So I'd try this before throwing the whole game in the toilet:
Bring down real-world consequences. Think about the mayhem they are generating and how the authorities would choose to deal with it. It doesn't have to start with the whole army - it can start with local authorities, and then escalate from there. If the regional government gets worried about this rampaging group of jerk-heads, it will be in their best interest to either apprehend or kill them. So hire a few hardcore assassins and bounty hunters to bring them down piecemeal. The party will inevitably defeat one or more of the hunters, so be sure that when they loot the body, they discover a legal warrant with payment to apprehend the party, dead or alive.
Consider turning the game into a modified "East March" style campaign. Okay players, you're here in the town you just terrorized (indicate hex map) - where do you want to explore next? They can point and you can let them explore wilderness, landmarks, unexplored caves, etc, where they can murder monsters and gain fabulous treasure. And maybe (you can try) giving them people to rescue - who have no treasure - that promise huge rewards if returned to their wealthy families. That way they get paid for doing the right thing.
If neither of these things bring a good (or better) outcome, I'd say it's time to trash the game.
As for the murder hoboism and kleptomania in game, it sounds like you might need harsher penalties to deter that behavior? If your Players act like criminals, they need to be branded as such by civilized society and dealt with accordingly.
As for them not being interested in the game, that is a much more serious problem. Are they having fun, as far as you can tell? People on phones isn't too big a concern, most people in today's world can listen and look at a phone. Sure, would rather they don't but don't stress on it. As for backstories, if they don't want to write them that's perfectly fine. Plenty of players just want to swing their sword and throw out some cheesy 1 liners, and that's as much character development as you ever see. Nothing wrong with that.
As for the murder hoboism and kleptomania in game, it sounds like you might need harsher penalties to deter that behavior? If your Players act like criminals, they need to be branded as such by civilized society and dealt with accordingly.
I'm going to politely disagree with everyone arguing for in-character consequences to the actions of the problem players. It's not going to work, and for one simple reason: the problem at its core is that these players do not care about the in-character part of the game. If they had cared about in-character content, they wouldn't be killing shop owners and the like in the first place. If they had cared about in-character content, they'd have made up backgrounds (at least eventually). These players are not taking the in-character stuff seriously -- that is why the DM posted here. There is no reason to believe that they would take an arrest warrant for their party, or hell even the deaths of their own characters, as anything other than just another joke, something else to laugh at. In-character consequences won't work in this case because these players are not taking the in-character world seriously. And the DM will just look petulant doing it. Therefore, I personally do not recommend in favor of an attempted "in character" solution. You can only do that with players who already respect the IC parts of the game, which these people clearly do not.
People on phones isn't too big a concern, most people in today's world can listen and look at a phone. Sure, would rather they don't but don't stress on it.
Again, I am going to have to politely disagree. Someone looking at the phone is not listening fully. I've had lots of people claim they can "multi-task." It's a lie. The human brain cannot multi-task in this way, which is why just about every state in the US now has laws against doing things like texting and driving. If these people are on their phones, then they are clearly not paying attention and not engaged in the story. I suspect it is because of what I said before -- they are not interested in the IC parts of the game, so the IC things (such as the story) don't matter to them... and these players are tuning out that part of the game, because they don't care.
The solution to both the phone problem and the "not acting IC" problem is still, I think, the person-to-person, out of character, conversation between the DM and the players. If there are (as the OP seems to have indicated) other players, who pre-date these people and are actually serious about playing, I would speak to them first and enlist there aid. "Hey guys, I want to talk to Jason, Jen, Bill, and Karen about their behavior, which I think is becoming disruptive. Do you agree?" If they do then say, "OK let's talk to them together and you can back me up." If the 4 problem people are confronted with the fact that they are upsetting everyone else and not just the DM, then it may be more likely they will turn over a new leaf.
However, what I am hearing of this group of disruptive people is that they may not be the right fit at all for this group and should probably be asked to find a different game group (and DM).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Yeah, some friend groups you play D&D with, and some friend groups you play video games with. One isn't better than the other, but if you try to play dnd with people who would really just rather play an MMO or shooter, then nobody's going home happy. Some people you just play a different game with.
Make an npc that would intrigue the players but looks weak, when they attack him, you introduce him as like literally a god-level adventurer, and make him obliterate them
Make an npc that would intrigue the players but looks weak, when they attack him, you introduce him as like literally a god-level adventurer, and make him obliterate them
Again, this assumes players who take the game seriously. The problem players here are clearly not taking the game, or their characters, seriously. They'd probably laugh and think it is a lark and happily roll up new characters. And to make matters worse it appears the problem players came into an existing group that was not like this. What does he do then, kill off the PCs of the good players too?
This kind of solution would only work for a group that is taking the game seriously, but a group that was taking the game seriously wouldn't be causing these problems in the first place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Have the party arrested, have the judge list out all of the charges against them, then have the judge offer them an ultimatum: execution, or go on a suicide mission. Once they are aware that the NPCs in the game give a darn about what they do, hopefully they will take that suicide mission seriously. If they don’t take it seriously... well, it is a suicide mission after all....
BioWizard, everyone in this thread is aware of the high likelihood that the OP's players just don't give a damn about the game. We are offering ideas to the OP about how they might handle things if it turns out that their players do give a damn.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
None of the players in my current campaign gave me backstories for months either. Finally I handed out paper and said “I need a 500 word backstory from each of you” like a middle school essay assignment. once they started writing it took off. I even got a polished 5 page narrative with specific dialogue from one of them! Some players just need the impetus.
Make an npc that would intrigue the players but looks weak, when they attack him, you introduce him as like literally a god-level adventurer, and make him obliterate them
Again, this assumes players who take the game seriously. The problem players here are clearly not taking the game, or their characters, seriously. They'd probably laugh and think it is a lark and happily roll up new characters. And to make matters worse it appears the problem players came into an existing group that was not like this. What does he do then, kill off the PCs of the good players too?
This kind of solution would only work for a group that is taking the game seriously, but a group that was taking the game seriously wouldn't be causing these problems in the first place.
However, you could make the npc a paladin, so he only kills the bad ones, plus, you could what i do and make it so that if someone dies, then they can't join back in that campaign
You can go passive/aggressive and don't give xp or rewards to characters when they murder townsfolk. Take away all rewards. And don't roll dice for that type of encounter- just say ok, it happens and move on.
Or just tell them that you don't want to run a game like that and they are free to stop playing or change their play-style.
Being they aren't putting forth the effort and time and clearly do not respect or listen to you (the phones) I would 86 it quick. Either A. have their characters get arrested for being murder hobos or attacked by guards and killed. Or B. Just tell them you decided to end the game for now. Either way works. Look for a new party. If you can get 2-3 solid players, it's perfect.
I suggest that you as the DM, control the music too. There's plenty of Fantasy music to use on youtube or whatever player you use. If anyone decides to play over what you are playing, that's a botch at being a respectable human. You will find the right group eventually...took me years!
What a mess. Honestly, to me it looks like you're going to have to kick them from your table. But let's try to sort through it.
If you think they REALLY want to play, then try this:
No phones. Put them in a box and you get them back when the games over. Seriously. They've proven they don't have the self control to leave them alone.
Kill their characters. Then they have as long as they need to draw up new ones, with a backstory. But character and backstory needs to be submitted to you before they can rejoin. The quicker they do it, the quicker they can play again. If they don't do it, they don't really want to play.
Have XP penalties. You killed a bunch of villagers? -1000XP for you. If that takes you down a level, well, maybe you shouldn't have been a tool.
Have a REAL talk with them. Why did they kill the shopkeeper? "I felt like it" isn't a real answer. You're afraid of conflict and they're taking advantage of it.
That's all I got. But it sounds like you're letting them walk all over your game and ruining it for everyone. I don't think they really want to play D&D, and you'll eventually have to boot them out. They're rude and disrespectful of you, the work you put in, and the other players. They're in dire need of a session 0. You may think you had one, but if that were the case, they've completely ignored it, which is horrible.
Kill their characters. Then they have as long as they need to draw up new ones, with a backstory. But character and backstory needs to be submitted to you before they can rejoin. The quicker they do it, the quicker they can play again. If they don't do it, they don't really want to play.
I dunno about killing them... maybe just telling them "make a new character." But if you want to keep going with these players I definitely agree with this idea. Letting them at the table without the backstory was one of the first mistakes. No backstory, no play. If they really want to play, they'll make up a backstory. And not just any old backstory -- it has to be a real attempt at one. It doesn't necessarily have to be a great one, because not everyone is good at that kind of thing -- but they have to have made a real effort to produce a reasonable backstory and not just some thrown-together they did in 5 minutes. It has to all fit with the background they chose, and fit with your world, and so forth. So not just "can't play till you submit a background" but "can't play till you submit one and DM approves it" has got to be the rule. This makes you the gatekeeper. Anyone who really wants to play will write one that satisfies you, and anyone who doesn't do that, doesn't really want to play as MajorP said.
I also agree with BigLizard that these people are not playing the game you're trying to run. The only thing I would add here is that, as the DM, I would not be interested in running the other games he suggested. So... if the players decided they'd rather play one of those, they'd be looking for a new DM. I might (perhaps) join as a player, despite my lack of interest in those other games other than maybe DCC, but I'd not be willing to DM for it. I have to absolutely love the world I am going to be GMing, because I work hard on things like setting and backstory and NPCs and the like, and I have to want to go back to that world over and over again for months or years if I am going to be running a real campaign. And I'm not really interested in running one-shots -- I like continuity. (Which is incidentally why one of the things that drives me up a wall with many modern movies and TV shows that other people seem to like is when they ignore, or worse flout, continuity.) It's the same reason I don't think I'd like to run a West Marches style game.
And I think this is the main issue here... your "sweet spot" for the type of game you want to experience when you are DMing this group is in one place, and their "sweet spot" for what they want to experience as players is in another place. So either they're going to have to agree to play in your sweet spot, or you're going to have to agree to DM in theirs, or frankly, you just can't play together. But going on like this where you're able to kind of ruin each other's fun, is not really an option (or it shouldn't be). Because the whole point of this thing is to have fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
you can't work under the assumption that D&D 5e is "always the best choice" for your group. In fact I would say in my experience 90% of the time its not. Finding the right game for your group is a far better move then trying to twist something as specific as D&D 5e into being the right game for your group.
I completely agree with that, I'm just saying that the other ones suggested like "Vampire: The Masquerade" are not appealing to me and as a DM, you can't just run the game everyone else wants, you have to like it too.
I'd be happy with GMing Champions... or Rolemaster... or Space Master... instead of D&D 5e. But I would not be happy with Alien or Vampire.
EDIT: And -- if these players are going to pull the same stuff in Champions, blowing away hostages to prevent the villain from being able to "use them" in negotiations, stealing from the bank after they defeat the robbers, ignoring villains because they want to go to a football game or something -- I wouldn't be any happier GMing Champions for them than D&D.
Ultimately as a DM, although comedy is fine, I tend to prefer my players to at least take my campaign serious and RP in a reasonable way. If they're going to have the attitude of just doing whatever at random and not taking my setting and campaign seriously, I'll be unhappy regardless of the game system.
I agree with many earlier posters. It sounds to me like you're just in the wrong group.
Now then. How your characters are playing is a totally legitimate form of play. It's just very different than the one you want to play. It sounds like they'd really enjoy a campaign where they were chaotic evil characters trying to take over the world.
I agree with many earlier posters. It sounds to me like you're just in the wrong group.
Now then. How your characters are playing is a totally legitimate form of play. It's just very different than the one you want to play. It sounds like they'd really enjoy a campaign where they were chaotic evil characters trying to take over the world.
How they are playing is not a legitimate form of play for the campaign they are in, the way they are playing is just annoying for the DM to put on, people tend to forget that the DM is doing what they do because they enjoy it, its not a responsibility or a task, if thats not the course of the campaign then they don't need to do that, even if the DM put on a campaign where they were evil they would just kill any important NPCs, what they are doing is not a play style they just are bad players, especially supported by the fact they play music over the DMs music and play on their phones, they are just a bad bunch of players
Well. Make it so the group is wanted and have a giant bounty put on their heads. Dead or alive. Have some NPCs around that could help them in some way. If they kill them well then that will just create another issue for them. Also force them to retreat when a group of bounty hunters comes after them. Make sure that the bounty hunter group is far stronger then they are. Basically if they dont they die or are captured. If captured then send them to jail/prison and take everything away from them, and I mean everything. Leave them with just rags or even nothing at all. Force them to live a prison life while trying to break out. Depending on how mature the group is you could even toss in a prison Buba forcing them into foul acts. If they happen to escape prison then do not give them their stuff back. Make them earn new stuff. And guess what. They are wanted once again. What im getting at is to adjust the game to fit the players. If they want to play like a bunch of hooligans then there will be dire consequences. Make several adventures out of it and see how it goes. If they dont like it then they can leave the group. Worst case, or better, is you might just need to find another group to play with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I'd try this before throwing the whole game in the toilet:
If neither of these things bring a good (or better) outcome, I'd say it's time to trash the game.
As for the murder hoboism and kleptomania in game, it sounds like you might need harsher penalties to deter that behavior? If your Players act like criminals, they need to be branded as such by civilized society and dealt with accordingly.
As for them not being interested in the game, that is a much more serious problem. Are they having fun, as far as you can tell? People on phones isn't too big a concern, most people in today's world can listen and look at a phone. Sure, would rather they don't but don't stress on it. As for backstories, if they don't want to write them that's perfectly fine. Plenty of players just want to swing their sword and throw out some cheesy 1 liners, and that's as much character development as you ever see. Nothing wrong with that.
I'm going to politely disagree with everyone arguing for in-character consequences to the actions of the problem players. It's not going to work, and for one simple reason: the problem at its core is that these players do not care about the in-character part of the game. If they had cared about in-character content, they wouldn't be killing shop owners and the like in the first place. If they had cared about in-character content, they'd have made up backgrounds (at least eventually). These players are not taking the in-character stuff seriously -- that is why the DM posted here. There is no reason to believe that they would take an arrest warrant for their party, or hell even the deaths of their own characters, as anything other than just another joke, something else to laugh at. In-character consequences won't work in this case because these players are not taking the in-character world seriously. And the DM will just look petulant doing it. Therefore, I personally do not recommend in favor of an attempted "in character" solution. You can only do that with players who already respect the IC parts of the game, which these people clearly do not.
Again, I am going to have to politely disagree. Someone looking at the phone is not listening fully. I've had lots of people claim they can "multi-task." It's a lie. The human brain cannot multi-task in this way, which is why just about every state in the US now has laws against doing things like texting and driving. If these people are on their phones, then they are clearly not paying attention and not engaged in the story. I suspect it is because of what I said before -- they are not interested in the IC parts of the game, so the IC things (such as the story) don't matter to them... and these players are tuning out that part of the game, because they don't care.
The solution to both the phone problem and the "not acting IC" problem is still, I think, the person-to-person, out of character, conversation between the DM and the players. If there are (as the OP seems to have indicated) other players, who pre-date these people and are actually serious about playing, I would speak to them first and enlist there aid. "Hey guys, I want to talk to Jason, Jen, Bill, and Karen about their behavior, which I think is becoming disruptive. Do you agree?" If they do then say, "OK let's talk to them together and you can back me up." If the 4 problem people are confronted with the fact that they are upsetting everyone else and not just the DM, then it may be more likely they will turn over a new leaf.
However, what I am hearing of this group of disruptive people is that they may not be the right fit at all for this group and should probably be asked to find a different game group (and DM).
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Yeah, some friend groups you play D&D with, and some friend groups you play video games with. One isn't better than the other, but if you try to play dnd with people who would really just rather play an MMO or shooter, then nobody's going home happy. Some people you just play a different game with.
Make an npc that would intrigue the players but looks weak, when they attack him, you introduce him as like literally a god-level adventurer, and make him obliterate them
Again, this assumes players who take the game seriously. The problem players here are clearly not taking the game, or their characters, seriously. They'd probably laugh and think it is a lark and happily roll up new characters. And to make matters worse it appears the problem players came into an existing group that was not like this. What does he do then, kill off the PCs of the good players too?
This kind of solution would only work for a group that is taking the game seriously, but a group that was taking the game seriously wouldn't be causing these problems in the first place.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Have the party arrested, have the judge list out all of the charges against them, then have the judge offer them an ultimatum: execution, or go on a suicide mission. Once they are aware that the NPCs in the game give a darn about what they do, hopefully they will take that suicide mission seriously. If they don’t take it seriously... well, it is a suicide mission after all....
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
BioWizard, everyone in this thread is aware of the high likelihood that the OP's players just don't give a damn about the game. We are offering ideas to the OP about how they might handle things if it turns out that their players do give a damn.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
None of the players in my current campaign gave me backstories for months either. Finally I handed out paper and said “I need a 500 word backstory from each of you” like a middle school essay assignment. once they started writing it took off. I even got a polished 5 page narrative with specific dialogue from one of them! Some players just need the impetus.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
However, you could make the npc a paladin, so he only kills the bad ones, plus, you could what i do and make it so that if someone dies, then they can't join back in that campaign
You can go passive/aggressive and don't give xp or rewards to characters when they murder townsfolk. Take away all rewards. And don't roll dice for that type of encounter- just say ok, it happens and move on.
Or just tell them that you don't want to run a game like that and they are free to stop playing or change their play-style.
Being they aren't putting forth the effort and time and clearly do not respect or listen to you (the phones) I would 86 it quick. Either A. have their characters get arrested for being murder hobos or attacked by guards and killed. Or B. Just tell them you decided to end the game for now. Either way works. Look for a new party. If you can get 2-3 solid players, it's perfect.
I suggest that you as the DM, control the music too. There's plenty of Fantasy music to use on youtube or whatever player you use. If anyone decides to play over what you are playing, that's a botch at being a respectable human. You will find the right group eventually...took me years!
What a mess. Honestly, to me it looks like you're going to have to kick them from your table. But let's try to sort through it.
If you think they REALLY want to play, then try this:
That's all I got. But it sounds like you're letting them walk all over your game and ruining it for everyone. I don't think they really want to play D&D, and you'll eventually have to boot them out. They're rude and disrespectful of you, the work you put in, and the other players. They're in dire need of a session 0. You may think you had one, but if that were the case, they've completely ignored it, which is horrible.
I dunno about killing them... maybe just telling them "make a new character." But if you want to keep going with these players I definitely agree with this idea. Letting them at the table without the backstory was one of the first mistakes. No backstory, no play. If they really want to play, they'll make up a backstory. And not just any old backstory -- it has to be a real attempt at one. It doesn't necessarily have to be a great one, because not everyone is good at that kind of thing -- but they have to have made a real effort to produce a reasonable backstory and not just some thrown-together they did in 5 minutes. It has to all fit with the background they chose, and fit with your world, and so forth. So not just "can't play till you submit a background" but "can't play till you submit one and DM approves it" has got to be the rule. This makes you the gatekeeper. Anyone who really wants to play will write one that satisfies you, and anyone who doesn't do that, doesn't really want to play as MajorP said.
I also agree with BigLizard that these people are not playing the game you're trying to run. The only thing I would add here is that, as the DM, I would not be interested in running the other games he suggested. So... if the players decided they'd rather play one of those, they'd be looking for a new DM. I might (perhaps) join as a player, despite my lack of interest in those other games other than maybe DCC, but I'd not be willing to DM for it. I have to absolutely love the world I am going to be GMing, because I work hard on things like setting and backstory and NPCs and the like, and I have to want to go back to that world over and over again for months or years if I am going to be running a real campaign. And I'm not really interested in running one-shots -- I like continuity. (Which is incidentally why one of the things that drives me up a wall with many modern movies and TV shows that other people seem to like is when they ignore, or worse flout, continuity.) It's the same reason I don't think I'd like to run a West Marches style game.
And I think this is the main issue here... your "sweet spot" for the type of game you want to experience when you are DMing this group is in one place, and their "sweet spot" for what they want to experience as players is in another place. So either they're going to have to agree to play in your sweet spot, or you're going to have to agree to DM in theirs, or frankly, you just can't play together. But going on like this where you're able to kind of ruin each other's fun, is not really an option (or it shouldn't be). Because the whole point of this thing is to have fun.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I completely agree with that, I'm just saying that the other ones suggested like "Vampire: The Masquerade" are not appealing to me and as a DM, you can't just run the game everyone else wants, you have to like it too.
I'd be happy with GMing Champions... or Rolemaster... or Space Master... instead of D&D 5e. But I would not be happy with Alien or Vampire.
EDIT: And -- if these players are going to pull the same stuff in Champions, blowing away hostages to prevent the villain from being able to "use them" in negotiations, stealing from the bank after they defeat the robbers, ignoring villains because they want to go to a football game or something -- I wouldn't be any happier GMing Champions for them than D&D.
Ultimately as a DM, although comedy is fine, I tend to prefer my players to at least take my campaign serious and RP in a reasonable way. If they're going to have the attitude of just doing whatever at random and not taking my setting and campaign seriously, I'll be unhappy regardless of the game system.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I start by assuming that most of your group has fun.
Turn the game around, if they want to be murder hobos, try to recruit them to the dark side.
The Big Bad Guy could try to receuit them, and depending on their usefullness he can either reward them or use them a decoy pawns in his big plan.
Attack: [roll]3d20dl2+6[/roll] Damage: [roll](if([roll:-1:critical], =0, 1d8, 2{1d8}.expand()))+4[/roll] Sneakattack: [roll](if([roll:-2:critical], =0, 2d6, 2{2d6}.expand()))[/roll]I agree with many earlier posters. It sounds to me like you're just in the wrong group.
Now then. How your characters are playing is a totally legitimate form of play. It's just very different than the one you want to play. It sounds like they'd really enjoy a campaign where they were chaotic evil characters trying to take over the world.
How they are playing is not a legitimate form of play for the campaign they are in, the way they are playing is just annoying for the DM to put on, people tend to forget that the DM is doing what they do because they enjoy it, its not a responsibility or a task, if thats not the course of the campaign then they don't need to do that, even if the DM put on a campaign where they were evil they would just kill any important NPCs, what they are doing is not a play style they just are bad players, especially supported by the fact they play music over the DMs music and play on their phones, they are just a bad bunch of players
Well. Make it so the group is wanted and have a giant bounty put on their heads. Dead or alive. Have some NPCs around that could help them in some way. If they kill them well then that will just create another issue for them. Also force them to retreat when a group of bounty hunters comes after them. Make sure that the bounty hunter group is far stronger then they are. Basically if they dont they die or are captured. If captured then send them to jail/prison and take everything away from them, and I mean everything. Leave them with just rags or even nothing at all. Force them to live a prison life while trying to break out. Depending on how mature the group is you could even toss in a prison Buba forcing them into foul acts. If they happen to escape prison then do not give them their stuff back. Make them earn new stuff. And guess what. They are wanted once again. What im getting at is to adjust the game to fit the players. If they want to play like a bunch of hooligans then there will be dire consequences. Make several adventures out of it and see how it goes. If they dont like it then they can leave the group. Worst case, or better, is you might just need to find another group to play with.