I´m sorry if this is not the right section of the forum.
So I recently started a campaign with 5 players (2 of them have some expiereince with pen&papers) the other 3 have none or almost none.
We agreed to meet up about once a month to play in my apartment and the first session was alot of fun. Now the problem is that since then one of my players keeps on complaining about meeting up (he lives about an hour away but orignallly saif he wouldn´t mind the way) so i offered to do it online with webcams so i can observe the rolls cause they really love to use their dice but that doesn´t make him happy either. saying it takes the flair away (all the others including me disagree on that) the he started complaining about the way i GM the game.
now i don´t just want to tell him to stay home since he brought one of the players into the group and i´m afraid that she will stop playing too´.
Any suggestions on what to do? or should i just kick him out?
Well, I would start by talking to them more. If the drive is a problem and playing online is a nonoption, perhaps a change of location would work. If someone lives the least distance away from the most people perhaps they could host? Additionally, if they are complaining about the way you gm asking them about what the problems are and how you could better GM. Weather or not you take their advice is up to you.
Regardless of the situation, I would recommend doing a debrief after you play. Give everyone some time as a group to talk about the experience, what they liked/didnt like, what worked and what didnt work. It helps make sure everyone is on the same page about where the game is at. Again, weather you listen to the group or not is up to you.
If NOTHING ELSE you should defiantly talk to the rest of your group about it. Its really important to be transparent with your players when there is a problem at the table unless said problem is highly personal or sensitive (like in the case of sexual harassment). Extra so if you have a problem player that you are seriously considering removing from the group.
I find that there are times when player and GM expectations don't line up and that causes a lot of problems. Usually the easiest way to fix that is to have an open discussion about the game and the expectations players have. If one player wants to play an evil game but the GM is running a traditional hero adventure, I can see why said player would consider the GM a bad GM. Of course in this hypothetical some fault falls on the player for not being able to read the table and adapt accordingly.
Nobody can tell you what to do, you need to ask that player what the problem is. From my perspective if he doesn't want to drive over, and doesn't want to play online - then what's the point. He might as well not bother. I wouldn't take any crap, I would have just said he was not welcome to play.
It's really difficult when this happens. Broaching this kind of thing with someone can be very hard, especially if you're confrontation averse.
Effectively you have one player who doesn't want to attend sessions, or play online, so this is a social issue, not a game-table issue. So just start organising games on the basis that if one player is missing, it doesn't matter. Let them "sit on the wagon" as my group calls it. Either they'll be sad they're missing out and realise that they don't dictate the schedule, or they'll not attend 3 in a row and you can tell them that they're no longer part of the campaign.
As for the other person who they brought into the game - that person should be playing the game because they enjoy it, not because their friend is playing. If they're only participating because their partner/friend is involved, they aren't that interested. Don't be afraid to add more players, or replace those that don't show interest.
I would try suggesting a rotating location. If they don't want to travel that far, could you all meet at their house (or a location nearby) for some sessions? Would they be happy with each person taking a turn at hosting?
If they still throw up blockers, then it is likely they are not telling you the real reason. There is likely to be something underlying which they don't want to tell you about. it could be a problem with another player, wishing to play differently, not liking the character they have built. They may even be suffering from depression: When I did, I made all sorts of excuses not to interact with people. It may be worth speaking to the player they brought along, or a mutual friend.
If they continue to be difficult and you feel you have exhausted the available options, get the rest of the group together for a game and, as suggested above, have their character sit this one out. While you have them all together, have a conversation with the rest of the group. First, try to find out if any of them can understand the reason why. If that fails, gently broach the possibility of excluding them from the group if a solution cannot be found, and see what the reaction of the group is.
It's a tough one and you have my sympathy. I hope you can find a way forward.
Well, I would start by talking to them more. If the drive is a problem and playing online is a nonoption, perhaps a change of location would work. If someone lives the least distance away from the most people perhaps they could host? Additionally, if they are complaining about the way you gm asking them about what the problems are and how you could better GM. Weather or not you take their advice is up to you.
Regardless of the situation, I would recommend doing a debrief after you play. Give everyone some time as a group to talk about the experience, what they liked/didnt like, what worked and what didnt work. It helps make sure everyone is on the same page about where the game is at. Again, weather you listen to the group or not is up to you.
If NOTHING ELSE you should defiantly talk to the rest of your group about it. Its really important to be transparent with your players when there is a problem at the table unless said problem is highly personal or sensitive (like in the case of sexual harassment). Extra so if you have a problem player that you are seriously considering removing from the group.
I find that there are times when player and GM expectations don't line up and that causes a lot of problems. Usually the easiest way to fix that is to have an open discussion about the game and the expectations players have. If one player wants to play an evil game but the GM is running a traditional hero adventure, I can see why said player would consider the GM a bad GM. Of course in this hypothetical some fault falls on the player for not being able to read the table and adapt accordingly.
We do speak alot about what they liked or disliked about each session since i´m interested in making it as fun and interesting for them as possible. I do take their feedback and adjust my game to it.
For the idea of someone else hosting. I did bring that up, the problem is that 5/6 people live in the same city and we decided on my apartment simply cause i live by myself so we wouldn´t bother anyone else and cause i have the space to host all of them comfortably. And he orignally said it wouldn´t bother him.
I would try suggesting a rotating location. If they don't want to travel that far, could you all meet at their house (or a location nearby) for some sessions? Would they be happy with each person taking a turn at hosting?
If they still throw up blockers, then it is likely they are not telling you the real reason. There is likely to be something underlying which they don't want to tell you about. it could be a problem with another player, wishing to play differently, not liking the character they have built. They may even be suffering from depression: When I did, I made all sorts of excuses not to interact with people. It may be worth speaking to the player they brought along, or a mutual friend.
If they continue to be difficult and you feel you have exhausted the available options, get the rest of the group together for a game and, as suggested above, have their character sit this one out. While you have them all together, have a conversation with the rest of the group. First, try to find out if any of them can understand the reason why. If that fails, gently broach the possibility of excluding them from the group if a solution cannot be found, and see what the reaction of the group is.
It's a tough one and you have my sympathy. I hope you can find a way forward.
As for the idea of letting him "skip" a session or two. i did offer that since i understand that the way can be an issue sometimes but he gets really defensive when bringing up topics that include not having every member of the group playing. he says it defeats the purpose of the game (coming together as the group and spending time) and i understand that but since this is going to be a longer campaign i think sooner or later its going to happen anyway. for example 2 players going on a "personal quest" while the rest of the group continues their main quests or stays in a city or whatever.
Have you talked to the group about the problems you are having with this particular player? It seems like the only option you are leaving open for us to suggest is removing the problem player, which for me is always a last case senerio.
Have you talked to the group about the problems you are having with this particular player? It seems like the only option you are leaving open for us to suggest is removing the problem player, which for me is always a last case senerio.
I have brought it up to the group, i also asked him to help me out finding a sollution to work with but he doesn´t really respond to that.
I dont want to remove him either since i like the group and i think that when it comes down to actually playing he fits into the group and we all have alot of fun
Have you talked to the group about the problems you are having with this particular player? It seems like the only option you are leaving open for us to suggest is removing the problem player, which for me is always a last case senerio.
I have brought it up to the group, i also asked him to help me out finding a sollution to work with but he doesn´t really respond to that.
I dont want to remove him either since i like the group and i think that when it comes down to actually playing he fits into the group and we all have alot of fun
I appreciate that it is an uncomfortable situation but from what I am reading;
1. He doesn't want to travel to the location the game is being played.
2. He doesn't want to join in by playing on line.
2. He has been asked, but is unable to tell you, what he thinks might be a solution.
To me that says he is just making excuses, he wants to be part purely because he can't imagine the game could continue without him and because he doesn't want his friends having fun without him being involved. This is unacceptable, your only real choice is to tell him you are going to carry on and play at X location and Y time and hope that he is able to make it, but you won't be postponing the game if he cannot be there either in person or electronically. After a few weeks he will realise that he is not the most important thing since sliced bread and turn up - or you won't hear from him again.
Have you talked to the group about the problems you are having with this particular player? It seems like the only option you are leaving open for us to suggest is removing the problem player, which for me is always a last case senerio.
I have brought it up to the group, i also asked him to help me out finding a sollution to work with but he doesn´t really respond to that.
I dont want to remove him either since i like the group and i think that when it comes down to actually playing he fits into the group and we all have alot of fun
I appreciate that it is an uncomfortable situation but from what I am reading;
1. He doesn't want to travel to the location the game is being played.
2. He doesn't want to join in by playing on line.
2. He has been asked, but is unable to tell you, what he thinks might be a solution.
To me that says he is just making excuses, he wants to be part purely because he can't imagine the game could continue without him and because he doesn't want his friends having fun without him being involved. This is unacceptable, your only real choice is to tell him you are going to carry on and play at X location and Y time and hope that he is able to make it, but you won't be postponing the game if he cannot be there either in person or electronically. After a few weeks he will realise that he is not the most important thing since sliced bread and turn up - or you won't hear from him again.
Yeah, I'm with Beardslinger on this. You only play once a month? So an hour's travel maybe an overnight on someone's couch isn't that unreasonable.
I'm concerned you're framing this as "your problem" when it's really your group's problem. The player, aware of the logistics, made the commitment and for whatever reason isn't willing to honor the monthly commitment. That's on them and the player is failing to meet the group's expectations. If it is truly impossible to make the monthly meet, or, more likely, the player just doesn't want to, the group has to let the player know that they're welcome to pop in and out and play a sidekick or what have you, but it's unfair of that player to hold the rest of the game hostage to a whim. Players can be replaced. You could even advertise your group's opening, and select a new member through a few "guest starring" visits from other players (heck, if you're only meeting monthly and open to virtual, I might be game for that).
(I don't mean to sound that antagonistic toward your frustrating player, there could well be a genuine reason for their lack of availability)
One last point, where in any of the core books does it say the DM has to be the one responsible for scheduling the game? It's a pet peeve. DM already has, generally, a higher preparation overhead than the other players, and making the DM the cat herder isn't necessary. In the two groups I run, in one I actually do the scheduling because I am one of only two literal adults in the room and the only one who knows the other kids' parents. In the other, I hand another player a grid schedule reflecting my availability over a general week and tell them "These are the blocks of time that work for me. I could do 2-3 hours weekly or 3-4+ hours every other week. When you all settle on a time I can do as well, let me know" and my prep for this game is much more relaxing (though the former is a labor of love and a way to give the kids some social space they're lacking these days). DM, scheduler (maybe carpool organizer too), snack or meal coordinator, don't have to all fall on one person just because they're showing up with the world to play in.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I´m sorry if this is not the right section of the forum.
So I recently started a campaign with 5 players (2 of them have some expiereince with pen&papers) the other 3 have none or almost none.
We agreed to meet up about once a month to play in my apartment and the first session was alot of fun. Now the problem is that since then one of my players keeps on complaining about meeting up (he lives about an hour away but orignallly saif he wouldn´t mind the way) so i offered to do it online with webcams so i can observe the rolls cause they really love to use their dice but that doesn´t make him happy either. saying it takes the flair away (all the others including me disagree on that) the he started complaining about the way i GM the game.
now i don´t just want to tell him to stay home since he brought one of the players into the group and i´m afraid that she will stop playing too´.
Any suggestions on what to do? or should i just kick him out?
Well, I would start by talking to them more. If the drive is a problem and playing online is a nonoption, perhaps a change of location would work. If someone lives the least distance away from the most people perhaps they could host? Additionally, if they are complaining about the way you gm asking them about what the problems are and how you could better GM. Weather or not you take their advice is up to you.
Regardless of the situation, I would recommend doing a debrief after you play. Give everyone some time as a group to talk about the experience, what they liked/didnt like, what worked and what didnt work. It helps make sure everyone is on the same page about where the game is at. Again, weather you listen to the group or not is up to you.
If NOTHING ELSE you should defiantly talk to the rest of your group about it. Its really important to be transparent with your players when there is a problem at the table unless said problem is highly personal or sensitive (like in the case of sexual harassment). Extra so if you have a problem player that you are seriously considering removing from the group.
I find that there are times when player and GM expectations don't line up and that causes a lot of problems. Usually the easiest way to fix that is to have an open discussion about the game and the expectations players have. If one player wants to play an evil game but the GM is running a traditional hero adventure, I can see why said player would consider the GM a bad GM. Of course in this hypothetical some fault falls on the player for not being able to read the table and adapt accordingly.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
Nobody can tell you what to do, you need to ask that player what the problem is. From my perspective if he doesn't want to drive over, and doesn't want to play online - then what's the point. He might as well not bother. I wouldn't take any crap, I would have just said he was not welcome to play.
It's really difficult when this happens. Broaching this kind of thing with someone can be very hard, especially if you're confrontation averse.
Effectively you have one player who doesn't want to attend sessions, or play online, so this is a social issue, not a game-table issue. So just start organising games on the basis that if one player is missing, it doesn't matter. Let them "sit on the wagon" as my group calls it. Either they'll be sad they're missing out and realise that they don't dictate the schedule, or they'll not attend 3 in a row and you can tell them that they're no longer part of the campaign.
As for the other person who they brought into the game - that person should be playing the game because they enjoy it, not because their friend is playing. If they're only participating because their partner/friend is involved, they aren't that interested. Don't be afraid to add more players, or replace those that don't show interest.
I would try suggesting a rotating location. If they don't want to travel that far, could you all meet at their house (or a location nearby) for some sessions? Would they be happy with each person taking a turn at hosting?
If they still throw up blockers, then it is likely they are not telling you the real reason. There is likely to be something underlying which they don't want to tell you about. it could be a problem with another player, wishing to play differently, not liking the character they have built. They may even be suffering from depression: When I did, I made all sorts of excuses not to interact with people. It may be worth speaking to the player they brought along, or a mutual friend.
If they continue to be difficult and you feel you have exhausted the available options, get the rest of the group together for a game and, as suggested above, have their character sit this one out. While you have them all together, have a conversation with the rest of the group. First, try to find out if any of them can understand the reason why. If that fails, gently broach the possibility of excluding them from the group if a solution cannot be found, and see what the reaction of the group is.
It's a tough one and you have my sympathy. I hope you can find a way forward.
We do speak alot about what they liked or disliked about each session since i´m interested in making it as fun and interesting for them as possible.
I do take their feedback and adjust my game to it.
For the idea of someone else hosting. I did bring that up, the problem is that 5/6 people live in the same city and we decided on my apartment simply cause i live by myself so we wouldn´t bother anyone else and cause i have the space to host all of them comfortably. And he orignally said it wouldn´t bother him.
As for the idea of letting him "skip" a session or two. i did offer that since i understand that the way can be an issue sometimes but he gets really defensive when bringing up topics that include not having every member of the group playing. he says it defeats the purpose of the game (coming together as the group and spending time) and i understand that but since this is going to be a longer campaign i think sooner or later its going to happen anyway. for example 2 players going on a "personal quest" while the rest of the group continues their main quests or stays in a city or whatever.
Have you talked to the group about the problems you are having with this particular player? It seems like the only option you are leaving open for us to suggest is removing the problem player, which for me is always a last case senerio.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
I have brought it up to the group, i also asked him to help me out finding a sollution to work with but he doesn´t really respond to that.
I dont want to remove him either since i like the group and i think that when it comes down to actually playing he fits into the group and we all have alot of fun
I appreciate that it is an uncomfortable situation but from what I am reading;
1. He doesn't want to travel to the location the game is being played.
2. He doesn't want to join in by playing on line.
2. He has been asked, but is unable to tell you, what he thinks might be a solution.
To me that says he is just making excuses, he wants to be part purely because he can't imagine the game could continue without him and because he doesn't want his friends having fun without him being involved. This is unacceptable, your only real choice is to tell him you are going to carry on and play at X location and Y time and hope that he is able to make it, but you won't be postponing the game if he cannot be there either in person or electronically. After a few weeks he will realise that he is not the most important thing since sliced bread and turn up - or you won't hear from him again.
Yeah, I'm with Beardslinger on this. You only play once a month? So an hour's travel maybe an overnight on someone's couch isn't that unreasonable.
I'm concerned you're framing this as "your problem" when it's really your group's problem. The player, aware of the logistics, made the commitment and for whatever reason isn't willing to honor the monthly commitment. That's on them and the player is failing to meet the group's expectations. If it is truly impossible to make the monthly meet, or, more likely, the player just doesn't want to, the group has to let the player know that they're welcome to pop in and out and play a sidekick or what have you, but it's unfair of that player to hold the rest of the game hostage to a whim. Players can be replaced. You could even advertise your group's opening, and select a new member through a few "guest starring" visits from other players (heck, if you're only meeting monthly and open to virtual, I might be game for that).
(I don't mean to sound that antagonistic toward your frustrating player, there could well be a genuine reason for their lack of availability)
One last point, where in any of the core books does it say the DM has to be the one responsible for scheduling the game? It's a pet peeve. DM already has, generally, a higher preparation overhead than the other players, and making the DM the cat herder isn't necessary. In the two groups I run, in one I actually do the scheduling because I am one of only two literal adults in the room and the only one who knows the other kids' parents. In the other, I hand another player a grid schedule reflecting my availability over a general week and tell them "These are the blocks of time that work for me. I could do 2-3 hours weekly or 3-4+ hours every other week. When you all settle on a time I can do as well, let me know" and my prep for this game is much more relaxing (though the former is a labor of love and a way to give the kids some social space they're lacking these days). DM, scheduler (maybe carpool organizer too), snack or meal coordinator, don't have to all fall on one person just because they're showing up with the world to play in.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.