I was wondering if I could get some opinions? I DM a couple of different groups throughout the week, and I've just started a new one. The team has never played D&D before, but are picking up the rules quick and are loving the role playing aspect. However, over the first couple of games they've succumbed to the dark powers of murder hoboism.
They attack, kill and intimate pretty much every NPC; which is quite risky for the early level characters that they are. For example, Durnan is an NPC in my campaign, and they constantly threaten him and undermine him (checks succeeding). My question is...
Do I let the NPC's punish the characters? And if so, how harshly?
Thanks everyone, look forward to hearing your thoughts!
Don't pre-judge player reactions. Just include the NPCs that you want in your campaign, and have them act appropriately.
If they threaten Rufus the Knight, then have him laugh in their faces. Set the Intimidation check at DC30. If they attack him, then it's time to discover that Rufus is a level 15 paladin. Have him Divine Smite one-shot one of the characters, and let that character die.
This is the only way to run a game in which player choices really matter. My players may encounter a CR21 Lich when they are only level 7-10. They should act respectfully and try not to antagonise it. If they do? They will get Power Word: Death'd. If a player chooses to dive into a vast canyon then they have to expect 20d6 bludgoning damage from the fall.
If they've been killing innocent NPCs, then set the law on them. Don't give them easy options and let them just get away with it. Send an adventuring party of the same level after them (party vs. party fights are very deadly, expect multiple casualties or a TPK). Ensure that when they enter towns or villages there are wanted posters, and they are turned away from every door. You could even have the big baddie try to recruit them. Maybe your players would prefer to work for the villain? The players' actions need to dictate the course of the campaign, and that may need veering wildly away from what you have planned.
You should never see yourself as "punishing" players. You should create the world, and the world may punish the characters if they make foolish choices.
He could maybe have the players over to the bar for some friendly advice. A little older-sibling “here’s how to adventure properly “ talk. Then after that, you start introducing the consequences. Then see if that works.
Thanks for the advice Sanvael. I think you're absolutely right about the characters dictating the course of the campaign. It doesn't just include the quest related choices they make, it also includes how the interact with the world. For good or bad.
I was slightly worried about TPK'ing or killing off characters at such early levels, but hopefully by understanding that actions have consequences it will make the role playing all the more immersive for them.
I'll let you know how it goes the next time they cross Durnan!
If they threaten durnan from yawning portal, they should die, you don't threaten the nigh-immortal durnan, one of the most adventurer's in the forgotten world, survivor of undermountain.
Exactly. They aren't really that knowledgeable to the Forgotten realms history and lore, so I doubt they have any idea who Durnan is. And how deadly he is.
Give them a situation in which their murder hoboism screws everything up for them. Allow a situation to occur where they learn their lesson. Make them get Jumped or attacked or ran out of town. Something that will cure them. I suggest having a high level creature disguised as a peasant or someone. as soon as they attack it transforms and nearly devours them! I've tried this it worked and it was highly entertaining. For the people reading this reply im not an evil DM i just wanted to cure my players of this. I allowed them to survive unnecessarily.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM: Ok you encounter a Bugbear.
Newbie: THAT SOUNDS AWFUL! its like a bear bug combo!
Veteran: No actually its-
DM: (scribbling furiously) The Bugbears mandibles click loudly! Roll initiative!
I'm with Sanvael in that the choices PCs make should matter. There should be in game consequences for in game shenanigans.
After their one fair warning in-game, should this behavior persist, I might suggest that you have an out-of-game issue. Murder Hobo is a term that describes poor player behavior and can only be dealt with out of game and in person. I'm an advocate for giving them their one shot to not act like a wangrod, but beyond that - nope.
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
Yeah, I will definitely try what Sanvael suggested. Hopefully that will scare/enlighten them about consequences.
I hope no out-of-game conversations will be necessary; but I agree, DM'ing is enough work without problem players! So a limited amount of opportunities will be given!
It's a fairly common trope in Western movies that the relatives of slain gunfighters turn up looking for revenge. So, if the players killed an NPC, have the NPC's brother turn up and confront them. If they kill him, have another relative turn up. This time, however, the relative confronts the party somewhere public. If they kill that relative, they now get in trouble with the law for murder, multiple murders if the PCs let on they killed others. Even if they don't kill the relative, the local law enforcement wants to know why the PCs are bheing accused of murder.
Note that this is in a world where taking the 5th, Miranda, etc do not exist.
In trouble with the law means no access to services like towns, temples, and so on.
As a GM you don't get to directly control what the players do with their characters. That agency is theirs. As a GM, what you do get to do (and what I believe strongly you should do) is have the game world react appropriately to character actions.
Put the fear of consequences front and center in their game experience.
Have them see the guard dragging away some poor schlub to jail, complaining all the way that he didn't know it was wrong.
When they ask a bystander what happened have them say " He says that he didn't know that (egregious behavior) was wrong." Have the bystander explain that the rules of society are not that different from place to place. "In your town, would they allow (egregious behavior)? What would they do?" he says. Let them think on it a while then implement Sanvael's plan.
Put the fear of consequences front and center in their game experience.
Have them see the guard dragging away some poor schlub to jail, complaining all the way that he didn't know it was wrong.
When they ask a bystander what happened have them say " He says that he didn't know that (egregious behavior) was wrong." Have the bystander explain that the rules of society are not that different from place to place. "In your town, would they allow (egregious behavior)? What would they do?" he says. Let them think on it a while then implement Sanvael's plan.
This is one potential way to take a soft approach, and could be worth a try... but Murder Hobo'ism typically stems from the players failure to understand a core part of RPGs: that they are not gods, that their characters can die, and that the DM will not always present them with things that they are guaranteed to defeat in combat. Murder Hobo players typically don't grasp that the whole game is not their personal playground to act however they like. Consequences for NPCs =/= consequences for PCs in their minds. They already know that NPCs can suffer and die. They just don't believe their characters can.
Session Zero. New players never played DnD, you as DM need to set expectations of the type of game you want to run, and be prepared for the game not to run. It sounds a lot like none of you have set any expectations, and they have gone into this looked down the list of character attributes and seen most of them are about killing things and assumed that is all they can do. You say they have attacked or intimidated every NPC, so when they said "I want to intimidate NPC X" (and I wonder why?) did you say "roll a D20 add Y, ok you rolled a 18 he tells you Z", or baring in mind new players and you as DM get to set the tone of the table did you say, "yes you could intimidate him but there are consequences even if you succeed, and there is a chance you will fail and your character and in worse case the whole party will be dead? You have other options so are you sure you want to do that?"
I guaranty that if you just punish them without warning they will at a minimum think you are a bad DM, at worse they will assume the game sucks in general and stop playing, they will not after you kill their characters think that was our fault we should have known that would happen because of our behaviour.
If you want to change their behaviour now you need to talk to them out of character first, do that make sure they understand how your world works, then next time they want to attack/intimidate a NPC just ask "are you sure?" if they say yes feel free to let the dice stuff them.
They are all new players, and weren't very cooperative about working with the DM to build characters, so you are probably right about the whole 'murder orientated character build'.
I have bee letting dice rolls dictate the outcomes, including a punch in the characters face as a failure.
I think next time, I will definitely implement saying as the DM 'this is a risk and you have other options'.
I want to warn them, instead of killing them all, and possibly make them hate the game.
I was wondering if I could get some opinions? I DM a couple of different groups throughout the week, and I've just started a new one. The team has never played D&D before, but are picking up the rules quick and are loving the role playing aspect. However, over the first couple of games they've succumbed to the dark powers of murder hoboism.
They attack, kill and intimate pretty much every NPC; which is quite risky for the early level characters that they are. For example, Durnan is an NPC in my campaign, and they constantly threaten him and undermine him (checks succeeding). My question is...
Do I let the NPC's punish the characters? And if so, how harshly?
Thanks everyone, look forward to hearing your thoughts!
Have they succumbed or have they just reapplied the same shoot-em-up style of play that may have served them well in video games? Constant or at least regular reminders of other ways to play may help.
So they are in a campaign where NPCs are dying while other NPCs are getting intimidated by the newly arrived adventuring group.
In the context of outlaws coming to town, what might happen? Locations like the local shop might close doors and only trade through a hatch while raising prices for the belligerent, unwanted and suspect strangers. The tavern might have a minimum of cash at the establishment. The NPCs may keep to a script that the group would need to change their approach if they are to be welcomed and appreciated.
If a killed NPC had been nameless, give them a name. Make a quest to find the body/killers of sweet Bobby the NPC. He may have previously had good relationships locally despite his actions in relation to the party.
Realistically the locals may just want the players out of town. Your campaign, however, remains in town so, if they decided to go, a new set of characters would be needed. You can continue to play consequences in any realistic way in which the NPCs might react.
I have limited experience but I have run for a couple of very different groups, my friends where we are basically learning stuff and the group will tolerate me changing how things work with no issue, and for Kids, with them I was very firm on the you don't get to roll dice till I call for a roll, and there is no auto success, the some of the kids defiantly had tendency to murder hobo, basically because they had seen it once and it worked so they just wanted to repeat, they also had a few members that tended to PvP, which I put my foot down because of the group, but I can see that that would be fine with some groups.
My players have a dead body they plan to return for a bounty. A single cloaked man is about to take the body from them without asking. He has a CR of 16.
Shouldn't set a city on fire.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi everyone!
I was wondering if I could get some opinions? I DM a couple of different groups throughout the week, and I've just started a new one. The team has never played D&D before, but are picking up the rules quick and are loving the role playing aspect. However, over the first couple of games they've succumbed to the dark powers of murder hoboism.
They attack, kill and intimate pretty much every NPC; which is quite risky for the early level characters that they are. For example, Durnan is an NPC in my campaign, and they constantly threaten him and undermine him (checks succeeding). My question is...
Do I let the NPC's punish the characters? And if so, how harshly?
Thanks everyone, look forward to hearing your thoughts!
Don't pre-judge player reactions. Just include the NPCs that you want in your campaign, and have them act appropriately.
If they threaten Rufus the Knight, then have him laugh in their faces. Set the Intimidation check at DC30. If they attack him, then it's time to discover that Rufus is a level 15 paladin. Have him Divine Smite one-shot one of the characters, and let that character die.
This is the only way to run a game in which player choices really matter. My players may encounter a CR21 Lich when they are only level 7-10. They should act respectfully and try not to antagonise it. If they do? They will get Power Word: Death'd. If a player chooses to dive into a vast canyon then they have to expect 20d6 bludgoning damage from the fall.
If they've been killing innocent NPCs, then set the law on them. Don't give them easy options and let them just get away with it. Send an adventuring party of the same level after them (party vs. party fights are very deadly, expect multiple casualties or a TPK). Ensure that when they enter towns or villages there are wanted posters, and they are turned away from every door. You could even have the big baddie try to recruit them. Maybe your players would prefer to work for the villain? The players' actions need to dictate the course of the campaign, and that may need veering wildly away from what you have planned.
You should never see yourself as "punishing" players. You should create the world, and the world may punish the characters if they make foolish choices.
This is Durnan from the Yawning Portal?
He could maybe have the players over to the bar for some friendly advice. A little older-sibling “here’s how to adventure properly “ talk. Then after that, you start introducing the consequences. Then see if that works.
Thanks for the advice Sanvael. I think you're absolutely right about the characters dictating the course of the campaign. It doesn't just include the quest related choices they make, it also includes how the interact with the world. For good or bad.
I was slightly worried about TPK'ing or killing off characters at such early levels, but hopefully by understanding that actions have consequences it will make the role playing all the more immersive for them.
I'll let you know how it goes the next time they cross Durnan!
Haha thats a brilliant idea! I think that's a great way to explain those types of rules without being too meta.
Yes, Yawning Portal Durnan. I'm currently running Dragon Heist.
If they threaten durnan from yawning portal, they should die, you don't threaten the nigh-immortal durnan, one of the most adventurer's in the forgotten world, survivor of undermountain.
My homebrew content: Monsters, subclasses, Magic items, Feats, spells, races, backgrounds
Exactly. They aren't really that knowledgeable to the Forgotten realms history and lore, so I doubt they have any idea who Durnan is. And how deadly he is.
Give them a situation in which their murder hoboism screws everything up for them. Allow a situation to occur where they learn their lesson. Make them get Jumped or attacked or ran out of town. Something that will cure them. I suggest having a high level creature disguised as a peasant or someone. as soon as they attack it transforms and nearly devours them! I've tried this it worked and it was highly entertaining. For the people reading this reply im not an evil DM i just wanted to cure my players of this. I allowed them to survive unnecessarily.
DM: Ok you encounter a Bugbear.
Newbie: THAT SOUNDS AWFUL! its like a bear bug combo!
Veteran: No actually its-
DM: (scribbling furiously) The Bugbears mandibles click loudly! Roll initiative!
I'm with Sanvael in that the choices PCs make should matter. There should be in game consequences for in game shenanigans.
After their one fair warning in-game, should this behavior persist, I might suggest that you have an out-of-game issue. Murder Hobo is a term that describes poor player behavior and can only be dealt with out of game and in person. I'm an advocate for giving them their one shot to not act like a wangrod, but beyond that - nope.
“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
Yeah, I just might have to try that. I want to scare them into realising that actions have consequences without needing to TPK.
Thanks for the advice!
Yeah, I will definitely try what Sanvael suggested. Hopefully that will scare/enlighten them about consequences.
I hope no out-of-game conversations will be necessary; but I agree, DM'ing is enough work without problem players! So a limited amount of opportunities will be given!
One ingame consequence to consider is families.
It's a fairly common trope in Western movies that the relatives of slain gunfighters turn up looking for revenge. So, if the players killed an NPC, have the NPC's brother turn up and confront them. If they kill him, have another relative turn up. This time, however, the relative confronts the party somewhere public. If they kill that relative, they now get in trouble with the law for murder, multiple murders if the PCs let on they killed others. Even if they don't kill the relative, the local law enforcement wants to know why the PCs are bheing accused of murder.
Note that this is in a world where taking the 5th, Miranda, etc do not exist.
In trouble with the law means no access to services like towns, temples, and so on.
As a GM you don't get to directly control what the players do with their characters. That agency is theirs. As a GM, what you do get to do (and what I believe strongly you should do) is have the game world react appropriately to character actions.
Put the fear of consequences front and center in their game experience.
Have them see the guard dragging away some poor schlub to jail, complaining all the way that he didn't know it was wrong.
When they ask a bystander what happened have them say " He says that he didn't know that (egregious behavior) was wrong." Have the bystander explain that the rules of society are not that different from place to place. "In your town, would they allow (egregious behavior)? What would they do?" he says. Let them think on it a while then implement Sanvael's plan.
This is one potential way to take a soft approach, and could be worth a try... but Murder Hobo'ism typically stems from the players failure to understand a core part of RPGs: that they are not gods, that their characters can die, and that the DM will not always present them with things that they are guaranteed to defeat in combat. Murder Hobo players typically don't grasp that the whole game is not their personal playground to act however they like. Consequences for NPCs =/= consequences for PCs in their minds. They already know that NPCs can suffer and die. They just don't believe their characters can.
Sanvael, you are undeniably correct.
I was offering a way to improve one's DM skill and educate the PCs.
It also assuages the feelings of guilt from a TPK when the DM can say "I told you what would happen."
Bit of devils advocate here.
Session Zero. New players never played DnD, you as DM need to set expectations of the type of game you want to run, and be prepared for the game not to run. It sounds a lot like none of you have set any expectations, and they have gone into this looked down the list of character attributes and seen most of them are about killing things and assumed that is all they can do. You say they have attacked or intimidated every NPC, so when they said "I want to intimidate NPC X" (and I wonder why?) did you say "roll a D20 add Y, ok you rolled a 18 he tells you Z", or baring in mind new players and you as DM get to set the tone of the table did you say, "yes you could intimidate him but there are consequences even if you succeed, and there is a chance you will fail and your character and in worse case the whole party will be dead? You have other options so are you sure you want to do that?"
I guaranty that if you just punish them without warning they will at a minimum think you are a bad DM, at worse they will assume the game sucks in general and stop playing, they will not after you kill their characters think that was our fault we should have known that would happen because of our behaviour.
If you want to change their behaviour now you need to talk to them out of character first, do that make sure they understand how your world works, then next time they want to attack/intimidate a NPC just ask "are you sure?" if they say yes feel free to let the dice stuff them.
Good advice PWMF
They are all new players, and weren't very cooperative about working with the DM to build characters, so you are probably right about the whole 'murder orientated character build'.
I have bee letting dice rolls dictate the outcomes, including a punch in the characters face as a failure.
I think next time, I will definitely implement saying as the DM 'this is a risk and you have other options'.
I want to warn them, instead of killing them all, and possibly make them hate the game.
Have they succumbed or have they just reapplied the same shoot-em-up style of play that may have served them well in video games? Constant or at least regular reminders of other ways to play may help.
So they are in a campaign where NPCs are dying while other NPCs are getting intimidated by the newly arrived adventuring group.
In the context of outlaws coming to town, what might happen? Locations like the local shop might close doors and only trade through a hatch while raising prices for the belligerent, unwanted and suspect strangers. The tavern might have a minimum of cash at the establishment. The NPCs may keep to a script that the group would need to change their approach if they are to be welcomed and appreciated.
If a killed NPC had been nameless, give them a name. Make a quest to find the body/killers of sweet Bobby the NPC. He may have previously had good relationships locally despite his actions in relation to the party.
Realistically the locals may just want the players out of town. Your campaign, however, remains in town so, if they decided to go, a new set of characters would be needed. You can continue to play consequences in any realistic way in which the NPCs might react.
Hope that works, let us know.
I have limited experience but I have run for a couple of very different groups, my friends where we are basically learning stuff and the group will tolerate me changing how things work with no issue, and for Kids, with them I was very firm on the you don't get to roll dice till I call for a roll, and there is no auto success, the some of the kids defiantly had tendency to murder hobo, basically because they had seen it once and it worked so they just wanted to repeat, they also had a few members that tended to PvP, which I put my foot down because of the group, but I can see that that would be fine with some groups.
My players have a dead body they plan to return for a bounty. A single cloaked man is about to take the body from them without asking. He has a CR of 16.
Shouldn't set a city on fire.