New answers tagged

0

I ran several games (Shadowrun, Cyberpunk, D&D, Rolemaster... and of course, Ars Magica) where there was a main character per player. If the player could not make the session, the character would be played by another player who would control two characters. Clearly, the so-called "zombie" character would take a step back but still be there. This ...


0

No. Now I don't have an issue with substitute players playing different characters, if there is a reasonable way to fit them in. Or maybe even semi-reasonable (Hal Jordan. Another time shift. I'm up to speed, carry on.). But they should not be playing another person's character. You can't run the risk of a sub getting someone else's character killed. ...


7

Styles of Play This has been mentioned by others, but I think it is worth a much more elaborate discussion because I think it is the root cause of your problem. There are many styles of RPGs, especially when you are taking about a system as diverse and venerable as D&D. Some people play it as essentially a tactical challenge with just enough of a ...


95

You I'll deal with your issues first: you are an angry 14 year old. Don't sweat it; everybody was, is or will be. Maturity can in fact be summed up as learning not to punch the face of someone who richly deserves it. You have to remember that you have no control over the way other people behave; you only have control over the way you behave. And ... you ...


14

Was this player's behaviour justified? No, it really wasn't. They are entitled to prefer a play style that emphasises faster, combat heavy roleplaying and limited verbose descriptions – it is a valid way of playing. However, the way they went about expressing their views to you and the table was extremely disrespectful, especially to you. The preferred ...


26

As the DM, you can ask a player to leave your table if they're causing problems. Be willing to do that. :) (If, for whatever reason, you can't ask a player to leave, you probably don't want to run games for that group.) You say this was a public game. Are you sure you will have the same players as last time? (If the players you had last time had a bad ...


3

Honestly, I don't think you have anything to be sorry for. The PC obviously had decided to not enjoy the game and be openly hostile way before your session started. I would not want to play with someone like that and would remove them from the group. If the whole group feels that way, look for a group that wants to play your style of game. Now, I will ...


17

Escalation, especially public escalation is almost always the wrong answer-- like every group activity, playing in or running a game is an exercise in social capital. Ideally, everyone has fun, everyone gains social capital and maybe friendships are formed. Pessimally, things like this happen, everyone loses capital, no one has fun, everyone goes home and ...


42

Well firstly, you need to behave in a mature manner, which is sometimes tough, even for us middle aged guys. The best way to show your maturity is when you go in, apologize to each person as they walk in, including the guy who acted like an arse. Take it on the chin and share how disappointed you are in yourself for reacting the way you did, but conclude it ...


0

Discussions make noise. Something might hear that noise. That something might decide to take advantage your distraction.


3

So many answers and nobody mentions the obvious meta- game solution: Guys, you're overthinking this. The situation is X, you've talked your plan to death. What do you do? You are the game master and, yes you can agonise over immersion and in-game solutions or you can remember that you are actually playing a game and it's OK to push the players as well ...


3

TL;DR: This group of players does not like you running the game with such a firm grip. Regardless of who is right, you'll need to give them back some control by letting them reach a consensus in these cases, or risk losing the group's interest. People have listed some decent conflict resolution tactics here but I think a key point needs to be emphasized a ...


-3

Maybe you could limit the number of words they could say per turn? That is how the games I play in/DM work in combat...


1

Sometimes my players get involved in planning and discussion and they seem to be having fun. As long as everyone is having fun I'm happy to let it go on. If it looks like people are getting irritated, or like they're tuning out the conversation because they don't think it's productive, what I do is I directly step in and ask for a vote. I go around the ...


2

When discussing this with my players, I've found it really useful to stress, "We only have a couple of hours to play the game this evening, we don't want to waste a quarter of that discussing rules." The disagreement resolution process in my game is as follows (taken from the website where I send all my prospective players). If you disagree with something ...


-1

Using time limits IRL can be a solution, but that brings the issue of the disparity between how quick/clever the character is, and how quick the player is. A potential remedy is to limit a player's time based on their character's INT or some other stats. For example, Bob, playing Smashy the Ork, gets 5 minutes to decide. Susan, playing Brainlord the ...


2

Come to a decision as a group if it is that big of a problem. I don't agree with a number of the other posts about various conflict resolution methods because it doesn't cover a number of real cases. For example, if I was a player and was told that a certain spell was going to be house ruled a certain way that I did not agree with, after the DM told me this, ...


5

I can see several issues with this situation: One of the most common problem: different expectations. For game and for fun. Players involvement. Abundance of time. First. Expectations of fun. You may have heard that a DM should talk with players and know what kind of fun they expect. When this problem occurs many will suggest using Same page tool. This ...


2

Almost every player argues with a GM at some point. I've GM'd a lot and had it happen, and I've done while playing, too. (And occasionally looked back and realized what a pain I must have been.) My basic thought is that most games thrive on consistency and shared understanding, moreso than they thrive on having rules that each and every player agrees ...


14

Establish A Rule Disagreement Resolution Tool for your Table In my reply to this question, I recommended establishing, before the game session, or before the game while session zero is underway, what the "rules disagreement resolution tool" will be at your table. The objective of this tool -- or something similar that you need to tailor to your specific ...


3

In general, 5e is not super specific on a lot of topics, giving the DM ultimate authority on things that can or cannot happen. This is by design (it harkens back to AD&D). That said, here's what I would do, regarding spells: Players who have spell casting characters give you a list of each spell they have prepared before the session starts. Go over ...


0

GMs word is final, solve the dispute by saying for this session that the rule you are using now goes and then,once the session is over check over the handbooks and rules and correct the error for the next session, if the rule is very up to interpretation, then it is up to GMs discretion not the player on how it is implemented, regardless of how the player ...


6

A DM shouldn't have to "flex [his] power." There is (or at least, should be) an implicit trust relationship between the DM and the players. In this case it sounds like your players don't trust you (trust me, I've been there) and are therefore not happy with your ruling because they feel it is unfair in some way, i.e. they feel like you are trying to screw ...


9

Players taking a long time to figure out what to do is a depressingly common problem. It happens a lot when facing simple fights, because the players are pretty sure you have a nasty surprise waiting for them. The thing is, you're the Game Master. That means that you're responsible not just for running the game world and its denizens, but the game itself. ...


23

First off, these things sometimes happen. If this is a one-off occurrence, I wouldn't be too concerned: people sometimes get it into their heads that they need to do something "weird" for no good reason. I was playing in an In Nomine game as an angel who could possess people/animals; I somehow decided that I needed a monkey, and we spent about as long ...


2

Situations like this I like to solve in one of two ways, well three if you count the one I do not like. Make the situation more urgent They obviously need the captain alive and able to run his ship. So anything that threatens his safety should help prompt them to actions. The captors could be preparing to hang the captain and the characters see them ...


2

The simplest and most obvious answer is to read the rule book. it happened to me once that I forgot to put clay in my initial inventory as a druid. I could then not cast "Stone Shape" and we decided to add it to my inventory in retrospect because it's quite a reasonable thing to have as a druid/not expensive and I just forgot to have it For example, if ...


9

Going with the very same idea of @Angelo, I'd suggest to let players try anything. If rules, though, don't let that happen you have several ways to react: Still let it happen If you are with a group of players who are not familiar with the rules, and you have not much interest in them knowing them, you can try to twist the rules some times, so they don't ...


5

I would suggest the DM should role-play the "You can't do that" situations as opposed to just saying "You can't do that". You'll find that even the most ridiculous player requests when role-played allow the story to continue and may even teach the player(s) some valuable lessons. Yes, this will be harder for a new DM to handle fluently. However, the more ...



Top 50 recent answers are included