Hello everyone, so I am pretty new at DMing. Some background, I started this group with a few friends but its mostly people I met at a game store near us. So there is not much of a pre-established friendship within the group. We are 4 games in now and it has become pretty evident that every player designed their character to be the rudest and mean possible. As far as NPC's go, I couldn't care less. They will just not get help from certain NPC's. But I have one particular player that is nice in nature and is struggling to really make connections in the group as a player and as a character. She's not having any fun. Each game, she ends up holding back tears when the other player's characters treat her's like trashIt'sts not really that she's taking things too personally because it really is just making it hard for everyone to play. So I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions for getting players to RP a little more kindly and respectfully? I plan on bringing it up before tonight's session and presenting them with the possibility of inspiration for good RP and negative impacts for bad RP (like random incounters and such). Any thoughts? I'm kind of desperate because this player wants to quit soon and I really don't want this to be her only interaction playing dnd. Thanks everyone!
i would suggest a come to Jesus meeting with the group. It sounds like from your post that they are being real wang-rods and need to realize that their fun cannot come at the cost of another person's enjoyment. Lay out how you perceive the player's actions and how you see it impacting the group. Explain, in no uncertain terms, what you expect out of the game behaviorwise and a timeline...no later than this very session which is about to start.
Being wang-rods they will likely pitch a fit about how they are entitled to act any way they want under the auspices of "Player Agency". At this point you fold up your gear and pack it away. Wish them well in the future and head out the door of your FLGS or where ever you congregate to game. You do not owe them more that this. No promises to change after they screw up over and over again. Just make a line in the sand and drop them like the toxic people they are when they violate your rules.
Later on contact this poor player that is so not fitting in with the current group and offer to DM for her. She can form either the nucleus of a new group or you can run a solo game for her. She should not be driven out or stressed in this hobby. We play it for fun.
Bringing it to the attention of the table is a good idea. "We're here to have fun, and even though we're pretending to be these characters there are real people behind them."
I would also propose, if you're in the shop, asking the proprietor about this type of activity and how much authority you have for removing people from the game for unacceptable behavior.
If this is your home game, then I would make a firm statement that anyone who takes things too far will be asked to step out of the game.
You're playing a game that should be fun for everyone, and just because you're playing Generic Angsty & Edgy Loner Hero 745 doesn't mean you are allowed to treat others poorly.
If you have the chance, I'd recommend talking to the nice player before everyone else arrives, let her know you're going to try and address the problem, but you can't make the rest of the table stop being That Guy. Let her know that if this group doesn't shape up, you'll call it quits, but the two of you can start up again with a different group, run solo, whatever. After that, I agree about confronting the table as a whole and asking them to play nicer, though phrasing is important. While you might want to say "Ok, chuckleheads, stop being jerks and start being decent human beings," that may not be highly productive. Maybe something more like "the constant negativity and rudeness in-character is getting out of hand and making this game unenjoyable. If that doesn't change, I'm afraid I'll have to bow out as your DM." They can play their characters however they want, but you are under no obligation to run a game that does not interest you. By the same token, if you wanted to run a grim, gritty, violent, and adult content-laden Game Of Thrones type game, but all the players insisted on playing it like He-Man, you'd be similarly within your rights to say "sorry, I'm not enjoying this and see no reason to continue."
While you might want to say "Ok, chuckleheads, stop being jerks and start being decent human beings," that may not be highly productive. Maybe something more like "the constant negativity and rudeness in-character is getting out of hand and making this game unenjoyable. If that doesn't change, I'm afraid I'll have to bow out as your DM."
Huh. I would actually think the reverse would be true. I guess it depends on the group. In some cases, the former would come across lighter, and would have a better chance of being accepted and acted on than the latter (many people react badly to ultimatums, and threatening to end the game, accusing people of "constant negativity and rudeness", and of "making the game unenjoyable" is unlikely to end well). So I guess pick whichever you feel your group will react to better. =)
On the other hand, while everyone is immediately assuming the problem is with the "rude and mean" character players, consider the fact that every player but one decided to play that way, and are apparently having fun doing so. So I'd suggest you consider the possibility that the problem lies with the "nice" player: maybe they aren't a good fit for the group. Of course, you, as DM, need to have fun doing so, and if DM'ing for a bunch of players who enjoy playing "rude and mean" characters isn't fun for you, that's also a bad match. Being a bad match for a group doesn't mean you're doing it wrong, it just means there's a compatibility issue. When those happen, you've got four options: make the majority change how they play in order to satisfy the minority, make the minority change how they play in order to satisfy the majority, make all players come to a compromise, or just don't play together. Most replies I've read here are suggesting the first option: make the majority change to satisfy the minority. I find that unfair, and might result in most players not having fun with the game.
With the possibility of appearing to be a sockpuppet of Hawksmoor some more . . ..
Being rude to the other players is neveracceptable.
It’s also been my experience that most GMs would rather have one, good, player over any number of bad players. Having a talk with the other players is always a good start. Let them know that they are alienating the good player and you would like them to be more respectful of their feelings. If they come back with “I’m just playing my character,” or any of its contemporary arguments, then kick them out of the group. That’s not a valid answer. Your character may be a piece of garbage but you, the player, had better be nice to the other players.
If they like both playing and being a jerk to others, suggest they play Warhammer instead (either Warhammer or Warhammer 40,000). That’s part-and-parcel for the majority of players while the rest of us developed a thick skin and don’t play matches against the jerks.
Have the good player invite her friends to play. If she doesn’t have any, then ask if she’d be willing to play with some of your friends. If you both don’t have any (how that would happen, I guess you’re both new to the area) then play one-on-one games. If you’re uncomfortable with doing that (not everyone can handle a one-on-one game), reach out here and see if you guys can join other games in your area. You should be taking every opportunity to make new gamers.
Me, I’m in Denver, so I can’t really help you, directly with a game, unless you’re interested in playing on-line through TableTop Simulator and Discord.
On the flip, having the discussion might be necessary for the others to notice that she’s taking it personally (they may not be rude, just obtuse). Taking it personally, when it’s just a game, is always bad. MAGOne’s Fringeworthy game had problems with one of our players taking everything personally. He was the only one. Gummiβear’s Hero/IBC game had us at each other’s throats for several sessions, but at the end of every session, we would all exchange hugs affirming that it was all just in-character tension.
While you might want to say "Ok, chuckleheads, stop being jerks and start being decent human beings," that may not be highly productive. Maybe something more like "the constant negativity and rudeness in-character is getting out of hand and making this game unenjoyable. If that doesn't change, I'm afraid I'll have to bow out as your DM."
Huh. I would actually think the reverse would be true. I guess it depends on the group. In some cases, the former would come across lighter, and would have a better chance of being accepted and acted on than the latter (many people react badly to ultimatums, and threatening to end the game, accusing people of "constant negativity and rudeness", and of "making the game unenjoyable" is unlikely to end well). So I guess pick whichever you feel your group will react to better. =)
Good point, actually. I was trying to indicate avoiding it "feeling" like an ultimatum, but yes, my phrasing was not choice in that regard. Which actually emphasizes my point, find a way to say what you need to say without alienating anyone, which is very tricky.
The point I was trying to get across with the second way is to not tell them they're playing the game wrong, that they need to change to suit the DM and one other player, but that the kind of game they want is not the kind of game the DM and this other player want, and so if those to styles prove irreconcilable, it's best that the group split up before any feelings are seriously hurt. Saying "sorry, the kind of game you want isn't one I'm interested in/comfortable with/capable of running" strikes me as kind of the gamer equivalent of "It's not you, it's me." True as far as it goes, and an easy letdown.
I'd also avoid bringing up the nice player specifically. In my experience, it's critical to avoid even the appearance of favoritism (much less actual favoritism), and singling out one player as superior/inferior to the others invites all kinds of nasty, out-of-character conflict that can turn even good groups sour.
This may be hard for you to answer given that you don't know the players particularly well, but are they
1: Nice people RPing bad people, or
2: Bad people RPing bad people.
If it's #2, run far far away and stop DMing this group. Reach out to the nice one and let them know and start another game full of people who respect each other.
If it's #1, then you can work with that. I would definitely pull aside the nice person and let them know that you're aware of the issue, that it's not right, and that you're trying to address it. When you do, don't mention the nice player who is struggling, because it's almost certain that she won't want to feel like she's a problem or for the other players to focus on her. Let them know that this is a table where everyone wants to have fun. And tell them you don't find it fun. Set some expectations of player behaviour. If they pitch a fit about being able to do what they want, say sure, but why the hell would anyone want to spend time with your PC if they behaved that way. Your party would disband. If they're nice people, they'll adapt. If they're not, then they're not worth your time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello everyone, so I am pretty new at DMing. Some background, I started this group with a few friends but its mostly people I met at a game store near us. So there is not much of a pre-established friendship within the group. We are 4 games in now and it has become pretty evident that every player designed their character to be the rudest and mean possible. As far as NPC's go, I couldn't care less. They will just not get help from certain NPC's. But I have one particular player that is nice in nature and is struggling to really make connections in the group as a player and as a character. She's not having any fun. Each game, she ends up holding back tears when the other player's characters treat her's like trashIt'sts not really that she's taking things too personally because it really is just making it hard for everyone to play. So I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions for getting players to RP a little more kindly and respectfully? I plan on bringing it up before tonight's session and presenting them with the possibility of inspiration for good RP and negative impacts for bad RP (like random incounters and such). Any thoughts? I'm kind of desperate because this player wants to quit soon and I really don't want this to be her only interaction playing dnd. Thanks everyone!
i would suggest a come to Jesus meeting with the group. It sounds like from your post that they are being real wang-rods and need to realize that their fun cannot come at the cost of another person's enjoyment. Lay out how you perceive the player's actions and how you see it impacting the group. Explain, in no uncertain terms, what you expect out of the game behaviorwise and a timeline...no later than this very session which is about to start.
Being wang-rods they will likely pitch a fit about how they are entitled to act any way they want under the auspices of "Player Agency". At this point you fold up your gear and pack it away. Wish them well in the future and head out the door of your FLGS or where ever you congregate to game. You do not owe them more that this. No promises to change after they screw up over and over again. Just make a line in the sand and drop them like the toxic people they are when they violate your rules.
Later on contact this poor player that is so not fitting in with the current group and offer to DM for her. She can form either the nucleus of a new group or you can run a solo game for her. She should not be driven out or stressed in this hobby. We play it for fun.
Bringing it to the attention of the table is a good idea. "We're here to have fun, and even though we're pretending to be these characters there are real people behind them."
I would also propose, if you're in the shop, asking the proprietor about this type of activity and how much authority you have for removing people from the game for unacceptable behavior.
If this is your home game, then I would make a firm statement that anyone who takes things too far will be asked to step out of the game.
You're playing a game that should be fun for everyone, and just because you're playing Generic Angsty & Edgy Loner Hero 745 doesn't mean you are allowed to treat others poorly.
If you have the chance, I'd recommend talking to the nice player before everyone else arrives, let her know you're going to try and address the problem, but you can't make the rest of the table stop being That Guy. Let her know that if this group doesn't shape up, you'll call it quits, but the two of you can start up again with a different group, run solo, whatever. After that, I agree about confronting the table as a whole and asking them to play nicer, though phrasing is important. While you might want to say "Ok, chuckleheads, stop being jerks and start being decent human beings," that may not be highly productive. Maybe something more like "the constant negativity and rudeness in-character is getting out of hand and making this game unenjoyable. If that doesn't change, I'm afraid I'll have to bow out as your DM." They can play their characters however they want, but you are under no obligation to run a game that does not interest you. By the same token, if you wanted to run a grim, gritty, violent, and adult content-laden Game Of Thrones type game, but all the players insisted on playing it like He-Man, you'd be similarly within your rights to say "sorry, I'm not enjoying this and see no reason to continue."
Huh. I would actually think the reverse would be true. I guess it depends on the group. In some cases, the former would come across lighter, and would have a better chance of being accepted and acted on than the latter (many people react badly to ultimatums, and threatening to end the game, accusing people of "constant negativity and rudeness", and of "making the game unenjoyable" is unlikely to end well). So I guess pick whichever you feel your group will react to better. =)
On the other hand, while everyone is immediately assuming the problem is with the "rude and mean" character players, consider the fact that every player but one decided to play that way, and are apparently having fun doing so. So I'd suggest you consider the possibility that the problem lies with the "nice" player: maybe they aren't a good fit for the group. Of course, you, as DM, need to have fun doing so, and if DM'ing for a bunch of players who enjoy playing "rude and mean" characters isn't fun for you, that's also a bad match. Being a bad match for a group doesn't mean you're doing it wrong, it just means there's a compatibility issue. When those happen, you've got four options: make the majority change how they play in order to satisfy the minority, make the minority change how they play in order to satisfy the majority, make all players come to a compromise, or just don't play together. Most replies I've read here are suggesting the first option: make the majority change to satisfy the minority. I find that unfair, and might result in most players not having fun with the game.
With the possibility of appearing to be a sockpuppet of Hawksmoor some more . . ..
Being rude to the other players is never acceptable.
It’s also been my experience that most GMs would rather have one, good, player over any number of bad players. Having a talk with the other players is always a good start. Let them know that they are alienating the good player and you would like them to be more respectful of their feelings. If they come back with “I’m just playing my character,” or any of its contemporary arguments, then kick them out of the group. That’s not a valid answer. Your character may be a piece of garbage but you, the player, had better be nice to the other players.
If they like both playing and being a jerk to others, suggest they play Warhammer instead (either Warhammer or Warhammer 40,000). That’s part-and-parcel for the majority of players while the rest of us developed a thick skin and don’t play matches against the jerks.
Have the good player invite her friends to play. If she doesn’t have any, then ask if she’d be willing to play with some of your friends. If you both don’t have any (how that would happen, I guess you’re both new to the area) then play one-on-one games. If you’re uncomfortable with doing that (not everyone can handle a one-on-one game), reach out here and see if you guys can join other games in your area. You should be taking every opportunity to make new gamers.
Me, I’m in Denver, so I can’t really help you, directly with a game, unless you’re interested in playing on-line through TableTop Simulator and Discord.
On the flip, having the discussion might be necessary for the others to notice that she’s taking it personally (they may not be rude, just obtuse). Taking it personally, when it’s just a game, is always bad. MAGOne’s Fringeworthy game had problems with one of our players taking everything personally. He was the only one. Gummiβear’s Hero/IBC game had us at each other’s throats for several sessions, but at the end of every session, we would all exchange hugs affirming that it was all just in-character tension.
Good point, actually. I was trying to indicate avoiding it "feeling" like an ultimatum, but yes, my phrasing was not choice in that regard. Which actually emphasizes my point, find a way to say what you need to say without alienating anyone, which is very tricky.
The point I was trying to get across with the second way is to not tell them they're playing the game wrong, that they need to change to suit the DM and one other player, but that the kind of game they want is not the kind of game the DM and this other player want, and so if those to styles prove irreconcilable, it's best that the group split up before any feelings are seriously hurt. Saying "sorry, the kind of game you want isn't one I'm interested in/comfortable with/capable of running" strikes me as kind of the gamer equivalent of "It's not you, it's me." True as far as it goes, and an easy letdown.
I'd also avoid bringing up the nice player specifically. In my experience, it's critical to avoid even the appearance of favoritism (much less actual favoritism), and singling out one player as superior/inferior to the others invites all kinds of nasty, out-of-character conflict that can turn even good groups sour.
This may be hard for you to answer given that you don't know the players particularly well, but are they
1: Nice people RPing bad people, or
2: Bad people RPing bad people.
If it's #2, run far far away and stop DMing this group. Reach out to the nice one and let them know and start another game full of people who respect each other.
If it's #1, then you can work with that. I would definitely pull aside the nice person and let them know that you're aware of the issue, that it's not right, and that you're trying to address it. When you do, don't mention the nice player who is struggling, because it's almost certain that she won't want to feel like she's a problem or for the other players to focus on her. Let them know that this is a table where everyone wants to have fun. And tell them you don't find it fun. Set some expectations of player behaviour. If they pitch a fit about being able to do what they want, say sure, but why the hell would anyone want to spend time with your PC if they behaved that way. Your party would disband. If they're nice people, they'll adapt. If they're not, then they're not worth your time.