Dealing with certain characters.

[shadzar]

i dont see much of a problem here. Hack and Slash is a viable playstyle. it just doesn't seem to fit with your group, and you might jsut need to openyl discuss with the whole group if thee is a problem fromt he other players with this no fear player.


if the other players have no problem with it, then you shouldn't. it isnt YOUR game as a DM, it is the players.

you mention some do this, so that must be their preferred playstyle. maybe you are not a fitting DM for what they want since you want something els,e and shold offer someone else a chance to DM?


Either way you all need to discuss your ideas as a whole group and see what people are looking for out of the game. Then you will be able to figure out what is ging wrong.


It could just be people tired after long day and jsut want to bash things, or maybe they are uninterested in the "story" (Princes of the Apocalypse for example loses many peoples interest with all its confusion), or maybe they just want to tabletop Diablo?

the best course of action is to take time and talk to everyone. if it seems you are the only person having an issue with this, then just go with what the players want out of the game. if you are unable to give the players what* they wan because it conflicts too much with how you can enjoy the game as a DM... well, then you might not be a good fit to DM for this group?


without more details, there is really nothing to go on but blanket suggestions or accusing each other of things when nobody may be at fault on either side of the DM screen.


*Note: a GM isnt a babysitter and required to give the players everything all the time, that defeats the purpose of a game, and just becomes "play" or becomes some Munchkin-fest, which not all DMs enjoy and that is understandable. all DMs are players too and have a right to have fun, but we must realize what are limits of likes and dislikes during games are over time. and no DM can have everything ready at the drop of a hat if the playrs want one thing and the only thing the DM has had time for is something else. Maps don't draw themselves, and NPCs create themselves, encounters don't budget themselves, etc.

[celestian]

if the other players have no problem with it, then you shouldn't. it isnt YOUR game as a DM, it is the players.

I don't agree with this at all myself. Your players certainly have the choice of playing in a game they like (hack & slash or not) but the game is run by the DM and if he isn't having fun and he stops running it, it's gone. That certainly means it's his game. Even if he "hands off" DMing to another person, while he was running it, the game is his. That doesn't mean the players have no affect on the adventures choices, it just means w/o a DM there isn't a game. Let the players do what is within the system but there are also consequences.

If you want to run a RP heavy game I'd make sure to point that out in the blurb when looking for players. I wouldn't try to "make them change" to what you want tho. I tend go for RP lite and Action heavy games myself I think these days we call them "beer and pretzel games".

If your group has been together for a bit you could try and get one of them to continue DMing the game you're running (heavy action) and then start another and make sure everyone is aware of the style it will be.

[Bonkon]

Good Day All
I would not have a problem with starting the char at level one with basic starting gear and having an NPC fill the void left by the, in my opinion, selfish player.

[shadzar]

No, and you misquoted before you cherry-picked a line rather than reading fully the note at the bottom.

The world is the DMs, the game is the players. The DM can create anything in the world, but when the players are sick of it, they leave; the DM then has no game, but he stil has his world.

You are almost bringing back the DM vs player argument with a slight twist.

a game doesnt exist without a DM (unless apparently it is Gloomhaven), but there is only 1 DM, and it is a thankless job because the players outnumber the DM.. its THEIR game. they choose to play it or not.

the game can go on without the DM that began it, and that may be to the enjoyment of the players, because it is THEIR characters, NOT the DMs. they can take those characters and continue the game without the DM and with another DM.

the players get to keep their game, and the DM gets to keep his world, he is just no longer apart of the players game at that point. and if such a DM wants to use his world again he has to do more work to get more players into it.

either side of the screen can continue without the other side and replace that other side and the "game" continues, but it isnt the same game if it is all new players and characters, only the same world.

[Trenloe]

I don't think the OP even mentioned the style of their game. The issue is the player wanting to kill off a PC they no longer wish to play, and seemingly do this regularly so they have an optimized character for the next one or two chapter of the campaign.

"Hack and Slash" is an RPG style. It is combat centric. It doesn't necessarily mean that every PC in a hack and slash campaign is maxed out and the most efficient for that chapter of the campaign being played. In fact, a lot of enjoyment can be had from a hack and slash style campaign where the PCs are less than optimal. There's nothing wrong with a hack and slash game, if that's what you're after. But having issues with a hack and slash style player was not at all what the OP was asking.

[dulux-oz]

...it isnt YOUR game as a DM, it is the players..

I disagree. The power dynamics in any RPG lies firmly with the GM (see my last blog post for a more in-depth discussion) - without the GM there is no game, and with the current (and, some may argue, perpetual) shortage of GMs in our hobby a GM can always find players, whereas the players may not always be able to find a game (ie a GM) to play with. It is also the GM who has the most "ownership" in the game, being the individual who spends the most time, effort and money compared to any player, or even all (of the game's) players.

In relation to the OP's OP: its a player issue, not a character one. Talk to the player, explain to them why its a problem, and, ultimately, if the undesirable behavior persists, don't invite them to play with you any more - you can always find another player to take their place if that's what you desire. it *IS* your game, *YOU* are in charge, so don't put up with behavior that is unacceptable - after all, its your job to make sure that the group has fun - and that includes you as well.

Cheers

[Targas]

if the other players have no problem with it, then you shouldn't. it isnt YOUR game as a DM, it is the players.

Well, you asked for it... I disagree - partially. Same as Dulux-oz stated. It should be a game everbody enjoys. It sounds like a player issue, and I wouldn‘t mind asking a guest player to join as a possible replacement for any troublemaker. As a GM you can spend countless hours making a roleplaying session a refreshing. interesting experience. I seldom see Players spending much thought on their chars, but it‘s improving with all the adventures an adventurer will go through. So this player starting from scratch, will loose this immersion...
It definately helps motivating other Players to GM as well. It took me a year to bring my Players so far, but those who try enjoy to GM themselves (and understand the GM side better after being a GM themself.) Some don‘t like to GM, and it‘s not something for everyone. But to look over the edge and broaden the mind is a big step into better roleplaying, IMHO.

[JohnD]

I don't agree with this at all myself. Your players certainly have the choice of playing in a game they like (hack & slash or not) but the game is run by the DM and if he isn't having fun and he stops running it, it's gone. That certainly means it's his game. Even if he "hands off" DMing to another person, while he was running it, the game is his. That doesn't mean the players have no affect on the adventures choices, it just means w/o a DM there isn't a game. Let the players do what is within the system but there are also consequences.

Well said.

[shadzar]

I disagree. The power dynamics in any RPG lies firmly with the GM (see my last blog post for a more in-depth discussion) - without the GM there is no game

Really?

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...antasy-Grounds

This is a Dungeons & Dragons Fifth Edition adventure designed for one level 3 player, without a DM.

Part 2 -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMdEmgHsCkc

(I will be sure to let SmiteWorks employee, Rob2e, know he is [by your standards] playing D&D wrong, as well everyone that bought and enjoyed those games.)

and apparently it is the 3rd, meaning there are 2 others at least made for D&D 5e, and FG....

Shall i prove you wrong more?




and arguably all these can be played without a DM. https://www.tsrarchive.com/add/add-hhq.html

without a DM there is easily a game, proven with facts. that playstyle may not be your preferred playstyle, but others are NOT required to use your playstyle as the only one they have to play by.

[Trenloe]

(I will be sure to let SmiteWorks employee, Rob2e, know he is [by your standards] playing D&D wrong, as well everyone that bought and enjoyed those games.)

and apparently it is the 3rd, meaning there are 2 others at least made for D&D 5e, and FG....

Shall i prove you wrong more?

...

without a DM there is easily a game, proven with facts.

The facts? 5 solo adventures out of thousands of adventures published for D&D over the years. Way less than 1% - that's a statistical anomaly. It's laughable that you throw these out and think that this proves people "wrong more".

D&D is designed to be played as a group with a DM and players. Any solo adventures for D&D are produced to allow people to primarily play when they can’t get to a group - and they are basically pick-a-path books using the D&D system. Picks-a-path books have their place, and I’ve enjoyed many over the years. But I don’t class them as a role-playing game, and I definitely don’t see them as anything like a substitute for joining a DM to play with other players in the DM's game.

The "facts", as you put it, are that without a DM here would not be well over 99% of the D&D games played. And, it could be argued, D&D probably wouldn’t exist anything like it does today if it wasn’t for the hoards of DMs who made and ran the game for their players over the years - if they didn’t, there would not have been a game!

For the majority of DMs it is not a thankless task, it is something they do that they love and so they can play with friends (old and new) and enjoy creating a world and running a game that provides hours of enjoyment and social interaction. I actually feel sorry for you that your experience of the DM/Player dynamic makes you think that being a DM is a thankless task. That is far from my experience - I find running games for my friends incredibly rewarding and they are very thankful that I do. I’ve also been involved in many large RPGing societies and conventions and I can tell you that the vast majority of the players are very thankful and appreciative of the DMs who run games.