|
Post by Zulgyan on Aug 20, 2019 2:33:29 GMT -6
In my current AD&D 2nd ed campaign, the players are so obsessed with money and survival that they seem hesitant to even adventure at all. They are viewing the characters as extensions of themselves, only willing to do anything if there is a great reward and minimal risk. "I wouldn't risk my life by going into those sewers, why should Blurp the Bold?" I'm trying to shift their perspective to thinking of their character as being in a book or movie - what would be the most interesting path the character would take? No one wants to watch a movie about a bunch of dudes sitting in the tavern turning down adventures waiting for an easy gig. At times it really drags things down and gets frustrating, since this is supposed to be an action and adventure game, and I don't want to railroad/force them into an adventure out of spite. Bring the adventure to them like a horror movie: Wererat infestation! Orc invasion! Have their town attacked and make them fight for their lives.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2019 11:48:16 GMT -6
Obsessed with money? Why the Hell do they think men have risked their lives for treasure for centuries? Honest work pays a few hands full of coppers.
Or, more seriously, it sounds like they aren't actually interested in the game. If it's a game about adventure and the players refuse to adventure, they are not interested in the game.
Quit running it. Not gaming is better than bad gaming.
|
|
|
Post by peterlind on Aug 20, 2019 13:49:23 GMT -6
Strangebrew: A couple of comments and suggestions . . .
Is it possible that your players are not understanding how they fit into the game and setting? In some games/settings, players may think that the world revolves around them and that they are supposed to be the heroes. This is a more story-based approach to gaming. However, I do not believe that this is how D&D was originally set up. The characters are self-motivated adventurers that need no inducements to go out on adventures . . .
Is there anything that you can do to establish more trust between you as GM and the players? So players think that the GM is out to get them, but again, this is not how D&D was originally set up. The GM is a neutral judge and arbiter. For some hints, you/the players may want to check out the "advice" to "DMs" and the "tips" to "players" in B1. Something there may be helpful.
|
|
|
Post by peterlind on Aug 20, 2019 14:27:59 GMT -6
A couple other suggestions:
1. Offer up a couple of alternate short adventures, such as 1) something involving the local lord/lady, 2) a merchant needing escort for caravan to next town/city, etc.
2. For each day of idleness, roll for random city events like rolling for wandering monsters. Ways they can end up losing their precious money . . .
|
|
eotb
Level 1 Medium
Posts: 22
|
Post by eotb on Aug 20, 2019 20:00:21 GMT -6
My personal rules as a player
1) I do not hoard my wow-bangs. If I die with a sheet full of magical items or spells, then I played in vain. I am not here to advance a character, I am here to make fun memories with people I enjoy spending time with. Regular battles of attrition are slightly more interesting uses of my time than a 3rd grade math pop quiz.
2) Getting somewhere depends on rudimentary time management. Pixel-seeking for 45 minutes on something that isn't going to change the curve is wasting not only your time but everyone else's. I know there are one-way doors in the game, but most of the time you can come back with better information if it seems like you're missing something, rather than OCD on not-immediately obvious Q or A.
3) I surprise the DM - I do not find the margins and color inside of them. I find the weak points not considered and blow up the best-laid plans of my adversaries like the dudes walking away with their backs to the explosion. I am not concerned about dramatic tension; I am looking to dominate, bypass, confound, and neutralize. Moments of sheer panic will happen regardless but my goal is to have none.
4) Help other players have big moments - I know I'm a strong personality who will end up in a caller-like role whether consciously or unconsciously. So if leading a party, be a leader-servant. When other players are all looking at each other unsure of what to do, break the silence. When other players have an idea, help them make it happen. When you see a way for them to shine that they don't - put them in that position and try your d**nedest to make everyone the party's X factor from time to time. When you all get together over beers afterwards, no one wants to hear stories about one person's character.
5) Spend your d**n money - buy information, rumors, contacts, hidey-holes, strongholds (name-level or not), small armies of mercs, church support, adoration from the masses, and anything and everything else that gives your DM a lever to move your world. Whenever I look at a player's character sheet - presuming they have all of the basic game necessities met (training, maintenance, whatever) - and there's some ridiculous amount of gold scratched on there I feel like I'm sitting with a middle-manager only capable of following someone else's plan. Help them see the possibilities.
6) Have a short, medium, and long term goals that have zero to do with whatever the DM is cooking up - tying in with the above, adventure seeds are great - I'm always hunting for this stuff. But surely you know something you want to do that's intrinsic to yourself. Are you a fighter that wants a magic sword? Don't pine for it, drop out-of-game hints, or anything else. Start hunting for it. make it known. If you're a thief - make contacts way before you're thinking of setting up a guild in a few levels. Look for one ripe for takeover. Cleric? Where doth the church need extending its reach? Etc.
7) Contribute to the game world - make custom spells, items, and prayers. If you're a fighter, don't just found a stronghold - find a good natural harbor and start a new city.
8) Pay attention - be ready to roll. Don't be the guy saying "huh" every time. Speak up. Move things along. Write down stuff.
9) Be versatile - every time I see a player whine because they had a specific idea for a character in mind and must have that or their time isn't fun, I get flashbacks to every high-maintenance girl I've ever stupidly dated anyway. The warning signs are always there early, and they always come true.
10) There is no arc - embrace setbacks. This is not a novel. At this point there's nothing more boring than saving the world except a nice steady progress from week to week where my character consistently waxes in power. I don't invest in the bond market, and I'm not looking to play D&D to meter my progress through the level names. You're not really winning at D&D if you never lose. Gamble. Take big risks with the equivalent of monopoly money. If you're a character-driven roleplayer, seek the admiration that comes from a populace that sees your character rise from the ashes to become even better than before the tumble. Laughing off real adversity is the role most D&D characters should be playing, not the guy who always hits their scratch off ticket for $1 more than it cost.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2019 21:31:29 GMT -6
This is interesting, both the general topic, as well as the case explained by strangebrew: Overall, I think, the one defining trait all "good" players share is "gameness" - willingness to engage. You can get super-intelligent players, but unless they are not fundamentally willing to play along, the group will never work well. "Willingness to engage", as, for example, in that, while I don't necessarily cling to the concept of OD&D's "only the DM may know the rules", I assume that my interpretation of the rules will be generally accepted, and not continuously debated on a fundamental level. Or, for example, that I expect the party to generally follow directions - in that noone fundamentally tries to outsmart me while we're playing, as in that he or she actively tries to make the point that the story wouldn't make sense. "Fundamental" is the key word here: Some of this is always going to happen; discussing in-game situations is part of the game, and people bringing bad habits from previous gaming experiences is pretty normal, especially at our age. But "game flow" is a matter of personal trust, more than anything else. That's stuff that got to develop, over time. But whenever people come to the table not to "engage", but to "represent", that's when things are inevitably going to go South. Generally, though, I'd strongly avoid rating gaming experiences as "good" or "bad", or rating one's own gaming group based on a supposed (and mostly imagined) standard: 95% of this is not the rules, but the people at the table clicking with one another, and you can have a lot of fun even in "bad" games. Listening to the players is as important as having a well prep'ed script as a DM. - But as long as people keep coming back, something is right and "good" about your game. - Whether your game is "effective" is another matter, but personally I don't think that running "effective" (timed, paced, by-the-book) games is necessarily an indicator for a game being "good". The point, after all, is, first and foremost, to have fun. --- As to the case that strangebrew related, I don't think this is all too dramatic a problem: Just force the characters into the story, in the ways that have been suggested. Put them under siege, push them into action. - If even then they don't engage, best have a very open talk about what they want from the game. In my own experience, people of the 21 century can be pretty experienced roleplayers, and still fundamentally misunderstand how "sword and sorcery"-style campaigns work. D&D 4e did a good thing there, in that it explicitly defined which role each character has to fulfill for an adventure party to function; a likewise explanation might be useful for your party, from the sound of it. - Also, mind you that especially modern-day computer RPGs are mostly about "asset and resource allocation", and maximizing stats and profits. So, players emulating those strategies at the gaming table doesn't come as a surprise in the era in which "Dark Souls" is considered a good video game RPG, but "The Bard's Tale" isn't.
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Aug 21, 2019 8:01:09 GMT -6
Gary Gygax's take on what makes a good player:
From his interview in White Dwarf #14 (August 1979).
Allan.
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Aug 21, 2019 8:21:23 GMT -6
I've been DMing constantly since 1979, both in person, and online, so I may as well chime in with what I like to see from a player (in any game system)
IN PERSON GAMES Be decisive. I really don't care what decision you make, I can handle any decision, I just need you to make one. Run away or confront? Negotiate or fight? Go left or go right? If you need more information to make a decision, ask - I'll be happy to help
Be pleasant. Even if you an a fellow player do not exactly get along, put aside those differences for the sake of the game. The guy's a jerk but he's a wounded front-line fighter and you're the cleric - heal him!
Be engaged. If you know you need to roll a d20 when you attack, have one close to you. If you know you roll a d6 for damage, have one near you. Don't keep asking "where are we?" because you are staring at your phone all the time and not the map.
You don't really have to know the rules, you just basically have to have an idea of what your character is good at, and what success chances you can reasonably expect. The DM can handle the rest of it
ON LINE GAMES Post with reasonable frequency. I ask people to commit to two or three times per week, depending on the game and situation. If you post every 3 weeks, why are you there?
Also be pleasant, and be decisive. As we say in chess, a bad plan is better than no plan.
That's really it
If they are too hesitant to ever want to do anything, they should maybe play another game. This is a game of adventure. I have one game going currently where the party is basically refusing to explore anything because it could be dangerous. They have even ignored a treasure hoard they found because it could be trapped. I'm not sure why we are playing
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Aug 21, 2019 15:31:03 GMT -6
Be self-directed. If the DM offers you a setting and no premise, you should still go do something. Not that I would be happy with such a DM either.
|
|
|
Post by clownboss on Aug 23, 2019 10:02:04 GMT -6
No such thing as a good player. Anything can be good in D&D. Or rather, a good player in D&D is one that is not a disruptive player.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Aug 24, 2019 7:55:41 GMT -6
No such thing as a good player. Anything can be good in D&D. Or rather, a good player in D&D is one that is not a disruptive player. I’ve got to disagree. If it is a game, then there is good and bad play. If there is good and bad play, then there are good and bad players. As with any game, some of it is raw talent, and some of it is acquired skill through repetition and discipline. Now, where I might overlap with your point is that there is no one talent or one skill that defines good play in D&D.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 14:49:07 GMT -6
My problem is not so much with assigning good and bad player qualities *in theory*, but with the *practical consequences*: It seems to suggest that instances of bad communication at the gaming table are one particular person's fault alone. I hope we can all agree that this is not the rule: Usually, if a group doesn't play well together, it's simply more than just one thing.
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Aug 26, 2019 4:46:25 GMT -6
A certain way with the ladies, alluring aftershave, nice threads, sexy red convertible...
Oh. I think he means a different kind of player.,
*ahem*
Manners, courtesy, gamesmanship, verbal-social skills, ability to negotiate (not argue and hope that He-Who-Is-Loudest-Is-Rightest), brings his own dice, brings some meat/drink to the event, is courteous with one's spouse and children, knows what soap is, etc.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Aug 28, 2019 11:27:20 GMT -6
In my current AD&D 2nd ed campaign, the players are so obsessed with money and survival that they seem hesitant to even adventure at all. They are viewing the characters as extensions of themselves, only willing to do anything if there is a great reward and minimal risk. "I wouldn't risk my life by going into those sewers, why should Blurp the Bold?" I'm trying to shift their perspective to thinking of their character as being in a book or movie - what would be the most interesting path the character would take? No one wants to watch a movie about a bunch of dudes sitting in the tavern turning down adventures waiting for an easy gig. At times it really drags things down and gets frustrating, since this is supposed to be an action and adventure game, and I don't want to railroad/force them into an adventure out of spite. Because as a ploughman, Father's wage was six silver pence per year. Thomas the Bastard and his friends went down last week. Two came back. They had over twenty pounds Sterling between them. I'll risk Death rather than spend my life grubbing in dung like my father. Because that tavern tab is getting very large and it’s time to pay the price. Also, that really pissed off Wizard is in town again, the one that did you a big favor that one time. Well, has he got a job for you!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2019 13:34:12 GMT -6
Quit running it. Not gaming is better than bad gaming. Yeah, I'd find new players or, failing that, quit running the game. Running a game for these kind of players is like showing up to a game of Risk where everyone refuses to fight and says things like, "Yes, but why do I want to conquer the word" or "War, what is it good for?"
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Sept 20, 2019 16:16:03 GMT -6
Good players “don’t go into a kind of Anaphylactic shock when their character gets killed.” (Tim Kask in The Curmudgeon in the Cellar)
|
|