking PLEADED, with them to not be idiots just for fucking once and wouldnt you know it through cautious advancement, proper planning, and teamwork they finished it without anyone even being bloodied with the exact same difficulty of the previous one.

Didn't matter though since right the fuck after they were back to running into unknown danger like the idiots theyve always been. I swear it's like dealing with a bunch of children, constantly crying and complaining as if actions shouldnt have consequences. Been playing with them for years, but I have a feeling next session is going to be it. You can't help those who don't want it.

>>55426033
Banner Saga. Fixed turns meaning it's always enemy turn Ally turn, regardless of numbers.

>>55432986
That sounds like a (You) problem.
What I did there was a snarky dick move, but you seriously need to cut them off and find different players that are more serious and appreciative, or dumb your games down to their level (which in turn, may be too low for you, prompting you to cut them off anyway). Maybe they'll be better at something other than dungeoneering, like pirate captain or generic space opera or something.

>>55431711
I always just tell the group that the price I stated is the price after they haggled. I mean, there's no reason they wouldn't do it IC, and it's a big timesink.

File: 137452384756.jpg (17KB, 384x316px)

17KB, 384x316px

>Players want to do modules
>complain when they are railroaded into events within the module
>Players want a sandbox campaign
>complain when many of their choices, or the world, aren't as fleshed out because sandbox
>even with the few named things that exist >>55425970 happens anyways but they never see themselves as a problem
>complain how they are still being railroaded because there are attempts to actually make a coherent story to said sandbox
>Try to give as detailed a picture as possible when players enter an area, see enemies, etc according to their perceptions or past experiences
>doesn't matter, they scatter with their own plans and are taken down individually
>complain things were impossible to complete when, in actuality, I had multiple ways to complete the task but they are just so phenomenally dense that they seem to always choose suicide
>"What do you mean I don't get this for free? I got a 20 persuasion!"
>"What do you mean I don't kill the big bad with 100%? I got a 20 STR check to rip his head off!"
>"How were we supposed to know the dungeon with lit torches was inhabited?!"

"Why do I still DM for you assholes?" Is what I ask myself every day.

>>55425950
Players who aren't engaged at the table or zone out while I'm trying to describe what's going on/where they are/what an NPC is saying. It's one of the reasons I really prefer playing in-person to using VoIP; there's a lot more accountability and far fewer distractions when you're all gathered around a table as opposed to sitting at one's computer with easy access to other websites, etc. I'm also still fairly new at GMing, so I'm sure I could stand to tighten up my explanations a little bit or move things along a little faster so they have more reason to be engaged, but still.

>>55433151
>Maybe they'll be better at something other than dungeoneering, like pirate captain or generic space opera or something.

They say they "want" to do dungeons, then run through without regarding traps as things that even exist in every single dungeon that isn't the innkeepers basement. They've done a pirate campaign and killed each other in the first session by using the "pirate code" to challenge the captain's mettle to theirs in combat or wits eventually killing themselves all to the last man. And space drama ended almost instantly with "I try to fuck it XDDDDDD" bullshit in regards of what happened after their first combat encounter.

But yeah it's like you said, should have cut the cord years ago.

>>55432757
Sometimes you can't win, but may still achieve a partial success.
In his case the Nat20 meant that the noble considers the possibility of eventually giving him a title. Which is of course not the same as directly getting the title, but it allows you to try and work towards it.
Maybe a 10 would have been your reaction.
Maybe a 1 would have been him being deeply insulted and ordering his guards to kill them/throw them out

>>55433043
>Kill a few enemies
>The survivors suddenly start zipping and zooming across the battlefield and take slashes at you in an increasingly rapid flurry, getting ever faster the fewer of them remain

>>55433268
Can you stab them a few times too?
You've really wasted time and effort with them.
Also, GM rule number whatever: always keep your notes, this will allow you to recycle campaigns and stuff for newer better people.
Maybe write a module and throw it out somewhere for free or a small fee

>>55431301
Can I have a link to your survey? I want to shit on your godawful spelling and grammar

>>55432280
This
>is green text

>>55432386
Because their understanding was that it would cause ALL of the bandits to stream out and put out this fire. The bandits aren't retarded and weren't going to devote their entire manpower into doing something that a few of them could handle. I coulsn't reconcile this with what the players wanted to happen but I could reconcile it with the effect they wanted so while I had the fire draw out some of yhe bandits I also had it frighten the leader amd the rest of them into believing they were under attack: incapacitating the rest of the bandits in the way they wanted. It wasn't that the players didn't get what they wanted it was that their reasoning was faulty and so I had to bullshit a consequence of their actions they didn't plan for and they acted as though that was part of their plan

>>55426558
In my experience, session zeros are a huge waste of time. The players who are willing to come up with details and work with each other do it on their own time. The ones who aren't sit through a session zero and do nothing, and if anything meaningful is established for them, it's by the GM or another player and they just go along with it. With as hard as it is to get people together one day a week to actually play, why waste one of those days on that?

>>55426151
Come now zach, we're not so bad

>>55426574
A good roleplayer doesn't need a written backstory or even to have one at all to be effective in the game. If you know the personality you are playing, can have a functional memory, you can roll with no information and just build a backstory as you go.

Most of the players I've known who show up with written details aren't good roleplayers, anyway, so it makes no difference that they established what year they were born and what their parents names were and who their wife is ahead of time, because they aren't interesting to play with and can't use any of that information on the fly.

>>55426951
>One player is consistently late
Stopped reading there. Find a new player.

>>55427072
Well, two things. A lot of people are not GMs. They do not have the mindset for it at all. Even if they really tried, they couldn't come up with much to say about how well you're doing a job because they don't even really understand what you're doing. It's like if you say that a movie had good cinematography, and someone asks "what's cinematography". Some people just can't contribute on a meaningful level in some conversations because they don't know enough about the subject to say anything useful.

Second, a lot of other players, like me, have long ago learned that giving feedback to most GMs is a waste of time, because they never listen and never alter their behavior. Worse yet, some GMs, I've met several, actually ask for feedback and then punish people who give them any sort of criticism. And others, I've met some of them as well, if they are given any kind of criticism at all, even pretty minor stuff, they get self conscious and frustrated, and actually get worse because of it, or even just stop GMing altogether. So a lot of players just learn never to offer any feedback at all, because it is useless or makes things worse.

>>55433644
On the level of experience I agree with this, but on the level of ideal I'm absolutely opposed. I'd rather suggest people get better at contributing and make an effort than suggest GMs never run a session 0 again.

No game is better than a bad game, anyways. And worse yet is a bad game that I didn't see coming. I'd rather have the advance warnign the session 0 gives me.

>>55425970
This
>>55426000
Shit
>>55426148
Right
>>55426189
Here
>>55426283
Drives
>>55426338
Me
>>55426553
Absolutely
>>55426638
Batshit
>>55426706
Insane.
>>55426905
Why
>>55427006
Do
>>55427029
These
>>55427172
"""""PEOPLE""""""
>>55427214
Actively
>>55427395
Choose
>>55427728
To
>>55427750
Waste
>55428039
Everyone's
>>55428128
Time
>>55428696
Including
>>55431711
Their
>>55432509
Own?

>>55433683
I'd rather demand people be good at both things. I don't see why I should lionize people be good and lazy over bad and willing to contribute. Be good and willing and there's no problems.

>>55426000
>I have a campaign starting in three days
>I have one complete character sheet from my group of four.

Find a better group.

I started a campaign earlier this year. After a month of prep, only 2 of 5 players were ready. Those two are currently in the campaign - - the others got the boot.

No Players > Shitty Players

>>55427116
I assume the same as World of Darkness. You can power through your character upgrades, very little with other things and no loot upgrades.

I GM for a party of two. One is a much more experienced player than the other and a bit more of a power player, not out of trying to game the system but them just loving high power stuff, it's the same way when he GMs.

The other is an incredibly indecisive and self-pitying thing that will insult and degrade themselves at the slightest provocation no matter how much sense it does/doesn't make.

Examples
>Character breaks a magic circle on the suggestion of the other player. It was holding a gift I'd spent two weeks designing for them, a relic that was a symbiote/parasite similar to venom or carnage. It triggered a trap and he immediately called himself a fucktard for the tenth time that session.
>Misses an attack, immediately calls himself shit.
>Creating character, is so indecisive that he has to forcibly roll his class, rolls into sorcerer, so proceeds to roll his fucking bloodline. This isn't even his character anymore.
>But he's a good roleplayer and shows up on time every session.

Send help.

>>55427243
You've obviously never played DnD before if you don't think players think that a nat 20 is an "autowin" for any situation.

>>55425950

People flaking out.

I get >>55426148 's pain and I've accepted it, but at the same time I'd like some warning if you can't make a session at least or an explanation to as why.

God fucking help you if I look in my steam friend list and see you in a game.

"Why is it you have come to these far flung ruins young adventurer?"
>"I tell him Why I'm here"

>>55434060
I'm alright with players narrating or describing their actions rather than roleplaying them directly. Some people just get too uncomfortable when they try to directly inhabit another person's skin like that.

That said, this green text combines that, which is something I merely tolerate, with an implication of the player not knowing the plot, which I mostly do not tolerate, thus making this the most perfectly tailored DM bait I've ever read. Are you one of my players?

File: 1399833377619.jpg (35KB, 292x365px)

35KB, 292x365px

>>55434060
Every time. Every, fucking, time.

>>55434060
I've seen this.

File: QEMeSe1.jpg (19KB, 320x213px)

19KB, 320x213px

>>55425950
>Spend week preparing for session
>Everything written out, multiple things for players to do, different paths, etc
>'party face' type player who everyone else follows has an annoying trait
>If she thinks that anything is of major story importance she's intentionally go out of her way to subvert it
>Major NPC? Become needlessly confrontational with them or outright hostile
>A run down temple with the screams of someone echoing out from the shattered windows?
>"I take player 2's oil flask and use it to light a fire at the base of the church"
>Have intricate storyline prepared for new area the players just entered
>Does her damndest to convince everyone to leave immediately
>Will complain once she runs through all my plans that it seems like I have little prepared when she runs through all my ideas and I have to start winging it, because all of the battle maps and NPCs I had prepared are suddenly null

I love the group but it's seriously the most tedious thing to deal with.

>run a few straight dungeon crawls
>players have a ton of fun, but request some more roleplaying too
>have them meet with a few NPCs, expect them to ask about quest hooks, treasure, etc
>"I don't trust this guy, we should kill him."

why the fuck do people immediately jump from roleplaying to murderhobo'ing and find it acceptable

File: hopesdeleted.gif (279KB, 500x282px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 500x282px

>playing DnD
>enjoying myself on story driven campaign, but notice players are dragging feet somewhat
>overtime at work caused me to panic on upcoming session, little or no plot
>literally just a filled dungeon pulled from a pre-made adventure
>PC's said the session was great "especially not having to worry about all that kingdom stuff"
>Have more fun entering into dungeons with no plot or backstory
>Not even RP'ing going into town, happier with buying equipment on the side ASAP in order to get to the next dungeon.
>pic related

>>55431892
Can you try to incorporate things you like into the games? You shouldn't be suffering just so your friends can have everything their way, have you tried talking with them about it and trying to work out a compromise so that you all get some of what you enjoy?

>>55426049

>So the way I see it is that they effectively have no backstory

Backstory for me starts at session 2, which is what happened in Session 1.

The second you expect me to read a single sentence of backstory for your character is when it is too long. Bring that shit out in play, not by blocks of text.

File: 1495996447071.png (116KB, 430x324px)

116KB, 430x324px

>>55425970
Is that you chris? I'm sorry but the names you make just don't stick in my memory and we have too much time between sessions sometimes. I'm really trying i swear.

>>55434150
Kill her
Rape the corpse

>>55434125
>I'm alright with players narrating or describing their actions rather than roleplaying them directly.
That's fine. In which case he would say "I tell him I'm looking for my parents' murderers/information about dragons/a legendary weapon" or whatever.

>>55425970
fucking this

>>55434150
>"I take player 2's oil flask and use it to light a fire at the base of the church"
Congrats, you just became wanted in all the kingdoms and squads of paladins are hunting for you.

>>55425970
I've asked you half a dozen times for a setting document and you've given me jack and shit. I gave up because you clearly didn't care about me caring about your world. Help me help you.

>>55427172
>I decide to humor him and make him do a persuasion check
this is your fault.

>>55432280
How did all these squares make a circle!?

>>55433515
Yeah. I know how to make text green.
I'm saying that I didn't put the
>
At the beginning of any of my paragraphs, and yet after I hit the button to post what I had typed all of the paragraphs had them.

Maybe it was some weird situation where I had all the text in the quick reply box selected and then pressed a post number causing it to try to quote the highlighted text?

>>55434125
In my experience its a little of both. Not knowing the plot, and being uncomfortable with role playing their character. Its just i'd rather have something more.I'd even accept them lying and saying something completely opposite of the reason why they are there. That, to me, is what makes a plot interesting

>>55434170
Sounds like what they want is a video game.

>>55432986
>bloodied
>Playing 4e with retards

Yeah, no thanks. Just switch to 5e or a simpler system.

>>55434204
I can see that, but your character needs some concept. That can double as a simple write-up of how you ended up where you are. Too many people go into goddamn autobiography territory for some reason.

>>55430793
Dunno if it's worth it replying at this point but here goes
>What are your players like? Age, profession, couples?
In one game it's seven students, age 18 to 30. In the second game, it's a pair of 30+ couples (sounds hot but it's strictly, uh, professional). The third game is on discord and I don't know anything about the three players IRL. Two games are Pathfinder, the other is WHFR 2e.
>What's your job?
CS student
>Do you use some sort of program or call them up for sessions?
For my IRL games we use discord or google hangouts, and call/text each other when necessary.
I met my student group at my school's Pathfinder Society, my couples group at a local PFS, and my discord game via /tg/ gamefinder
>How long are the sessions?
Student game is 7-9 hours, couple game is 3 hours, discord game is 8-9 hours
>How many have you booted and how harsh are your standards?
Haven't booted anyone but I strictly control who joins IRL games and I do occasionally ask players to shape up their behavior, manage their hygiene or come up with more character development. I bring a stick of deodorant and a bottle of listerine to games now. My standards are like this:
No cell phones or computers at the table unless you're looking something up or rolling a huge number of dice.
No sociopolitical talk from any perspective
Party has to stick together in one general area, no physical infighting or theft within party, no acting directly contrary to the interests of the party
No sexuality beyond George RR Martin-tier stuff i.e. normie sexuality. I'm sensitive to this last one after witnessing a bunch of disgusting shit in games where I was a player

Anyone else hate having to train players to be good at roleplaying?

Seriously take a ton of work.

>>55434559
It was 5e.

They are just so stupid that even with a system as brain-dead as 5e, they still manage to fuck everything up.

Enemies unaware of the party? Better fix that by walking up to a bunch of savages and "I say hi". Gather information on our task beforehand instead of waddling in unprepared? Fuck that, we'd rather complain that everything wasn't simply given to us the second we decided to do X. King? Yo fuck that guy I'm a player character, I shit in his garden XDDDDD.

>>55427728
Hand them a character sheet and say to make a new character that does care.

>>55434627
Oh I just assumed since you said bloodied. I'm....so sorry. You deserve better.

It sounds like your PCs are dumb, young, drunk, high or a combination of all of those. Maybe you could try something like Vampire or Mage where they can just fuck around the entire time and not have to worry about combat specifics?

>Four of the five players create interesting concepts, brief backstories they're proud of, figure out how theyre connected to the plot and other characters
>Fifth player is a naked barbarian named 'Steve Murder' who very loudly does a bad Randy Savage impression and keeps trying to do fist attacks in battle complaining that he's not doing a lot of damage.

>>55427172
On the other end of the spectrum, the Nat 1.
>I try to shoot him with my crossbow
>I roll a 1
>LOL DAT MEANS YOU SHOOT YOURSELF I NTEH FACE

Holy fuck are those people annoying.

>>55434729
Doing a bad impression is step one on the road to roleplaying, anon.

How many of us first started actually embodying characters just because they had a vocal quirk or strange accent we wanted to capture. Pirate characters are top notch for inducing this effect in reticent players.

>>55434763
Bad impression is fine, doing it loudly isn't. Also actively ignoring advice and then complaining that the game sucks is highly frustrating.

>Let players loot bodies individually, everything has its own loot including the shit they were carrying/using
>Players prioritize looting over everything even in combat, and spend more time fighting or arguing over loot than anything else
>Players complain all the time about the situation and the fact that the rogue has been getting 80% of the loot
>Assign loot arbitrarily so it's more fair and everyone gets personalized stuff at the end of a session or after a particular event
>Players complain about not being able to loot the mobs

>>55434803
Man I just gloss over the looting phase and say "You find enough gold that everyone gets x amount, one of this, three of that, and two of these" and my players are satisfied.

I get the feeling if I tried to do that with your players, they'd piss their pants with rage and start arguing with each other about distributing the money according to who contributed the most during battle.

>>55434803
>>Players prioritize looting over everything even in combat, and spend more time fighting or arguing over loot than anything else
Just like Boatmurdered.

>>55434726
Probably going to leave the group and get new players. They haven't changed over the years and after trying to get them into a more serious mood through attempting to act out NPCs, background imagery reference pages, and other things it just isn't working. As far as I can see after looking back over it all they just want campaigns to have no real difficulty, the ability to do whatever they want without consequence, and last session made one guy leave after dying for the umpteenth time.

Some are friends, most are acquaintances, but we've clearly been looking for different things in a tabletop session and I've gotten more than enough experience now to get new people in and try again from scratch.

>or a combination of all of those
Yes, despite past notices to keep most of that shit out but you can't do much for stupidity.

File: 1494012315140.jpg (54KB, 597x597px)

54KB, 597x597px

>>55434844
They literally would.

File: 1472375286997.gif (3MB, 200x170px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 200x170px

>>55434803
>capitulating to the players
(You) made this rod for your own back.

>Players complain all the time about the situation and the fact that the rogue has been getting 80% of the loot
Take your shit forcefully if he doesn't agree to reason? Rough him up? Kill him? Sounds like a problem the characters need to resolve among themselves.

>Players complain about not being able to loot the mobs
Thats what you get for giving in the first time. Give an inch an they will take a god damn mile. Most of the times a good "Deal with it" is what the players need to hear.

I cant just find a motivation to continue my game. Im too easily burning out from ideas, especially if there is a zero appreciation\reaction.

>>55434844

Lucky for me I run Shadowrun, which basically discourages looting everything because of what a bitch it is to change ownership on even the shittiest comlink.

>>55425950
That it doesn't matter how well designed and thought out your game is or how well you run it that good gming just comes down to charisma and good voices. If you happen to be a good looking voice actor for example you can run any old shit and people will think it's the height of the game.

>One character is built for fighting
>The only roleplaying she does is complaining about the lack of fighting both IC and OOC
>Last adventure was a long walk in a spooky forest with spooky shenanigans going on, with only one single fight right at the very end.
>Doesn't turn up to the latest adventure in our long running campaign because it won't have non-stop fighting.

I don't know what it is about our group, but we do barely any fighting. If there is a way to talk our way out of a problem we'll go for it 9/10 times.

>>55434942
Who hurt you anon? Who stole her from you?

File: 1499293698175.png (699KB, 567x598px)

699KB, 567x598px

My group is feverishly attached to Pathfinder and it's all my fault since that's what I introduced them to, though at the time I was new to the hobby and 3.5 was the only system I was really able to get books for.

I've put up with 3.5/Pathfinder's flaws for about a decade at this point, and what used to be cute little system hiccups have now become giant blistering sores that just take the fun out of game for me. I've tried to get them to play other systems: Shadowrun, Dark Heresy, Unknown Armies, Fate, Blades in the Dark, Trail of Cthulhu, D&D 5e, etc and they enjoy those campaigns and talk fondly of their characters, but comes time for them to GM it's back to Pathfinder. I'll keep trying to win them over with other systems, but I know deep in my heart that I'll be playing Pathfinder with them until we stop playing together as friends, and considering they've been buds for many years I don't really want that to happen.

>>55425950
Players who refuse to try to mediate a hostage situation.

Doesn't matter what game it is, if that guy is present, that hostage is dying.

>>55435000
Looks like your problem solved itself.

File: 1470086382077.jpg (39KB, 663x579px)

39KB, 663x579px

>Running tabletop games
>3/4 eager, enjoyable players
>Have one player that is "That guy" and really abrasive
>But we're basically his only friends
>Can't remove him from games or I'll feel bad for isolating him
>Can't run games because he'll just clash with other players

We still hang out sometimes, but we haven't played RPGs in a while.

>>55427072
If you can record yourself running a session. It's the best way to get feedback with players who are too nice.

>>55425950
My biggest overall gripe.
I give players cool stuff to use, I help them through character creation so they can pick cool abilities, I make encounters where using special tactics can really turn the tide. What do they do? They shoot the enemy with the same guns over and over again. Aside from one of them who uses all his buffing abilities to bail them out every time they do something dumb. The players have the most boring strategy in existence and one player is keeping them all alive.

My current big gripe.
When I ask every country to give me a quick list of their military forces, I expect it to be done in a week. If I have to update 15 people every week, you all can spend some time to write a page and a half about how your nation fights. I'm not looking to a 15-page codex (although some of them do this) I just want the basics. And it hurts them when they don't because when people attack them I have to assume that their military is weak if I don't know what it does, how it works, or even how big it is.

>>55435054
Coward. You are not some autists keeper. Drop him and make it Known that he is the problem. Don't enable them.

>>55435032
Why is this a problem? are they bad at pathfinder? can't manage a system they love? You have more time and space to work within the familiar borders of a familiar system and you complain that you don't have to to come here and bitch about how your players can't wrap their heads around your garbage game of the week. you should be pushing what pathfinder can do instead of whinging that otherwise fine sounding players are happy with the routine

File: 1378060356092.jpg (40KB, 500x388px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x388px

>>55434904
Just about done as well. Got to making the first room for next session and and just didnt see a reason to continuing. Will probably just tell my players its done soon and see if I can finally be a player in some other group and have fun for once.

File: 1459279837519.png (222KB, 640x360px)

222KB, 640x360px

>>55425970
THAT FUCKING FEEL

>Player playing chaotic good paladin
>Bullies people, steals, demands more money, kills everyone who doesn't lick his boots and acts generally lolsorandumb
>I ask him "Aren't you supposed to be playing a good character?"
>"Yeah, but I'm CHAOTIC good"

>>55435146
>you complain that you don't have to to come here and bitch about how your players can't wrap their heads around your garbage game of the week. you should be pushing what pathfinder can do instead of whinging that otherwise fine sounding players are happy with the routine

You do know this is a GM complaint thread right? Bitching is kind of the point.

If you want specifics then I guess a couple things that drive me up the walls is that they keep tripping over the same faults of the system every single time that they actively complain about like martial characters having shitty skill points, summoners, how a cool boss can be cripple into a joke via a single spell, how AC scaling means you gotta negate it almost entirely or watch none of your monsters hit, etc. On top of that I have my own beefs that they don't have like combats taking up huge chunks of the session, the crazy amount of system bloat Pathfinder has, and just exhaustion from playing dealing with this kind of shit for several years.

>>55435244
>Player uses the terms "Evil" or "chaotic" to behave like a goddamned autist.

File: 1281194418722.jpg (41KB, 200x259px)

41KB, 200x259px

>>55434904
>>55435164
You're not alone brothers.
>Been DM for almost a year, 2 short campaigns and an ongoing hexcrawl
>The entire point of playing a hexcrawl was for players to design dungeons as well and they would run those sessions when the characters discovered them
>Everyone agreed, I was relieved so that I'd be able to play occasionally and I wouldn't have to design every single thing we do
>4 months in, nobody has volunteered to run a dungeon or even put any thought into designing one
>Remind them, everyone says they want to
>Still nobody does
>Finally tell them I'm burned out and need a break
>"But there's no reason why we don't keep playing as a group. You guys need to sit in the DM chair for a couple sessions."
>"Yeah definitely DM!"
>Week 3 of my hiatus, not a peep from any of my group
>Life is suffering

People who got so used to Forever GMing that they sperg out when they're playing and can't handle not being in control.

File: 1459816856229.gif (93KB, 212x192px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 212x192px

>>55435539
>mfw trying to GM for our usual Forever GM
>"What do you mean I can't? It makes sense my character can do this"
>"Can we just handwave that I had that prepared?"
>Their characters are incredibly hard to work with to the point where it's questionable why they are even player characters

File: dude-what.jpg (21KB, 480x480px)

21KB, 480x480px

>>55427476
>especially in the count's throne room
i needed those sides

>>55435539
As a forever GM, it's less of an external sperg-out and more of an internal one, because I can't stop thinking about how I would have done this or that differently, or I know a better way to do it, or that's not how this rule works, and I destroy my own enjoyment of the game. I don't actually say any of this out loud, though.

>>55427728
I disagree here.
It's the DMs job to actually provide bait on the plothooks, not just the adventure-hooks themselves.

You gotta give people at least some hook tailored to their characters because expecting every party to work together perfectly as a team immediately from the start, always being interested in the same things and sticking together because "that's just how they were made to be" skips over some of the most interesting facets of adventure stories.

LotR and the Hobbit was pretty interesting as far as stories go right? Now think for how much of those stories the parties were together working towards the same goal in the same place.

>>55435734
This also goes for the rest of you
>>55432445
>>55433841
>>55434687

Tbh from my point of view as someone that DMd once and usually just plays, most of you sound exactly like the masters described in /that guy/ threads

>>55435539
>can't handle not being in control
When I am attempting to perceive traps just to have one of the usual idiots waltz through and trigger them all, yeah I'm going to be annoyed.
When I am trying to use tact and diplomacy, instead of the usual all-in fight leading to TPK that the others usually do, only to have someone come in with a completely unnecessary intimidate roll when negotiations were going fine yeah I'm going to call them a fucking moron.
When I am attempting to scout out a position beforehand instead of just barging into an enemy encampment without an idea of numbers or capabilities, but the barb just charges in making everyone else have lemming syndrome and get instantly killed YEAH it makes you wonder how these people even blink and breathe at the same time.

>>55435734
The group got together to play a campaign/setting. This usually implies that a session zero happened, or at the very least the group was told of what the next session was going to entail and to make their characters accordingly (good/evil centric and the like). So if you actively choose to be difficult and say "nah I'm good" then thats all well and good but you're not needed then. The hook is there now take it or leave it.

>LotR and the Hobbit was pretty interesting as far as stories go right?
No. The Hobbit was boring, Fellowship even moreso, Two Towers was good only during the two assaults, and the assault on the white city was resolved in the most lazy way possible. What was the point of using this as an example? That you liked it, therefore it's a good example for tabletops? That's silly, stop being silly. Some of them were level 1, others were mid, and a few more were high level characters. Do you have campaigns that allow for someone to just be a 15 level wizard but force others to be level 1 civilians? What if someone says the ring is a railroad device and doesn't take this "hook" because it seems forced upon their character?

>>55434626
At least your players are trainable.

>>55427728
>>55435734
Plus it's not even that difficult to force involvement of that loner character in this situation.

>After examining the strange meteorite, the commotion starts to collectively move to the local bar to deliberate about their findings.
>A couple of minutes later the barkeep raises his voice and announces:
>"It's clear then. We'd need a brooding dark assassin who specializes in corner sitting to solve this particular conundrum. Where ever could we find one?"

>Handing the player a note that reads:
>"Just before you entered the bar you saw the person of said description being dragged into a dark alleyway, making you the last to see them alive as well as see their assailant's face."

Or a relatively easy solution:
>Pulling the player aside after the session to have a chat with him.
>"Dude it seems like your character is not getting involved in the action as easily as the other characters are. Do you have any ideas what would need to happen for your character to get involved?"

One can solve these problems without being passive aggressive about them.

So maybe the player wanted to play the fucking game but it would've been more focused on the development of the characters and the party instead of the outside trials bestowed upon them by the GM.


That's not to say that the player couldn't have been an obstructive asshole, but i have had situations myself where 'just go along with the party' didn't make any IC sense for otherwise great characters.

>>55435884
Tbh from my point of view as someone that only DMs and never plays, you sound exactly like the kind of player that ruins sessions through irrational action and video game mentality if you cannot understand the frustration most of these posts are trying to convey.

>>55435884
>Tbh from my point of view as someone that DMd once and usually just plays

Your point-of-view is entirely irrelevant here.

>>55435929
>That you liked it, therefore it's a good example for tabletops?
That the majority of people liked it because of which the books became cult classics and the movies earned the most oscars ever to be handed out to a single franchise.
Which means that they are good storytelling.
I don't want to go into assumptions about what you like, but you have to at the very least accept that these fine examples of storytelling orked completely without a well banded together party.

>What if someone says the ring is a railroad device and doesn't take this "hook" because it seems forced upon their character?
You mean which is PRECISELY what is being dealt with in multiple situations in The Fellowship?

This is precisely my point. If an adventure needs to happen the GM can force the world to be a way that makes the people involved go along with it.

>>55435974
>Plus it's not even that difficult to force involvement
What if this person doesn't bite because they are feeling "forced" into it?

>Pulling the player aside after the session to have a chat with him.
>"I just don't see a reason to go along with it."
>Well what would?
>Says a ridiculous amount of payment or some ludicrous weapon that their character more than likely has never heard of

>That's not to say that the player couldn't have been an obstructive asshole
It's gotten to the point where this is almost always assumed to be the case for me. Look, you were told what this was going to be beforehand and you actively chose to make this character. Since you are not taking the hook even while being present in the location, or hell even sometimes being told that you and everyone else had gathered for this specific job in the first place, you can go ahead and take that sheet straight into the trash and try again until you make one that will fit into this party.

It's easy enough to convince yourself the character might go along with something, maybe they recently lost their home/money/belongings and need a quick buck. Maybe they are trying to get away from their past life and want to move on. Maybe they are just bored and wanting adventure I don't know, but to say that the DM simply HAS to conform to each and every single one of the players sensibilities in order to start off a campaign is dumb.

>>55427339
God this fucking one. It took fucking years to get away from this shit, originally it was god damn laptops with Alt tabbed games and people posting shit to each other. Once they went away and I literally forced them to use printed sheets some cunts still used phones. Now I'm in a state where only 1 of the 4 ever uses his phone, he gets 1 strike per session, if he goes on it for a non urgent reason I just take it off him.

I can spend a week or two planning a single session for my players to enjoy and this sack of shit can't stop gawping at his bullshit facebook feed for 4-5 hours.

The usual

>group takes very selfish actions constantly and have never considered that these actions may have consequences
>whenever these consequences show, or anything bad happens to the party, they believe it's me fucking them over instead of their own stupid bullshit decisions
>Treat all NPCs like they're just me telling them what to do, take everything NPCs say as though it's me telling it to them as the GM (I even do voices), which leads to stupid bullshit (like spending a session searching after treasure because some random guy on the street told them that there is TOTALLY millions of gold in the sewers)
>despite having total agency over their characters/the direction of the campaign, they'll never do anything but drink in taverns and fight in whatever arenas they can find.
>they then complain to me that there's nothing for them to do, despite being able to do literally anything and having like seven different questlines going at once (that they've mostly forgot about, again my players are dumb as fuck)
>despite having played weekly for a YEAR they forget basic shit

college stoner douchebags do not make for good players, but they're my friends.

>>55436063
>Which means that they are good storytelling.
That's not all that tabletop entails though and you know it. Sure, the party is split up because of random circumstances and I'm sure that's what your second chunk is about. Adapting the storytelling to those that may choose to not directly do the ring storyline but do the other things necessary to help the story along. But most people are not going to run multiple sessions in a week due to one or two players not accepting the hook, and most people are not going to wait potentially for hours at a time if the group does decide to split up to this degree for party B to finish their combat/rp.

>This is precisely my point. If an adventure needs to happen the GM can force the world to be a way that makes the people involved go along with it.
But my point is that in a movie/book the pacing and time allotted to the storytelling is completely up to the SINGLE person who chose to watch the movies or read the books. In tabletops you agreed to meet at a certain time, contribute to the party with your character and their skills towards the job/adventure that the GM more than likely spoke a little of beforehand, and do it all again after the fact. Some people expect to have the story crafted around them specifically, and will not accept your hook/path regardless of the rest of the group, and to those people you should simply tell them to roll up someone that will then because you all did not gather to entertain them personally for this session.

What if going down the path this one person was bitching about makes another person say that they do not see a reason for doing x? You going to split the party up now? Are you willing to make the separate parties wait while the others do their thing? What if they don't come back because of ideological differences? You have the time to dedicate to two, three, maybe four simultaneous storylines that will have enough content to satisfy all the players individually?

File: 1392937863045.gif (2MB, 324x178px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 324x178px

>>55436170
>make campaign
>cry about railroading
>give them control of the reigns and say we'll go sandbox if they want
>cry about nothing to do
>put in NPCs and a story line since they want something to do
>cry about railroading

Fuck em. You just can't please some people.

>>55436105
>What if this person doesn't bite because they are feeling "forced" into it?
That's an OOC reason. If they are complaining about an OOC issue, then they're being obstructive OOC not IC and can thus be immediately removed from the game.

>Says a ridiculous amount of payment or some ludicrous weapon that their character more than likely has never heard of
This is then a different problem that can be addressed in turn.
"This sort of reward is completely outside the scope of this campaign at this level. If you wish to play a higher level high-power campaign you might have picked the wrong group dude."

>hell even sometimes being told that you and everyone else had gathered for this specific job in the first place
Again, this is being obstructive OOC, because it's blatantly ignoring IC facts. Thus it can be met with swift and easy warning/kicking.

Generally "it's what my character would do" responses should be valid at all times.
-If it's not furthering progress then the GM has to try and do the carrot and stick thing, maybe even asking the player how to best go about it. It's collaborative storytelling after all.
-If it's actively annoying the other players, this is most likely something that should have been discussed before the character was approved.
-If it's actively conflicting with the tone of the game or making players uncomfortable, this is most likely something that should've been discussed before the player was approved.
-If it's causing inter-party strife, it is either a great opportunity for the other players to roleplay their characters and go through the organic motions of resolving disputes or should the other players be inept at this, an opportunity for the GM to work his magic with plot manipulation.

>>55435734
>Not making a character that'll go an adventures
Why are you here anon? I have five other guys ready to roll on this map for loot and glory. and you're sitting there with your dick in your hand watching sponge bob porn. So I'll ask again. Why are you here anon? you exhibitionist fuck?

>>55434626
It is a ton of work but if it's happening then at least that means they want to get better and are trying. Sometimes you aren't that lucky with the players you get.

>>55436063
>it's popular so it must be good
A lot of people like Twilight too. Is that good storytelling?

>>55436265
>Some people expect to have the story crafted around them specifically,
You don't have to craft the session around them specifically. You just need to give them a better hook, and maybe a different one to the rest of the party.
Which also answers:
>if the group does decide to split up to this degree for party B to finish their combat/rp.
They shouldn't split up to that degree, that was not the point. The point was that they were not unified in goals or in time and place.
You don't have to split the party into 5 different groups and have each member follow a separate agenda, but you don't have to force everyone to always push towards the same goal for the same reasons in the same place either.

>You going to split the party up now?
No i'd try to *give* them a reason for doing x or ask them what they would perceive as an adequate reason.
On the one hand you say that the GM is not there to entertain single players, but on the other hand you keep forgetting that the GM can just ask the players for input. He doesn't need to be the unknowable god of the gameworld.

>>55436317
>That's an OOC reason.
Says who? If they are simply in a tavern for instance, and you're hook for this lone That Guy is to hope that he hears this conversation going and perhaps hears mention of more people needed, the promise of welth, etc and still doesn't take it what can you do? Capitulate and let them tell you what to do as well as play? What if they say that their background flaw is that they don't trust others easily and therefore they choose to no t do it? How do you try to write them in? Lets just say the inn gets attacked after the fact and he fights the bandits off with the rest of the group but still decides to go his own path after the fact? That's IC, not OOC, and is still being obstructive and should be told to make a new character.

>Generally "it's what my character would do" responses should be valid at all times.
Agreed, but like my above "example" shows, they are completely in character but still chose to not join the story. Would you keep on designing the campaign to fit them individually or tell them to just make a new character? Pretty sure that's what most people are talking about here, players who actively choose to make lone-wolf asshats and are seriously expecting to still be apart of the group when you are trying to bring them in but they use IC traits to support why they won't.

>>55435986
>muh players don't use strategies and just deal the most damage possible
>muh players don't remember the name of each fucking NPC I created
>muh players narrate instead of roleplaying
I understand that I might have been extremely lucky with my rpgs experiences but role playing it's exentially a different form of narration in wich the public has an active role. It's not about having 4/5 people sucking your dick at the same time once a month. Nobody likes retarded weeaboos that only play the edgiest characters but adapting to your players in the name of fun isn't a dishonour. And if you don't want to just find another party.

>>55436317
>"it's what my character would do"
CREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

You are cancer
kys

>>55436430
>and maybe a different one to the rest of the party
What if the rest of the party was fine with it? What if changing a key element to fit the persons reasons would go counter to anothers?

>The point was that they were not unified in goals or in time and place.
But the time and place is the important thing here. If the point was NOT about splitting up why use the Fellowship as an example? The group literally splits into three separate parties that were 100% set on the same goal (stopping the coming horde/evil) though they had different ways of doing it. And there are going to be times when someone will just not bite regardless of what you could justify within their levels.

>No i'd try to *give* them a reason for doing x or ask them what they would perceive as an adequate reason.
And the reason is usually in that single hook. Not saying a GM needs to be omnipotent but story hooks usually implies session 1, the beginning of the end, bottom of the barrel, nowhere to go but up, and so on. So if someone is not going to accept the most basic of premises for grouping together at this level then it's usually safe to just continue on without them. Before it is a story, it is a game, and you agreed to said game by making a character, showing up to the agreed to time prepared, and playing. But if you choose to make yourself an outsider at the expense of the rest of the party, the time of the session, or the potential cost to the future of the story then you can sit your happy ass in the tavern for the rest of the session while everyone else gets what they came for. And maybe when they come around again looking a bit more well off and experienced you may choose to ask to join, but until then try not to piss your all black trenchcoat in your sleep Talos Ashbringer.

>>55436346
>I have five other guys ready to roll on this map for loot and glory
For storytelling instead of loot and glory.

It's ironic how some people ITT are complaining about players behaving like as if the ttRPG was vidya and then you go saying that you'd rather have 5 other guys who're ready for loot and glory.

>>55436409
Twilight didn't gather 475 awards in its movie adaptations and didn't define an entire genre for 50 years to come.


>>55436432
>the promise of welth, etc and still doesn't take it what can you do?
Have someone point out the guy in the corner of the tavern. Maybe be officially requested by the king/mayor to help out or get killed.
You're the frikkin GM, it's your world you can resolve almost anything IC.

>Capitulate and let them tell you what to do as well as play?
>Capitulate
Collaborating with your players to create a more fun experience for everyone involved is not "capitulation". It's not a damn powerstruggle between you and your players, or at least it damn well shouldn't be.

>they don't trust others easily and therefore they choose to no t do it?
Have them forced together thanks to random circumstance so they can slowly learn to trust the rest of the group. See the above ideas about the king's decree or just some reward that the character in question needs so much that he can't ignore. Or alternatively promise some grotesquely big reward which you never actually deliver on. Which could be the start of the next adventure.
>Lets just say the inn gets attacked after the fact and he fights the bandits off with the rest of the group but still decides to go his own path after the fact?
Make him unable to do that. Have the inn assault not end, have the other characters stick to him because of his awesome skills, or an NPC important to the others go with him, stuff like that.

You don't need to design the campaign to fit them, you just need to make it stick to them so they can't get rid of it.
It should haunt them wherever they go.

>>55426013
>I can not force myself to sit through a bad game to be polite so I made myself forever gm.
same brother.

>>55436456
>but adapting to your players in the name of fun isn't a dishonour

I don't think that a single one of these posts is saying that. Most are saying that adapting to a single person is bad, or that the groups are expecting a level of play equivalent to easy mode on dynasty warriors and are putting in efforts that they feel at least warrant a session without meme-spouting, dude-bro faggotry, and a modicum of thought into their actions.

>>55427378
That's as bad as just kicking him out. You can't just socially infantilize someone and expect them to stick around and enjoy themselves. No one will be happy if he does that.

>>55427339
I'd say if he can pay attention to two things at once, why not let him?

>>55436683
>Have someone point out the guy in the corner of the tavern.
This has happened before and they asked the group to leave them alone. Then complained when they did just that because "I was just being in character."

>Collaborating with your players to create a more fun experience for everyone involved is not "capitulation"
When you must adapt to only one person, it is.
>It's not a damn powerstruggle between you and your players
>players
Look at how you chose to use the "s" at the end of that. Now look at the rest of the conversation and see that the assumption is almost always that there is one, SINGULAR, person that is choosing to be Wolfy Blackheart and making it an active chore to move things along because of their brooding nature. But hey, its IC so no problem right? Just adapt to them right?

>Maybe be officially requested by the king/mayor to help out or get killed.
>You're the frikkin GM, it's your world you can resolve almost anything IC.
>Have them forced together thanks to random circumstance so they can slowly learn to trust the rest of the group.
>Make him unable to do that.
I have the feeling that you've never had players that constantly bitch and moan that saying they got up in the morning is railroading. Must be nice.