Hey guys, so I'm running my first -ish campaign, its been a few months now (with one session of 2-4 hours a week, and some holiday break back in xmas), and although I'm a pretty easy going and benevolent DM, my players are still too scared to commit to their characters because they are afraid that the characters will die and they don't want to feel the sadness of losing them.
They aren't doing terribly at all, they're not expert players who fully explore all their options yet, but they're doing pretty good, completing quests, gaining loot, talking to some npcs (but never too in depth).
I've a homebrew rule that if you die once, you have the chance to be revived only once more, and not every time you die, they haven't had to use any of these, and none of them has even fallen in battle yet and had to do death saves.
I'm pretty lenient with rolls, and as long as they justify things right they can often get advantages and stuff.
Yet they are still terrified of investing too much on their characters because of the fear to die? I've tried having a conversation with them about it, but it seems like that is all there is to it? Problem is, with how long this has been running, they're characters haven't been very engaging in anything because they lack that drive to well, be a character. I'm also quite new at this so, I'm trying to improve it myself, I'll be trying to throw in some npcs that will be a little more pushy in terms of trying to get them to interact as characters, not too much so as to not be forceful, but enough that it feels like I'm dangling the carrot in front of them?
If anyone with more experience has some tips to make this an easier transition that'd be great! Thank you!
Yeah this seems odd to me, because usually this kind of thing will peter out after they go through several sessions and see that it is not a bloodbath. You are saying weekly sessions for a few months, clearly from before Xmas. If I assume Dec, Jan, Feb, Mar with 4 weeks off, that's about 12 weeks, which is like 36 hours of play based on your description. I would assume by now they are level 3 or 4, yes? And have completed many quests and done the equivalent of cleaning out several dungeons. And you say they have done all this without even one of them faceplanting a single time?
If that's all true then they definitely should not be still worried about character death to this extent. I mean what do they want you to do? Sign a contract saying characters cannot die? Are they going to wait until the campaign is over, and their character lived through it, and THEN get attached?
I have seen people be a little "gun shy" for a session or 3 at the very start until they get the feel of the DM but by the time the 3rd session is over, heck often long before that, they realize the DM is not going to attack their level 1 party with a Red Dragon and they stop being so paranoid. It sounds like you have done more than enough to earn their trust and they are still not trusting.
Have you tried having an open discussion about this? The one thing I can think could cause this sort of behavior to last this long would be if several of them had a DM before who started out all nice and friendly, waited till level 5, and then started the bloodbath.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Lose the homebrew rule is quite simply the easiest solution. The reluctance you are observing is just one of the side effects of changing a rule/system that professional game designers put in for a reason.
Now if you are unwilling to do that, then time to lose your benevolence, in a fashion. Time to see just how selfish the characters actually are. There is a theory, taking the fight to the enemy is better than having the enemy bring the fight to you. And that is how you "force" engagement, you can't force investiture, but you can force engagement.
Characters are hanging out at the tavern/inn/town. Well a farm on the outskirt gets attacked. Characters do nothing? Two more get attacked after a time period. Still do nothing, the actual tavern/inn/town gets attacked. Innocent people being murdered and abducted before their eyes. Still do nothing, the enemy has encircled the place, they are closing in on the character's hiding place, razing buildings, destroying everything. At some point the players will realize that their characters either intervene and engage, or they can do nothing and be slaughtered (or even worse captured, players hate to be captured) like the innocent NPC's they did nothing to protect. In otherwords, if the PC's won't go to the adventure, bring the adventure to them. If they are in a really secure area, then it is time for a coup or revolution in the area. At no time are you interfering with player agency, they can always choose to not engage, but the logical consequences of not doing so get progressively worse. Wiping out an outpost, hamlet, or even small town to show the consequences of inaction and remind the players that they are heroes (or anti-heroes) and not just livestock waiting to be slaughtered.
Eh, I don't know how much the homebrew rule is causing the reluctance. At low levels, characters can't generally be rez'ed anyway... When does Raise Dead become PC-available, 9th level or something? Unless the PCs can cast it there has never been any guarantee that a rez is possible, because you can't control whether an NPC (a) has the spell, (b) is willing and able to cast it for you, and (c) is within a 10 day trip (or round trip if the dead guy can't be moved). Oh and either way they need access (within 10 days of the death happening) to a 500 gp diamond. Every time.
Given all that, character death is generally rather permanent below 9th level anyway, and even above 9th level may very well be, unless the characters have access to the material component (and not, not just 500 gold, but a single diamond worth 500 gp, which may, or may not, be readily available). Resurrection can be done basically whenever (on a campaign time scale), but it requires a 1,000 gp diamond, and you have to be 13th level now.
So I could see them maybe worrying about the "one rez, ever" rule at high level, when they are facing down the likes of Tiamat or Asmodeus. But assuming these new players are level 2s fighting orcs and zombies, death at that level = perma-death anyway, so a perma-death rule should not be causing them to be so gun shy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
It is a psychological effect. Think about a video game, Galaga is a great example, you start with three lives, and go all out to "capture" your second ship. Once you get the double, you only have one life left, so you play more conservatively until you get your next "bonus life". If you lose the just the doubly, you play very "safe" while you only have one left. However, once you are on your last life, you take many risks trying to get enough score to get your "bonus life". Two is just a real bad number to be at psychologically because it is only one away from "your last". Being on "your last" actually increases risk taking over having a limited number, with two being the nadir of risk taking and infinity being the zenith, but a very sharp rise when you get to "your last".
Oh wow! thanks so much for the feedback! Yeah they're level 3 right now, and they even have an npc companion with them that can pretty much handle itself.
yeah, none of them have faceplanted yet, there was ONE case halfway through where we are now, that one fell to a trap and was left at like 2 hit points, which was fine cuz they managed to recover pretty well.
For the Resurrection thing at early levels, the best way they would have to do it (since as you said, it is not a spell that is acquired quite so early on) is to employ the service of someone that can, which, although not at all common, there are a few characters across the world that can do such a thing.
I've done the bringing the fight to them approach last month and it uh...didn't quite do it? I mean they faced it and fought it in the end, but they're still not engaging as characters and see it more like a video-game with permadeath.
I think we started the campaign way back in October? there's five players total + an npc, so its not like they can't back each others up either. to me this makes it hard because its harder to find a way to put things at stake for them that aren't just their lives, as the characters come to care for nothing? I don't know, its an odd place. I've had open talks about it with them, but they themselves don't seem to be able to explain why this is a problem. (Again, I'm a fairly new DM and I try to see if the problem is in the way I do things as well).
I do have a habbit of maybe being too lenient and easy at times, so maybe that needs to harden a bit.
I'd get rid of your house rule because, well, what purpose is it serving? It seems to tuned to make people more scared of dying, and the problem you're having is that they're overly scared of dying, so...
Other than that, it's worth reducing someone to 0 hp so they actually have a sense of how hard it actually is to die in D&D5 (other than TPKs and being reduced to 0 hp in a damaging zone, it almost never happens).
Hey guys, so I'm running my first -ish campaign, its been a few months now (with one session of 2-4 hours a week, and some holiday break back in xmas), and although I'm a pretty easy going and benevolent DM, my players are still too scared to commit to their characters because they are afraid that the characters will die and they don't want to feel the sadness of losing them.
[...]
I've a homebrew rule that if you die once, you have the chance to be revived only once more, and not every time you die, [...]
Yet they are still terrified of investing too much on their characters because of the fear to die? I've tried having a conversation with them about it, but it seems like that is all there is to it? Problem is, with how long this has been running, they're characters haven't been very engaging in anything because they lack that drive to well, be a character. I'm also quite new at this so, I'm trying to improve it myself, I'll be trying to throw in some npcs that will be a little more pushy in terms of trying to get them to interact as characters, not too much so as to not be forceful, but enough that it feels like I'm dangling the carrot in front of them?
If anyone with more experience has some tips to make this an easier transition that'd be great! Thank you!
What exactly would it look like for the players to commit to their characters to you? You are saying they lack the drive to be a character, do you mean they aren't role-playing their characters enough for you? Clarification on what exactly you think is missing here would be helpful.
The house rule of only allowing 1 revive might just be a red herring in this case. Is it possible this is just a disconnect between how they want to play and how you want them to play? An expectations misalignment? I could of course be totally wrong here, you are there not me.
I say this just because I have quite the split of players in the game I run. One of them really likes role-playing and being the face of the party, another just wants to loot, lvl up, and get cool magic items like we are playing World of Warcraft. I am able to do a little of both to keep each player happy, and seeing them have fun allows me to have more fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey guys, so I'm running my first -ish campaign, its been a few months now (with one session of 2-4 hours a week, and some holiday break back in xmas), and although I'm a pretty easy going and benevolent DM, my players are still too scared to commit to their characters because they are afraid that the characters will die and they don't want to feel the sadness of losing them.
They aren't doing terribly at all, they're not expert players who fully explore all their options yet, but they're doing pretty good, completing quests, gaining loot, talking to some npcs (but never too in depth).
I've a homebrew rule that if you die once, you have the chance to be revived only once more, and not every time you die, they haven't had to use any of these, and none of them has even fallen in battle yet and had to do death saves.
I'm pretty lenient with rolls, and as long as they justify things right they can often get advantages and stuff.
Yet they are still terrified of investing too much on their characters because of the fear to die? I've tried having a conversation with them about it, but it seems like that is all there is to it?
Problem is, with how long this has been running, they're characters haven't been very engaging in anything because they lack that drive to well, be a character.
I'm also quite new at this so, I'm trying to improve it myself, I'll be trying to throw in some npcs that will be a little more pushy in terms of trying to get them to interact as characters, not too much so as to not be forceful, but enough that it feels like I'm dangling the carrot in front of them?
If anyone with more experience has some tips to make this an easier transition that'd be great! Thank you!
Yeah this seems odd to me, because usually this kind of thing will peter out after they go through several sessions and see that it is not a bloodbath. You are saying weekly sessions for a few months, clearly from before Xmas. If I assume Dec, Jan, Feb, Mar with 4 weeks off, that's about 12 weeks, which is like 36 hours of play based on your description. I would assume by now they are level 3 or 4, yes? And have completed many quests and done the equivalent of cleaning out several dungeons. And you say they have done all this without even one of them faceplanting a single time?
If that's all true then they definitely should not be still worried about character death to this extent. I mean what do they want you to do? Sign a contract saying characters cannot die? Are they going to wait until the campaign is over, and their character lived through it, and THEN get attached?
I have seen people be a little "gun shy" for a session or 3 at the very start until they get the feel of the DM but by the time the 3rd session is over, heck often long before that, they realize the DM is not going to attack their level 1 party with a Red Dragon and they stop being so paranoid. It sounds like you have done more than enough to earn their trust and they are still not trusting.
Have you tried having an open discussion about this? The one thing I can think could cause this sort of behavior to last this long would be if several of them had a DM before who started out all nice and friendly, waited till level 5, and then started the bloodbath.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Lose the homebrew rule is quite simply the easiest solution. The reluctance you are observing is just one of the side effects of changing a rule/system that professional game designers put in for a reason.
Now if you are unwilling to do that, then time to lose your benevolence, in a fashion. Time to see just how selfish the characters actually are. There is a theory, taking the fight to the enemy is better than having the enemy bring the fight to you. And that is how you "force" engagement, you can't force investiture, but you can force engagement.
Characters are hanging out at the tavern/inn/town. Well a farm on the outskirt gets attacked. Characters do nothing? Two more get attacked after a time period. Still do nothing, the actual tavern/inn/town gets attacked. Innocent people being murdered and abducted before their eyes. Still do nothing, the enemy has encircled the place, they are closing in on the character's hiding place, razing buildings, destroying everything. At some point the players will realize that their characters either intervene and engage, or they can do nothing and be slaughtered (or even worse captured, players hate to be captured) like the innocent NPC's they did nothing to protect. In otherwords, if the PC's won't go to the adventure, bring the adventure to them. If they are in a really secure area, then it is time for a coup or revolution in the area. At no time are you interfering with player agency, they can always choose to not engage, but the logical consequences of not doing so get progressively worse. Wiping out an outpost, hamlet, or even small town to show the consequences of inaction and remind the players that they are heroes (or anti-heroes) and not just livestock waiting to be slaughtered.
Carrots require sticks to work...
Eh, I don't know how much the homebrew rule is causing the reluctance. At low levels, characters can't generally be rez'ed anyway... When does Raise Dead become PC-available, 9th level or something? Unless the PCs can cast it there has never been any guarantee that a rez is possible, because you can't control whether an NPC (a) has the spell, (b) is willing and able to cast it for you, and (c) is within a 10 day trip (or round trip if the dead guy can't be moved). Oh and either way they need access (within 10 days of the death happening) to a 500 gp diamond. Every time.
Given all that, character death is generally rather permanent below 9th level anyway, and even above 9th level may very well be, unless the characters have access to the material component (and not, not just 500 gold, but a single diamond worth 500 gp, which may, or may not, be readily available). Resurrection can be done basically whenever (on a campaign time scale), but it requires a 1,000 gp diamond, and you have to be 13th level now.
So I could see them maybe worrying about the "one rez, ever" rule at high level, when they are facing down the likes of Tiamat or Asmodeus. But assuming these new players are level 2s fighting orcs and zombies, death at that level = perma-death anyway, so a perma-death rule should not be causing them to be so gun shy.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
It is a psychological effect. Think about a video game, Galaga is a great example, you start with three lives, and go all out to "capture" your second ship. Once you get the double, you only have one life left, so you play more conservatively until you get your next "bonus life". If you lose the just the doubly, you play very "safe" while you only have one left. However, once you are on your last life, you take many risks trying to get enough score to get your "bonus life". Two is just a real bad number to be at psychologically because it is only one away from "your last". Being on "your last" actually increases risk taking over having a limited number, with two being the nadir of risk taking and infinity being the zenith, but a very sharp rise when you get to "your last".
Oh wow! thanks so much for the feedback! Yeah they're level 3 right now, and they even have an npc companion with them that can pretty much handle itself.
yeah, none of them have faceplanted yet, there was ONE case halfway through where we are now, that one fell to a trap and was left at like 2 hit points, which was fine cuz they managed to recover pretty well.
For the Resurrection thing at early levels, the best way they would have to do it (since as you said, it is not a spell that is acquired quite so early on) is to employ the service of someone that can, which, although not at all common, there are a few characters across the world that can do such a thing.
I've done the bringing the fight to them approach last month and it uh...didn't quite do it? I mean they faced it and fought it in the end, but they're still not engaging as characters and see it more like a video-game with permadeath.
I think we started the campaign way back in October? there's five players total + an npc, so its not like they can't back each others up either.
to me this makes it hard because its harder to find a way to put things at stake for them that aren't just their lives, as the characters come to care for nothing? I don't know, its an odd place. I've had open talks about it with them, but they themselves don't seem to be able to explain why this is a problem. (Again, I'm a fairly new DM and I try to see if the problem is in the way I do things as well).
I do have a habbit of maybe being too lenient and easy at times, so maybe that needs to harden a bit.
I'd get rid of your house rule because, well, what purpose is it serving? It seems to tuned to make people more scared of dying, and the problem you're having is that they're overly scared of dying, so...
Other than that, it's worth reducing someone to 0 hp so they actually have a sense of how hard it actually is to die in D&D5 (other than TPKs and being reduced to 0 hp in a damaging zone, it almost never happens).
What exactly would it look like for the players to commit to their characters to you? You are saying they lack the drive to be a character, do you mean they aren't role-playing their characters enough for you? Clarification on what exactly you think is missing here would be helpful.
The house rule of only allowing 1 revive might just be a red herring in this case. Is it possible this is just a disconnect between how they want to play and how you want them to play? An expectations misalignment? I could of course be totally wrong here, you are there not me.
I say this just because I have quite the split of players in the game I run. One of them really likes role-playing and being the face of the party, another just wants to loot, lvl up, and get cool magic items like we are playing World of Warcraft. I am able to do a little of both to keep each player happy, and seeing them have fun allows me to have more fun.