Tag Info

New answers tagged

4

I don't think the specific SPT you linked to matters that much. The salient part of this question is, "should I discuss important matters of game tone with brand new players". If your problem is not with the idea of such a discussion, but the particulars of the bankuei SPT, then it is trivial to modify it or even make your own SPT anyway. Generally, I think ...


9

I've had to teach a lot of new people how to roleplay. While I don't break out the full Same Page Tool, there's definitely key points I use from it. Notably, the first one is "Do you play to win?" because a lot of RPGs don't do that, which makes them the opposite of most games as we understand it. The second is covering whether the motivation should be ...


5

I think it depends. Some players are going to be more interested in talking about the nuances expressed within the SPT before playing. Other people would be turned off. Some games are perhaps more suited to bringing up some issues touched on by the SPT before play than others. For instance, talking about the approach to character creation might be ...


28

NO It's not overkill, it's awesome. I just used the SPT to kick off a new group. Most (4 of 7) had never played before, and one thought that D&D was some sort of board game. We had a get-together before the first session where we just hung out and talked about media - what games, tv shows, books, etc., we liked and what kind of stuff we would want to ...


7

It is useful but not in its long form. The Same Page Tool goes into a lot of details. It works well for people who have experience of RPG and want to invest a large amount of time into a game. However, there is too much details for a short series of game sessions. When I introduced new players to RPGs, I always had a short discussion with them. In the first ...


2

A couple more extreme solutions explaining how the players come together: Escape from an impregnable fortress scenario. The characters are prisoners languishing in the dungeon of a powerful sorcerer's vast mountain fortress in the polar wastes. Perhaps they were all members of separate adventuring bands of varying alignment who were captured and thrown ...


2

Your players are telling you quite clearly what game they want to play: they want to play an implausible mixed bag of race and character types that make no sense together, but that they think are fun. Apparently they don't want to take the edges off this by changing their individual concepts, or by doing a lot of work to make their mixed bag plausible, or by ...


-8

If I may, group cohesion and common cause are only necessary in certain types of campaigns, campaigns which you need to tell your players about before you start playing. For instance: "Oh hey, the universe is dying, Cthulhu is riding a comet towards the earth, cults are burning everything to pieces, you're four characters working together because if you ...


1

That is a tricky one, in the groups I've played in the GM has told us before the start of the campaign that 'This is a campaign on the high seas', so we know to look at the swashbuckler class, or roll a race that does well with water. Or another example 'this will be an evil campaign', so we know to roll an evil character and in this way there's some group ...


5

There is a dangerous misconception here among this group, and you may want to address it now before participating in any future games with them. It is not the sole responsibility of the GM to keep the game going This is an early roleplaying misconception, and one very easy to fall into. It is true that the GM has a special role in the game that they ...


3

Everyone runs their games differently, and people are very different. With that in mind, When I am DMing, I usually have a starting place or what the movies would call a 'meet-cute' in mind. Something that at least has the characters run into each other with a common goal. Based on your example, it might have to be something extreme, like everybody waking up ...


6

This is common for players to not put much effort into how they formed a party. Generally its "we meet at a tavern". Players form a character then some time in the game do the party formation story. The players aren't lazy unless they won't do their own roleplay their inter-party dynamics. The problem is the character concepts have so much in conflict. Its ...


6

GMJoe does bring up two important points, although I fear he skipped the most crucial one. Setting Entanglements: A player is far less likely to abandon a character if they feel that the character will be missed, that their presence and history is respected in the environment they live in. I had a player who had a tendency to switch characters once every ...


7

There are already a lot of answers aiming at the human problem and I think this is the way to go. However, assuming those people are friends or that simply dropping the game is not an easy solution, I'll try to tackle the problem from the other side and figure out a generic way to make such a group work. If your party can't work in the standart setting, ...


6

I've a two-pronged solution to this. It worked for me in a lesser-but-similar situation to yours, but I don't know your players, so your mileage may vary. Story time: A player told me that he was planning a new character, because he considered the current one "done" - He'd already imagined all the situations in which that character's skills would be of use, ...


-7

That sounds like a pack of munchkins. Warn them if that if they don't want to take the RP part of RPG seriously, then that's the game they get -- brutal, nasty and short. My suggestion is that you play it somewhat like Paranoia, that great old game where you should be done in a few hours, everyone gets six clones because the DM will try to kill them off ...


5

Other answers are correct that you left out telling them what kind of characters they needed to choose. "Anything from D&D" is way too broad, and will cause this problem. Now they have characters they like, which won't be compatible without creativity, cooperation, and/or several of them dying off or going their own way. That said, here's an idea for ...


10

There are two important social aspects of GMing (or really any form of managing people). One is setting expectations, the other is understanding what is expected of you. The first role in this situation appears to have been fumbled a bit. The PC's were to have been given the freedom to make whatever characters they wanted, without any guidelines or ...


61

"Fine, then we just won't play." "OK." Call their bluff, whether you think it's a bluff or not. If they're bluffing, they do want to play and will buckle down and figure it out if they have to. If they're not bluffing, they don't really want to play anyway and you've dodged a bullet. (GMing for a group that doesn't really want to play is a ...


5

Option 1: Be Honest: Tell them that 1: it's not the DM's job to come up with how the party meets, and 2: their party is so stretched to ridiculous levels that they need to have a legitimate excuse. Option 2: Give them a reason to be together: Now, I don't want to say let them be right, but You can give them some recommendations or tell them why there are ...


12

There are already some great answers here, but I wanted to touch on something that has not yet been addressed. The 'it's all the GM's responsibility' attitude that you are encountering is not that uncommon, and can cause a real problem as it tends to significantly increase the amount of work you have to do. For the sake of argument, lets say that you decide ...


32

If you don't give your players guidelines, then they will do whatever. That said, you did give a guideline ("At least give a me a reason, any reason, you know each other"), a pretty low, low bar to meet, and the players aren't interested in meeting it. Your options are: Play the gonzo game with no expectations I'm not a huge fan of this, just because ...


21

What am I supposed to do exactly whenever players want to all be something so different? The way I solve this problem is by not having it... Yeah, kinda circular but bear with me. First, all my game start with a set of requirements. Some are non-optionals, some are. Always, the first non-optional one is related to how I want the game to start. For ...


95

Don't run the campaign It is often important (but not always) for the party to have a preexisting, long term reason to stay a party. It is especially important in situations like this, with non-standard parties. Unless that reason is part of your pitch, it is incumbent upon the players to come up with that reason. Your Options Make it a One-Shot So you ...


1

It is always a good idea to ask a player to explain what he is trying to accomplish and how he thinks is action is going to do that. If the GM is confused by a players action, it's usually because he doesn't understand what the player means to do, so it's always good to ask so that everyone is on the same page. If you have established that the player ...


-1

I had a similar problem once with two characters in a roleplay I was running and I stated that: 1. Everyone would be minus xp for hindering the party Implemented revolving do's so each player had the chance to see how annoying it was And had a discussion out of game separately then together with all members involved.


13

The usual advice is talk to the player in the first instance, or to the DM if you are uncomfortable with approaching the player directly. At the end of the day it is the DM's responsibility to ensure everyone is having fun, but they often need a prompt from the players to recognize that something has crossed the line from "slightly annoying" to ...


6

Talk to him. Make sure you are civil-- polite and non-accusatorial-- when having this conversation. If he's been RPGing for 10 years he should be used to having conversation about the metagame, and this will be easily resolved. If you talk with him and he becomes immediately hostile, try to have a conversation with the group (including him) about it. If ...



Top 50 recent answers are included