So I have been running this D&D capaign for some time and it sometimes feels like it takes more energy to keep the group together than to actually prepare and run it. Everyone in the group is in their late 30s and I thought they were on friendly terms with each other.
As we all have jobs and other responsibilities, it is not always possible to play, even on set dates. One player had bigger difficulties so we ended up agreeing to play, even if (any) one player could not. I thought that this would solve the issue that was creating a bit of tension among some of the players, as everyone agreed.
The first time that it seemed that two players could not play, though, one of the others raised the issue of playing even with two or more absent players. I tried to explain that this was not what had been agreed and that it would make my job as a DM difficult and said that I could not accept it. In return I was told that I was acting like their boss and that I was creating drama (whatever that meant). To make things worse anohter player provoked the person that was unable to play the most trying to start a "fight". At that point I sent a private message to the guy and told him that he was acting like a dick and that he should not do so. As he ignored me and went on, I told him that I would leave the game because of his behavior. To make a long story short, it turned out that at least two of the players (the one that wanted to play with more than one players absent and the one that tried to pick a fight) had been talking shit about the guy that could not play the most. That guy got wind of it, following the aforementioned events, and left the game. The two others involved also proposed leaving the game, but I told them that I had no intention of kicking anyone out and that if they wanted to play they should do so.
Then, during the last session one player was trying to use the "common loot" to trade an item for a magic item. The transaction went on for about 15 minutes and he had to roll a couple of persuasion checks, but in the end he managed to get a deal. At that moment one of the players said he did not want to give the item for the trade and he would not let it happen. The one carrying the bag of holding with the loot (same guy that wanted to play with more players absent), also objected to the action, but said that they should get the magic item as it would benefit the party in combat. Needless to say that the guy that was trying to make the transaction got angry and said he would not go ahead with it. There was tension in the group and I felt I should intervene to keep things from escalating. I said that if they had a problem they should have spoken when the whole thing started, because now it seemed that they had a problem with the other guy succeeding and not with him using the common loot to buy a magic item. I also pointed out that even the guy that objected had been using the common gold freely and for reasons thay were not very useful (make decorations for is armor, or bribe someone for information that could be obtained by anyone for free), so they should decide on a way to use the common loot and gold, which would apply to all.
Of course, I was the bad guy again, as I was accused of taking the side of the guy that tried to make the transaction.
Is it me? Is it them? Should I leave this ******* game and find another group? Should I propose they find another DM? Should I continue to try to keep things fair and civil in the group? Should I wash my hands of their squabbles and let things be, even if it means more people leaving the game? Should I cut the three that caused problems from the game? Is there any way to save this mess?
The only thing I know for cetrain is that I am not having much fun anymore. Trying to keep everyone happy is impossible, for some the rules are observed only when it suits their needs and I feel some players only care about what they get out of the game, ignoring others. Cutting those that have misbehaved in any way could be harsh and would mean cutting the party in half, which could result in the game being over for everyone, even those that have caused no problems.
Sounds like there is tension between the players. Until that's resolved, if possible, then you'll always have disagreements. If they can't get on out of game then personally I'd disband the party and start a new one. But that's me personally as you're there to have fun and relax, not to play childminder of the others in your game.
As for the ones missing game days, I have a similar issue, but this is how i resolve it.
We play every 2 weeks regardless who can or cannot make it. If 1 player is missing the regular campaign continues. If 2 or more cant, or even if 1 can't and its at a really critical point in the campaign, I have a mysterious creature called "The keeper" who transport the rest of the players to another plane and sets them tasks and trials to complete. This can be random dungeons for the keepers pleasure, or you can write it in to say that the keeper is testing those players for their journey ahead. You can make it really mysterious and link it or not to your main campaign. It's actually made my party want to explore this creature more and find out more about them so I've accidently made a new story arc to use at some point
Hope you resolve this issue and find the joy in DMi g that should be there all the time.
It sounds like the game is already past the critical point of this being resolvable, and you have at least one immature player.
I've been in this situation before; the players don't like each other, so they let their tensions spill over into the game. There is no way back from this situation. Even if it seems like it's being resolved, the problem will just rear its ugly head again in time because nothing you can do will change the fundamental problem - they just don't like each other.
End the campaign, and find a group of players who are just hyped and psyched to be playing. Keep any players who you are still enjoying playing with and invite them to the new game, and dismiss the trouble makers. You are never obligated to play with people who are rude to you, or cause trouble at the table.
I wouldn't bother putting forward an explanation to any of those that are antagonistic or caustic to the group. Be done with either the group as a whole, or the players that cannot abide by Wheaton's Law. If you feel that any of the players are worth keeping in a group, maybe offer them an opportunity to join the new game you start.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
I'm sorry to hear your story. It is always a difficult decision to end a campaign. However, if there are real life conflicts between the players that are making your life as DM more difficult and not enjoyable then I'd say you should probably end it.
There are likely reasons why all these folks are acting the way they are. Perhaps bad days at work, an unrewarding social life, problems at home ... real life is always more important than D&D ... and it usually affects game playing even if that is only to prevent a person from playing. However, by the time that folks are in their late 30's you would think they would know that. Life > D&D ... if folks want to play they will do their best to play but if they have work/spouse/children then their time is not entirely their own and their schedule has to bend to the other more important aspects of their lives.
Adding to everyone else's stellar observations and feedback, I would strongly recommend backing out of this group. Do so in a civil manner: tell them you can't DM for them any longer in these circumstances, tell them the decision has not been easy, and thank them for their time and wish them the best. Whoever throws a hissy fit outs themselves as a poor sport who needs to get their act together, and whoever leaves without a trace means the game was already over for them before your announcement. You may well have players thanking you for resolving this albeit by extreme means, and those are the ones you should keep on your whitelist if/when you're ready to return to DMing or as a player.
One more thing: the role of a Dungeon Master is a referee and a narrator, not a therapist, a social worker, or an anger management consultant. You're not obligated to suffer player temper tantrums because of the stresses of real life. We all have our problems to deal with, some more than others absolutely, but D&D is neither the time nor the place to resolve them (unless everyone consents to it, and the caveat of above still applies), it's the time to put them aside and enjoy a game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
On the one hand, I can see why you'd want to try to preserve this. You've put a lot of effort into this group and campaign and it shows. On the other hand, you deserve players who will be respectful of you and each other, and it doesn't sound like this scenario will be easy to come by.
I agree that it seems the players have personal issues that make your efforts to find common ground difficult. While it's possible you could do it, I think it would take a lot of attention and energy on your part. Potentially worthwhile if you value these relationships, though it certainly won't be quick.
Just know that you aren't a bad DM. You've gone through the right steps. You've made honest and repeated attempts. If your players won't meet you halfway, then that's on them. Some groups just don't click, and it's better not to play than to force something to gel that can't. You have a right to have fun, too.
As others said, you might want to look at putting together a new group. If you want to try to salvage this one, get everyone together for a session 0 type discussion and all of you figure out what’s happening. It could be that one person is really souring things and making others not want to play as much. The solution there is uncomfortable, but uncomplicated. It could be no one likes each other and things need to end. It could be that a couple of the players, like pretty much everyone these days, are having a bit of a rough patch in their lives irl, and everyone needs to cut them some slack.
If you fo end up splitting and finding a new group, I’d suggest being very forgiving on scheduling. As people get older it gets harder and harder to carve out time to play a game. In my group, we have 6-7 people on the game, because we realize 2-3 won’t be able to make it any given week. We just roll with it. No need to explain the character’s absence and sudden reappearance, it just happens and we get on with playing. So that would be my advice, have a couple more people on the group, realizing that someone is going to miss a week or two here and there. And don’t think about it too hard when they do.
I actually did not expect so much, as most of the problems I describe could be considered childish, especially for people of my age. It pains me to realise that you are probably right, as I have struggled for too long to keep the game going and to keep personal issues out of it. It just seems, sometimes, that some people do not care to even try.
Sounds like there is tension between the players. Until that's resolved, if possible, then you'll always have disagreements. If they can't get on out of game then personally I'd disband the party and start a new one. But that's me personally as you're there to have fun and relax, not to play childminder of the others in your game.
As for the ones missing game days, I have a similar issue, but this is how i resolve it.
We play every 2 weeks regardless who can or cannot make it. If 1 player is missing the regular campaign continues. If 2 or more cant, or even if 1 can't and its at a really critical point in the campaign, I have a mysterious creature called "The keeper" who transport the rest of the players to another plane and sets them tasks and trials to complete. This can be random dungeons for the keepers pleasure, or you can write it in to say that the keeper is testing those players for their journey ahead. You can make it really mysterious and link it or not to your main campaign. It's actually made my party want to explore this creature more and find out more about them so I've accidently made a new story arc to use at some point
Hope you resolve this issue and find the joy in DMi g that should be there all the time.
The "Keeper" idea is actually not bad and I will give it some thought. I mean if we can get to the point, where the only problem is the missed sessions, this could be a good solution.
Out of curiosity, how big is your group? The way you tell it, with potentially multiple people missing each week and still enough people left over to stir up drama, it sounds like you're working with a very large group.
I'd say any group with more than 6 people is gonna be hard to run, from a game balance perspective and ESPECIALLY from a scheduling perspective.
If you end up starting a new game (because problem players are problem players regardless of party size so player selection is key too), I'd suggest running a group of 3-5, and if more people want to play, consider starting a second group before just piling more people onto an existing group where overcrowding can cause players to rub each other the wrong way.
Out of curiosity, how big is your group? The way you tell it, with potentially multiple people missing each week and still enough people left over to stir up drama, it sounds like you're working with a very large group.
I'd say any group with more than 6 people is gonna be hard to run, from a game balance perspective and ESPECIALLY from a scheduling perspective.
If you end up starting a new game (because problem players are problem players regardless of party size so player selection is key too), I'd suggest running a group of 3-5, and if more people want to play, consider starting a second group before just piling more people onto an existing group where overcrowding can cause players to rub each other the wrong way.
It began with 3 players and got to 7, before one left because of the way some of the others acted. Now it is me and six players. One has always been pushy and a bit problematic and another two were the ones that created the issue that lead to the departure of a player from the game. These two seem to have settled down, as I was quite clear on how I felt about what had happened. The other one creates problems in the group from time to time (he is pushy on scheduling, not repsecting other people's priorities, he tries to hog the game, he keeps questioning other players' abilities, he always wants the team to follow his plan, even though it has almost killed them more than once, he has even asked me to cheat in the dice in favor of the group) and was the one that caused the issue with the loot usage. I have dealt with him, since the beginning of the game and managed to keep things relatively balanced. It was the other two that I did not expect and the fact that a player left because he felt unwanted has made me both sad and angry.
The only thing I know for cetrain is that I am not having much fun anymore. Trying to keep everyone happy is impossible, for some the rules are observed only when it suits their needs and I feel some players only care about what they get out of the game, ignoring others. Cutting those that have misbehaved in any way could be harsh and would mean cutting the party in half, which could result in the game being over for everyone, even those that have caused no problems.
You answered your own question right here. If you're not having fun doing something that's a hobby (or even semi-pro but still a game) then you shouldn't be doing it.
As for the idea of reforming the game without the problem players, it can be done. The LFG forum is stacked with people looking for online games and most FLGS have a board where you can post that you're looking for more people for a game. You already went from 3 to 7 players once; there's no reason you couldn't do it again. And it's a lot easier to recruit to a fun table than a not fun table.
So I have been running this D&D capaign for some time and it sometimes feels like it takes more energy to keep the group together than to actually prepare and run it.
Everyone in the group is in their late 30s and I thought they were on friendly terms with each other.
As we all have jobs and other responsibilities, it is not always possible to play, even on set dates. One player had bigger difficulties so we ended up agreeing to play, even if (any) one player could not. I thought that this would solve the issue that was creating a bit of tension among some of the players, as everyone agreed.
The first time that it seemed that two players could not play, though, one of the others raised the issue of playing even with two or more absent players. I tried to explain that this was not what had been agreed and that it would make my job as a DM difficult and said that I could not accept it. In return I was told that I was acting like their boss and that I was creating drama (whatever that meant).
To make things worse anohter player provoked the person that was unable to play the most trying to start a "fight".
At that point I sent a private message to the guy and told him that he was acting like a dick and that he should not do so. As he ignored me and went on, I told him that I would leave the game because of his behavior.
To make a long story short, it turned out that at least two of the players (the one that wanted to play with more than one players absent and the one that tried to pick a fight) had been talking shit about the guy that could not play the most. That guy got wind of it, following the aforementioned events, and left the game.
The two others involved also proposed leaving the game, but I told them that I had no intention of kicking anyone out and that if they wanted to play they should do so.
Then, during the last session one player was trying to use the "common loot" to trade an item for a magic item. The transaction went on for about 15 minutes and he had to roll a couple of persuasion checks, but in the end he managed to get a deal. At that moment one of the players said he did not want to give the item for the trade and he would not let it happen. The one carrying the bag of holding with the loot (same guy that wanted to play with more players absent), also objected to the action, but said that they should get the magic item as it would benefit the party in combat. Needless to say that the guy that was trying to make the transaction got angry and said he would not go ahead with it.
There was tension in the group and I felt I should intervene to keep things from escalating. I said that if they had a problem they should have spoken when the whole thing started, because now it seemed that they had a problem with the other guy succeeding and not with him using the common loot to buy a magic item. I also pointed out that even the guy that objected had been using the common gold freely and for reasons thay were not very useful (make decorations for is armor, or bribe someone for information that could be obtained by anyone for free), so they should decide on a way to use the common loot and gold, which would apply to all.
Of course, I was the bad guy again, as I was accused of taking the side of the guy that tried to make the transaction.
Is it me? Is it them? Should I leave this ******* game and find another group? Should I propose they find another DM? Should I continue to try to keep things fair and civil in the group? Should I wash my hands of their squabbles and let things be, even if it means more people leaving the game? Should I cut the three that caused problems from the game? Is there any way to save this mess?
The only thing I know for cetrain is that I am not having much fun anymore. Trying to keep everyone happy is impossible, for some the rules are observed only when it suits their needs and I feel some players only care about what they get out of the game, ignoring others. Cutting those that have misbehaved in any way could be harsh and would mean cutting the party in half, which could result in the game being over for everyone, even those that have caused no problems.
Sounds like there is tension between the players. Until that's resolved, if possible, then you'll always have disagreements. If they can't get on out of game then personally I'd disband the party and start a new one. But that's me personally as you're there to have fun and relax, not to play childminder of the others in your game.
As for the ones missing game days, I have a similar issue, but this is how i resolve it.
We play every 2 weeks regardless who can or cannot make it. If 1 player is missing the regular campaign continues. If 2 or more cant, or even if 1 can't and its at a really critical point in the campaign, I have a mysterious creature called "The keeper" who transport the rest of the players to another plane and sets them tasks and trials to complete. This can be random dungeons for the keepers pleasure, or you can write it in to say that the keeper is testing those players for their journey ahead. You can make it really mysterious and link it or not to your main campaign. It's actually made my party want to explore this creature more and find out more about them so I've accidently made a new story arc to use at some point
Hope you resolve this issue and find the joy in DMi g that should be there all the time.
It sounds like the game is already past the critical point of this being resolvable, and you have at least one immature player.
I've been in this situation before; the players don't like each other, so they let their tensions spill over into the game. There is no way back from this situation. Even if it seems like it's being resolved, the problem will just rear its ugly head again in time because nothing you can do will change the fundamental problem - they just don't like each other.
End the campaign, and find a group of players who are just hyped and psyched to be playing. Keep any players who you are still enjoying playing with and invite them to the new game, and dismiss the trouble makers. You are never obligated to play with people who are rude to you, or cause trouble at the table.
No D&D is better than bad D&D.
I wouldn't bother putting forward an explanation to any of those that are antagonistic or caustic to the group. Be done with either the group as a whole, or the players that cannot abide by Wheaton's Law. If you feel that any of the players are worth keeping in a group, maybe offer them an opportunity to join the new game you start.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
I'm sorry to hear your story. It is always a difficult decision to end a campaign. However, if there are real life conflicts between the players that are making your life as DM more difficult and not enjoyable then I'd say you should probably end it.
There are likely reasons why all these folks are acting the way they are. Perhaps bad days at work, an unrewarding social life, problems at home ... real life is always more important than D&D ... and it usually affects game playing even if that is only to prevent a person from playing. However, by the time that folks are in their late 30's you would think they would know that. Life > D&D ... if folks want to play they will do their best to play but if they have work/spouse/children then their time is not entirely their own and their schedule has to bend to the other more important aspects of their lives.
Adding to everyone else's stellar observations and feedback, I would strongly recommend backing out of this group. Do so in a civil manner: tell them you can't DM for them any longer in these circumstances, tell them the decision has not been easy, and thank them for their time and wish them the best. Whoever throws a hissy fit outs themselves as a poor sport who needs to get their act together, and whoever leaves without a trace means the game was already over for them before your announcement. You may well have players thanking you for resolving this albeit by extreme means, and those are the ones you should keep on your whitelist if/when you're ready to return to DMing or as a player.
One more thing: the role of a Dungeon Master is a referee and a narrator, not a therapist, a social worker, or an anger management consultant. You're not obligated to suffer player temper tantrums because of the stresses of real life. We all have our problems to deal with, some more than others absolutely, but D&D is neither the time nor the place to resolve them (unless everyone consents to it, and the caveat of above still applies), it's the time to put them aside and enjoy a game.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
On the one hand, I can see why you'd want to try to preserve this. You've put a lot of effort into this group and campaign and it shows. On the other hand, you deserve players who will be respectful of you and each other, and it doesn't sound like this scenario will be easy to come by.
I agree that it seems the players have personal issues that make your efforts to find common ground difficult. While it's possible you could do it, I think it would take a lot of attention and energy on your part. Potentially worthwhile if you value these relationships, though it certainly won't be quick.
Just know that you aren't a bad DM. You've gone through the right steps. You've made honest and repeated attempts. If your players won't meet you halfway, then that's on them. Some groups just don't click, and it's better not to play than to force something to gel that can't. You have a right to have fun, too.
As others said, you might want to look at putting together a new group. If you want to try to salvage this one, get everyone together for a session 0 type discussion and all of you figure out what’s happening. It could be that one person is really souring things and making others not want to play as much. The solution there is uncomfortable, but uncomplicated. It could be no one likes each other and things need to end. It could be that a couple of the players, like pretty much everyone these days, are having a bit of a rough patch in their lives irl, and everyone needs to cut them some slack.
If you fo end up splitting and finding a new group, I’d suggest being very forgiving on scheduling. As people get older it gets harder and harder to carve out time to play a game. In my group, we have 6-7 people on the game, because we realize 2-3 won’t be able to make it any given week. We just roll with it. No need to explain the character’s absence and sudden reappearance, it just happens and we get on with playing. So that would be my advice, have a couple more people on the group, realizing that someone is going to miss a week or two here and there. And don’t think about it too hard when they do.
Thank you all for responding.
I actually did not expect so much, as most of the problems I describe could be considered childish, especially for people of my age.
It pains me to realise that you are probably right, as I have struggled for too long to keep the game going and to keep personal issues out of it. It just seems, sometimes, that some people do not care to even try.
The "Keeper" idea is actually not bad and I will give it some thought. I mean if we can get to the point, where the only problem is the missed sessions, this could be a good solution.
Thanks again!
Out of curiosity, how big is your group? The way you tell it, with potentially multiple people missing each week and still enough people left over to stir up drama, it sounds like you're working with a very large group.
I'd say any group with more than 6 people is gonna be hard to run, from a game balance perspective and ESPECIALLY from a scheduling perspective.
If you end up starting a new game (because problem players are problem players regardless of party size so player selection is key too), I'd suggest running a group of 3-5, and if more people want to play, consider starting a second group before just piling more people onto an existing group where overcrowding can cause players to rub each other the wrong way.
It began with 3 players and got to 7, before one left because of the way some of the others acted.
Now it is me and six players. One has always been pushy and a bit problematic and another two were the ones that created the issue that lead to the departure of a player from the game. These two seem to have settled down, as I was quite clear on how I felt about what had happened. The other one creates problems in the group from time to time (he is pushy on scheduling, not repsecting other people's priorities, he tries to hog the game, he keeps questioning other players' abilities, he always wants the team to follow his plan, even though it has almost killed them more than once, he has even asked me to cheat in the dice in favor of the group) and was the one that caused the issue with the loot usage.
I have dealt with him, since the beginning of the game and managed to keep things relatively balanced. It was the other two that I did not expect and the fact that a player left because he felt unwanted has made me both sad and angry.
You answered your own question right here. If you're not having fun doing something that's a hobby (or even semi-pro but still a game) then you shouldn't be doing it.
As for the idea of reforming the game without the problem players, it can be done. The LFG forum is stacked with people looking for online games and most FLGS have a board where you can post that you're looking for more people for a game. You already went from 3 to 7 players once; there's no reason you couldn't do it again. And it's a lot easier to recruit to a fun table than a not fun table.
"Teller of tales, dreamer of dreams"
Tips, Tricks, Maps: Lantern Noir Presents
**Streams hosted at at twitch.tv/LaternNoir