Okay, I’m gauging what’s the most appropriate/fairest option for my game and my players.
I recruited four players for an open world campaign. I told everyone up front, the campaign will be RP heavy, and I want characters with solid backstories.Two are people I’ve played with before, they are very enthusiastic. They have their characters ready to go, backstory and all.
The other two I found in an LFG post. It’s a pair of friends, both new players. I gave them the pitch (including backstory requirements) and the response was really positive. Then I added them on Discord and it became far more lukewarm. One in particular was very disengaged during session 0, and gave odd answers on the consent document. Both have created characters, but have given me no backstory details, nor responded to my prompting or offers to help.
Session 1 is less than a week away, and I’m not feeling either one of these players.I don’t really want to play the ultimatum game “write a backstory, or you don’t get to play” If I have to do that … I want players who care enough to not have to be forced to do the basic stuff I told them was required from the start.
What I’m asking is, would it be fair to kick these two with just a quick, “sorry, the vibe is not meshing” or do I owe them more.
First of all, unless you have people to fill their spaces at the table, don't kick out those players if you can possibly avoid it. In my experience, it is very difficult to run a fully functional game with fewer than 4 players. My advice here is to compromise. It looks like half your players have happy with a social-heavy game, and half would prefer a combat-heavy game. You can and should provide both! Throw something for each of your players to enjoy into the game. It might mean changing your plans a little bit, but that's a small price to pay to keep everyone happy. Even then, though, encourage them to provide at least a brief backstory. It doesn't need to be really long or stand out; it just needs to give them a bit of a role in the world and a bit of personality for your social scenes, and you can mostly focus on the backstories of the more enthusiastic roleplayers in your group.
If you have other people who want to play, on the other hand, don't feel afraid to tell those players that this game may not be for them. Chances are, it isn't.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Panda-wat (I hate my username) is somehow convinced that he is objectively right about everything D&D related even though he obviously is not. Considering that, he'd probably make a great D&D youtuber.
"If I die, I can live with that." ~Luke Hart, the DM lair
I would give them the ultimatum but in a polite manner.
explain to them that the game you're running needs backstories, and so far they haven't given you one. Ask them if they still want to play in a RP heavy game with backstories, and if they do, ask them to get the backstory to you before a certain date. Also ask them if they are waiting for session 1 before they build a backstory into the world you present for them, some people make their backstories after the game starts.
If they back out, or don't step up, find a new pair of players and be leniant so that they can make their backstories between the first couple of sessions.
Whilst you don't owe them anything, I would get the facts before booting them. Some people are bad at communications and they might be just laying the finishing touches on the best backstory you could have hoped for!
Okay, I’m gauging what’s the most appropriate/fairest option for my game and my players.
I recruited four players for an open world campaign. I told everyone up front, the campaign will be RP heavy, and I want characters with solid backstories.Two are people I’ve played with before, they are very enthusiastic. They have their characters ready to go, backstory and all.
The other two I found in an LFG post. It’s a pair of friends, both new players. I gave them the pitch (including backstory requirements) and the response was really positive. Then I added them on Discord and it became far more lukewarm. One in particular was very disengaged during session 0, and gave odd answers on the consent document. Both have created characters, but have given me no backstory details, nor responded to my prompting or offers to help.
Session 1 is less than a week away, and I’m not feeling either one of these players.I don’t really want to play the ultimatum game “write a backstory, or you don’t get to play” If I have to do that … I want players who care enough to not have to be forced to do the basic stuff I told them was required from the start.
What I’m asking is, would it be fair to kick these two with just a quick, “sorry, the vibe is not meshing” or do I owe them more.
Some people enjoy the prospect of playing D&D, until they find out there is homework involved, and that they have to put something into the game to get the story out. Some might not get the concept of cooperative game play, or storytelling. Not everyone enjoys the idea of writing an essay, they just want to play a game. It's possible that your disengaged players didn't quite understand what they were getting into with your pitch, and now that the curtain is pulled back, may not be connecting with the structure and style of fun that you are offering.
What you owe them is you understanding what their version of fun looks like, and what they hope to get out of the experience. Thus far, you've only spoken to your requirements of them, with no mention of their requirements of you or the game. There doesn't seem to be much stated focus on their fun or the process to achieve it. Considering their hesitance to accept your offers of assistance, there might be some reluctance on their side to continue. An open, two-sided conversation is likely neccessary. One that focuses on what they want, and how they "fun".
If those things don't match up, they don't match up. Agree to part ways, and thank them for their time and consideration. If there is an honest compromise that you can make, I would encourage the good-faith attempt to do so. There's nothing wrong with changing to allow for fun, from both parties.
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
It's also worth mentioning that new players very frequently have no idea what to expect from D&D. What might come across as disengaged might actually be lack of certainty of what they should be doing at a table. They might still be figuring out their characters. They might be nervous or overwhelmed with the things you've asked of them. Heck, they might just be busy. An open conversation and the benefit of the doubt wouldn't go amiss.
Additionally, "RP heavy" can mean wildly different things to different people. It's worth making sure that everyone at the table is on the same page - be it "I use a silly voice for this character" or "I expect there to be personal arcs and tons of improv conversations in which I channel my inner dramatist" or anything in-between. It's possible those two players didn't realize what they signed up for and they're trying to figure out what to do about it.
What do you owe them? Communication and a chance. That said, you have the right and responsibility to lay out your expectations for the kind of game you want and plan to run. If people aren't on board with that...well, no D&D is better than bad D&D.
It's really not a big deal. Two players engaged in RP is enough to keep the game going. If the others just want to be along for the ride, as long as they know what's happening when their turn comes in combat and don't hold up the game, it's fine. And from time to time something they find interesting will happen in the game and they'll engage with RP for a few minutes every couple sessions.
If they aren't engaging with the game, then kick them and find different players. That's all there is to it. Finding players is not difficult. For an RP heavy campaign, you need VERY engaged players - much more so than for a hack'n'slash game. You'll only end up kicking them later anyway.
Consider finding 2 more players and run it for 6? Then it doesn't matter if you lose the 2 unengaged guys.
Thanks, I appreciate all the advice! I made one more offer to both of them to help out with backstory and reminded them it needs to done by session 1 (Wednesday)
One responded that they planned to work on their backstory this weekend. The other said they are very busy and they aren’t sure they will be able to commit to the campaign. So, we’ll see if they do drop out and whether that causes the other player to drop as well, since they wanted to play together. If they make it to session 0 we’ll see how they do with RP and go from there.
I do understand different play styles, however I was very clear in the description and in session 0 what was expected of players AND what they should expect of me. I stated up front that I do not want players who just want to roll dice and smash things. It’s not fair for my two engaged players to have to carry the weight of the roleplay.
The general issue I think your having and usually will have with people joining your table from outside of your personal circles is the prospect of "RP Heavy" is quite intimidating. In particular with a DM who is giving off "I'm going to judge how good your RP is and then decide if this is working out", which notably is the vibe I got from your post, is .... doubly so. I mean, I'm a 35+ year vet of running and playing RPG's, I'm not even in your game and I felt the pressure in how you phrased things.
"RP Heavy" is not a playstyle.. its something that a game/group becomes and something that develops naturally over time as players become comfortable with each other unless you happen to be lucky enough to find some extroverted theatre kids or actors to join your table. The idea that a game will be RP Heavy, combined with a table full of strangers you have never met is really bad footing to start from in a campaign.
You're running a D&D game, not holding auditions for a theatre play.. I would advise you lay off the pressure... a sufficient back story to play D&D is simply to ask the guy at session one, tell us about your character. I'm an Elf that likes magic and trains pigeons who grew up as an orphan among humans is more than enough back story to get a game going. You can always prompt your players a bit to fill in more later once everyone gets to know each other and gets comfortable.
So, you’re telling me my fun is wrong? This is how I have fun playing D&D. I’ve played games with little to no in character roleplay, and I do not enjoy them.
I’ve DMed several long term campaigns, one which is still going a year later. Most of my players were people I had just met when we started playing and did not know each other. They jumped right into RP and we have an awesome time. I am the least intimidating person you will ever meet.
I was only looking for advice on the fairest approach to take with these two players not following the requirements for my game. My play style might be wrong for you, but it is how I DM and I want my players to understand that. If I’ve made that clear and they ignore it, they aren’t a good fit for my table.
Before kicking them out i would at least ask for backstory again, highlighting that some engagement is expected from players enthusiasts to play in this campaign. If they ignore and show up at session 1 without a decent backstory or excuses for lack of thereof, i would then part ways, explaining them the reasons for their booting.
So, I wouldn't worry about the backstory too much. Many people can be really good at roleplaying even without backstories and can just adlib things on the spot.
Personally I'd send them a reminder that you would like to have their backstories as soon as possible but I'd at least try to play that first session just to see how it goes. Who knows, maybe they''ll contribute a lot to the game? If not, all you've lost is a single session.
Now, what you could do if you are really worried is to talk to your two old players and tell them that you are feeling unsure about the two new ones and might want to drop them. If so, you should just find new players and just restart the campaign with your two old friends playing the same characters again.
Overall I think this is being very unfair to new players. If you are willing to take on new players, you should expect them to be learning the rules and game mechanics, not have them writing backstories yet, especially if they don’t seem to thrilled about it.
Backstories don’t matter compared to simply learning the basics, like how combat works. Let them get that stuff down first then slowly come out of their shell, RP-wise.
I would ask them what is wrong. I remember I was in a group what seems a long time ago and the dm insisted that I explore complex elements of story telling after he agreed to let me play a simple fantasy hero creature . The dm shoved complex elements at what was a fun character going as far to change my back story without telling or asking my permission. I was miserable cause I was not allowed to play what I asked &told I could play. My mistake was giving it a second chance cause he psychologically broke my second character disregarding everything in their backstory &we were already in the final days of the campigin so I made 3rd char who was already dead inside and he approved that char probably without reading the backstory than got upset . At no point did he ask me and when I tried to tell him he disregarded it My point is you need to just ask them what is the matter .
My original question was "do I drop these two based on their lack of engagement/enthusiasm so far, or give them one more chance," and it has been answered. I sent one last message reminding them to get their backstories done and offering assistance; one responded that she needed to drop the game, the other said they would work on their backstory this weekend. If I don't get any response or see their backstory posted by Monday evening, I will assume they are no longer interested in the game. If they do post a backstory, we'll see how things go on game night.
A few things to clear up:
1. As I said in the original post, my concern is not simply over the lack of backstory, but the lack of enthusiasm. Lack of engagement during session 0, slow or no response to messages, etc. It feels like they aren't sure this is the right game for them, and I'm concerned that despite that they're hesitant to drop because they don't want to have to look for another game. Forcing yourself to adopt a playstyle that doesn't suit you is not fun for anyone at the table, nor is it fair to decide that you don't need to follow the same expectations as the other players.
2. I use player backstories to build the plot of the campaign. I want each player to have a character that is fully invested in the setting and story, because in my experience that gives the player a bigger investment in the game. It throws off my planning when players don't provide me the information I need to build the story. I do not ask for a full length novel. All I require are four simple questions: 1. Where/how did you grow up? 2. What are your goals 3. What is your worst flaw and best trait? 4. Why are you adventuring?
3. I was up front about the roleplay aspects of my game, and have been very open in my offers to support/help them with developing their characters and backstories. I have asked every step of the way if the requirements, playstyle, etc work for them, and been told yes. I have done everything in my power to ensure they feel comfortable communicating with me. They are adults. If something is wrong, and they feel they can't communicate that to me, there's not much more I can do.
Not every game is a good fit for every player, and I find it strange so many DMs here seem to be telling me I need to change what I require from players/how I run my games. I don't owe these players a gaming experience different than what I promised them. They read the requirements, they agreed to those requirements when they applied. They don't get to decide now that actually they don't like the requirements, but they're already in the game, so they should be allowed to stay.
I would ask them what is wrong. I remember I was in a group what seems a long time ago and the dm insisted that I explore complex elements of story telling after he agreed to let me play a simple fantasy hero creature . The dm shoved complex elements at what was a fun character going as far to change my back story without telling or asking my permission. I was miserable cause I was not allowed to play what I asked &told I could play. My mistake was giving it a second chance cause he psychologically broke my second character disregarding everything in their backstory &we were already in the final days of the campigin so I made 3rd char who was already dead inside and he approved that char probably without reading the backstory than got upset . At no point did he ask me and when I tried to tell him he disregarded it My point is you need to just ask them what is the matter .
They don't even have to be about the game, but ask them questions and get them talking.
"Did you have a backstory idea in mind?"
"Is Discord working okay for you?"
"Is this your first D&D game? Have you played before?"
Get them talking and you will find the source of the problem and perhaps gain an opportunity to fix it. Only way to do that is to ask them questions.
I have asked all these questions, and done my very best to make them feel comfortable communicating with me. I have reached out several times, and most of the responses have been one or two words, when I get a response at all. What have I done in this forum post to make myself seem super intimidating, or like someone who does not invite open communication?
Overall I think this is being very unfair to new players. If you are willing to take on new players, you should expect them to be learning the rules and game mechanics, not have them writing backstories yet, especially if they don’t seem to thrilled about it.
Backstories don’t matter compared to simply learning the basics, like how combat works. Let them get that stuff down first then slowly come out of their shell, RP-wise.
In the requirements for the game it stated they would need to come up with character backstories. They read those requirements and agreed to the game. They are adults, so if they really weren't thrilled about the backstory thing, that's on them.
I run my games in the exact opposite way from what you have suggested. That's what works for me; it does not need to work for anyone else. I have run 5 campaigns, two which were tailored specifically to new players, all RP heavy. Rules and mechanics are learned while playing, and I tell my players if they aren't sure about something, just ask. I will happily answer the same question as many times as needed. Instead of memorizing the rules, I would much rather my players focus on playing their character.
I would ask them what is wrong. I remember I was in a group what seems a long time ago and the dm insisted that I explore complex elements of story telling after he agreed to let me play a simple fantasy hero creature . The dm shoved complex elements at what was a fun character going as far to change my back story without telling or asking my permission. I was miserable cause I was not allowed to play what I asked &told I could play. My mistake was giving it a second chance cause he psychologically broke my second character disregarding everything in their backstory &we were already in the final days of the campigin so I made 3rd char who was already dead inside and he approved that char probably without reading the backstory than got upset . At no point did he ask me and when I tried to tell him he disregarded it My point is you need to just ask them what is the matter .
They don't even have to be about the game, but ask them questions and get them talking.
"Did you have a backstory idea in mind?"
"Is Discord working okay for you?"
"Is this your first D&D game? Have you played before?"
Get them talking and you will find the source of the problem and perhaps gain an opportunity to fix it. Only way to do that is to ask them questions.
I have asked all these questions, and done my very best to make them feel comfortable communicating with me. I have reached out several times, and most of the responses have been one or two words, when I get a response at all. What have I done in this forum post to make myself seem super intimidating, or like someone who does not invite open communication?
You don't seem intimidating at all, and you're quite open I would say - might just be how they are, super introverted, who knows. I can tell you a few years ago I had a group join Discord and it was pretty much silent most of the time, even after I posted something. During our sessions, everyone was the complete opposite. It might just be that they've never used it, could be a million different things.
I would say try to view the glass half-full, and try to approach things as objectively as you can. Is it aggravating? Of course, and I think most people here have dealt with someone like this at one point or another. Take it as an opportunity as a DM to further your skills. Clearly, they don't want to make a backstory - so you have a player that likes to do their own thing right off the bat. Encourage that during the sessions and see where it goes.
The other two I found in an LFG post. It’s a pair of friends, both new players. I gave them the pitch (including backstory requirements) and the response was really positive. Then I added them on Discord and it became far more lukewarm. One in particular was very disengaged during session 0, and gave odd answers on the consent document. Both have created characters, but have given me no backstory details, nor responded to my prompting or offers to help.
In all the years I've played D&D, no one has ever asked me to complete a "consent form".
So, I'm curious. What exactly did you need them to consent to, and what kind of questions were asked on the form?
Based on the information you provided, it's the only thing I can think of that may have changed their attitude/level of engagement.
The other two I found in an LFG post. It’s a pair of friends, both new players. I gave them the pitch (including backstory requirements) and the response was really positive. Then I added them on Discord and it became far more lukewarm. One in particular was very disengaged during session 0, and gave odd answers on the consent document. Both have created characters, but have given me no backstory details, nor responded to my prompting or offers to help.
In all the years I've played D&D, no one has ever asked me to complete a "consent form".
So, I'm curious. What exactly did you need them to consent to, and what kind of questions were asked on the form?
Based on the information you provided, it's the only thing I can think of that may have changed their attitude/level of engagement.
It's was for players to communicate what potentially triggering elements they're okay with, which ones they'd like to keep veiled and which ones they do not want in the game at all. I like to have it all written out for players to go through, because it gives them a chance to share their triggers in private, and ensures a number of elements are covered.
I don't think the form would have changed their attitude. What threw me off is that they were the most open to potentially troubling elements (genocide, child/animal abuse, etc) but offered no clarity. Which is on me. I burrowed the form from someone else, and didn't adjust it to require more detailed explanations. They also said they were okay with an NC-17 rating in the game, which again, is on me. I didn't remove that option from the form. But it did seem weird to select that answer as I had already established there would be no explicit sex or graphic gore or violence, which I feel is the cut off for NC-17.
I suppose, on reflection, it's possible the form did bother them, because they felt there was a possibility of a more intense game, but now they see that won't happen. I don't know. My feeling about their responses to the consent form are highly subjective, and less defensible. This is a silly thing to say about a form, but it just seemed like they blew through it, selecting green for almost everything, and offering no further explanations, expect in the section asking "is there anything in particular you would really like to see happen in the game?" to which they responded with a one word "no," which felt very ... enthusiastic. Like asking a teenager which ride they're most excited about going on at Disney World, and having them respond "none of them." Weird to me, but I fully appreciate why anyone reading this explanation would be like "Wow, you need to relax."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Okay, I’m gauging what’s the most appropriate/fairest option for my game and my players.
I recruited four players for an open world campaign. I told everyone up front, the campaign will be RP heavy, and I want characters with solid backstories.Two are people I’ve played with before, they are very enthusiastic. They have their characters ready to go, backstory and all.
The other two I found in an LFG post. It’s a pair of friends, both new players. I gave them the pitch (including backstory requirements) and the response was really positive. Then I added them on Discord and it became far more lukewarm. One in particular was very disengaged during session 0, and gave odd answers on the consent document. Both have created characters, but have given me no backstory details, nor responded to my prompting or offers to help.
Session 1 is less than a week away, and I’m not feeling either one of these players. I don’t really want to play the ultimatum game “write a backstory, or you don’t get to play” If I have to do that … I want players who care enough to not have to be forced to do the basic stuff I told them was required from the start.
What I’m asking is, would it be fair to kick these two with just a quick, “sorry, the vibe is not meshing” or do I owe them more.
First of all, unless you have people to fill their spaces at the table, don't kick out those players if you can possibly avoid it. In my experience, it is very difficult to run a fully functional game with fewer than 4 players. My advice here is to compromise. It looks like half your players have happy with a social-heavy game, and half would prefer a combat-heavy game. You can and should provide both! Throw something for each of your players to enjoy into the game. It might mean changing your plans a little bit, but that's a small price to pay to keep everyone happy. Even then, though, encourage them to provide at least a brief backstory. It doesn't need to be really long or stand out; it just needs to give them a bit of a role in the world and a bit of personality for your social scenes, and you can mostly focus on the backstories of the more enthusiastic roleplayers in your group.
If you have other people who want to play, on the other hand, don't feel afraid to tell those players that this game may not be for them. Chances are, it isn't.
Panda-wat (I hate my username) is somehow convinced that he is objectively right about everything D&D related even though he obviously is not. Considering that, he'd probably make a great D&D youtuber.
"If I die, I can live with that." ~Luke Hart, the DM lair
I would give them the ultimatum but in a polite manner.
explain to them that the game you're running needs backstories, and so far they haven't given you one. Ask them if they still want to play in a RP heavy game with backstories, and if they do, ask them to get the backstory to you before a certain date. Also ask them if they are waiting for session 1 before they build a backstory into the world you present for them, some people make their backstories after the game starts.
If they back out, or don't step up, find a new pair of players and be leniant so that they can make their backstories between the first couple of sessions.
Whilst you don't owe them anything, I would get the facts before booting them. Some people are bad at communications and they might be just laying the finishing touches on the best backstory you could have hoped for!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Some people enjoy the prospect of playing D&D, until they find out there is homework involved, and that they have to put something into the game to get the story out. Some might not get the concept of cooperative game play, or storytelling. Not everyone enjoys the idea of writing an essay, they just want to play a game. It's possible that your disengaged players didn't quite understand what they were getting into with your pitch, and now that the curtain is pulled back, may not be connecting with the structure and style of fun that you are offering.
What you owe them is you understanding what their version of fun looks like, and what they hope to get out of the experience. Thus far, you've only spoken to your requirements of them, with no mention of their requirements of you or the game. There doesn't seem to be much stated focus on their fun or the process to achieve it. Considering their hesitance to accept your offers of assistance, there might be some reluctance on their side to continue. An open, two-sided conversation is likely neccessary. One that focuses on what they want, and how they "fun".
If those things don't match up, they don't match up. Agree to part ways, and thank them for their time and consideration. If there is an honest compromise that you can make, I would encourage the good-faith attempt to do so. There's nothing wrong with changing to allow for fun, from both parties.
“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
It's also worth mentioning that new players very frequently have no idea what to expect from D&D. What might come across as disengaged might actually be lack of certainty of what they should be doing at a table. They might still be figuring out their characters. They might be nervous or overwhelmed with the things you've asked of them. Heck, they might just be busy. An open conversation and the benefit of the doubt wouldn't go amiss.
Additionally, "RP heavy" can mean wildly different things to different people. It's worth making sure that everyone at the table is on the same page - be it "I use a silly voice for this character" or "I expect there to be personal arcs and tons of improv conversations in which I channel my inner dramatist" or anything in-between. It's possible those two players didn't realize what they signed up for and they're trying to figure out what to do about it.
What do you owe them? Communication and a chance. That said, you have the right and responsibility to lay out your expectations for the kind of game you want and plan to run. If people aren't on board with that...well, no D&D is better than bad D&D.
It's really not a big deal. Two players engaged in RP is enough to keep the game going. If the others just want to be along for the ride, as long as they know what's happening when their turn comes in combat and don't hold up the game, it's fine. And from time to time something they find interesting will happen in the game and they'll engage with RP for a few minutes every couple sessions.
I honestly talk to my players and ask them straight up the format they want it helps allot.
If they aren't engaging with the game, then kick them and find different players. That's all there is to it. Finding players is not difficult. For an RP heavy campaign, you need VERY engaged players - much more so than for a hack'n'slash game. You'll only end up kicking them later anyway.
Consider finding 2 more players and run it for 6? Then it doesn't matter if you lose the 2 unengaged guys.
Thanks, I appreciate all the advice! I made one more offer to both of them to help out with backstory and reminded them it needs to done by session 1 (Wednesday)
One responded that they planned to work on their backstory this weekend. The other said they are very busy and they aren’t sure they will be able to commit to the campaign. So, we’ll see if they do drop out and whether that causes the other player to drop as well, since they wanted to play together. If they make it to session 0 we’ll see how they do with RP and go from there.
I do understand different play styles, however I was very clear in the description and in session 0 what was expected of players AND what they should expect of me. I stated up front that I do not want players who just want to roll dice and smash things. It’s not fair for my two engaged players to have to carry the weight of the roleplay.
So, you’re telling me my fun is wrong? This is how I have fun playing D&D. I’ve played games with little to no in character roleplay, and I do not enjoy them.
I’ve DMed several long term campaigns, one which is still going a year later. Most of my players were people I had just met when we started playing and did not know each other. They jumped right into RP and we have an awesome time. I am the least intimidating person you will ever meet.
I was only looking for advice on the fairest approach to take with these two players not following the requirements for my game. My play style might be wrong for you, but it is how I DM and I want my players to understand that. If I’ve made that clear and they ignore it, they aren’t a good fit for my table.
Before kicking them out i would at least ask for backstory again, highlighting that some engagement is expected from players enthusiasts to play in this campaign. If they ignore and show up at session 1 without a decent backstory or excuses for lack of thereof, i would then part ways, explaining them the reasons for their booting.
So, I wouldn't worry about the backstory too much. Many people can be really good at roleplaying even without backstories and can just adlib things on the spot.
Personally I'd send them a reminder that you would like to have their backstories as soon as possible but I'd at least try to play that first session just to see how it goes. Who knows, maybe they''ll contribute a lot to the game? If not, all you've lost is a single session.
Now, what you could do if you are really worried is to talk to your two old players and tell them that you are feeling unsure about the two new ones and might want to drop them. If so, you should just find new players and just restart the campaign with your two old friends playing the same characters again.
Overall I think this is being very unfair to new players. If you are willing to take on new players, you should expect them to be learning the rules and game mechanics, not have them writing backstories yet, especially if they don’t seem to thrilled about it.
Backstories don’t matter compared to simply learning the basics, like how combat works. Let them get that stuff down first then slowly come out of their shell, RP-wise.
I would ask them what is wrong. I remember I was in a group what seems a long time ago and the dm insisted that I explore complex elements of story telling after he agreed to let me play a simple fantasy hero creature . The dm shoved complex elements at what was a fun character going as far to change my back story without telling or asking my permission. I was miserable cause I was not allowed to play what I asked &told I could play. My mistake was giving it a second chance cause he psychologically broke my second character disregarding everything in their backstory &we were already in the final days of the campigin so I made 3rd char who was already dead inside and he approved that char probably without reading the backstory than got upset . At no point did he ask me and when I tried to tell him he disregarded it My point is you need to just ask them what is the matter .
Ask them questions.
They don't even have to be about the game, but ask them questions and get them talking.
"Did you have a backstory idea in mind?"
"Is Discord working okay for you?"
"Is this your first D&D game? Have you played before?"
Get them talking and you will find the source of the problem and perhaps gain an opportunity to fix it. Only way to do that is to ask them questions.
My original question was "do I drop these two based on their lack of engagement/enthusiasm so far, or give them one more chance," and it has been answered. I sent one last message reminding them to get their backstories done and offering assistance; one responded that she needed to drop the game, the other said they would work on their backstory this weekend. If I don't get any response or see their backstory posted by Monday evening, I will assume they are no longer interested in the game. If they do post a backstory, we'll see how things go on game night.
A few things to clear up:
1. As I said in the original post, my concern is not simply over the lack of backstory, but the lack of enthusiasm. Lack of engagement during session 0, slow or no response to messages, etc. It feels like they aren't sure this is the right game for them, and I'm concerned that despite that they're hesitant to drop because they don't want to have to look for another game. Forcing yourself to adopt a playstyle that doesn't suit you is not fun for anyone at the table, nor is it fair to decide that you don't need to follow the same expectations as the other players.
2. I use player backstories to build the plot of the campaign. I want each player to have a character that is fully invested in the setting and story, because in my experience that gives the player a bigger investment in the game. It throws off my planning when players don't provide me the information I need to build the story. I do not ask for a full length novel. All I require are four simple questions: 1. Where/how did you grow up? 2. What are your goals 3. What is your worst flaw and best trait? 4. Why are you adventuring?
3. I was up front about the roleplay aspects of my game, and have been very open in my offers to support/help them with developing their characters and backstories. I have asked every step of the way if the requirements, playstyle, etc work for them, and been told yes. I have done everything in my power to ensure they feel comfortable communicating with me. They are adults. If something is wrong, and they feel they can't communicate that to me, there's not much more I can do.
Not every game is a good fit for every player, and I find it strange so many DMs here seem to be telling me I need to change what I require from players/how I run my games. I don't owe these players a gaming experience different than what I promised them. They read the requirements, they agreed to those requirements when they applied. They don't get to decide now that actually they don't like the requirements, but they're already in the game, so they should be allowed to stay.
I have asked all these questions, and done my very best to make them feel comfortable communicating with me. I have reached out several times, and most of the responses have been one or two words, when I get a response at all. What have I done in this forum post to make myself seem super intimidating, or like someone who does not invite open communication?
In the requirements for the game it stated they would need to come up with character backstories. They read those requirements and agreed to the game. They are adults, so if they really weren't thrilled about the backstory thing, that's on them.
I run my games in the exact opposite way from what you have suggested. That's what works for me; it does not need to work for anyone else. I have run 5 campaigns, two which were tailored specifically to new players, all RP heavy. Rules and mechanics are learned while playing, and I tell my players if they aren't sure about something, just ask. I will happily answer the same question as many times as needed. Instead of memorizing the rules, I would much rather my players focus on playing their character.
In all the years I've played D&D, no one has ever asked me to complete a "consent form".
So, I'm curious. What exactly did you need them to consent to, and what kind of questions were asked on the form?
Based on the information you provided, it's the only thing I can think of that may have changed their attitude/level of engagement.
It's was for players to communicate what potentially triggering elements they're okay with, which ones they'd like to keep veiled and which ones they do not want in the game at all. I like to have it all written out for players to go through, because it gives them a chance to share their triggers in private, and ensures a number of elements are covered.
I don't think the form would have changed their attitude. What threw me off is that they were the most open to potentially troubling elements (genocide, child/animal abuse, etc) but offered no clarity. Which is on me. I burrowed the form from someone else, and didn't adjust it to require more detailed explanations. They also said they were okay with an NC-17 rating in the game, which again, is on me. I didn't remove that option from the form. But it did seem weird to select that answer as I had already established there would be no explicit sex or graphic gore or violence, which I feel is the cut off for NC-17.
I suppose, on reflection, it's possible the form did bother them, because they felt there was a possibility of a more intense game, but now they see that won't happen. I don't know. My feeling about their responses to the consent form are highly subjective, and less defensible. This is a silly thing to say about a form, but it just seemed like they blew through it, selecting green for almost everything, and offering no further explanations, expect in the section asking "is there anything in particular you would really like to see happen in the game?" to which they responded with a one word "no," which felt very ... enthusiastic. Like asking a teenager which ride they're most excited about going on at Disney World, and having them respond "none of them." Weird to me, but I fully appreciate why anyone reading this explanation would be like "Wow, you need to relax."