tldr; can you run a campaign that is fun for both people who only care about combat and for other people who only care about roleplay and don't like combat at all?
Hey, I'm fairly new to DM'ing, but I started a campaign with 4 friends. None of us have played together before. We are a couple sessions in and I've been running a module that is fairly combat and dungeon-crawl oriented.
So far, it's been fun and things have been going relatively well. Two of the players like min-maxing, combat, and using the tactical positions on the map, attacks of opportunity, etc. to smash things in combat. They don't participate very much in the roleplaying. The combats have been lasting about 10 to as much as 45 minutes each (for the big boss combat), and they've really enjoyed it.
However, the other 2 players seem like the exact opposite. All they do is roleplay. They complain about the combat and think that a 45 minute long combat is unacceptably long (even when it's a final boss combat that is very important). They think that their character death should NEVER be determined by random rolls of the dice, and they should only be threatened to die if their character does something "stupid" or decides to sacrifice himself for a reason. They think attacks of opportunity and having to roll 20 sided die all the time for combat is lame. Basically, they want a more "cinematic" combat with less die rolling and also much less combat in general (maybe 1 a session) where the rest of the session is just roleplaying.
My DM'ing style is probably skewed towards more of the min-maxers combat oriented since that's the way I play. I am probably also less "roleplay" and more combat, so I naturally DM more that way, though I definitely tried hard the last two sessions to make combats super fast and inject as much RP as possible.
So, are these types of players (the pure roleplayers and the pure tactical combat players) completely incompatible for a campaign? Is it possible to run a campaign where they are both super happy and having a good time? Right now, I'm starting to feel like it isn't. I don't know if I'm going to be able to please both. I don't want to break up the group, but do I need to?
OR, is it totally possible to run campaigns that appeal to both groups at the exact same time? If so, please tell me how to do so :) much advice needed. Btw, one one the "roleplay" players already told me he'd quit the group if it continued to have combats that are completely dependent on just rolling dice and hoping you get better rolls than the enemies, and that he wanted more creative and cinematic battles instead.
Thanks.
Don't play Pathfinder would be my answer
play an rpg that runs faster
sorry I can't see how PF is the right game for your group.
you need something were combat is more narrative and dynamic
Try world of darkness, or exalted, or dark heresy they have fast combat and a lot more roleplaying.
You could try having enemies who talk a lot in combat.
I believe ur player has already answered ur question. Theres the ones who are more on cinematics and then ones that are the tactical using the board. It usually can be done if u give both types their moments to play as they want, but usually they have to agree to roll with the "bad" parts as well as the good. If not they can find another group.
I no what ur going thru because ive been part of each type uve listed and they are the same but very different.
Me personally id point out that the fights are not in fact 45 mins long seeing how each turn is just 6 secs and its the players outta game that makes the actual fights that long, so that can take away some of the flame.
But my advice, talk with each person and let them no how ur running it. Let them no that while they envision their charecters to be almighty "heros" the world itself may not. Even heros can fall when they dont want to. Btalk to the minmaxers and get them to participate more in the roleplaying aspect and get the cinematicers to participate more in the combat. Let everyone no what ur rules are and how things will go and let the dice fall.
Remember the game should be fun for them but should also be fun for u as well
@Lincoln Hills,
it's not that they don't want to combat. They are fine with combat. I just feel like they fundamentally disagree with the entire Pathfinder combat system. They don't want to sit there and roll dice and cross their fingers hoping their rolls are better than the enemies. They don't want to have to calculate out squares for moving distance and attacks of opportunity.
Perhaps I simply need to convince them that the Pathfinder way is BETTER than the pure cinematic, roleplay way of doing combat. Otherwise, it isn't the right group or them. How can I convince them that PF combat is better than the combat they want to do?
|
First, disregard any "play another game" comments, they are not useful at all (c'mon folks, this guy is asking for help!). Here's what I would do:
1. I would finish the module you're currently playing, making sure I add an NPC or two for the RPers (if possible). Make sure a good RP sequence provide some sort of advantage (info about a specific monster, how to avoid traps, etc.) to incite the combat-oriented players to RP a bit more.
2. What about puzzles? What about having some sort of puzzle during a fight? The combat-oriented players will fight while the RPers have to solve a riddle, puzzle, etc. You might have to change your GMing style a bit, but as you said, if you're fairly new to GMing, you might not know it yet (aside from your own playing style). Try a few things. There is nothing wrong with trying something new once in a while (investigation sequences, chase scenes with RP in them, fights they have to avoid/flee from, 5 seconds to decide what your character is doing or you go on delay - to speed up combat, etc.)
3. Try to incorporate RP into combat. Why not give a circumstance bonus if one of your players describe his movement well? (borrowed from Exalted cited above) This might force your min-maxers to roleplay a bit in combat to gain extra bonuses. What about performance combat? If would slow things a bit but "might" interest your RPers...
4. Pick scenarios/modules well. Murder's Mark has a lot of RP while Ruby Phoenix is a bloodfest with some RP in it (you can, of course, modify what you want if you're not playing PFS. Ruby Phoenix could become a mini-campaign with more investigation/RP scenes in it and Murder's Mark could easily benefit from more fights, including fun combat demos at the carnival).
5. Select a campaign style that will benefit from diverse playing styles. Have you considered a Kingmaker-type campaign for example? (you get to explore, RP, kill stuff, build a kingdom, everybody should be happy!)
6. As mentionned previously, talk to your players; communication is the key. If you guys want to continue, everybody, yourself included, might have to adjust to the group's playing style.
Hope it helps!
Pathfinder one week,Dungeon World the next.
"They think that their character death should NEVER be determined by random rolls of the dice, and they should only be threatened to die if their character does something "stupid" or decides to sacrifice himself for a reason."
I have to ask, why are they even playing a Tabletop RPG?
Not all tabletop RPGs are governed by dice or any other random generator yet they are still tabletop RPGs.
"They think that their character death should NEVER be determined by random rolls of the dice, and they should only be threatened to die if their character does something "stupid" or decides to sacrifice himself for a reason."
I have to ask, why are they even playing a Tabletop RPG?
Because I asked them to give it a shot. I am the one who decided on the Pathfinder system, not them.
RP smack dab in the middle of combat has been mentioned.
I certainly can't speed up combat for you a 45 minute combat at our table would be super fast 10 minutes would be amazing.
The other suggestion is try to time things so that you end sessions in a place were more investigating, shopping, down-time is the next. Let the rpers be the ones that do the face work, investigating, shopping around throw in some spice related to their characters give them a chance to follow personal goals and such. Have them show up an hour or so early. When the combat crew arrives, the rpers can share the news they learned, give them their share of the sell off of their gear.
Dotted
mix up the challenges in your encounters...
if each encounter is "we kick in the door and kill everything on the other side" anyone who is in the game for character development will get bored.
Make sure your bad guys, even the disposable ones, have some personality. treat them like extras who are desperately trying to get noticed, try to make them memorable...
if this means and evil-for-evil sake villain that threatens the heroes with a long-winded and frighteningly creatively torturous death during combat... great...
if this means 6 Kobolds form a heroic shield wall and yell out, get the eggs to safety, and heroically sacrifice themselves in a rear-guard action, while some non-combatants carry clutches of eggs while fleeing into nearby escape tunnels, only to drop the tunnel behind them as they go... that's great too.
The targeted end game here, is a month after the session is over, the players remember the enemies they vanquished as something more personal than "the former occupants of room #12"
That kind of environment should engage your 'role-players' more.
"They think that their character death should NEVER be determined by random rolls of the dice, and they should only be threatened to die if their character does something "stupid" or decides to sacrifice himself for a reason."I have to ask, why are they even playing a Tabletop RPG?
I have to agree with Bill here, there are dozens of cinematic style Tabletop RPGs where if a player character died in anything but a dramatically crucial moment, the GM is failing miserably at his job. Not everyone views these combat rules as the most important part of the game, so much as a 'necessary element to resolve conflict in the story'... the story being most important.
... to each their own.
Not trying to be captain obvious or make light of your dilemma but in all seriousness I would say you just need to split the time at the table so that half of the session is combat and half is RP. Two of the players will enjoy the combat half of the session more, the other two will enjoy the RP half of the session more.
Of course it's not an exact science and some sessions will end up more combat heavy and others will end up more RP heavy, but try to keep a balance and aim for 50/50. If one session is relatively RP light, make sure the next one isn't a slugfest too. It will all balance out, with each player having enough time devoted to his/her favorite aspect of the game to make the whole experience worthwhile.
Also check out the videos of DM Chris Perkins running 4e for an example of how combat can be run in a way that still appeals to players who are more interested in the RP.
Perhaps I simply need to convince them that the Pathfinder way is BETTER than the pure cinematic, roleplay way of doing combat. Otherwise, it isn't the right group or them. How can I convince them that PF combat is better than the combat they want to do?
I wouldn't approach it from a "one way is better" perspective. I'd ask them to go along with that part of the session and accept that with any RPG everyone has some things they like and some things they don't.
Presumably they're aware that the other two are enjoying themselves during tactical encounters and "zoning out" a little during the role playing. Pointing out that they're getting their way some of the time and not other times might help.
We face this situation (no matter what system we play). Our group naturally gravitates towards the most suitable type of character - combat focused or "story focused" and we accept that everyone has their time to do their thing. I think it can work just fine in pathfinder, as with most systems.
It seems like your "roleplayers" dont understand the nature of dnd combats. Combats are rarely determined by the roll of a dice beyond extremely early level, combats are determined by ability use, and character stats. Stronger characters have better odds of winning a combat, simple.
Advice: PUSH the tactical aspect. Push it HARD. Let your players know its not all about rolling dice. Reward them for making smart choices, give them plenty of options. Make liberal use of terrain for cover, or hinder them with it in the form of movement impairment. Make combat about dealing with situational obstacles, rather than stand up and make full attacks all day.
.... a word though, saying 45 minute combats is unreasonable is very worrysome. I've been in boss fights that took all night, I'm talking hours long in one combat. 45 minute combats are probably about "standard" when we play. 10 minute combats to me means: why did you have a combat in the first place? Obviously it was far too easy.
Beyond low level, I see your group having some serious problems...