While I can't speak to dealing with Murder Hobos, I do want to offer some encouragement about running the campaign...
I have been playing D&D in some form since 2nd ed, and I am currently running HotDQ. I have stumbled through scenes and had to consult teh adventure book/my notes many times (I'm still getting used to some of the 5th ed mechanics changes).
it is a process, and one that you get better at the more you do it. Don't be discouraged.
Oh, one thing to think about is if you have any clerics in the group, especially if they are following a good-aligned deity. after some of the party;s actions, if the cleric didn't leave the group, then have them lose all levels as a cleric, adn have the deity abandon them for going against the faith... you could even have others from the religious sect be sent to find the heretic.
Finding themselves without someone to cast healing spells might make them realize that there is way more to this game than just killing anything you can... obviously they're to used to console video games.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
ChaoticGoodPaladin2 (because 1 is never enough)
Famous Last words #27: "Of course I trust the thief, he's in our party" Famous Last Words #32: "The minotaur's got me in a bear hug? GREAT! I cast Flame Strike on it!"
Yeah, one of my problems is I can’t really punish my players thematically a lot because all they see D&D as is a linear video game that’s slightly more immersive. To them it’s killing everything that can be killed, then getting a handful of gold or a magic item.
We have a human rogue, a dwarf fighter, a wood elf Druid, and a human Bard.
Literally none of them have backstories. This was definitely my fault. I tried to hold a session zero, but they quickly go bored of me trying to explain class features and rules. So we jumped right in.
None of them wanted to use the traits, flaws, and bonds provided by the PHB so they made there own. The dwarf fighter is apparently “deathly afraid of women” but he has yet to show it.
Any tips on what to fix next campaign? Maybe I’ll tell them to have a character concept in mind and know that classes traits and features.
Session 0 should cover the what you (player) should expect and what I (DM) expect from this game and each other. This is a low fantasy, survival horror game. I don't expect there to be a heavy atmosphere as I'd like to keep it light, sort of a Shawn of the Dead feel. What would you guys like to see from the game? (A way to get dialogue going and set expectations)
Nailing down the how to do X can happen while the game is in session or during character creation.
Creating a back story can happen as a Q&A session during character creation, and some of it can be initiated during that Session 0 dialogue. "You are all soldiers returning from a recent skirmish with the neighboring city state. Think for a moment about what you were doing before you were enlisted/drafted." After you give that description and let them ponder it for a little while open up discussion with "So, John, what happened during that last skirmish that made you decide to become an adventurer rather than going home and picking up the family business?"
You, as DM, take notes on their responses, then tailor events to happen randomly as they play which show their decisions having an impact on the world. Now, they don't have to build a character "by the book" but their decisions and answers have an impact beyond wasted words.
A option you could try is to turn your game more into a dungeon crawl. Focus on the players wants, which is currently to kill stuff. Make rooms in your dungeon that challenge your players to use their other abilities. You stated the druid at level 4 has never cast a spell!
Doing a premade won't help if the players say let's kill the town's people instead of talking to them. Once the players learn the rules and get the hack and slash out of their system they may want a more story driven game.
Doing a premade won't help if the players say let's kill the town's people instead of talking to them. Once the players learn the rules and get the hack and slash out of their system they may want a more story driven game.
That's also not a bad idea. Give them Diablo III if they want it.
You could also have something/someone beat them to the punch regarding their town. "That blacksmith you wanted to have upgrade your gear then kill? He dead already." "The tavern you wanted to get drunk in then not pay the bill? It's burnt down." Twisted revenge plot.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
OK, the airship is up. "Go ahead and kill me. Good luck getting down without crashing."
And I also agree, who said the crew is small and lvl 0? There could easily be 30-50 crew with officers lvl 8+
Then the weather turns stormy, the steering mechanism gets hit by lightning, the airship is blown back to a point down river, where the body of a halfling girl washes up, whose ghost begins haunting the party, hindering long rests.
How to start solving the "out of game talking" you describe? (i.e. "Let's kill everyone on the ship afterwards..")
You can do what Mathew Mercer does in Critical Role.
When players speak "out of game" while he is "in game" - he let's the NPC hear what the players said.
"Wait - did you just say you are going to kill all our crew? Is that what you just said? Men draw your swords." The captain turns to the PCs. "You better speak quickly or you aren't going anywhere."
Then let the PCs scramble to undo the damage.
If players start to whisper to each other during in game conversation - take that also as "in player" action. NPC says, "What are you whispering about?"
Do this enough times and your players will realize their "out of game" chat isn't working.
Murder Hobo's - introduce the TPK... try to take over the ship, the crew vastly outnumbers them and a few probably out-skill them. The benevolent NPC with the magic items, have her use the magic items to destroy the party. Unless the game is an evil campaign, of course, then a few sacrificial PC deaths to get them back in line usually does the trick. Another option is to have the cleric lose their ability to cast spells (depending on their god)...
Talking OOC is fine as long as they are not involved in an RP moment... then ANY discussion is taken as in character. The captain would have heard him and then raised the alarm.
1. They need to know that their actions have equal and opposite reactions. Just like in real life.
2. OOC should not be done at the table. A player needs to flag me down and take a time out. For example if they are trying to get organized in combat, they should be yelling from across the battle field.
3. Not all consequences happen immediately. The halfling girl could come back to haunt them (they’ve killed other NPCs too but they were minor and it’s probably to late to incorporate them)
4. Don’t make them stick to their alignments. If they shade one way or another make them become that alignment. For example I had a few adventurers start the campaign playing chaotic good and neutral good characters. After the first session I could already see them shading to the Neutral evil side. After they robbed an adventuring store for better amour and weapons (amounting to about 2000 gp) then plotted murder, I guess we can assume they are chaotic evil.
My one problem is that I have one player who is not a murder hobo. He’s played some D&D before, though he’s still fairly new. He understands that it’s not all about killing things, and he doesn’t really partake in too much of it. He wasn’t even at the session where they threatened to kill the whole crew. But if I end up TPKing the party I feel I still need to kill him as well. I’m a fairly new DM but I still know that player favoritism is a huge mistake.
I have one more session to run before the ship sets sail. It’s a small dungeon (5 room dungeon) but it’s pretty challenging. It’s stocked with a few traps, some thugs, veterans, and a enchantress for a boss. The entire dungeon is a deadly encounter, but I have a major NPC helping the party (this is the artificer they were planning murder against) hopefully his helpful nature will show the party that they don’t necessarily have to kill everyone.
I would explain the situation to the one player, and let him/her know to not take a TPK personally (if it were to happen), as you recognize that they are mostly innocent.
Level setting the expectations goes a long way towards preventing misunderstandings. Also, if the TPK doesn't happen, you could eventually have that one character become like the face of the party, since they haven't partaken in most of the heinous acts the others have. No one talks to anyone in the party except for that one bc of their reputation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
ChaoticGoodPaladin2 (because 1 is never enough)
Famous Last words #27: "Of course I trust the thief, he's in our party" Famous Last Words #32: "The minotaur's got me in a bear hug? GREAT! I cast Flame Strike on it!"
1. They need to know that their actions have equal and opposite reactions. Just like in real life.
Their actions have consequences, there is nothing about equal and opposite. Save the local town marshall, they give you a discount at the local general store and maybe turn a blind eye at their next transgression. Kill the local town marshall and the entire populace chases you down with pitchforks and torches as a blood thirsty lynch mob. Having consequences happen consistantly will help most, if 90% of their actions are met with some consequence 100% of the time, they'll begin to change their ways.
2. OOC should not be done at the table. A player needs to flag me down and take a time out. For example if they are trying to get organized in combat, they should be yelling from across the battle field.
Within reason; you'll know the difference between light hearted banter and planning a coup against the airship. Having the NPCs hear the chatter is a nice touch, also sprinkle in the "Did you say that out loud/in character?" question when it's someone making a silly comment or bad pun, it makes a good reminder. The idea here is to get them to engage in the narrative, not punish them for discussing plans and ideas.
3. Not all consequences happen immediately. The halfling girl could come back to haunt them (they’ve killed other NPCs too but they were minor and it’s probably to late to incorporate them)
This is the biggest thing to play around with when turning players' actions into story fuel. Not only do the consequences sometimes happen at a later date, the consequences may not even appear to be relevant at first. You kill the strange NPC wandering around picking flowers in a grove, the capitols of two near by nations go to war a week later. The players may not understand, but the NPC they killed was the cousin of the ruler of one of those towns, and those two towns were already having problems in the first place. The actions of the players caused a war, they may never find out why/how the war started, but they're sure as heck going to get caught up in it. Once all is said and done, the players have done whatever it is that's necessary to create peace, then they find out that they were the cause of this whole thing.
4. Don’t make them stick to their alignments. If they shade one way or another make them become that alignment. For example I had a few adventurers start the campaign playing chaotic good and neutral good characters. After the first session I could already see them shading to the Neutral evil side. After they robbed an adventuring store for better amour and weapons (amounting to about 2000 gp) then plotted murder, I guess we can assume they are chaotic evil.
There are a thousand thousand threads about alignments, what they are, how they work, the best way to implement them, etc. to be perfectly honest, alignments are fluff in 5e. In previous editions the alignment of a character determined mechanical effects that would change how that character worked, what they could equip, and more. In 5e alignment is something that is held over because it is familiar, there is no mechanical necessity for it to be in the game. Even for Paladins and Clerics now that there is the whole "You can follow an idea rather than a diety" clause. Don't worry about alignment, worry about actions and consequences, if dieties are involved, look at what the diety stands for and how the actions fall in that scope.
My one problem is that I have one player who is not a murder hobo. He’s played some D&D before, though he’s still fairly new. He understands that it’s not all about killing things, and he doesn’t really partake in too much of it. He wasn’t even at the session where they threatened to kill the whole crew. But if I end up TPKing the party I feel I still need to kill him as well. I’m a fairly new DM but I still know that player favoritism is a huge mistake.
Talk to the players, tell them what's going on in your mind, how you feel about the way the game is going, what you're going to start to change in your DM style, etc. Be transparent, that's one of the biggest things that has helped me steer my gaming groups. The more they realize that you're human, you make mistakes, and you're going to be changing things up to make the game better for everyone, the better the game gets. I own up to my mistakes all the time, heck I just had one of my players tell me, after 2 years of our campaign, that I was doing sneak attack all wrong...but I wasn't because I'm the DM and I'm never wrong!!!
Metagaming is using information known by the player that is not necessarily known by the character. Examples:
- barbarian character expertly deactivates all the traps in the dungeon because they’ve read that adventure at the local game store
- monk character lacking in arcana tells everyone “this type of creature is vulnerable to X and resistant to Y” because they own a monster manual
This post highlights why worrying about "meta-gaming" is a fruitless effort at best, and actively detrimental to the overall game experience at worst.
Neither of those examples are meta-gaming. Depending on exact details, the first might be out-right cheating, but could potentially be fair play (if the barbarian character isn't doing anything not possible for the character given what they know and can do in the moment). The second example is either just fair game-play, or is out-right cheating, depending upon the table rules (and, in my not so humble opinion, is something that should be treated as an absolute non-issue because otherwise it implies that anyone who has ever been a DM should be viewed as less qualified to participate in a game as a player because they might remember some detail of the game learned in the act of DMing).
I've just started back up as a DM (5e) after last playing 2e 30+ years ago. Fortunately, my 2 daughters and one of their boyfriends have PC'ed some and they've helped me along as a DM (and they watch "Critical Role" to see how to role-play.)
Back in 2e, when the party would go all "Stabby stabby", I would take away their abilities until they showed repentance, send vengeful high-level NPC after them, and make them understand there are consequences to not role-playing your alignment. The other thing that's good for happy role-playing is for the DM to schedule a "session zero" with the players to go over his expectations and their expectations, discuss style of play, what kind of adventures they want, etc. If they want to murder the world, then the DM doesn't have to worry about continuing plots/storylines, just roll out a never-ending wave of bodies to murder, and as long as they correctly RP the character...good on them. EVENTUALLY, they'll want something more.
Taking away abilities is kinda a last resort for me. First of all my players are new, and they haven’t been taking advantage of the full power of their classes. They forget to do certain things. The Druid isn’t really a support class in my party. He kinda just turns into random animals and mauls things. Also he favors using his actual weapons more than he does spells. (He has yet to cast a spell 5 sessions in)
Also if I do take away powers I want to do it thematically. Say I take away a fighters powers. They might ask why, and there is no good reasoning. Just saying “One day you just forget how to swing your sword, despite having extensive training and 20+ years as a soldier.” Doesn’t cut it.
Though for a cleric/paladin it could be their deity taking away their powers. Maybe a paladin has to take an oath of redemption and take a holy quest to regain his/her powers. If it goes wrong maybe they turn into a death knight. That would be an interesting plot twist.
My players don’t really understand how to power game or min/max yet. Sometimes they ask “can I do this” and I say, as long as you can imagine it, you can do it. Sure you can That may have slightly encouraged them to become murder hobos (because in the video games you can’t kill friendlies... but in D&D you can) I’m just trying to open them up to all the possibilities. And I’m seeing some progress. They begun to become more creative. When entering a town they became very superstitious and had to make sure that the guards weren’t hostile. (After all they just did murder an innocent girl then throw her body in a river) so my bard and fighter had to BS their way through the town gates, while the rogue sneaked around and prepared to attack (just in case) the guards were never hostile in the first place, and when asked my bard failed horribly at role playing. He accidentally referred to the dwarf as his husband... so they tried to roll with it. They even kissed each other to try to sell it. That was by far the most messed up thing I have ever seen (in d&d or real life) after the session I told his girlfriend about it.
That was by far the most messed up thing I have ever seen (in d&d or real life) after the session I told his girlfriend about it.
Using a sleeping potion as a suppository... "Grappling" a shape-shifting baddie by biting down on it's head while it was in rat form... Turning a dead goblin in to a flaming undead kobold illusion to set off an ambush... Kidnapping a child, that was previously kidnapped, to save her from an abusive mistress who put a curse on her to make her believe she was an animal, only to then give the child to a blue dragon because the dragon liked her and wanted to play...
You have a long way to go, my friend, when it comes to messed up :) (yes, I DM'd each of those events)
There's a lot of great answers in this thread already on the subject of how to get your players to stop being murder hobos. The tip to make sure your players understand actions and consequences is particularly apt.
But to play devil's advocate for a second: your players are enjoying themselves. They like being murder hobos. They think you're doing fine! Maybe that isn't entirely a bad thing?
Rather than continuing to beat your head up against a wall, you might want to consider catering more to your players' tastes. Focus on hack-and-slash and dungeon crawl style gameplay. Or run a campaign where the characters are wholly evil, in which this type of behavior makes much more sense. Maybe these players just don't really have any interest in being heroes. There's nothing wrong with running a game that focuses more on combat or the video game-like aspects of D&D.
That's not to say you can't slowly try to work in more and more elements of narrative gameplay, but don't expect it to be easy. It may take some time for your players to mature. I remember my early D&D games, and they had similar problems, but the players' mentalities didn't change overnight. But the overall point is, there's nothing wrong with just having fun playing hack-and-slash D&D with little or no story. Story-driven games aren't inherently better, especially when they're poorly suited to the group you're playing with.
Anyway, I would just give the players a dose of consequences. The world exists regardless of them. If they want to go strait to the death knight and get murdered, let them. If they murder someone, that will come back to them.
There is something called "mechanics as story" which means the mechanics reflect the story. If they murder a girl, mechanically nothing happens. But if they start having alot of fights, can't buy weapons in town, and are being hunted, then there is a mechanical reason not to kill everyone (yes the players should have some small amount of morals, but this will bypass the ethics argument)
Also, setting boundaries is OK. Important for both DM'ing and life.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
While I can't speak to dealing with Murder Hobos, I do want to offer some encouragement about running the campaign...
I have been playing D&D in some form since 2nd ed, and I am currently running HotDQ. I have stumbled through scenes and had to consult teh adventure book/my notes many times (I'm still getting used to some of the 5th ed mechanics changes).
it is a process, and one that you get better at the more you do it. Don't be discouraged.
Oh, one thing to think about is if you have any clerics in the group, especially if they are following a good-aligned deity. after some of the party;s actions, if the cleric didn't leave the group, then have them lose all levels as a cleric, adn have the deity abandon them for going against the faith... you could even have others from the religious sect be sent to find the heretic.
Finding themselves without someone to cast healing spells might make them realize that there is way more to this game than just killing anything you can... obviously they're to used to console video games.
ChaoticGoodPaladin2 (because 1 is never enough)
Famous Last words #27: "Of course I trust the thief, he's in our party"
Famous Last Words #32: "The minotaur's got me in a bear hug? GREAT! I cast Flame Strike on it!"
Yeah, one of my problems is I can’t really punish my players thematically a lot because all they see D&D as is a linear video game that’s slightly more immersive. To them it’s killing everything that can be killed, then getting a handful of gold or a magic item.
We have a human rogue, a dwarf fighter, a wood elf Druid, and a human Bard.
Literally none of them have backstories. This was definitely my fault. I tried to hold a session zero, but they quickly go bored of me trying to explain class features and rules. So we jumped right in.
None of them wanted to use the traits, flaws, and bonds provided by the PHB so they made there own. The dwarf fighter is apparently “deathly afraid of women” but he has yet to show it.
Any tips on what to fix next campaign? Maybe I’ll tell them to have a character concept in mind and know that classes traits and features.
Session 0 should cover the what you (player) should expect and what I (DM) expect from this game and each other. This is a low fantasy, survival horror game. I don't expect there to be a heavy atmosphere as I'd like to keep it light, sort of a Shawn of the Dead feel. What would you guys like to see from the game? (A way to get dialogue going and set expectations)
Nailing down the how to do X can happen while the game is in session or during character creation.
Creating a back story can happen as a Q&A session during character creation, and some of it can be initiated during that Session 0 dialogue. "You are all soldiers returning from a recent skirmish with the neighboring city state. Think for a moment about what you were doing before you were enlisted/drafted." After you give that description and let them ponder it for a little while open up discussion with "So, John, what happened during that last skirmish that made you decide to become an adventurer rather than going home and picking up the family business?"
You, as DM, take notes on their responses, then tailor events to happen randomly as they play which show their decisions having an impact on the world. Now, they don't have to build a character "by the book" but their decisions and answers have an impact beyond wasted words.
A option you could try is to turn your game more into a dungeon crawl. Focus on the players wants, which is currently to kill stuff. Make rooms in your dungeon that challenge your players to use their other abilities. You stated the druid at level 4 has never cast a spell!
Doing a premade won't help if the players say let's kill the town's people instead of talking to them. Once the players learn the rules and get the hack and slash out of their system they may want a more story driven game.
That's also not a bad idea. Give them Diablo III if they want it.
You could also have something/someone beat them to the punch regarding their town. "That blacksmith you wanted to have upgrade your gear then kill? He dead already." "The tavern you wanted to get drunk in then not pay the bill? It's burnt down." Twisted revenge plot.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Then the weather turns stormy, the steering mechanism gets hit by lightning, the airship is blown back to a point down river, where the body of a halfling girl washes up, whose ghost begins haunting the party, hindering long rests.
Build the consequences into the storyline.
How to start solving the "out of game talking" you describe? (i.e. "Let's kill everyone on the ship afterwards..")
You can do what Mathew Mercer does in Critical Role.
When players speak "out of game" while he is "in game" - he let's the NPC hear what the players said.
"Wait - did you just say you are going to kill all our crew? Is that what you just said? Men draw your swords." The captain turns to the PCs. "You better speak quickly or you aren't going anywhere."
Then let the PCs scramble to undo the damage.
If players start to whisper to each other during in game conversation - take that also as "in player" action. NPC says, "What are you whispering about?"
Do this enough times and your players will realize their "out of game" chat isn't working.
Murder Hobo's - introduce the TPK... try to take over the ship, the crew vastly outnumbers them and a few probably out-skill them. The benevolent NPC with the magic items, have her use the magic items to destroy the party. Unless the game is an evil campaign, of course, then a few sacrificial PC deaths to get them back in line usually does the trick. Another option is to have the cleric lose their ability to cast spells (depending on their god)...
Talking OOC is fine as long as they are not involved in an RP moment... then ANY discussion is taken as in character. The captain would have heard him and then raised the alarm.
Sounds great. So far I’ve got
1. They need to know that their actions have equal and opposite reactions. Just like in real life.
2. OOC should not be done at the table. A player needs to flag me down and take a time out. For example if they are trying to get organized in combat, they should be yelling from across the battle field.
3. Not all consequences happen immediately. The halfling girl could come back to haunt them (they’ve killed other NPCs too but they were minor and it’s probably to late to incorporate them)
4. Don’t make them stick to their alignments. If they shade one way or another make them become that alignment. For example I had a few adventurers start the campaign playing chaotic good and neutral good characters. After the first session I could already see them shading to the Neutral evil side. After they robbed an adventuring store for better amour and weapons (amounting to about 2000 gp) then plotted murder, I guess we can assume they are chaotic evil.
My one problem is that I have one player who is not a murder hobo. He’s played some D&D before, though he’s still fairly new. He understands that it’s not all about killing things, and he doesn’t really partake in too much of it. He wasn’t even at the session where they threatened to kill the whole crew. But if I end up TPKing the party I feel I still need to kill him as well. I’m a fairly new DM but I still know that player favoritism is a huge mistake.
I have one more session to run before the ship sets sail. It’s a small dungeon (5 room dungeon) but it’s pretty challenging. It’s stocked with a few traps, some thugs, veterans, and a enchantress for a boss. The entire dungeon is a deadly encounter, but I have a major NPC helping the party (this is the artificer they were planning murder against) hopefully his helpful nature will show the party that they don’t necessarily have to kill everyone.
I would explain the situation to the one player, and let him/her know to not take a TPK personally (if it were to happen), as you recognize that they are mostly innocent.
Level setting the expectations goes a long way towards preventing misunderstandings. Also, if the TPK doesn't happen, you could eventually have that one character become like the face of the party, since they haven't partaken in most of the heinous acts the others have. No one talks to anyone in the party except for that one bc of their reputation.
ChaoticGoodPaladin2 (because 1 is never enough)
Famous Last words #27: "Of course I trust the thief, he's in our party"
Famous Last Words #32: "The minotaur's got me in a bear hug? GREAT! I cast Flame Strike on it!"
Their actions have consequences, there is nothing about equal and opposite. Save the local town marshall, they give you a discount at the local general store and maybe turn a blind eye at their next transgression. Kill the local town marshall and the entire populace chases you down with pitchforks and torches as a blood thirsty lynch mob. Having consequences happen consistantly will help most, if 90% of their actions are met with some consequence 100% of the time, they'll begin to change their ways.
Within reason; you'll know the difference between light hearted banter and planning a coup against the airship. Having the NPCs hear the chatter is a nice touch, also sprinkle in the "Did you say that out loud/in character?" question when it's someone making a silly comment or bad pun, it makes a good reminder. The idea here is to get them to engage in the narrative, not punish them for discussing plans and ideas.
This is the biggest thing to play around with when turning players' actions into story fuel. Not only do the consequences sometimes happen at a later date, the consequences may not even appear to be relevant at first. You kill the strange NPC wandering around picking flowers in a grove, the capitols of two near by nations go to war a week later. The players may not understand, but the NPC they killed was the cousin of the ruler of one of those towns, and those two towns were already having problems in the first place. The actions of the players caused a war, they may never find out why/how the war started, but they're sure as heck going to get caught up in it. Once all is said and done, the players have done whatever it is that's necessary to create peace, then they find out that they were the cause of this whole thing.
There are a thousand thousand threads about alignments, what they are, how they work, the best way to implement them, etc. to be perfectly honest, alignments are fluff in 5e. In previous editions the alignment of a character determined mechanical effects that would change how that character worked, what they could equip, and more. In 5e alignment is something that is held over because it is familiar, there is no mechanical necessity for it to be in the game. Even for Paladins and Clerics now that there is the whole "You can follow an idea rather than a diety" clause. Don't worry about alignment, worry about actions and consequences, if dieties are involved, look at what the diety stands for and how the actions fall in that scope.
Talk to the players, tell them what's going on in your mind, how you feel about the way the game is going, what you're going to start to change in your DM style, etc. Be transparent, that's one of the biggest things that has helped me steer my gaming groups. The more they realize that you're human, you make mistakes, and you're going to be changing things up to make the game better for everyone, the better the game gets. I own up to my mistakes all the time, heck I just had one of my players tell me, after 2 years of our campaign, that I was doing sneak attack all wrong...but I wasn't because I'm the DM and I'm never wrong!!!
Thanks to everyone who replied I’ll be sure to implement this more in my game.
Still open o any suggestions though.
This post highlights why worrying about "meta-gaming" is a fruitless effort at best, and actively detrimental to the overall game experience at worst.
Neither of those examples are meta-gaming. Depending on exact details, the first might be out-right cheating, but could potentially be fair play (if the barbarian character isn't doing anything not possible for the character given what they know and can do in the moment). The second example is either just fair game-play, or is out-right cheating, depending upon the table rules (and, in my not so humble opinion, is something that should be treated as an absolute non-issue because otherwise it implies that anyone who has ever been a DM should be viewed as less qualified to participate in a game as a player because they might remember some detail of the game learned in the act of DMing).
I've just started back up as a DM (5e) after last playing 2e 30+ years ago. Fortunately, my 2 daughters and one of their boyfriends have PC'ed some and they've helped me along as a DM (and they watch "Critical Role" to see how to role-play.)
Back in 2e, when the party would go all "Stabby stabby", I would take away their abilities until they showed repentance, send vengeful high-level NPC after them, and make them understand there are consequences to not role-playing your alignment. The other thing that's good for happy role-playing is for the DM to schedule a "session zero" with the players to go over his expectations and their expectations, discuss style of play, what kind of adventures they want, etc. If they want to murder the world, then the DM doesn't have to worry about continuing plots/storylines, just roll out a never-ending wave of bodies to murder, and as long as they correctly RP the character...good on them. EVENTUALLY, they'll want something more.
Taking away abilities is kinda a last resort for me. First of all my players are new, and they haven’t been taking advantage of the full power of their classes. They forget to do certain things. The Druid isn’t really a support class in my party. He kinda just turns into random animals and mauls things. Also he favors using his actual weapons more than he does spells. (He has yet to cast a spell 5 sessions in)
Also if I do take away powers I want to do it thematically. Say I take away a fighters powers. They might ask why, and there is no good reasoning. Just saying “One day you just forget how to swing your sword, despite having extensive training and 20+ years as a soldier.” Doesn’t cut it.
Though for a cleric/paladin it could be their deity taking away their powers. Maybe a paladin has to take an oath of redemption and take a holy quest to regain his/her powers. If it goes wrong maybe they turn into a death knight. That would be an interesting plot twist.
My players don’t really understand how to power game or min/max yet. Sometimes they ask “can I do this” and I say, as long as you can imagine it, you can do it. Sure you can That may have slightly encouraged them to become murder hobos (because in the video games you can’t kill friendlies... but in D&D you can) I’m just trying to open them up to all the possibilities. And I’m seeing some progress. They begun to become more creative. When entering a town they became very superstitious and had to make sure that the guards weren’t hostile. (After all they just did murder an innocent girl then throw her body in a river) so my bard and fighter had to BS their way through the town gates, while the rogue sneaked around and prepared to attack (just in case) the guards were never hostile in the first place, and when asked my bard failed horribly at role playing. He accidentally referred to the dwarf as his husband... so they tried to roll with it. They even kissed each other to try to sell it. That was by far the most messed up thing I have ever seen (in d&d or real life) after the session I told his girlfriend about it.
Using a sleeping potion as a suppository...
"Grappling" a shape-shifting baddie by biting down on it's head while it was in rat form...
Turning a dead goblin in to a flaming undead kobold illusion to set off an ambush...
Kidnapping a child, that was previously kidnapped, to save her from an abusive mistress who put a curse on her to make her believe she was an animal, only to then give the child to a blue dragon because the dragon liked her and wanted to play...
You have a long way to go, my friend, when it comes to messed up :) (yes, I DM'd each of those events)
There's a lot of great answers in this thread already on the subject of how to get your players to stop being murder hobos. The tip to make sure your players understand actions and consequences is particularly apt.
But to play devil's advocate for a second: your players are enjoying themselves. They like being murder hobos. They think you're doing fine! Maybe that isn't entirely a bad thing?
Rather than continuing to beat your head up against a wall, you might want to consider catering more to your players' tastes. Focus on hack-and-slash and dungeon crawl style gameplay. Or run a campaign where the characters are wholly evil, in which this type of behavior makes much more sense. Maybe these players just don't really have any interest in being heroes. There's nothing wrong with running a game that focuses more on combat or the video game-like aspects of D&D.
That's not to say you can't slowly try to work in more and more elements of narrative gameplay, but don't expect it to be easy. It may take some time for your players to mature. I remember my early D&D games, and they had similar problems, but the players' mentalities didn't change overnight. But the overall point is, there's nothing wrong with just having fun playing hack-and-slash D&D with little or no story. Story-driven games aren't inherently better, especially when they're poorly suited to the group you're playing with.
Your players sound like jack***
Anyway, I would just give the players a dose of consequences. The world exists regardless of them. If they want to go strait to the death knight and get murdered, let them. If they murder someone, that will come back to them.
There is something called "mechanics as story" which means the mechanics reflect the story. If they murder a girl, mechanically nothing happens. But if they start having alot of fights, can't buy weapons in town, and are being hunted, then there is a mechanical reason not to kill everyone (yes the players should have some small amount of morals, but this will bypass the ethics argument)
Also, setting boundaries is OK. Important for both DM'ing and life.