Hi, I'm a relatively DM, and a lot of the players are power gamers I need some advice on how to make the game more fun for me while not forcing them to change their characters.
Hi, I'm a relatively DM, and a lot of the players are power gamers I need some advice on how to make the game more fun for me while not forcing them to change their characters.
Well, as a DM, what do you find fun? And how does the players being "power gamers" impact your fun?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
So the problem isn't really "power gamers", it's the ratio of combat to non-combat. You can fairly easily deal with overpowered builds by just buffing the monsters, but if the players like lots of combat and you don't there isn't as easy a solution.
That's a tough one. If they're just classic hack-and-slash, all about the lootz and the XP kind of players, it can be tricky to get them to focus on your story
If they bothered to put any kind of hooks in their backstories, using those to get them more involved in that side of the game might work
You could also try having negative consequences for killing the wrong NPCs -- if they want bigger fights, more powerful magic items etc., make it obvious that they missed out on some leads to those things by just slaughtering all their enemies instead of trying to get info out of them
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
In my experience, a conversation with the players does wonders. If you aren't sure that will be fruitful, you can try other ways.
Disincentivize combat for every situation. Set one of the encounters up to be unwinnable via combat but TELL THE PLAYERS, so they use the other available options, such as running, social actions, or creative puzzle-like solutions. You can accomplish this by saying before the encounter "Your passive perception/insight tells you that they carry themselves like warriors. You have a sense that they are, currently, your better."
But if that is not quite enough to dissuade them, let the chips fall where they will, but don't kill the party. Knocking them out and capturing them would give them a neat little escape quest.
This is just an alternative idea though. The best solution is to simply tell the players it is not as fun for you and you would like to see them do other things. Most players are cool with exploring other options so long as you let them get their combat fix once in a while.
Hey this is great. It simply means you get to be a Power Dungeon Master. Create encounters where the monsters have good synergy (such as an enemy mage casting lighting bolt at them through a shambling mound) and fight them in a strategically challenging way, while being ruthless when attacking and killing downed characters.
There is one of these threads every few weeks - If the group likes combat - then give them lots of combat - if they optimize builds have the creature hit harder or more of them.
I far and away prefer players that build good characters it shows they are interested and know their class - unlike the "O I need to prepare spells?" crowd
"Bending" the group to be a rp heavy group if they are a combat heavy group just makes it less fun for them, sooner or later they will just leave the campaign and find a combat heavy campaign to enjoy.
There is one of these threads every few weeks - If the group likes combat - then give them lots of combat - if they optimize builds have the creature hit harder or more of them.
I far and away prefer players that build good characters it shows they are interested and know their class - unlike the "O I need to prepare spells?" crowd
"Bending" the group to be a rp heavy group if they are a combat heavy group just makes it less fun for them, sooner or later they will just leave the campaign and find a combat heavy campaign to enjoy.
The DM is entitled to have fun too, y'know
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
There is one of these threads every few weeks - If the group likes combat - then give them lots of combat - if they optimize builds have the creature hit harder or more of them.
I far and away prefer players that build good characters it shows they are interested and know their class - unlike the "O I need to prepare spells?" crowd
"Bending" the group to be a rp heavy group if they are a combat heavy group just makes it less fun for them, sooner or later they will just leave the campaign and find a combat heavy campaign to enjoy.
The DM is entitled to have fun too, y'know
Well as the OP states he is a new DM - if the DM prefers RP heavy groups then this is a learning experience and in future that should be sorted out at session zero or even earlier as the group is being formed.
Once the game has started I just think a DM should be able to have fun in either style - hell different parts of a campaign can swing a bit more rp or more combat - but forcing the players to not play hack and slash if that is what they want is never a great answer imho.
There is one of these threads every few weeks - If the group likes combat - then give them lots of combat - if they optimize builds have the creature hit harder or more of them.
I far and away prefer players that build good characters it shows they are interested and know their class - unlike the "O I need to prepare spells?" crowd
"Bending" the group to be a rp heavy group if they are a combat heavy group just makes it less fun for them, sooner or later they will just leave the campaign and find a combat heavy campaign to enjoy.
The DM is entitled to have fun too, y'know
Well as the OP states he is a new DM - if the DM prefers RP heavy groups then this is a learning experience and in future that should be sorted out at session zero or even earlier as the group is being formed.
Once the game has started I just think a DM should be able to have fun in either style - hell different parts of a campaign can swing a bit more rp or more combat - but forcing the players to not play hack and slash if that is what they want is never a great answer imho.
$.02
And remember- combat IS rp. The best rp in all of Dungeons and Dragons occurs in the heat of a battle. "Rp heavy" and "combat heavy" mean exactly the same thing.
And remember- combat IS rp. The best rp in all of Dungeons and Dragons occurs in the heat of a battle. "Rp heavy" and "combat heavy" mean exactly the same thing.
They really, really don't
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
And remember- combat IS rp. The best rp in all of Dungeons and Dragons occurs in the heat of a battle. "Rp heavy" and "combat heavy" mean exactly the same thing.
They really, really don't
Agreed, if my players said they want an RP heavy campaign and I ran them through a mega dungeon in which they never got to talk to anyone they’d be rightfully pissed off. Same if they asked for combat heavy and I gave them a royal ball full of political intrigue. I agree that role play shouldn’t stop when you roll initiative but the two things are referred to separately because they are separate things
Hi, I'm a relatively DM, and a lot of the players are power gamers I need some advice on how to make the game more fun for me while not forcing them to change their characters.
My Advice - there is no universal GM or DM. Not every player fits into every group. Not every GM can work for every player style. The harsh truth is that there is no way to alter the game if the players are the power gamer play style. They'll keep wanting to power game. The slippery slope there is that you may end up putting more difficult challenges in place and it can lead to a bad place. Generally speaking when recruiting a play group, it's good to know what your stylistic preferences are. If you prefer Roleplaying, then when recruiting players tell them that. I for example tell players that Min-Maxers won't fit in with my game groups, neither will players with Main Character Syndrome.
Unfortunately, if you do recruit a player whose style is incompatible or causes friction with your own or other players - the only practical advice is to either removing said player, or walking away from the group. That sucks to hear I know, but no gaming is better than bad gaming.
Hi, I'm a relatively DM, and a lot of the players are power gamers I need some advice on how to make the game more fun for me while not forcing them to change their characters.
My Advice - there is no universal GM or DM. Not every player fits into every group. Not every GM can work for every player style. The harsh truth is that there is no way to alter the game if the players are the power gamer play style. They'll keep wanting to power game. The slippery slope there is that you may end up putting more difficult challenges in place and it can lead to a bad place. Generally speaking when recruiting a play group, it's good to know what your stylistic preferences are. If you prefer Roleplaying, then when recruiting players tell them that. I for example tell players that Min-Maxers won't fit in with my game groups, neither will players with Main Character Syndrome.
Unfortunately, if you do recruit a player whose style is incompatible or causes friction with your own or other players - the only practical advice is to either removing said player, or walking away from the group. That sucks to hear I know, but no gaming is better than bad gaming.
I mostly agree with this and it is sound advice - I take slight issue with the potential conflation of min-maxers and main character types -
There is nothing a min maxer loves more than a table full of min maxers and a DM that can collectively keep them engaged as a group. Conversely min-maxers often detest players where after a few levels they do not even understand the core mechanics of their class. Its like doing math riddles with folks that are bad at algebra.
Example after 3 minutes on their turn debating all their awful choices because they didn't read the map correctly and put their character in a bad position then comes - I want to cast Firebolt - ok "First of all you will be casting at disadvantage as you are in melee of the creature, 2nd of all for the 47th time that is a to hit spell not a save - the fact that it says instant does not mean you do not need to roll a ranged spell attack ... sigh roll it out and lets move on.. Next player what do you have - now comes the min maxer (total turn for this guy 10 seconds) "I moved here - took my attack of opportunity - DM please roll it - and cast Fireball - I need mobs 1.2.3.4.5 to make dex 18 saves 30 on a fail 15 on a pass that's my turn ty."
That is a very different dynamic than the main character thing - I cant stand main character types at my tables.
If you prefer Roleplaying, then when recruiting players tell them that. I for example tell players that Min-Maxers won't fit in with my game groups, neither will players with Main Character Syndrome.
Neither of those things is actually incompatible with roleplaying (it can cause other problems) -- you can have power gamers who are good at roleplaying, and you can have players who who are uninterested in roleplaying and just want to fight all the time, but are not particularly interested in or good at making The Most Powerful Character. As for main character syndrome... that is a roleplaying behavior. It tends to translate into "roleplaying a colossal jerk", which you might not want at your table, but that doesn't make it not roleplaying.
Most power players just love the thrill of beating stuff up. So it would be demoralizing to be beaten. Lets say they just barely made it out of an encounter alive, you can tell them that in general you'll get more rewards and Xp for making story based decisions. If they are picking fights you can very easily make your enemies much more of a challenge. They might end up rethinking their "Over powered builds"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Uh, I have Illusory Script. I think I can read that."
If you prefer Roleplaying, then when recruiting players tell them that. I for example tell players that Min-Maxers won't fit in with my game groups, neither will players with Main Character Syndrome.
Neither of those things is actually incompatible with roleplaying (it can cause other problems) -- you can have power gamers who are good at roleplaying, and you can have players who who are uninterested in roleplaying and just want to fight all the time, but are not particularly interested in or good at making The Most Powerful Character. As for main character syndrome... that is a roleplaying behavior. It tends to translate into "roleplaying a colossal jerk", which you might not want at your table, but that doesn't make it not roleplaying.
Main character syndrome isn't "playing a collossal jerk", that's a different type of negative player behaviour. Main character syndrome is those players who dominate all the role play. They make every story beat about their character. They create and constantly bring up their character's sob-story background to evoke other player characters to completely focus on helping their character. They get annoyed if the DM tries to concentrate / make a story arc focused on one of the other characters, or if NPCs don't treat their character as the most important thing. They often already have their character's arc planned out and get angry if the DM doesn't follow it. They generally don't really care what the DM had planned for the story of the campaign, they are going to make the campaign revolve around their character no matter what.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi, I'm a relatively DM, and a lot of the players are power gamers I need some advice on how to make the game more fun for me while not forcing them to change their characters.
Well, as a DM, what do you find fun? And how does the players being "power gamers" impact your fun?
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I find a good medium of combat and story fun, but my players with overpowered builds are trying to get into fights all the time.
So the problem isn't really "power gamers", it's the ratio of combat to non-combat. You can fairly easily deal with overpowered builds by just buffing the monsters, but if the players like lots of combat and you don't there isn't as easy a solution.
That's a tough one. If they're just classic hack-and-slash, all about the lootz and the XP kind of players, it can be tricky to get them to focus on your story
If they bothered to put any kind of hooks in their backstories, using those to get them more involved in that side of the game might work
You could also try having negative consequences for killing the wrong NPCs -- if they want bigger fights, more powerful magic items etc., make it obvious that they missed out on some leads to those things by just slaughtering all their enemies instead of trying to get info out of them
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
thank you so much this helps a ton
In my experience, a conversation with the players does wonders. If you aren't sure that will be fruitful, you can try other ways.
Disincentivize combat for every situation. Set one of the encounters up to be unwinnable via combat but TELL THE PLAYERS, so they use the other available options, such as running, social actions, or creative puzzle-like solutions. You can accomplish this by saying before the encounter "Your passive perception/insight tells you that they carry themselves like warriors. You have a sense that they are, currently, your better."
But if that is not quite enough to dissuade them, let the chips fall where they will, but don't kill the party. Knocking them out and capturing them would give them a neat little escape quest.
This is just an alternative idea though. The best solution is to simply tell the players it is not as fun for you and you would like to see them do other things. Most players are cool with exploring other options so long as you let them get their combat fix once in a while.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
Power gamers? sounds like a good excuse to bust out the more powerful monsters to me!
Hey this is great. It simply means you get to be a Power Dungeon Master. Create encounters where the monsters have good synergy (such as an enemy mage casting lighting bolt at them through a shambling mound) and fight them in a strategically challenging way, while being ruthless when attacking and killing downed characters.
There is one of these threads every few weeks - If the group likes combat - then give them lots of combat - if they optimize builds have the creature hit harder or more of them.
I far and away prefer players that build good characters it shows they are interested and know their class - unlike the "O I need to prepare spells?" crowd
"Bending" the group to be a rp heavy group if they are a combat heavy group just makes it less fun for them, sooner or later they will just leave the campaign and find a combat heavy campaign to enjoy.
The DM is entitled to have fun too, y'know
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Well as the OP states he is a new DM - if the DM prefers RP heavy groups then this is a learning experience and in future that should be sorted out at session zero or even earlier as the group is being formed.
Once the game has started I just think a DM should be able to have fun in either style - hell different parts of a campaign can swing a bit more rp or more combat - but forcing the players to not play hack and slash if that is what they want is never a great answer imho.
$.02
And remember- combat IS rp. The best rp in all of Dungeons and Dragons occurs in the heat of a battle. "Rp heavy" and "combat heavy" mean exactly the same thing.
They really, really don't
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Agreed, if my players said they want an RP heavy campaign and I ran them through a mega dungeon in which they never got to talk to anyone they’d be rightfully pissed off. Same if they asked for combat heavy and I gave them a royal ball full of political intrigue. I agree that role play shouldn’t stop when you roll initiative but the two things are referred to separately because they are separate things
My Advice - there is no universal GM or DM. Not every player fits into every group. Not every GM can work for every player style. The harsh truth is that there is no way to alter the game if the players are the power gamer play style. They'll keep wanting to power game. The slippery slope there is that you may end up putting more difficult challenges in place and it can lead to a bad place. Generally speaking when recruiting a play group, it's good to know what your stylistic preferences are. If you prefer Roleplaying, then when recruiting players tell them that. I for example tell players that Min-Maxers won't fit in with my game groups, neither will players with Main Character Syndrome.
Unfortunately, if you do recruit a player whose style is incompatible or causes friction with your own or other players - the only practical advice is to either removing said player, or walking away from the group. That sucks to hear I know, but no gaming is better than bad gaming.
There's a great piece over here that I would also recommend checking out that details challenges and tactics for dealing with some things: https://rpgbot.net/general-tabletop/gamemasters/player-archetypes/
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
I mostly agree with this and it is sound advice - I take slight issue with the potential conflation of min-maxers and main character types -
There is nothing a min maxer loves more than a table full of min maxers and a DM that can collectively keep them engaged as a group. Conversely min-maxers often detest players where after a few levels they do not even understand the core mechanics of their class. Its like doing math riddles with folks that are bad at algebra.
Example after 3 minutes on their turn debating all their awful choices because they didn't read the map correctly and put their character in a bad position then comes - I want to cast Firebolt - ok "First of all you will be casting at disadvantage as you are in melee of the creature, 2nd of all for the 47th time that is a to hit spell not a save - the fact that it says instant does not mean you do not need to roll a ranged spell attack ... sigh roll it out and lets move on.. Next player what do you have - now comes the min maxer (total turn for this guy 10 seconds) "I moved here - took my attack of opportunity - DM please roll it - and cast Fireball - I need mobs 1.2.3.4.5 to make dex 18 saves 30 on a fail 15 on a pass that's my turn ty."
That is a very different dynamic than the main character thing - I cant stand main character types at my tables.
Neither of those things is actually incompatible with roleplaying (it can cause other problems) -- you can have power gamers who are good at roleplaying, and you can have players who who are uninterested in roleplaying and just want to fight all the time, but are not particularly interested in or good at making The Most Powerful Character. As for main character syndrome... that is a roleplaying behavior. It tends to translate into "roleplaying a colossal jerk", which you might not want at your table, but that doesn't make it not roleplaying.
Most power players just love the thrill of beating stuff up. So it would be demoralizing to be beaten. Lets say they just barely made it out of an encounter alive, you can tell them that in general you'll get more rewards and Xp for making story based decisions. If they are picking fights you can very easily make your enemies much more of a challenge. They might end up rethinking their "Over powered builds"
"Uh, I have Illusory Script. I think I can read that."
Main character syndrome isn't "playing a collossal jerk", that's a different type of negative player behaviour. Main character syndrome is those players who dominate all the role play. They make every story beat about their character. They create and constantly bring up their character's sob-story background to evoke other player characters to completely focus on helping their character. They get annoyed if the DM tries to concentrate / make a story arc focused on one of the other characters, or if NPCs don't treat their character as the most important thing. They often already have their character's arc planned out and get angry if the DM doesn't follow it. They generally don't really care what the DM had planned for the story of the campaign, they are going to make the campaign revolve around their character no matter what.