Hey! New DM here. I have four players, also all new to the game, and we are having a blast learning how to play together over the last four sessions (five with session 0). Overall I’m extremely happy with how our group interacts as both players and characters, but all four of the characters they’ve created have an “independent streak” that makes it a little hard to organically keep them together.
Last session there was some awesome RP in character development, but it nearly led to one of the druids getting left behind. Fortunately a bit of meta gaming and a set of sending stones resolved it this time.
I think all the players get along and want to stay together, but are struggling a bit with balancing the games needs for a team and these rather independent characters that they’ve created. How can I help reinforce their sense of cohesiveness as a team that needs each other without forcing them to act out of character?
This isn't just on you; the players need to figure out why the characters are sticking together, because external reasons only go so far. I suspect you may need a non-play conversation to talk about it.
And sometimes, the answer is either "they really wouldn't" or "I'm going to need to tweak my concept to make it work".
This falls into the problem of "it's what my character would do," to which the question "why did you make your character that way" follows. Another answer is the expectations haven't been properly set, or need to be reiterated. Session Zero is the most important session to a game of D&D: it's the one where everyone finds out what they're on board with, do's and don't's, and if everyone's compatible based on first impressions. You can have more than one S0 with time-outs: chats between sessions just to get feedback and have a reminder as to what the expectations of the game are.
The lone wolf scenario isn't uncommon in D&D. I recommend that players should create characters who have the following:
A reason to go on an adventure.
A willingness to join a group.
They don't have to blindly trust their companions from Session One, but they should come to the conclusion that they're better as a team early on. That's up to them. Remind them that they can assist one another with checks, help each other out in combat for synergy, or if you want to go the bad-cop route, set challenges that require them all to stay together.
So, let's go back to the original question: why did the players make a character who would leave a party member behind, and ultimately waste each other player's time? Does this make the game more enjoyable? And if so, for whom? Is it more fun for the person who lags behind, who can't receive help for something that would be possible with assistance, who ends up triggering traps or initiative instead of using an extra pair of eyes and ears?
If they'd prefer to go it alone they can write their own fan-fiction about their character and their lackeys. Maybe they are the next Dan Abnett and maybe their characters are the next Colonel-Commissar Gaunt, but this isn't the Tanith First-and-Only: this is Dungeons & Dragons, a cooperative roleplaying game.
I strongly suggest you put this to them more politely than I have. In the meantime, keep doing what you're doing. If the encounters you're making require them to work more as a team, they'd better figure that out or they're going to suffer the consequences after all the warnings they've received. Should they survive the encounter, the riskier the better, they'll likely form a bond and decide they need to have a good long chat about tactics and each member's role in the party.
I hope that helps. If you need more specific details I'm sure other users can help. Otherwise, keep on doing what you're doing. Necessity is the mother of invention, and lone wolves are prey animals.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
Try to include something in the hook for everybody if possible. The NPC/quest giver may designate a task...say investigate some ruins....that are rumored to contain some mcguffin one or more PCs want for reasons, and are near some other point of interest to other party members. Anything to give the party individual attention/motivation to cooperate.
I second that the players have some responsibility for group cohesion. It won't be wrong to come out of character and say something like, "guys, are we keeping the group together? If not, who's leaving and what are we doing about adding a new character for that player?" However, there is something you can do which is simply to acknowledge that group cohesion is valuable. There are ways to make that point in-game, and you can begin to look for opportunities.
One reason characters don't trust each other is that they don't know each other's story. I often use out of game incentives, like inspiration as a way to to say, "tell your character's story, so that the other players know where you're coming from." But I've found it to be vitally important to get to the step of characters explaining their backstories. I had a good set up one time where the players found a tavern where the drinks caused them to share each other's dreams. There are plenty of ways to do it, but spending the time and effort to do it is important.
Something that hasn't been said yet: because your players are new to the game, they may not fully realize that they need to think like a cohesive team.
I find that new players often adopt a kind of video game mentality in that while they may have teammates, they still think very much like individuals: "What's best for me, what interests me, and how can I have fun in this scenario?" None of that is bad or wrong, but there should be an additional running narrative of, "What's best for the party, what interests the other party members, and how can we all have fun in this scenario?" It can take some time for that team awareness to build organically, but you can speed it along by 1) providing more opportunities for the characters to bond, and 2) having an out-of-character conversation with your players about collaborative play.
Because everyone is new, I would not approach this issue as bad behavior that needs to be punished. Your players may genuinely not even know the game works best when adventuring parties act like a cohesive group. After learning this and/or playing a couple sessions that allow their characters to bond, they may go all in and become very team-oriented.
Firstly, there might be a DM issue. These days a lot of people have a bad idea in their head about how D&D works - they want a sort of infinitely large and detailed roaming sandbox to play in. But this isn't how D&D works. There should be a central story or problem to resolve, and it should be one that quickly engages player sympathies. For example, in my Session Zero, I outlined to my players that they were all being sent on a mission together from their homeland to retrieve a national artefact. They could create their own reasons for wanting to go on the sea voyage, but part of character creation was (a) that they wanted to go on the voyage, and (b) that they wanted to retrieve the artefact. That's what my game is about, so characters who don't want to be part of that adventure aren't suitable. So consider if you've given them a big old reason that they all want to work together to fix, or are they just milling about seeking individual fortunes and glory?
You can play a game which is nothing but sandbox, it just won't be terribly good, you'll never be able to prep even a basic amount. I've never found a game without a story to be satisfying.
Secondly, there's a character issue.
First, check that the characters are made to be adventurers. If they aren't interested in any of:
Earning a ton of money from adventuring
Gaining personal fame or power
Helping out the weak/innocent/needy
Testing their skills/proving themselves
...then chances are they're not suitable to be D&D characters. For instance, if their goal is "I want to find a home," then that doesn't require a party, or adventuring, or a character class. If they just want to earn enough money to fix their dad's shop up, then they may as well retire at level 4. "I'm on the run" is a good reason to be a protagonist in a novel; it's not a reason to go adventuring. Now if being on the run led to needing money in some way, cool, there's a reason to keep moving. Check these over with each character.
But, if it's purely that they just want to play lone wolf characters, there is only one pretty simple solution: you get the players together at the start of a session or otherwise message them all the following:
Hey guys, so I just wanted to point out the following. D&D is a group adventure game, and in any D&D, there has to be an adventuring party. You all seem to be enjoying your characters, but I want to make sure that everyone understands that it's essential that you play together as a team. The game just doesn't function in the most fun way if the party is divided up a lot, and doesn't work at all if the group splits. So here's what I'd like everyone to do. Before next session, please think about:
Why does my character value the rest of the group from the perspective of their own goals
What does my character like about the other characters in the group?
If the answer to either of these is that they don't, then your character needs to learn that they value/like the rest of the group in some way - otherwise the character isn't suitable for a D&D game. As said before, it's a team game, not a solo game.
The game is much more fun if the characters care about each other and like each other, and from a DM perspective, it's difficult to a game for four 'lone wolf' type characters.
I have this same problem and it is really getting me down. It's exhausting. I did not explicitly go over it in session 0 because I thought my players were more mature than this (big mistake!). I thought they would 'grow together' as a team but that has not happened. Those with anti-social character traits have really doubled down on them instead of getting over it. I think this could be because it is easier to say 'no' than 'yes', and anti-social/lone wolf characters are just walking 'no's. Plus saying 'no' makes you feel powerful and, well, feeling powerful is definitely an attractive part of TTRPGs.
I'm at the point now where I am tempted to try to pull them apart. So they need to leave (and roll up a new character), or find a reason to stay.
I have this same problem and it is really getting me down. It's exhausting. I did not explicitly go over it in session 0 because I thought my players were more mature than this (big mistake!). I thought they would 'grow together' as a team but that has not happened. Those with anti-social character traits have really doubled down on them instead of getting over it. I think this could be because it is easier to say 'no' than 'yes', and anti-social/lone wolf characters are just walking 'no's. Plus saying 'no' makes you feel powerful and, well, feeling powerful is definitely an attractive part of TTRPGs.
I'm at the point now where I am tempted to try to pull them apart. So they need to leave (and roll up a new character), or find a reason to stay.
I think it's better to bring this problem up directly with the players, and get them to help you solve it.
Thanks this helps! I definitely don’t want to punish them, we did talk about a lot of this session 0, so they are all generally interested in the central story and I think are trying to reconcile these characters as a team and just haven’t figured it out yet. I like the idea of doing in game team bonding moments as well as an out of game refresher.
I second that the players have some responsibility for group cohesion. It won't be wrong to come out of character and say something like, "guys, are we keeping the group together? If not, who's leaving and what are we doing about adding a new character for that player?" However, there is something you can do which is simply to acknowledge that group cohesion is valuable. There are ways to make that point in-game, and you can begin to look for opportunities.
One reason characters don't trust each other is that they don't know each other's story. I often use out of game incentives, like inspiration as a way to to say, "tell your character's story, so that the other players know where you're coming from." But I've found it to be vitally important to get to the step of characters explaining their backstories. I had a good set up one time where the players found a tavern where the drinks caused them to share each other's dreams. There are plenty of ways to do it, but spending the time and effort to do it is important.
I love this idea! This is exactly what I’m looking for. I think my players want to be a team, they just haven’t figured out how to rp their characters into being a full team yet. I had a nothic encounter all prepped to hint at backstory hooks for each of them but they ended up mostly skipping over it lol.
I have this same problem and it is really getting me down. It's exhausting. I did not explicitly go over it in session 0 because I thought my players were more mature than this (big mistake!). I thought they would 'grow together' as a team but that has not happened. Those with anti-social character traits have really doubled down on them instead of getting over it. I think this could be because it is easier to say 'no' than 'yes', and anti-social/lone wolf characters are just walking 'no's. Plus saying 'no' makes you feel powerful and, well, feeling powerful is definitely an attractive part of TTRPGs.
I'm at the point now where I am tempted to try to pull them apart. So they need to leave (and roll up a new character), or find a reason to stay.
I think it's better to bring this problem up directly with the players, and get them to help you solve it.
Yeah I have done that and it usually fixes it for a couple of sessions and then we're back where we started. I'm at the point where I would rather just.... not run games for this group anymore than bring it up again.
Argh. I'm just having a bad week after a bad session. We've all been there. It'll be fine.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey! New DM here. I have four players, also all new to the game, and we are having a blast learning how to play together over the last four sessions (five with session 0). Overall I’m extremely happy with how our group interacts as both players and characters, but all four of the characters they’ve created have an “independent streak” that makes it a little hard to organically keep them together.
Last session there was some awesome RP in character development, but it nearly led to one of the druids getting left behind. Fortunately a bit of meta gaming and a set of sending stones resolved it this time.
I think all the players get along and want to stay together, but are struggling a bit with balancing the games needs for a team and these rather independent characters that they’ve created. How can I help reinforce their sense of cohesiveness as a team that needs each other without forcing them to act out of character?
This isn't just on you; the players need to figure out why the characters are sticking together, because external reasons only go so far. I suspect you may need a non-play conversation to talk about it.
And sometimes, the answer is either "they really wouldn't" or "I'm going to need to tweak my concept to make it work".
This falls into the problem of "it's what my character would do," to which the question "why did you make your character that way" follows. Another answer is the expectations haven't been properly set, or need to be reiterated. Session Zero is the most important session to a game of D&D: it's the one where everyone finds out what they're on board with, do's and don't's, and if everyone's compatible based on first impressions. You can have more than one S0 with time-outs: chats between sessions just to get feedback and have a reminder as to what the expectations of the game are.
The lone wolf scenario isn't uncommon in D&D. I recommend that players should create characters who have the following:
They don't have to blindly trust their companions from Session One, but they should come to the conclusion that they're better as a team early on. That's up to them. Remind them that they can assist one another with checks, help each other out in combat for synergy, or if you want to go the bad-cop route, set challenges that require them all to stay together.
So, let's go back to the original question: why did the players make a character who would leave a party member behind, and ultimately waste each other player's time? Does this make the game more enjoyable? And if so, for whom? Is it more fun for the person who lags behind, who can't receive help for something that would be possible with assistance, who ends up triggering traps or initiative instead of using an extra pair of eyes and ears?
If they'd prefer to go it alone they can write their own fan-fiction about their character and their lackeys. Maybe they are the next Dan Abnett and maybe their characters are the next Colonel-Commissar Gaunt, but this isn't the Tanith First-and-Only: this is Dungeons & Dragons, a cooperative roleplaying game.
I strongly suggest you put this to them more politely than I have. In the meantime, keep doing what you're doing. If the encounters you're making require them to work more as a team, they'd better figure that out or they're going to suffer the consequences after all the warnings they've received. Should they survive the encounter, the riskier the better, they'll likely form a bond and decide they need to have a good long chat about tactics and each member's role in the party.
I hope that helps. If you need more specific details I'm sure other users can help. Otherwise, keep on doing what you're doing. Necessity is the mother of invention, and lone wolves are prey animals.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
Try to include something in the hook for everybody if possible. The NPC/quest giver may designate a task...say investigate some ruins....that are rumored to contain some mcguffin one or more PCs want for reasons, and are near some other point of interest to other party members. Anything to give the party individual attention/motivation to cooperate.
As a GM, I require this from players before the first adventure (it's a character creation question).
Why is your character part of this group?
What bond is keeping the team together, even though they might not like each other?
If a player can't answer for their character then I ask them to please come up with another character.
I second that the players have some responsibility for group cohesion. It won't be wrong to come out of character and say something like, "guys, are we keeping the group together? If not, who's leaving and what are we doing about adding a new character for that player?" However, there is something you can do which is simply to acknowledge that group cohesion is valuable. There are ways to make that point in-game, and you can begin to look for opportunities.
One reason characters don't trust each other is that they don't know each other's story. I often use out of game incentives, like inspiration as a way to to say, "tell your character's story, so that the other players know where you're coming from." But I've found it to be vitally important to get to the step of characters explaining their backstories. I had a good set up one time where the players found a tavern where the drinks caused them to share each other's dreams. There are plenty of ways to do it, but spending the time and effort to do it is important.
Something that hasn't been said yet: because your players are new to the game, they may not fully realize that they need to think like a cohesive team.
I find that new players often adopt a kind of video game mentality in that while they may have teammates, they still think very much like individuals: "What's best for me, what interests me, and how can I have fun in this scenario?" None of that is bad or wrong, but there should be an additional running narrative of, "What's best for the party, what interests the other party members, and how can we all have fun in this scenario?" It can take some time for that team awareness to build organically, but you can speed it along by 1) providing more opportunities for the characters to bond, and 2) having an out-of-character conversation with your players about collaborative play.
Because everyone is new, I would not approach this issue as bad behavior that needs to be punished. Your players may genuinely not even know the game works best when adventuring parties act like a cohesive group. After learning this and/or playing a couple sessions that allow their characters to bond, they may go all in and become very team-oriented.
Yeah, super common issue for new players.
Firstly, there might be a DM issue. These days a lot of people have a bad idea in their head about how D&D works - they want a sort of infinitely large and detailed roaming sandbox to play in. But this isn't how D&D works. There should be a central story or problem to resolve, and it should be one that quickly engages player sympathies. For example, in my Session Zero, I outlined to my players that they were all being sent on a mission together from their homeland to retrieve a national artefact. They could create their own reasons for wanting to go on the sea voyage, but part of character creation was (a) that they wanted to go on the voyage, and (b) that they wanted to retrieve the artefact. That's what my game is about, so characters who don't want to be part of that adventure aren't suitable. So consider if you've given them a big old reason that they all want to work together to fix, or are they just milling about seeking individual fortunes and glory?
You can play a game which is nothing but sandbox, it just won't be terribly good, you'll never be able to prep even a basic amount. I've never found a game without a story to be satisfying.
Secondly, there's a character issue.
First, check that the characters are made to be adventurers. If they aren't interested in any of:
...then chances are they're not suitable to be D&D characters. For instance, if their goal is "I want to find a home," then that doesn't require a party, or adventuring, or a character class. If they just want to earn enough money to fix their dad's shop up, then they may as well retire at level 4. "I'm on the run" is a good reason to be a protagonist in a novel; it's not a reason to go adventuring. Now if being on the run led to needing money in some way, cool, there's a reason to keep moving. Check these over with each character.
But, if it's purely that they just want to play lone wolf characters, there is only one pretty simple solution: you get the players together at the start of a session or otherwise message them all the following:
Hey guys, so I just wanted to point out the following. D&D is a group adventure game, and in any D&D, there has to be an adventuring party. You all seem to be enjoying your characters, but I want to make sure that everyone understands that it's essential that you play together as a team. The game just doesn't function in the most fun way if the party is divided up a lot, and doesn't work at all if the group splits. So here's what I'd like everyone to do. Before next session, please think about:
If the answer to either of these is that they don't, then your character needs to learn that they value/like the rest of the group in some way - otherwise the character isn't suitable for a D&D game. As said before, it's a team game, not a solo game.
The game is much more fun if the characters care about each other and like each other, and from a DM perspective, it's difficult to a game for four 'lone wolf' type characters.
I have this same problem and it is really getting me down. It's exhausting. I did not explicitly go over it in session 0 because I thought my players were more mature than this (big mistake!). I thought they would 'grow together' as a team but that has not happened. Those with anti-social character traits have really doubled down on them instead of getting over it. I think this could be because it is easier to say 'no' than 'yes', and anti-social/lone wolf characters are just walking 'no's. Plus saying 'no' makes you feel powerful and, well, feeling powerful is definitely an attractive part of TTRPGs.
I'm at the point now where I am tempted to try to pull them apart. So they need to leave (and roll up a new character), or find a reason to stay.
I think it's better to bring this problem up directly with the players, and get them to help you solve it.
Thanks this helps! I definitely don’t want to punish them, we did talk about a lot of this session 0, so they are all generally interested in the central story and I think are trying to reconcile these characters as a team and just haven’t figured it out yet. I like the idea of doing in game team bonding moments as well as an out of game refresher.
I love this idea! This is exactly what I’m looking for. I think my players want to be a team, they just haven’t figured out how to rp their characters into being a full team yet. I had a nothic encounter all prepped to hint at backstory hooks for each of them but they ended up mostly skipping over it lol.
Yeah I have done that and it usually fixes it for a couple of sessions and then we're back where we started. I'm at the point where I would rather just.... not run games for this group anymore than bring it up again.
Argh. I'm just having a bad week after a bad session. We've all been there. It'll be fine.