GM at a loss with group


Gamer Life General Discussion

1 to 50 of 64 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Ok,
I have been a GM for 22 years (give or take a year). I've had about 50 or 60 different players over the years, ranging in age from 12 to mid 50's. I've run GURPS, Shadowrun (1st, 2nd, and 3rd ed), Champions (3rd and 5th), WoD (Were, Vamp, WoD, both editions of each), Star Trek, Star Wars (d6 and d20), BattleTech, and I'm sure a few more I can't remember. I've had groups from 3 to 7 players, and in 3 different states. I've had both male players and female players.

I have never had the situation I have with one of my current groups.

Things are going down hill rapidly, although they started off well last year when we started off. Here's a list of complaints I've gotten, all handed to me in the last 2 months :


  • You are dictating my character to me.
  • You are not telling me what my character thinks is interesting, and what plot points I should pay attention too.
  • You're putting in too much combat and not enough intrigue.
  • If we're going to do Battletech next, I'd rather have just combat.
  • You don't give enough structure.
  • You don't give us enough flex to do what we want to do.
  • We don't feel like a team.
  • You need to make us feel more like a team.
  • Why doesn't everyone just shut up and play the game?

That's the hi-lights. When I ask for people to give me their background and character information and some personality information so I can flesh it out to match the world (it's a homebrew nobody really knows a lot about), I get one player saying ok, right on it. Another that says 'whatever, I'm good'. Another who says I'm dictating their character and building it in their place. And one who waits for everyone else including me to respond before they respond. I've literally had someone tell me they don't know what plots to follow because I didn't tell them the plot points to follow. And we never start on time, every single game is 30 to 90 minutes late. *sigh*

I've never, in all my 22 years, had this issue. I have another game that runs on a different night with different players, and I have no issues at all. The games start on time, everyone gives me feedback on what they want to follow up on. Not everyone get's into the RP as much as the hacking and slashing, but everyone seems to be happy they are getting enough of their favorite parts of the game.

I honestly am at the point where I dread even talking to anyone about the game, because it doesn't matter what I ask for or what I say or what I decide, one of them is going to give me a rap in the teeth and b&@~~ and moan.

Has anyone ever had to deal with something like this? I swear I don't know if I can take it much more. It's gotten so bad I actually dread the weekend. I've never given up on a game before, but I really am at my wits end on this. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rule N°2 : talk to your players.

We'll not be able to do miracles. Showing them what you wrote there could.


perhaps the group wasn't meant to be, if one only wants combat, another one only wants intrigue, it doesn't matter that you want to please them all, you can't.

I would have a session where you play card games or something, while talking about the game. Perhaps let someone else GM and see if maybe you are out of touch with the MMO-generation.

If someone doesn't get the plotline, perhaps make it more obvious or discard the plot and tell them that they can do whatever they want in the world and don't have to follow your plotline. This will probably become a "rob the world"-game, but being hunted by nations will make them feel like a group.


Maxximilius wrote:

Rule N°2 : talk to your players.

We'll not be able to do miracles. Showing them what you wrote there could.

Honestly, at this point, I'm afraid I'm too frustrated to get it across without it turning into an attack. Or at least being perceived that way. The last time I tried to explain how frustrated I was getting, I was told I taking it aggressively and that was the wrong way to approach the group. *sigh*


Eek!!!! that sounds like you have a group that wants to sit back and have you tell them a story, but then on the other hand not to tell them what to think or do and make sure you let them know when something important is happening.... And unless they want you to just railroad them with "this is what you can do next" adventures i would say find the players that you enjoy playing with and lose the dead weight. And the whole team thing is all on them, if they want to work as a team thats on them not you, along with thier character being intrested in the plot. But yeah good luck with that I dont think i would be gaming in that group for very long.


Hey man, I DM and have been gaming for as long as I can remember. I understand what your saying. I've been excited about creating a campaign, role playing, setting up bad A$$ encounters, fleshing out the world by having it revolve around the PC's, ect, ect, ect....only to have my world come crashing down by uninvolved players. Cut out the guys who seriously don't want to game, its that simple. Find other people who want to play. For those who just want to show up and beat up some baddies and hurry you into encounters say BYE, BYE. Its a sad reality of this game that after playing with a group for any length of time a player would ask the DM "Can you explain to me again why we are in this city/adventure/dungeon/quest/(ect, ect,)


Richard Leonhart wrote:

perhaps the group wasn't meant to be, if one only wants combat, another one only wants intrigue, it doesn't matter that you want to please them all, you can't.

Sometimes I feel like I can't please anyone. Several of those contradictory statements were actually made by the same person.

Richard Leonhart wrote:


I would have a session where you play card games or something, while talking about the game. Perhaps let someone else GM and see if maybe you are out of touch with the MMO-generation.

We tried that last weekend, we only talked about the game. I thought we'd worked it all out, but then when I asked for character details so I could flesh them out with world specific information, I got told I was dictating characters again. When I explained that I wasn't trying to dictate characters, I got told I was being overly aggressive.

Richard Leonhart wrote:


If someone doesn't get the plotline, perhaps make it more obvious or discard the plot and tell them that they can do whatever they want in the world and don't have to follow your plotline. This will probably become a "rob the world"-game, but being hunted by nations will make them feel like a group.

What I usually do is have a main plot line, and a bunch of sub plots that I toss out in the game. A lot of them aren't even fleshed out, just tossed out as a hook to see who bites. If someone bites, I flesh out that hook and either build it into the main one or set it up as an parallel subplot. I had one player follow up via e-mail because nobody else would follow up on them, one complain I didn't tell the plots, one say 'there were plots? I was just enjoying hitting people' and the fourth just ignore the whole thing when it came up.


Ouch...!

Before I started GMing my current campaign I sent the players a small batch of 'campaign options' which briefly introduced each campaign and gave some guidance on who/what/how the party would be.

I had a few basic themes ranging from 'intrigue' to 'beer and pretzels dungeon bash', from 'classic fantasy' to 'nordic themed' and the like (I'm sure I could dig up the primers if yuo were really that interested)
Similarly the starting level etc was defined, and having a clear theme allowed the party to work out who is doing what role etc.

I left it to the players to come back to me on which campaign they wanted, and with some concept of their characters. A team is something they are, and perhaps you just need to seed the discussion for them as they are struggling a little when not provided a clear unifying goal?

I suppose in some ways that would solve a few of the above points.

  • You are dictating my character to me.
  • We don't feel like a team.
  • You need to make us feel more like a team.
  • You're putting in too much combat and not enough intrigue.

    On the other hand,

  • You are not telling me what my character thinks is interesting, and what plot points I should pay attention too.
  • You don't give enough structure.

    After each game (or rather before the next session) I do a Facebook outline of 'what happened in the last episode' and a little bit of 'new news' to get their attention (ie - In the last few days the Local Thieves have been doing X, and the Wicked King Richard has been moving troops to collect the unfair taxes which has the locals talking...)

    Otherwise between games stuff just plain gets forgotten etc, and I'd prefer the party all on the same page at game o'clock.

    To some extent, having a few things they can pick up and run with gives that bit of flex they are suggesting they want as well...

  • You're putting in too much combat and not enough intrigue.
  • You don't give us enough flex to do what we want to do.

    Im a bit lost on the other few though:

  • If we're going to do Battletech next, I'd rather have just combat.
  • Why doesn't everyone just shut up and play the game?

    Not sure what thats about, if you care to expand a little perhaps we could chat more :)


  • Red Leaf wrote:
    Eek!!!! that sounds like you have a group that wants to sit back and have you tell them a story, but then on the other hand not to tell them what to think or do and make sure you let them know when something important is happening.... And unless they want you to just railroad them with "this is what you can do next" adventures i would say find the players that you enjoy playing with and lose the dead weight. And the whole team thing is all on them, if they want to work as a team thats on them not you, along with thier character being intrested in the plot. But yeah good luck with that I dont think i would be gaming in that group for very long.

    Yeah, I've been getting that advice from my old gaming group (I moved to another state). I hate to do that, I actually like all the players outside the game, and enjoy hanging out with them, when the game is not exploding and I don't feel like I'm a punching bag in a carnival arcade.

    I've just never dropped a group before because I can't find a way for them to enjoy themselves. It kind of feels like a giant personal failure on my part. :(


    You have to remember that you are doing this to have fun, if your not having fun stop wasting your time.


    Aretas wrote:
    Hey man, I DM and have been gaming for as long as I can remember. I understand what your saying. I've been excited about creating a campaign, role playing, setting up bad A$$ encounters, fleshing out the world by having it revolve around the PC's, ect, ect, ect....only to have my world come crashing down by uninvolved players. Cut out the guys who seriously don't want to game, its that simple. Find other people who want to play. For those who just want to show up and beat up some baddies and hurry you into encounters say BYE, BYE. Its a sad reality of this game that after playing with a group for any length of time a player would ask the DM "Can you explain to me again why we are in this city/adventure/dungeon/quest/(ect, ect,)

    LOL, the worst point of my life was one time when I went to a huge amount of effort to create a world, got it all built, had been in the game for 3 months (once a week games) and one of the players looked up from a book while we were waiting for a player to get back from the pizza shop and said 'Say, I've been meaning to ask, why are we trying to stay off this Komor's radar again?'.

    The entire group had been running away from the mech's of the Komor Republic since the first game session, because they found a lost tech mech (very advanced tech) and Komor was hunting down anyone that had found it to kill them and everyone they ever told about it.

    Dark Archive

    Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

    With out knowing which players are saying what. It sounds like there is just a big conflict in what the players want and or what you as a GM want to accomplish.

    I mean are all the players more or less saying the same things? If they are then it just might be a conflict in style between how you run and how they want to play. I have been in a group like that and it just end well.


    Shifty wrote:

    Ouch...!

    Before I started GMing my current campaign I sent the players a small batch of 'campaign options' which briefly introduced each campaign and gave some guidance on who/what/how the party would be.

    I had a few basic themes ranging from 'intrigue' to 'beer and pretzels dungeon bash', from 'classic fantasy' to 'nordic themed' and the like (I'm sure I could dig up the primers if yuo were really that interested)
    Similarly the starting level etc was defined, and having a clear theme allowed the party to work out who is doing what role etc.

    I did the same thing for this game, although we did it all in a room together. I said I can run a champions game, or a star wars, or a blah blah blah. And I gave them an idea of what I'd do for each type of game. Then they all went home and thought about it and hashed it out via e-mail.

    Shifty wrote:


    I left it to the players to come back to me on which campaign they wanted, and with some concept of their characters. A team is something they are, and perhaps you just need to seed the discussion for them as they are struggling a little when not provided a clear unifying goal?

    I suppose in some ways that would solve a few of the above points.

  • You are dictating my character to me.
  • We don't feel like a team.
  • You need to make us feel more like a team.
  • You're putting in too much combat and not enough intrigue.

    On the other hand,

  • You are not telling me what my character thinks is interesting, and what plot points I should pay attention too.
  • You don't give enough structure.

    After each game (or rather before the next session) I do a Facebook outline of 'what happened in the last episode' and a little bit of 'new news' to get their attention (ie - In the last few days the Local Thieves have been doing X, and the Wicked King Richard has been moving troops to collect the unfair taxes which has the locals talking...)

  • The new news might not be a bad idea, I really should have done that. But I kept throwing out hooks and nobody responded to them, so I took that as they were happier with the combats than the RP, so I started concentrating on that.

    As to the rest, I really, really, really don't like telling people what their character thinks, or feels, or anything like that. It makes me feel like I *am* dictating their character to them. I've always felt that a player should decide what their character finds interesting or not interesting, what they like or hate or have a problem with in character. For me to do it... it's honestly like dragging fingernails on a chalkboard. I literally get a little sick to my stomach doing stuff like that. And to pointing out plot points with giant yellow flags, I kind of feel like at that point, I might as well just stand up and recite a story rather than GM.

    Shifty wrote:


    Otherwise between games stuff just plain gets forgotten etc, and I'd prefer the party all on the same page at game o'clock.

    Yeah,

    I've been trying to avoid that. I usually spend the first 15-20 minutes of the game reminding everyone what happened last time (and I usually do hit the plot points in that recap, I just don't hold up a yellow flag and scream 'PLOT POINT 1! PLOT POINT 37!' after each one).

    Shifty wrote:


  • If we're going to do Battletech next, I'd rather have just combat.
  • Why doesn't everyone just shut up and play the game?

    Not sure what thats about, if you care to expand a little perhaps we could chat more :)

  • Oh, we were discussing what to do instead of the current game, which pretty much imploded because nobody was interested. Well, that's not true, I had one person who was VERY interested, one who was having fun, one who just didn't understand the plot, and one who didn't like his character.

    So the first one about the battletech was a comment made, which made me want to slam my head against a table, because it was made 5 minutes after a different player said they wanted less combat.

    The 'why doesn't everyone just shut up and play' was the complaint of another person made later after everything blew up again via e-mail. :(


    Dark_Mistress wrote:

    With out knowing which players are saying what. It sounds like there is just a big conflict in what the players want and or what you as a GM want to accomplish.

    I mean are all the players more or less saying the same things? If they are then it just might be a conflict in style between how you run and how they want to play. I have been in a group like that and it just end well.

    Yeah, I'm trying to keep it anonymous. I don't think any of my players read these forums, we don't play PF (at least, not when I'm running so far) and they don't really get into forum surfing, but I'd still rather at least try to keep the appearance of keeping things anonymous if I can.

    But no, it's not all the players saying the same thing. It's actually more like player A says this, player B says something else but then agrees with player A (contradicting themselves) when player A elbows them in the side. Player C says something else, and Player D says 'whatever, I don't care, let's play'.


    I wouldn't suggest telling them necessarily how they feel or respond, thats always their bag - I'd just treat it like 'news' on TV, up to them to respond to it...

    If they seem a bit slow on picking up the various hooks (Holy Plotdevice Batman!) lying around (or until they clue on that this is what you expect) you might ask them to loosely give you a suggestion of intent well before game day.

    I've had the players flat out ignorehooks because they had their own agenda, which is fine, but as a GM if I know where their heads are at I can plan things accordingly. So I'm keen to get the 'news'/recaps/intentions out well before game-day to avoid getting nailed by some unexpected player whimsy of going off to quest for some odd sidetrek.

    On that note, any admin (like working out crafting stuff etc) gets done on Facebook too, I have a pet hate of stopping a game so that the party can work out how much time and money it will take to make umpteen widgets... talk about immersion wrecker.

    Ive heard that 'shut up and play' conversation before at a table, worked out it was a huge disconnect between the wants of a Rollplayer vs a couple of Roleplayers. He just wanted to get to the killing parts.
    Managed to sort it out eventually once it became clear what his frustration was.


    Shifty wrote:

    I wouldn't suggest telling them necessarily how they feel or respond, thats always their bag - I'd just treat it like 'news' on TV, up to them to respond to it...

    One of the complaints was, and I quote, "I don't know what my character would feel is important unless you tell me what they feel." *boggle*

    Shifty wrote:


    If they seem a bit slow on picking up the various hooks (Holy Plotdevice Batman!) lying around (or until they clue on that this is what you expect) you might ask them to loosely give you a suggestion of intent well before game day.

    Worked in my PF game, didn't here. They said they weren't sure what they wanted out of the game.

    Shifty wrote:


    I've had the players flat out ignorehooks because they had their own agenda, which is fine, but as a GM if I know where their heads are at I can plan things accordingly. So I'm keen to get the 'news'/recaps/intentions out well before game-day to avoid getting nailed by some unexpected player whimsy of going off to quest for some odd sidetrek.

    Yeah, I'll give the 'new news' thing a try, see if that helps. Assuming things don't continue to go blooey.

    Shifty wrote:


    On that note, any admin (like working out crafting stuff etc) gets done on Facebook too, I have a pet hate of stopping a game so that the party can work out how much time and money it will take to make umpteen widgets... talk about immersion wrecker.

    Most of that stuff I let the players handle themselves at the table while other people are involved in things. I have a player who likes to craft weapons, so I helped him figure out how many sp's he gets per day taking 10 while traveling, and how many while sitting in town during down time. He keeps a bag of holding with 50 lbs of coal, a small dismantlable forge, a bellows, and a set of MW tools and a MW anvil. Then he just asks how many days they spent travelling, divides out the cost of his current project, and when he's done he says 'I give the rogue his Bulette claw short sword, buy some more materials in the next town, and replenish my coal' and starts on his next project.

    Shifty wrote:


    Ive heard that 'shut up and play' conversation before at a table, worked out it was a huge disconnect between the wants of a Rollplayer vs a couple of Roleplayers. He just wanted to get to the killing parts.
    Managed to sort it out eventually once it became clear what his frustration was.

    Actually, the person who said that enjoys both, they were just frustrated that we weren't roleplaying or doing combat, we were instead arguing over who caused what problem first.


    "I don't know what my character would feel is important unless you tell me what they feel."

    Whaaaaaaaat theeeeee f....


    Shifty wrote:

    "I don't know what my character would feel is important unless you tell me what they feel."

    Whaaaaaaaat theeeeee f....

    That response seems very familiar... Oh yeah, it's the one I choked down at the table so as not to make things worse.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    "Look guys, I have been doing this a long time, and I mean a loooong time, and I think I know what the problem is........ ya'll are terrible. I mean really really terrible, not just a little bit, but don't worry, I have a solution! I'm going to get up. Then I'm going to walk over to the bathroom, and use it. By the time I get back, everything will have gotten better, as in, ya'll won't be nearly as terrible. If, for some insane reason that I cannot possibly fathom, you haven't gotten less terrible, ya'll need to leave." ~~~ Walk to the bathroom ~~~


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Stubs McKenzie wrote:
    "Look guys, I have been doing this a long time, and I mean a loooong time, and I think I know what the problem is........ ya'll are terrible. I mean really really terrible, not just a little bit, but don't worry, I have a solution! I'm going to get up. Then I'm going to walk over to the bathroom, and use it. By the time I get back, everything will have gotten better, as in, ya'll won't be nearly as terrible. If, for some insane reason that I cannot possibly fathom, you haven't gotten less terrible, ya'll need to leave." ~~~ Walk to the bathroom ~~~

    LOL

    Not my style, but thanks for the laugh, I needed it.

    EDIT:
    As I read that, I had Frank Caliendo echoing in my head, reading it as Charles Barkley.

    "Look guys, ya'll are turrible, I mean really really turrible..."


    I would consider telling them that you get the feeling that you will never make them all happy and that it is driving you crazy. As a result you are just not going to be able to GM for a while for them but as you like them all and would still like to game that you will sit back and be a player. Who else would like to GM?

    What you are doing here is a couple of things:

    1 - Helping distance yourself from the bad feelings so that when it does come time to talk about it you are in a place that you can do so effectively.

    2 - Letting them know that abusing you as GM will cause you not to GM. That's ok, and it's important. Your fun is just as important as anyone elses at the table.

    3 - If/when another one steps up to run, watch what it is they are doing. What type of game do these people like? Is it possible to make them happy or will the contradictions just keep coming no matter who runs it? It is possible that you won't be able to run a game that this group likes because of the variety of wants in the group... accept that if it is the case and not run for them. If the situation is that you can't make them happy and you can't be happy in that situation then don't put yourself in it. Or... maybe you can see that they all b#&%+ and moan until they get into it and it is all fine... who knows.

    4 - Putting the onus on them to step up and fill the big boy shoes... sounds like some of them likely haven't experienced that. People who GM themselves often (but not always) make better players.

    Sean Mahoney

    Dark Archive

    Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
    mdt wrote:
    Dark_Mistress wrote:

    With out knowing which players are saying what. It sounds like there is just a big conflict in what the players want and or what you as a GM want to accomplish.

    I mean are all the players more or less saying the same things? If they are then it just might be a conflict in style between how you run and how they want to play. I have been in a group like that and it just end well.

    Yeah, I'm trying to keep it anonymous. I don't think any of my players read these forums, we don't play PF (at least, not when I'm running so far) and they don't really get into forum surfing, but I'd still rather at least try to keep the appearance of keeping things anonymous if I can.

    But no, it's not all the players saying the same thing. It's actually more like player A says this, player B says something else but then agrees with player A (contradicting themselves) when player A elbows them in the side. Player C says something else, and Player D says 'whatever, I don't care, let's play'.

    It sounds like there is a conflict in what people want and possibly with out knowing the people. That they might be use to most modern games. Where NPC's have big glowing ! over their head or something if they have a quest for you to do. Where everything is spoon fed to the player and the RPing is more of NPC says this and you have 4 options to respond.

    Not saying the above is true but it is starting to sound that way from the stuff you are saying. But regardless this is sounding like their is just a major conflict in play styles all around and if the players won't work with you and each other to compromise and make things work it never will.


    I'd say give the GM position to somebody else in the group and see if they can do it better.

    Grand Lodge

    I'll go with Sean - take a break.

    Put the campaign notes away (dont throw them out) for another time or group.

    Sit back and watch how the others play from the point of a player while you leave one of the others to fill the GM seat.

    Avoid the urge to slap them for doing the same 'mistakes' they accuse you of or asking 'how is this different with this game?'

    Dark Archive

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I had a similar problem involving veteran players... Smart phones / Game Books / Normal books being read or used at the table with way too much cross talk and no one paying attention.

    I stopped DM'ing them, took the one respectful player i had and started another group of newbies. Boy what a joy DMing them is... everything exciting again, they are very respectful bunch of guys and gals. The old group got the hint. After about 6 weeks I went back and said i will DM again but if any of the old habits start appearing... I will be taking another break.


    If you're living in the States, can't you just keep a shotgun behind the GM screen and pump the next bastard who says "you are not telling me what my character thinks is interesting, and what plot points I should pay attention too" full of lead?

    The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

    Don't GM again until everyone else in the group has had a turn.

    Scarab Sages

    Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

    Hey mdt, been DMing as long as you and I've had basically the same groups for several years each, changing a player here and there. We started Pathfinder 18 months ago and all was going well but then some players started to metagame constantly and others wouldn't bother to read the rules as they're characters gained level (assuming nothing had changed since 1st edition). Then one player started complaining constantly about the rules and I lost it and decided to quit DMing. Basically I got to the point where I was dreading the next session and thought all my hard work was for nothing.

    At the same time a fellow Sydney-sider contacted me about looking for a group, he offered to DM so I grabbed 3 of the players who weren't the cause of my problems and started a new game. Now unfortantely that new DM had to to a break due to RL so I decided to take over DMing once more.

    Frankly I'm loving it with this group and though I have run a game or two with the old group since "quitting" I really couldn't care less about that game and hope that they lose interest or a TPK happens next session so I can wipe my hands of it

    My advice if you've tried everything and it's not working, dump them and focus on the other group (and be thankful you have another group). If they really want to play they'll get their #$%^ together and change.

    Sometimes you find players love hanging out,laughing and rolling dice but they really don't LOVE this game. That's the type of players I intend to avoid from now on.
    Reebo

    Silver Crusade

    Red Leaf wrote:
    You have to remember that you are doing this to have fun, if your not having fun stop wasting your time.

    Rule N°5.

    *Puts his sunglasses*

    Grand Lodge

    Reebo Kesh wrote:


    At the same time a fellow Sydney-sider contacted me about looking for a group, he offered to DM so I grabbed 3 of the players who weren't the cause of my problems and started a new game. Now unfortantely that new DM had to to a break due to RL so I decided to take over DMing once more.

    What suburb of Sydney do you play from Reebo?

    Scarab Sages

    Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
    Helaman wrote:
    Reebo Kesh wrote:


    At the same time a fellow Sydney-sider contacted me about looking for a group, he offered to DM so I grabbed 3 of the players who weren't the cause of my problems and started a new game. Now unfortantely that new DM had to to a break due to RL so I decided to take over DMing once more.
    What suburb of Sydney do you play from Reebo?

    Currently we play at Epping - 4 players + 1 DM. We think the old DM might come back as a player after Xmas but I'm always looking to make contact with new players should we need a new player in the future. Drop me an email at reebo1 AT tpg DOT com DOT au.

    Reebo


    hm, if noone else in your group wants to GM, maybe try a different approach to GMing:

    I sometimes come to games completly unprepared, perhaps a general idea, and a more or less layout for a dungeon. I let them start in a town, and see what they do. If they get bored, some action happens. If they ask for the next orc village to raid, there will be one, with perhaps that dungeon I had. Same for evil wizard tower or whatever. For Monsters, GM-screen is you friend, fudge 90%.

    Go into the game, completly free, expect nothing of your players, no background story, nothing. If you do it right, and aren't too shabby at improvisation, they'll never notice (my players never did till I told them when the campaign was over).

    Silver Crusade

    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

    Sydneysiders represent!

    In any case, it really sounds like you might need to prune the group a little and explain what your view of the game is, so the players don't come in with unsupported expectations.

    Something as simple as:

    - The game is to begin promptly at 7 O'Clock, I suggest you arrive at 6.30 if you want to chat or have some rules questions answered or shop for gear.
    - I control the world and NPCs, you control your characters and their reactions to the world.
    - I like to run games that are a mix of roleplay and rules, I hope you like both these aspects, but if there's one you prefer over the other please try to participate actively in both. If you wait a little the aspect of the game you enjoy the most will likely turn up again.
    - I expect my players to keep a track of the plot, a journal will be given to a random player at the beginning of each session. That player MUST keep a simple chronicle of the evening's events. If YOU think something is important write it down. If it's written down then we BOTH know it's a plot point and I'll make sure to expand it.
    - I expect my players to keep track of the monsters, traps and challenges faced during the adventure, so at the end I can tally experience.
    - I expect my players to keep track of gold, loot and treasure gained during the adventure.
    - I try to be flexible enough to accommodate player choice, but sometimes I'll be thrown for a loop. Occasionally I'll need to take a few minutes to retool the adventure, please be patient while this happens.
    - If you're not sure how to proceed in an adventure, ask an involved NPC for advice, maybe they might have a suggestion. I control the NPCs remember, which means that if you ask someone for help, they have a direct line to me :)

    Also, I'm running Kingmaker, and before each session I throw down a bunch of "Quest Cards" on our facebook page asking which "hook" the group would like to follow next. That way when I'm prepping the adventure I can focus on the part I know the PCs will be interested in following. During the adventure plans can change of course, but having an adventure goal like: "Retrieve the McGuffin" or "Slay the Beast" or "Find the missing person" keeps the adventure moving even if the players go off track, I know whatever events I pull up next should guide them to the overarching plot.

    Grand Lodge

    Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

    Take the advice of Kenny Rogers.

    Know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run.

    You and this group are not a good fit. You know this, they know it. There's no shame in owning up to the inevitable.


    From the first description it looks to me a poorly mixed group that have different ideas and expectations of the game. With at least some of them suffering from lack of expectations (uh... "I don't know what my character is feeling, tell me what my character is feeling..."?! - more about it later).

    Maybe try gathering them for a talk - talk about their expectations about the game style. Take into account possibility of splitting the group according to their wishes and expectations - if two of them want combat and two of them want intrigue maybe try to form two groups and find 1-2 players to complement them?

    And in case of "telling what my character is feeling" - I had from time to time asked GMs for cultural clarification that could influence my charcter's opinions, on other occassions I had players asking if their characters could guess/think the same what they thought about certain facts or events (usually in the form "can I with my Int 13 come to that conclusion?").


    I feel ya man. I really do. A couple years ago I had one of these parties. It basically boiled down to a poor group dynamic mixed with a clash between my DM style and what the problem player wanted.

    In my example, I had six players, and one of them was causing issues and being disruptive.

    To resolve it, I spent two months trying to cater to what he wanted, but it caused issues with the other members in the group and in the end, we had to replace him due to the clash. It wasn't personal, it was just that what he wanted out of the game was not what the game was providing him.

    Shadow Lodge

    You should explain to the group that you don't feel comfortable gaming with them, that your playstyles don't seem to mesh, and leave. I don't think being a player under one of them DMing is a good idea, but it is possible, I suppose.

    I had much the same trouble starting my Shackled City game, when the couple playing the halfling rogues complained that there was too much combat and not enough roleplay. (Despite only showing up every other session, and unfortunately missing all the roleplay that setup the combats.) I had a very lengthy email conversation with them that ended with them amicably dropping out of the game.

    Hopefully your players will be as reasonable as mine were.

    Scarab Sages

    Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

    Honest opinion: End the game and stop gamemastering for this group for awhile (maybe 2 or 3 games). Let one of them GM. Calmly explain you don't have time to run a game any more, and tell them that you'd love to be a player in one of their games if they'd run one. If no one runs one, find a new group.

    Reason: It sounds like your play style isn't meshing, and if someone else GMs you can see if they are a venomous game group or not. It could be just one or two people causing problems, and that's a sure fire way to find out. Maybe they all are used to different types of games. Maybe one or two are just rabble-rousing your game. Maybe you're not as clear as you hope you are when explaining (happens to me all the time, take this post: I may come off as a jerk, and I'm sorry for that).

    Also, being a GM is suppose to be fun. I enjoy telling people about my game. Running something and hating it is counter-productive.


    Reading through this you clearly want to stop, I just don't think you are aware of it. You clearly are not having fun with this group. Cut your loses and leave them. It will work out for the better trust me. For I too have gone through something all too similar.


    Everyone has given some great advice, or else given me a smile or some encouragement. Thanks everyone. I'll let you know how it turns out. Right now I'm leaning toward stepping down as GM if anything else comes up. Since I suspect it will... *sigh* Anyway, thanks again.

    Shadow Lodge

    Do your best to keep your cool, man. Be the reasonable one if things go south. It is, after all, just a game.


    mdt wrote:
    Several of those contradictory statements were actually made by the same person.

    What a shock. If it's that big of a downer for you, end or suspend the campaign and force one of them to run something for a while and ride their asses for no reason with contradictory feedback.

    Or just find new people. Life is too short to share your fun time with jerks.


    mdt wrote:
    Everyone has given some great advice, or else given me a smile or some encouragement. Thanks everyone. I'll let you know how it turns out. Right now I'm leaning toward stepping down as GM if anything else comes up. Since I suspect it will... *sigh* Anyway, thanks again.

    Quit your group, come to munich and DM for us ;)


    I think maybe a few collective storytelling excersizes might be in order. It seems to me there is a big divergense in expectations, and the group needs to learn how to mesh. RPing is all about taking what people give you and working with it, adding in your own ideas and passing it along. It sounds like some in your group have forgotten they need to give and some have forgotten they need to take.

    A few games of once upon a time, or maybe something more structured. I got one off a podcast that I really like called narative control if you are interested.


    My only advice is to gauge whether you feel the enjoyment you receive is worth the effort or not; some games, sadly, just don't measure up. I LOVE gaming; which is why I don't want to waste my time or enthusiasm on games that rob me of both. Consequently I've quit a few groups for that very reason.

    By your own admission, you've started to dread this game. So try to imagine the best case scenario in which, after discussing the matter with those involved, everyone finally understand where the others are coming from and offer enough concessions to each others' play-style so that they can play together civilly. It might be hard but, can you picture it in your mind? If not, then you know it's better to let the campaign end and move on to better things, perhaps with different people. If you can imagine it, then you have to first judge whether achieving it seems feasible and second whether what you're imagining will be worth the stress and effort of getting there.

    I feel for you; I really do. But I still have you beat. One player in a dysfunctional group I once GMed sent me a carefully worded eighteen page manifesto describing the many ways in which I sucked/failed as a GM in his eyes. I ended that game shortly thereafter once I realized that he and I were looking for completely different things in a game. It's been many years since then but I sometimes dig out that old email to reminisce and to admire the man's determination to get what he wanted the way he wanted it.


    I have to say I feel bad for you. I am completely confused by the player response you are getting. If this happened to me... well I would be a bit lost myself. I can only assume that you have a strange mix of newbies and jaded players in this group.

    My first thought was maybe you could try eliminating the side plots. They don't seem to want to find their own way and the way you present those side paths seems to just be confusing them. I would simplify the game a bit by building around one main plot path, Using uncomplicated NPCs, and try out different game pacings on the group to see if maybe that is part of their issue?


    mdt wrote:
    Maxximilius wrote:

    Rule N°2 : talk to your players.

    We'll not be able to do miracles. Showing them what you wrote there could.

    Honestly, at this point, I'm afraid I'm too frustrated to get it across without it turning into an attack. Or at least being perceived that way. The last time I tried to explain how frustrated I was getting, I was told I taking it aggressively and that was the wrong way to approach the group. *sigh*

    My first inclination was, what a bunch of losers. I am like you, DMed a lot of systems, a lot of players.

    First, tell EVERYONE that it is MANDATORY that they submit a background history before the next game. Give them a deadline. If you get 3 responses, they go with the three and kiss off the others. If you get two, tell the two they are invited to a new game, disband the current group, and get some new players. If they can't think of something, they aren't trying; and no, 'I am orphan' does not count.

    Here is an example of character history, one paragraph of 7, that I wrote . . . .Irene is the third surviving daughter and sixth surviving child. Since the third son had joined the clergy, Mom and Dad thought it would be a good occupation for their youngest child. They already had two daughters to marry off and could not afford a third dowry. It was either that, a brothel, or a workhouse. Fortunately, the Dawnflower clergy were accepting acolytes with aptitude. At the request of her older brother, she was tested and accepted into the clergy at age 6.

    Second, after you get the history, tell everyone INDIVIDUALLY that they MUST also have a SECRET. Like a half orc that looks human. Tell them its between you and them and NOT to be told to anyone else. It should be something that is both an adventure hook and something to keep them on thier toes.

    On the other hand, if really have to have people in the game who are uncooperative, tell them thier history. If they can't RP it, well, you gave them a chance MU HA HA HA!

    /cue Chaotic Evil Laugh


    Helaman wrote:


    What suburb of Sydney do you play from Reebo?

    Geez mate, a good session at Maquarie Con and now you are working on picking up for home games too!

    That said, I might sneak out to the next Shadowlodge...


    I guess I can relate to some of the players, I'm not really a fan of homebrew worlds that create plots around my desires. It gets even more brutal when everyone's desires for the campaign are something different, which sounds like the case here.

    I prefer APs, modules, and scenarios, that's the kind of plot structure I think some of your players are looking for. When you play an AP, usually the player know what kind of campaign they're getting ahead of time, and they can participate or not participate in it. So one suggestion is to play a structured campaign (but you probably like homebrew worlds), and if you want to play a homebrew world and some players don't like that structure, maybe it's a bad match.

    Hey, maybe even try Pathfinder society with the group. It's low commitment on your end and their end too.

    It also sounds like everyone in your group wants different things from the campaign. Some want structure, others want more flexibility, some want combat and others want more intrigue. I suggest to maybe break the group up into either 2 separate sessions, or 1 session (and keep the players or playstyle you like).

    I also recommend that you take a break. If things are getting unfun and stressful, I just wouldn't GM. If you take a break and still want to come back to that group, do so. If you don't feel like it, maybe you're better off without. Life is so busy, it's hard to imagine you can't find something else to do.


    My advice is probably going to seem way out of left field, and probably a little insane... but I am tossing it out there because it actually worked for me just a couple years back when I was at the point that I couldn't enjoy sitting down to play a game with some friends because of the same sort of stuff the OP details.

    Drop everything. Get everybody involved together and let them know that the game is over, period.

    Then, once everyone is fully on board that the game is done - really done, not just on hold, break, hiatus, or any other synonym for not flushed down the toilet - ask them what they want to play.

    It may be best to have a few pre-fab adventures present and let the group decide as a group which one to play - the point is to get something out there that has a clear "you need characters that will want to accomplish [goal set by the adventure, mentioned no doubt in either the pre-adventure blurb or on the back cover]" for the players and doesn't require personal investment of any significant amount on your part.

    Playing through an adventure or two like that establishes a clear framework for them to play around and lets you just referee the rules and players - which lets all of you present find out how you feel about gaming with each other.

    ...and one, or more, of the people involved may need to be removed from the group - it happens. Sometimes people are just looking for something too different from each other to both be able to find it. For example, I found that I had a player that just wanted to hang out with friends and roll a few dice when asked - and the rest of the group wanted to cooperatively write a story about their characters and the world around them, so the guy that wasn't interested in talking in character or paying any attention to the story being told beyond "...is there a bad guy I can attack this turn?" needed to go for the rest of us to better enjoy the game.

    1 to 50 of 64 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / GM at a loss with group All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.