One of our core players is away for three weeks at the moment, and I was asked if two new players could join our existing campaign. Since I didn't really want to drop in two new people while someone was missing (they were in the middle of a prison rescue), I said that it could be a good opportunity to have a 'prequel' scenario where everyone started new characters, and went on an unrelated adventure in the same setting I have made. I suggested that they could encounter any of these new characters during the prison break when we get back to the usual program, which would be a natural introduction for them into the game.
Anyway, it turned out that everyone made a character who was either a monosyllabic grunting misanthrope, or had some other kind of social impediment from getting them to work together. It was a real struggle to run the game, and it's honestly the first time I didn't have fun. I asked them over text if they were okey with a simple cliche story hook to get this thing off the ground quickly (as we only have three weeks), and they said sure, but at the actual game table things were tedious and I lost count how many times I had to ask what they wanted to do. It felt like a battle of attrition between my quest giver and them agreeing to go along with it, and in the end it seemed only because of the social contract of 'going along with the adventure that is prepared'. Even the characters themselves didn't seem to want to bond together at all, and only stayed together because one of my players said 'nah we can't split the party' out of character. Note, their usual characters in our main game are much easier going and do more than grunt, so it's not a player problem.
At the time I was tempted to just say 'fine, he accepts you won't help him, and asks you to leave', and now I'm kinda wondering if I should have and just dumped them outside and forced them to come up with their own fun. I've got two more weeks of this, and I'm tempted just to cancel. Is it reasonable to ask them to make personality changes for these characters, or am I just being overly dramatic?
Also, this was a larger group than we normally play with (six people), and if the two new people stick around it's going to be seven. I'm looking forward to getting back the game I enjoy, but I don't know if that'll be an issue.. combat is already the biggest time sponge in the game, and it's were I notice everyone starts having eyes glaze over, or start scrolling on their phones. But I guess thats a whole other issue.
The only way to sort this out is to speak with your players and identify that them all being grunts doesn't work. Maybe some will be willing to change their characters to get the game flowing better.
This is why as a DM you need to approve character concepts beforehand. If you see everyone making loner type characters you need to tell the group that they can't do that... maybe, maybe, you can let one person do that, but if you have more than one it'll be exactly as you observed.
I agree with Farling -- speak to them OOC and tell them that this is not going to work. Either change their characters or make new ones.
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.
The only way to sort this out is to speak with your players and identify that them all being grunts doesn't work. Maybe some will be willing to change their characters to get the game flowing better.
Agreed. Also, rather than making "DM demands," I like to phrase it as "this will help you guys have a more fun, fast paced game." I always frame suggestions and rules to my players as ways to make the game better for them. That might not help in all cases, but I think most people really do want to help run a fun game for everyone. Being a good player is a learned skill, too.
Example: "Yes I know you want to kill everything you meet on sight, but if you kill my quest givers, you won't find all the truly epic fights that are waiting to be had and the game will get really boring." (This was playing with kids, but the idea holds. I emphasized over and over that the rules I set were for their benefit.)
One of our core players is away for three weeks at the moment, and I was asked if two new players could join our existing campaign. Since I didn't really want to drop in two new people while someone was missing (they were in the middle of a prison rescue), I said that it could be a good opportunity to have a 'prequel' scenario where everyone started new characters, and went on an unrelated adventure in the same setting I have made. I suggested that they could encounter any of these new characters during the prison break when we get back to the usual program, which would be a natural introduction for them into the game.
Anyway, it turned out that everyone made a character who was either a monosyllabic grunting misanthrope, or had some other kind of social impediment from getting them to work together. It was a real struggle to run the game, and it's honestly the first time I didn't have fun. I asked them over text if they were okey with a simple cliche story hook to get this thing off the ground quickly (as we only have three weeks), and they said sure, but at the actual game table things were tedious and I lost count how many times I had to ask what they wanted to do. It felt like a battle of attrition between my quest giver and them agreeing to go along with it, and in the end it seemed only because of the social contract of 'going along with the adventure that is prepared'. Even the characters themselves didn't seem to want to bond together at all, and only stayed together because one of my players said 'nah we can't split the party' out of character. Note, their usual characters in our main game are much easier going and do more than grunt, so it's not a player problem.
At the time I was tempted to just say 'fine, he accepts you won't help him, and asks you to leave', and now I'm kinda wondering if I should have and just dumped them outside and forced them to come up with their own fun. I've got two more weeks of this, and I'm tempted just to cancel. Is it reasonable to ask them to make personality changes for these characters, or am I just being overly dramatic?
Also, this was a larger group than we normally play with (six people), and if the two new people stick around it's going to be seven. I'm looking forward to getting back the game I enjoy, but I don't know if that'll be an issue.. combat is already the biggest time sponge in the game, and it's were I notice everyone starts having eyes glaze over, or start scrolling on their phones. But I guess thats a whole other issue.
The only way to sort this out is to speak with your players and identify that them all being grunts doesn't work. Maybe some will be willing to change their characters to get the game flowing better.
This is why as a DM you need to approve character concepts beforehand. If you see everyone making loner type characters you need to tell the group that they can't do that... maybe, maybe, you can let one person do that, but if you have more than one it'll be exactly as you observed.
I agree with Farling -- speak to them OOC and tell them that this is not going to work. Either change their characters or make new ones.
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.
Agreed. Also, rather than making "DM demands," I like to phrase it as "this will help you guys have a more fun, fast paced game." I always frame suggestions and rules to my players as ways to make the game better for them. That might not help in all cases, but I think most people really do want to help run a fun game for everyone. Being a good player is a learned skill, too.
Example: "Yes I know you want to kill everything you meet on sight, but if you kill my quest givers, you won't find all the truly epic fights that are waiting to be had and the game will get really boring." (This was playing with kids, but the idea holds. I emphasized over and over that the rules I set were for their benefit.)