Hey, so I am a newer DM and started out running a group of friends through LMOP before moving on to a larger campaign using the tyranny of dragons and some homebrew quests for character backgrounds. I do my best to let the players guide the direction even if I don't have an area prepped like larger cities that I have to prep in between our weekly sessions. I have made quite a lot of mistakes through out it and understand its a learning process. I always bring it up to the players and apologize or retroactively change some things to right any mistakes.
So the issue has been for half of the friend group. They are a combat loving group and enjoy beating things up and looting. I also enjoy combats so it works out great. The issue that seems to come up is the expectation of combat difficulty. The combats from the adventure paths have proved to not be the issue as they started 5 levels higher when beginning tyranny of dragons. The issue has typically come up when I have put together the encounters. I have only ever put them up against one encounter that proved incredibly difficult. I had put my 6 level 9 characters with their one level 5 goblin rogue follower (Droop) against a beholder that had been building an otherworldy army below castle never. This beholder was a setup for a future 20th level ending adventure if the campaign ever gets that far. They had received this contract to kill the beholder by a pact devil named Desovadai. The contract was for 35,000 GP and had provisions in place to help them out if they wished to evoke these provisions that came with consequences. Essentially they had a get out of TPK free card if necessary. They had time to prepare so I let the wizard of thay character do research and I gave them the stat block of the beholder to look at when preparing to battle it. I told them it would prove incredibly difficult for them if they don't come in with a plan and execute some smart tactics. I set up a large battle arena using some styrofoam builds to make a vertically cylindrical lair that had a maze like tunnel system that could be used for cover and getting out of the antimagic cone. I reminded them that they can go outside of the map if they need in combat to control the movement of enemies. I also gave them some new magic items like prayer beads, an increased AC shield, and a ring of spell quickening plus a potion of flying. They had a great plan of using earthbind to bring the beholder down, then using grappling hooks to physically bind it in place so it couldn't get away from them. Their druid was the only one who kept to their plan as the others forgot and ran around dealing with minions. They kept themselves stuck in the antimagic cone and didn't utilize any of the tunnels I mentioned several times for their aid. A TPK was incoming and a tough call was made to evoke the contracts provisions to summon devils to their aid. It was a long, tense, and exciting battle.
Though this is where I believe some of them began to grow some sense of distrust for me as a DM. After it was all said and done I used it as a moment to emphasize what I told them previously about the game I want to run. Not every combat can be won by standing in the same spot and fighting. Sometimes you need to decide if you can take the fight on now or need to get stronger to take it on at a later date. I also have thrown encounters at them that they are woefully overpowered for to showcase their growth whenever thematically fitting. Unfortunately, they rolled for two windwalk beads on the prayer beads so I couldn't put in as many easy on the road encounters as they would have liked and mentioned that is the reason. I always tell them I prefer thematic fights over balanced fights.
Now they are level 11 and have been in the underdark for some time trying to find a legendary artifact that once belonged to our war domain clerics deity who is now a vestige or dying god. It has been going well enough and I am consistent in communicating with them on their opinions, feelings, what they like and don't and what I can work on to help them out. I make it clear that I don't want to give them the answers to the problems but I will always give in game hints like describing an element in focus for their character when its their turn in combat. I also try to help them out in tactics they could use and I tell them, and show them with the enemies, that its sometimes smarter to use the 1st round as set up to secure advantage, positioning, or battefield control to make combats easier. I am a tactics person and like showcasing good tactics on weaker enemies and how they can drastically improve their odds in combat. I have made visual aids to have set pieces so they can see where they can get cover, or shove people off cliffs, or corral enemies into choke points. I also started slowly introducing dual objectives into combats to encourage them to move around in battle as they have a habit of standing in one place. I also try to have enemies run away once it gets too real for them. What I typically see from them is that they just don't play smart or utilize other actions like dodge or disengage because if they don't deal damage they aren't utilizing their turn fully. I have mentioned it before that taking a round to reposition or setup an ally for success can improve their odds or help them secure victory faster. Whenever they do work together in the rare occasion it happens I hand out inspiration.
This last session got to me. I took some advice I had seen and haven't used well enough before. I also took in the opinion of our one player, the paladin, that he wanted easier combats. They are still in the underdark and managed to secure the shattered blade of the war domain clerics deity. They are now tracking down a group of slavers that have the paladins family captured. They had seen the slavers before in the Duergar city they were in and having to secure the blade first the slavers had a lead on them. They haven't seen the slavers in action. When they saw them I mentioned the tools of their trades a bit. They carry nets, shackle restraints, and bolas. On the path tracking them they came to an old kraken society transportation hub that the party had to solve a puzzle to get to. Inside the hub they found other tools of the trade. These were smoke bombs. A nature herbalism check was done as these were glass vials with two chambers that had an assortment of crushed plants and fungus in one chamber and yellowish like resin in the other and, unfortunately, the roll wasn't high enough to figure out what it did. I did however point out that the druid had come upon some of these plants and fungus on their travels through the underdark. So he can potentially make them if he studies it more.
My set up for when they finally caught up to a separated group of the slavers was four slavers who set up a temporary skinning station to collect some dire bat pelts. Our paladin is a dragonborn that comes from a clan that domesticated dire bats to become flying mounts and he summons one with his find steed. Their warlock, with devil sight, caught a glimpse of one of the slavers placing some sort of plant down at the perimeter of their temporary station. A perception check was done and he saw it was a plant composed of individual tubules that grew straight upwards. On their movement forward I described it more for the druid stating what he sees now is a patch of different ordinary looking fungus where the slaver laid down the one. He also noticed the one the warlock saw and how the tubules resemble the shape of a train horn.The fungus was a shrieker mushroom put into a flat shallow container the creates the illusion of other ordinary mushrooms to hide it. He wanted to nature check so I asked him to describe the way he wanted to do it. He wanted to sneak closer to it as part of that action. He didn't have to get closer. I said he could do from where he was or get closer. So the shrieker went off, alerting the slavers, and I asked for what the party wanted to do and to answer quick, first thing that comes up. They froze staring at each other and me. So the slavers being quick to act threw two vials at the head of the party. These were sleeper vials. It knocked out three of the five party members within it and the battle began. Two of the slavers went first and took their actions to throw the smoke bombs to blind the party. I had the commanding slaver shout in draconic at one of the underlings to alert the others up ahead. To clarify better, the slavers were a deepdark race of dragonborn native to toril. When creating their stat blocks I used the half-dragon veteran as inspiration. Most underdark races get 120ft of darkvision. I gave them 60ft though I gave them 15ft of blindsight as they hail from the deep dark. They are entirely martial characters against a party of all spellcasters. The highest CR slaver was the commander at CR 5. There were also two CR 3 headhunters and a CR 2 rogue like slaver that wasn't in the fight as he was to alert others ahead of trouble. The fight was meant to showcase the tactics and tools the slavers would use. It was meant to be an easy and informative battle in preparation for the bigger one up ahead. Well it turned out to be harder than expected. The party decided to continue fighting blind within the smoke rather than move outside of it. I made mention of how difficult it was for their characters to battle blind in the smoke several times. I made mention of their enemies seem to be thriving in this fight and unimpeded by the smoke. They continued to fight within it to the point of even hitting their allies because they were shooting in that same direction without actually seeing what they were aiming at. By the time they decided to get out of the smoke, 5 rounds later, the signal arrow had been sent out alerting the caravan group had been alerted, and the other slavers close to death decided to try and run. The party managed to catch up to them and interrogate them for information of where the caravan was heading, Menzoberranzan. The party went to take a long rest and we called it a night.
During this whole fight, two of the party members were enjoying it. It was tense and they both almost died getting thrown off the cliffside but the one managed to succeed on his dex save and stop his plummet by grabbing onto a small rock ledge. As the other got chucked off after failing to shove the slaver off he was saved by the previous member casting feather fall. The other three party members, we had one missing, were just frustrated. I could see it on their faces. Especially the paladin character. The wizard was annoyed by the fact that him shooting blindly managed to hit his party member. I also heard he complained to one of the party members that He couldn't do anything because I, as the DM, am just making him blind and forcing his hand. Which, I didn't. They weren't locked into being in the smoke. They just had to move and I even showed where the smokescreen ends by having the slaver drag one of the characters to the cliff side outside of the smoke.
I apologize for the rant at this point. My question is What else can I do to help solve some of this frustration that turns into some players just blaming me into making it difficult for them? I try helping in all the manners I can without just telling them what to do. Some of them seem to want that though. I have already had to deal with player vs player arguments, not fun when they are your friends, and I've been on top of trying to make the game more immersive with visual aids and builds. I have laid out my expectations and even did a mid session 0 to address any issues and try to find a compromise with battle difficulty. I have been honest that I don't like to run every battle where victory is undoubtedly the end. I also don't try to kill them even though I play the enemies like they will. I even gave them five levels of max hp on their level ups to increase their ability to survive. I feel I am at a loss of what to do so these frustrations don't come up and I'm not a target for blame. I told them after this session that I needed a break as I have been getting burnt out from managing the game, mediating OOC issues with party members, and just dealing with frustration and blame coming my way. I love DMing and I wish I got into this earlier as it hits all the marks for creative work I like.
TL/DR:Party becomes frustrated when battles get difficult. Party got got frustrated for an easy battle that they decided to continue fighting blind rather than move out of the area making them blind and blamed me for having to find blind. What do I do?
Take the break and recharge. Think about how you want the game to be run and what is important to you as a DM. Maybe have another Session 0 with them and go over the problems you are having and the difficulty they are making in playing the game to what I call unreasonable expectations. Plus, if they are blaming you for their problems in a game that you are spending your time to run maybe they need to go behind the DM screen for a session or two and see how easy it is for them to run a game.
Sometimes they need a close almost TPK encounter to get their wits about them to think about tactics, especially if they are 11th level, they should have learned a thing or two. If they blame you for the encounter that they almost died turn it around on them to think about maybe not every encounter is a fight to the bitter end.
If it is a constant fight about encounters, it is essential to have another talk, and if it seems like the blame is directed back at you it may just not be worth the effort you put in to be a punching bag for people who only want the game to be played one way, and that is their way.
The cliche is D&D you are supposed to have fun and I did not read that in your post that you are.
Sounds like you work really hard for your players and need a break!
Here is one possible approach:
I'm guessing no one else has offered to DM, but it's not unreasonable to ask players to take turns running one battle per game, or to run a one shot side adventure (you can put caps of treasure doled out). Let them design an encounter and/or the battlefield, then run it. (This involves a bit of letting go as a DM.)
Their character can be out, or you could run them if that works for you. You can even give players in-game rewards for running things. Make it fun and worthwhile.
Frame it as a friendly request, "Guys, I need your help to keep this going..."
They may discover a new appreciation for your work, or one may find they like DMing too! I'm training up a new DM and it's fun. He just ran his first one shot!
BKThomson: I wouldn't say it's not fun though I can see how my post makes it seem that way. I have an amazing amount of fun running the game and we have had some funny moments from shenanigans. More or less, the issues that arise with more difficult combats depreciate the overall fun I have and can be discouraging when preparing the next session. I am usually good at mitigating stress and dealing with behaviors arising from frustration as I work with kids with disabilities and my days are just that. I think with covid and dealing with work stress related to the pandemic has had me feeling it a little more. I have flipped it around on them and when I give them the reasons they tend to realize it was their bad tactics though I think it leaves a worst taste in their mouths. You are probably right that I should keep in mind that if this keeps coming up it isn't worth my energy to do it anymore. After the break I'll try to bring it up again and see where we stand. The thing that sucks is they are all friends and one is my brother. My brother has given me the worst of it so I tend to avoid talking to him about it. If I ever do end it, I might just play a game with the two that have been loving it and haven't been giving me that issue. What's funny is that one of my friends who has loved everything about the game has gotten the worst beatings and circumstances happen to his character. He had his hand torn off during their first dragon fight and was captured by the cult and was half transformed into a dragonspawn before the party saved him.
RivaGrayEyes: I appreciate that and I do what I can in my free time to improve it! No one had offered outright as we were all new to the game and I got into it knowing I wanted to DM (Damn Matt Mercer for making it seem so effortless lol). I have made mention for some of them to try their hands at DMing. My brother did it twice before. The first time he hated it and vowed never to do it again. Though I encouraged him to try with a different friend group and it was a hit so he isn't adverse to the idea. I have another friend who is gearing up to do a campaign after me and has DMed a few combat arena games. So some of them do have interest and have DMed some games before but not the extent of a campaign. They don't go the lengths I do though I never expect that from them. Anytime they DM I always support however they wish to rule things or whatever they wish to do. I even helped one pull off a doppelganger infiltrating the party by having my character captured. It was fun and unexpected by the others. It seems there is a difference in attachment for one shots and campaigns. I think they are afraid of their characters dying, which I tell them might happen and I've done all I could think of doing to prevent that besides plot armor. It's kind of the reason I'm lost. They understand how much I prepare and that I'm interested in their characters growing in the campaign. I have set expectations. I offer advice after session for ways to get around certain tactics used. Some have experienced what it's like to DM in a small capacity. I realize campaigns and one shots are different breeds. I do like the idea of having them design a battle map and encounter and then me just running it. I don't mind letting go as it frees me up to think of other things. I think I'll suggest that to them when I finish recharging!
That's a good point. Typically I give reasons for the way I had things planned. I could try doing it again and just listening and getting to the bottom of it. I just hope they don't get annoyed as even the mid campaign session 0 it was really hard to get their honest opinions of things as I had to bring up comments they made to other members about the game before they gave me an honest response of easier combat. I guess what was frustrating is I did that and it wasn't easy enough still lol
You are right that there is a difference between some of them of what they expect. A rather big one in my opinion. As two want a gritty and more realistic world and consequences with an unrestricted open world. Which I'm fine with. Another likes challenging combat though gets frustrated when it is and just didn't do what they could have to help themselves. For example, the slavers fight I said they could have just moved out of the smoke. His response was how were they suppose to know that. One is just along for the ride with whatever is present and just wants some cool things for his character. So I've given opportunities through patron jobs to do just that. The other two literally want to be railroaded and told what to do and don't want the difficult fights. They say it's fine when I ask and when it comes to it they get annoyed by being a situation that brings disadvantages that they can do stuff to avoid. So when I got that I was trying to figure ways to compromise with all the differences in wants which was hard as they weren't about giving solutions. So it was me saying I can give a little bit of that for each person but they can't expect it in every session as it would be impossible for me to do.
Some players get really attached to their characters. As in, if they died, the game is kinda ruined for them. Others are like, "Hey, I got my extra character sheet here if I die! Kinda wanting to try out a new build anyway. Let's go for it!" It's preference--there's no right or wrong here.
If some players are really averse to losing a character, you might privately discuss with them other options that losing a fight could bring. (i.e. you may lose treasure, you may get captured, you may have to fork over 1000 GP to get resurrected--possibly becoming indebted to someone powerful, you may get cursed somehow and have to find a way to heal...)
I tell my players that no consequences to losing would make the fights less exciting, but if they don't want to roll a new character, I'm not going to make them do that. That's just the game I play, though. You'll want to talk to your players, and ask yourself if there's a way you can resolve different feelings about character death.
I can definitely try reaffirming that to some of them. I am a pretty firm believer in failing forward and as much as I like the fear of death on the table to ramp tension I never really try to kill them. I always have some means of a fail safe in place. They are typically stocked with diamonds for revivify and the druid has someone related to his backstory that can perform resurrections for them. They just need to find the diamond. What it's beginning to seem to me is the ones who get frustrated don't seem to like any sort of setback. I could never imagine putting a curse on some of them as even the aboleth disease one of them acquired for a day was having him frustrated with me as he needed to constantly soak himself with water while trying to infiltrate a place. Sometimes I feel like I can't win with some of them lol
Well, sometimes you can't win with them, and some players are just not into tactics!
It seems like you specifically want to encourage movement. You've clearly tried a lot of ways to help them use tactics, and I don't want to minimize that. You of course can't force them to move.
Would you consider a (maybe temporary) house rule of dropping opportunity attacks? This would allow players to try out more movement. They wouldn't have to sacrifice doing damage on their turn, or take a hit, just because they moved. Rogues would still have a dash bonus action (or could just attack twice with weapons), so it wouldn't short them too much.
From a player's perspective, it can be difficult to wait 10-15 min for your turn, and then spend it on a disengage.
So basically, remove the penalty for moving, and then each turn say, "Okay, you attacked, and where do you want to move?"
That's something I really never considered. I can understand that it does feel like you aren't doing much if that's how you use your action after waiting for your turn. I'll try proposing that to them and see what they say. Thanks for the advice!
So reading the above you said that you throw overpowered fights at them they are supposed to lose and underpowered fights at them to make them feel powerful as they are supposed to win.
so why would they need to play through those fights? You have decided an outcome already. Rather than planning fights that are correctly levelled and could go either way.
Your players frustration’s sound like they are coming from feeling a lack of choice, you are putting all your prep effort into setting up encounters and set pieces that are rollercoasters if the players strap themselves in. Sounds like the players don’t want a rollercoaster, they want an RPG.
I only ever prepared one overpowered fight for them. That was the beholder fight for them at level 9. They were 6 characters and one follower. This mission was optional. They didn't have to take it at that moment. It would have come up later at another time in some capacity. They know I really like to play the characters as best as I can, I'm really not that great but I try to. They chose to undertake it because the pact devil offered them 35000gp. The NPC really wanted it done and, it's a devil, so they like contracts that bind people to them for one thing or another. I put it out there thinking they wouldn't take it. After hearing the gold price attached to it they did take it and formed a blood contract on it. Should I have not offered it? I probably shouldn't have is what I feel like you both are getting at. Okay, lesson learned. Can't play NPCs like that as players will expect they can take it on even when they know it's power level. That was the only one I knew there was a chance for them to die and so I gave them three provisions in the contract to aid them if need be. They weren't meant to lose as it wasn't mandatory to do it. After signing it I told them this would be really difficult and they need to have a plan. They could die, but they have these things to fall back onto so they can succeed at a cost. They chose to try and do so without. I was hoping for the best. It didn't turn out that way and they had to evoke it. They won but with a consequence. This is where they realized I would let them die if it came down to it. Some were angry others were fine and said they just have another story point ahead of them is all. I talked to the ones who were upset and explained they didn't have to say yes. I was playing the character as if they would give whatever to have it done and they took what was offered. They understood, if only begrudgingly. I learned that they do not like that. So it has never happened again. They still owe a summons to the pact devil, however, as I didn't retconn that because the others liked the idea.
As far as not giving them choices I feel I am competent in giving that if only I can find better ways to do so sometimes. The first mission in LMOP they decided to skip the cave and instead take the wagon and sell the goods. It was funny and made for an interesting turn of events when another group saved sildar and brought him back. I typically leave it for them to decide how they do things. Even going so far as telling a drop-in player who told them they derailed the campaign that they didn't, we just meandered down a different path. I let them bend spells if it makes sense and have them push action limits in moments of desperation. I try to say yes more than no when it's reasonable to do. It's not always met kindly but, that's alright, it's typically a short hiccup.
My players playstyles are widely different and I have had to mediate actual screaming matches between them at certain points. We are all friends. We are just used to competitive strategy games rather than cooperative ones and it has taken time to steer that frame of mind toward cooperative play. We do have one friend that isn't the nicest in communicating his opinions and I have had to talk to him about it. It got to the point where I had to tell him he needs to meet us cooperatively or he can't play. I don't really like being a mediator though it's not something I'm new to. The "apparently" different playstyles comes from the fact we are friends rather than strangers. The two hardcore gamers come from a strategy and war gaming background. They would prefer a complete sandbox adventure which is why they usually take things outside the adventure path. No issue there. Those improv moments were pretty great and it was good practice. One has told me he would prefer a railroad and just be narrated through seems and get to the fights. He said he wanted some easier fights however, like steamroll fights, so I have put those in there. My opinion is the same as to why are they fighting it if there is no question they will win. He wanted it. Was it boring for the two hardcore gamers, slightly, did he and the other laid back one have a blast decemating the bodies of their enemies, absolutely. I have another one who is in and out but is just along for the ride and doesn't care about the difficulty as he just wants cool things. So I've used his character as a half NPC half player character that we agreed on and he gets cool things from his patron for it. My brother, our druid, gets upset when it seems there are no other choices. There typically are other choices and we have had issues before because when one bad thing happens it becomes the end of the world. We have had talks about it. I give him advice outside of the game. It still comes up, however, but he has gotten better. The other laid back character, our friend who isn't the best at communicating in a friendly manner gets annoyed at the slightest things and tends to attack people verbally. He has been the center of most arguments at the table. He doesn't do it to the other players anymore, he just talks about how terrible I am to them when they have cigarette breaks.
Cue in our last encounter that is for our Paladin player that wanted easier combat. I made this encounter easy to trivial with the aid of the DM tools available to me. I was hoping for a balance of easy fight, though I still get to use some tactics so I can have fun. 3 enemies versus our party of nine. 6 players, 3 npc dwarf followers. They had a chance to surprise them if checks came out well. They had rub into shrieked fungus before so it wasn't a surprise element they haven't dealt with. I tried being detailed on my description to see if it would click. It didn't and they alerted it. Enemies covered the area with smokescreen on their first turns so they could take advantage of their blindsight. The party kept fighting blind so I tried narrating how difficult it was for them and showed them where the smokescreen ended. They stayed in it and were frustrated. Our not so friendly friend asked how do I expect them to do anything if I force them to fight blind. I didn't. They just decided to stay in the effect making them blind.
I get that I'm obviously doing something wrong. Maybe I am not giving them choices. I must be as blind as a rock because I can't find where I restrict choices. I've been told I give too much freedom by my one friend so I have been trying to find a balance of railroad and freedom since the two more hardcore players wouldn't like the railroad. I was asked for some easier fights and I tried delivering that while maintaining something I could have fun playing. I didn't deliver it and I'm at a loss of where to look so that's why I finally decided to go to the forums for help. I understand they are playing an RPG. They have different opinions on the RPG they want to play and I've been fiddling around trying to find the right balance for everyone.
I'll definitely look into the worf effect and if it seems like something I can implement I will bring it up to them to have the final say. I typically let them decide what we change as far as rules and what we don't. If they don't like the feel of something I try to start a conversation around it to make something work.
I actually like battles I don't know what the outcome is. I'm not a veteran DM nor a veteran player. I paid to have a DM so I could have experience as a player to understand their perspective better. It was a cool campaign and I learned a lot but not enough. The big boss battle we had 2 sessions before this last one was exactly that! It was exciting and I didn't know which way it would swing. The tone of the next session was sad but they all played into it and had a wonderful RP moment about their losses leading up to this point and I gave them all inspiration because I was proud of that effort they made when they typically don't RP much. I don't force them to either if that ever comes up. Just ask them to describe as best as they can.
I'm sorry if I wrote too much. I have a problem with putting a lot out there as I like to hit all the points as best I can. I'm burnt out. At a loss. And just really wanted other opinions of things to try as I know I have failed in many respects and will probably continue to do so going further
I really do appreciate all of the advice. I'll try the NPC idea out. As I do give them followers but I let them play them as they like controlling other things. And maybe you are right that they don't want improvement. They probably just want an easy stress free experience with some choices and consequences. Maybe not too intense consequences though. Sounds like I'm back to the drawing board again. I know the two hardcore guys would rather have that experience of improvement and difficulty and reasonable failure. I'll try bringing this up specifically and see where we can compromise.
Also, I don't really mind if they improve or not. If they don't play smart it's really not too big of a concern. They just have things to deal with. The issue is frustration coming back at me and/or blame for the situation while trying to play the enemies. If that didn't happen I would be happy to be in front of my material figuring out how to make it better.
The other laid back character, our friend who isn't the best at communicating in a friendly manner gets annoyed at the slightest things and tends to attack people verbally. He has been the center of most arguments at the table. He doesn't do it to the other players anymore, he just talks about how terrible I am to them when they have cigarette breaks.
That would burn me out too. Honestly, I'd be in tears. I've never had a player act like this, even when I was a really inexperienced DM.
It's okay if players have "Here's how the game could work better for us" or even specific "I didn't like how xyz played out" feedback, and you start a friendly back and forth of what might work better. That's valuable, and it's a great thing to ask of your players, but unproductive criticism hurts. I'm hoping that at least some of your players are appreciative, and just want to express how to have a better experience.
You are under no obligation to DM for someone--even a friend, for free (or even paid). DMing is like cooking for someone. If you cooked for someone, and they tossed it on the floor, or told everyone, "Yech, this is gross!" would you still cook for them?
It's okay to say something like, "You know, I know we're friends, but I can't keep DMing for you. Thank you for playing, but this just isn't working for me anymore." You don't have to give them a reason, or argue it out. Just spam, "It just doesn't work for me."
Then talk to your group and let them know that you accept ideas for improvement, and let them know you really want to be better, but it just didn't work out with this player. Don't start a war, or vent to your group, just set your boundaries for what behavior you will accept. If this player started screaming matches, perhaps some of the other players will be relieved.
Other DMs here probably know how to handle such a situation better.
Unrelated, on the possible "no opportunity attack" house rule, I'd probably allow opportunity attacks that result from using spells like dissonant whispers, command, or fey presence. I picture creatures bolting in an unthinking way, as opposed to a warrior who is moving past opponents more carefully.
So to echo the advice already given but you need a session zero - you have all your players pulling you in several directions and you are trying to please them all. You won’t.
it sounds like you have fallen into the trap that many do in trying to emulate what you see in live plays, it’s not bad but it’s a fools errand. Most of the good live plays have DM’s with years of experience as both DM & Player. You don’t have that.
I am not trying to put you down by saying that, you seem to be beating yourself up for not being the perfect DM. You need to take a step back. Right now the things that are going wrong in your campaign are going to keep happening, you can try some of the solutions offered but with respect to all the suggestions they are temporary fixes for the current symptom. The problem is that you are not on the same page as your players and your players are not on the same page as eachother.
you are on the fast track to burnout right now
I would also say that your concept’s of what is sandbox and what is railroading are huge exaggerations.
its not railroading to have plot hooks that players are expected to follow, a DM preparing one good well thought out encounter arc is better than a DM preparing 7 rough ideas and improving them so the player has “choice”
railroading is when there is only one action, one solution and all agency is removed.
The guest player was right when he said your other players are subverting the campaign. Sure you were able to make it work and have fun, but you also could of had fun doing the planned thing without any pressure to improv something new. Just because (to your credit) you made it work doesn’t mean it was better than the players cooperating with the adventure hook.
tldr - through no fault of your own you are in over your head, rewriting rules, dropping features and planning for a group you can’t trust to follow your plans because your group is not on same page. The only long term solution is to get them on the same page with a session zero.
its not railroading to have plot hooks that players are expected to follow, a DM preparing one good well thought out encounter arc is better than a DM preparing 7 rough ideas and improving them so the player has “choice”
railroading is when there is only one action, one solution and all agency is removed.
Agreed! For example, on having players follow a hook. I had a kid (very creative and entertaining player, but sometimes tried to test me a bit) who upon hearing the quest declared, "I think I'll head off into the woods that way instead!" (Actually, he first declared he was going to slay the pixie, and I said, "Roll for initiative." On the spot, I decided she had backup in the trees that the players couldn't see. He replied, "No! No! I didn't mean it!" So he didn't end up trying to slay my quest giver.)
And I smiled and said, "Sure, go for it. The woods are lovely this time of year. Your character can have a very peaceful walk. But, if you want to slay cool monsters, you should listen to this lady."
And he LOVES slaying monsters, so he went with the quest and we all had a blast. I don't consider that railroading. His character could have walked off, and I would have just run the real adventure for his companions until he decided to join. I didn't feel obligated to come up with a brand new adventure "off that way." That's not where the action was! If everyone had gone along with his plan, it would have been a pretty short, uneventful session!
Now, allowing for player creativity. I had an NPC usher them to the entrance of this colosseum they were supposed to infiltrate. Our rogue said, "I want to use my flying potion and sneak in over the top." (The player was going for the right goal, but had creative solution I did not anticipate. Player creativity like this entertains me so much, and causes me to have to think fast! At this point, I would consider it railroading to say "No. You all have to go in the way my guy showed you.")
So I let them sneak in from 2 different directions (just one fight for each group, so they didn't stay separated long).
I had planned on the players being under a force field when they emerged in the arena, but decided on the spot the rogue who snuck in from above would find a guarded control room for the arena. He broke in, turned off the force field, and set the terrain of the arena. (I had already planned on letting the kids set up the battlefield with legos, but now it was "because our rogue 'hacked the system.'")
For the record, it took a while to learn how to manage all this well. I had a lot of things fall flat over the years! Also, although the one player was mischievous, he always took my rulings cheerfully, and was excited to play.
I think the reintroduction of a session 0 is the best place to start and see where we can get. I recruited another player to help out because I have had trouble getting the communication going and full participation present. Hopefully if we have the other player helping to lead an open conversation it will help to ease the others into it. Its a typical trick I use with the kids I work with at my job.
Unfortunately, as much as I have sympathy for the one friend who has been hard to deal with, I have been more on the side that we just don't play well together. There are underlining circumstances for why I haven't been able to just give that hard line decision. I am also big on giving people chances and attempting to redirect. That might be something I need to bring up to them and be strong handed in what I decide.
I'm glad my idea of a railroad hasn't been that far off from the three of yours. I've definitely not been the best at designing it fully but its been my goal. Part of the problem might be that I'm a self-learner. I came from a low income family and so if I wanted to learn something I typically had to find a way to teach myself. There are a lot of differing opinions on what a railroad and open world is for TTRPG. They are all very similar. They differ a lot on the details and what feels right for each group. Our group needs to figure out what feels right for us and how to work together in that.
You are right, Lyxen, that i'm happy when others are happy. Probably too much so that I don't ask myself if its fun or worthwhile for me anymore.
I appreciate the time you all have taken to help me with this. It means a lot!
Remember that as a DM you are a player at the table too, and you are just as entitled to enjoy the game sessions as anyone else at the table.
My advice to many DMs that believe they are not getting the respect due to a DM is to announce that in a few sessions you will step down and let someone else DM for a while. This is advisable so you can remember what it is like as a player and you might come up with new ideas for encounters.
Best of luck.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
MusicScout: Thank you for the kind words! I have so many character concepts I want to try out! It will probably be some time before I get to play in a campaign though I will be excited when it comes up. I think this break will be a good thing!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey, so I am a newer DM and started out running a group of friends through LMOP before moving on to a larger campaign using the tyranny of dragons and some homebrew quests for character backgrounds. I do my best to let the players guide the direction even if I don't have an area prepped like larger cities that I have to prep in between our weekly sessions. I have made quite a lot of mistakes through out it and understand its a learning process. I always bring it up to the players and apologize or retroactively change some things to right any mistakes.
So the issue has been for half of the friend group. They are a combat loving group and enjoy beating things up and looting. I also enjoy combats so it works out great. The issue that seems to come up is the expectation of combat difficulty. The combats from the adventure paths have proved to not be the issue as they started 5 levels higher when beginning tyranny of dragons. The issue has typically come up when I have put together the encounters. I have only ever put them up against one encounter that proved incredibly difficult. I had put my 6 level 9 characters with their one level 5 goblin rogue follower (Droop) against a beholder that had been building an otherworldy army below castle never. This beholder was a setup for a future 20th level ending adventure if the campaign ever gets that far. They had received this contract to kill the beholder by a pact devil named Desovadai. The contract was for 35,000 GP and had provisions in place to help them out if they wished to evoke these provisions that came with consequences. Essentially they had a get out of TPK free card if necessary. They had time to prepare so I let the wizard of thay character do research and I gave them the stat block of the beholder to look at when preparing to battle it. I told them it would prove incredibly difficult for them if they don't come in with a plan and execute some smart tactics. I set up a large battle arena using some styrofoam builds to make a vertically cylindrical lair that had a maze like tunnel system that could be used for cover and getting out of the antimagic cone. I reminded them that they can go outside of the map if they need in combat to control the movement of enemies. I also gave them some new magic items like prayer beads, an increased AC shield, and a ring of spell quickening plus a potion of flying. They had a great plan of using earthbind to bring the beholder down, then using grappling hooks to physically bind it in place so it couldn't get away from them. Their druid was the only one who kept to their plan as the others forgot and ran around dealing with minions. They kept themselves stuck in the antimagic cone and didn't utilize any of the tunnels I mentioned several times for their aid. A TPK was incoming and a tough call was made to evoke the contracts provisions to summon devils to their aid. It was a long, tense, and exciting battle.
Though this is where I believe some of them began to grow some sense of distrust for me as a DM. After it was all said and done I used it as a moment to emphasize what I told them previously about the game I want to run. Not every combat can be won by standing in the same spot and fighting. Sometimes you need to decide if you can take the fight on now or need to get stronger to take it on at a later date. I also have thrown encounters at them that they are woefully overpowered for to showcase their growth whenever thematically fitting. Unfortunately, they rolled for two windwalk beads on the prayer beads so I couldn't put in as many easy on the road encounters as they would have liked and mentioned that is the reason. I always tell them I prefer thematic fights over balanced fights.
Now they are level 11 and have been in the underdark for some time trying to find a legendary artifact that once belonged to our war domain clerics deity who is now a vestige or dying god. It has been going well enough and I am consistent in communicating with them on their opinions, feelings, what they like and don't and what I can work on to help them out. I make it clear that I don't want to give them the answers to the problems but I will always give in game hints like describing an element in focus for their character when its their turn in combat. I also try to help them out in tactics they could use and I tell them, and show them with the enemies, that its sometimes smarter to use the 1st round as set up to secure advantage, positioning, or battefield control to make combats easier. I am a tactics person and like showcasing good tactics on weaker enemies and how they can drastically improve their odds in combat. I have made visual aids to have set pieces so they can see where they can get cover, or shove people off cliffs, or corral enemies into choke points. I also started slowly introducing dual objectives into combats to encourage them to move around in battle as they have a habit of standing in one place. I also try to have enemies run away once it gets too real for them. What I typically see from them is that they just don't play smart or utilize other actions like dodge or disengage because if they don't deal damage they aren't utilizing their turn fully. I have mentioned it before that taking a round to reposition or setup an ally for success can improve their odds or help them secure victory faster. Whenever they do work together in the rare occasion it happens I hand out inspiration.
This last session got to me. I took some advice I had seen and haven't used well enough before. I also took in the opinion of our one player, the paladin, that he wanted easier combats. They are still in the underdark and managed to secure the shattered blade of the war domain clerics deity. They are now tracking down a group of slavers that have the paladins family captured. They had seen the slavers before in the Duergar city they were in and having to secure the blade first the slavers had a lead on them. They haven't seen the slavers in action. When they saw them I mentioned the tools of their trades a bit. They carry nets, shackle restraints, and bolas. On the path tracking them they came to an old kraken society transportation hub that the party had to solve a puzzle to get to. Inside the hub they found other tools of the trade. These were smoke bombs. A nature herbalism check was done as these were glass vials with two chambers that had an assortment of crushed plants and fungus in one chamber and yellowish like resin in the other and, unfortunately, the roll wasn't high enough to figure out what it did. I did however point out that the druid had come upon some of these plants and fungus on their travels through the underdark. So he can potentially make them if he studies it more.
My set up for when they finally caught up to a separated group of the slavers was four slavers who set up a temporary skinning station to collect some dire bat pelts. Our paladin is a dragonborn that comes from a clan that domesticated dire bats to become flying mounts and he summons one with his find steed. Their warlock, with devil sight, caught a glimpse of one of the slavers placing some sort of plant down at the perimeter of their temporary station. A perception check was done and he saw it was a plant composed of individual tubules that grew straight upwards. On their movement forward I described it more for the druid stating what he sees now is a patch of different ordinary looking fungus where the slaver laid down the one. He also noticed the one the warlock saw and how the tubules resemble the shape of a train horn.The fungus was a shrieker mushroom put into a flat shallow container the creates the illusion of other ordinary mushrooms to hide it. He wanted to nature check so I asked him to describe the way he wanted to do it. He wanted to sneak closer to it as part of that action. He didn't have to get closer. I said he could do from where he was or get closer. So the shrieker went off, alerting the slavers, and I asked for what the party wanted to do and to answer quick, first thing that comes up. They froze staring at each other and me. So the slavers being quick to act threw two vials at the head of the party. These were sleeper vials. It knocked out three of the five party members within it and the battle began. Two of the slavers went first and took their actions to throw the smoke bombs to blind the party. I had the commanding slaver shout in draconic at one of the underlings to alert the others up ahead. To clarify better, the slavers were a deepdark race of dragonborn native to toril. When creating their stat blocks I used the half-dragon veteran as inspiration. Most underdark races get 120ft of darkvision. I gave them 60ft though I gave them 15ft of blindsight as they hail from the deep dark. They are entirely martial characters against a party of all spellcasters. The highest CR slaver was the commander at CR 5. There were also two CR 3 headhunters and a CR 2 rogue like slaver that wasn't in the fight as he was to alert others ahead of trouble. The fight was meant to showcase the tactics and tools the slavers would use. It was meant to be an easy and informative battle in preparation for the bigger one up ahead. Well it turned out to be harder than expected. The party decided to continue fighting blind within the smoke rather than move outside of it. I made mention of how difficult it was for their characters to battle blind in the smoke several times. I made mention of their enemies seem to be thriving in this fight and unimpeded by the smoke. They continued to fight within it to the point of even hitting their allies because they were shooting in that same direction without actually seeing what they were aiming at. By the time they decided to get out of the smoke, 5 rounds later, the signal arrow had been sent out alerting the caravan group had been alerted, and the other slavers close to death decided to try and run. The party managed to catch up to them and interrogate them for information of where the caravan was heading, Menzoberranzan. The party went to take a long rest and we called it a night.
During this whole fight, two of the party members were enjoying it. It was tense and they both almost died getting thrown off the cliffside but the one managed to succeed on his dex save and stop his plummet by grabbing onto a small rock ledge. As the other got chucked off after failing to shove the slaver off he was saved by the previous member casting feather fall. The other three party members, we had one missing, were just frustrated. I could see it on their faces. Especially the paladin character. The wizard was annoyed by the fact that him shooting blindly managed to hit his party member. I also heard he complained to one of the party members that He couldn't do anything because I, as the DM, am just making him blind and forcing his hand. Which, I didn't. They weren't locked into being in the smoke. They just had to move and I even showed where the smokescreen ends by having the slaver drag one of the characters to the cliff side outside of the smoke.
I apologize for the rant at this point. My question is What else can I do to help solve some of this frustration that turns into some players just blaming me into making it difficult for them? I try helping in all the manners I can without just telling them what to do. Some of them seem to want that though. I have already had to deal with player vs player arguments, not fun when they are your friends, and I've been on top of trying to make the game more immersive with visual aids and builds. I have laid out my expectations and even did a mid session 0 to address any issues and try to find a compromise with battle difficulty. I have been honest that I don't like to run every battle where victory is undoubtedly the end. I also don't try to kill them even though I play the enemies like they will. I even gave them five levels of max hp on their level ups to increase their ability to survive. I feel I am at a loss of what to do so these frustrations don't come up and I'm not a target for blame. I told them after this session that I needed a break as I have been getting burnt out from managing the game, mediating OOC issues with party members, and just dealing with frustration and blame coming my way. I love DMing and I wish I got into this earlier as it hits all the marks for creative work I like.
TL/DR: Party becomes frustrated when battles get difficult. Party got got frustrated for an easy battle that they decided to continue fighting blind rather than move out of the area making them blind and blamed me for having to find blind. What do I do?
Take the break and recharge. Think about how you want the game to be run and what is important to you as a DM. Maybe have another Session 0 with them and go over the problems you are having and the difficulty they are making in playing the game to what I call unreasonable expectations. Plus, if they are blaming you for their problems in a game that you are spending your time to run maybe they need to go behind the DM screen for a session or two and see how easy it is for them to run a game.
Sometimes they need a close almost TPK encounter to get their wits about them to think about tactics, especially if they are 11th level, they should have learned a thing or two. If they blame you for the encounter that they almost died turn it around on them to think about maybe not every encounter is a fight to the bitter end.
If it is a constant fight about encounters, it is essential to have another talk, and if it seems like the blame is directed back at you it may just not be worth the effort you put in to be a punching bag for people who only want the game to be played one way, and that is their way.
The cliche is D&D you are supposed to have fun and I did not read that in your post that you are.
Sounds like you work really hard for your players and need a break!
Here is one possible approach:
I'm guessing no one else has offered to DM, but it's not unreasonable to ask players to take turns running one battle per game, or to run a one shot side adventure (you can put caps of treasure doled out). Let them design an encounter and/or the battlefield, then run it. (This involves a bit of letting go as a DM.)
Their character can be out, or you could run them if that works for you. You can even give players in-game rewards for running things. Make it fun and worthwhile.
Frame it as a friendly request, "Guys, I need your help to keep this going..."
They may discover a new appreciation for your work, or one may find they like DMing too! I'm training up a new DM and it's fun. He just ran his first one shot!
I appreciate the responses guys!
BKThomson: I wouldn't say it's not fun though I can see how my post makes it seem that way. I have an amazing amount of fun running the game and we have had some funny moments from shenanigans. More or less, the issues that arise with more difficult combats depreciate the overall fun I have and can be discouraging when preparing the next session. I am usually good at mitigating stress and dealing with behaviors arising from frustration as I work with kids with disabilities and my days are just that. I think with covid and dealing with work stress related to the pandemic has had me feeling it a little more. I have flipped it around on them and when I give them the reasons they tend to realize it was their bad tactics though I think it leaves a worst taste in their mouths. You are probably right that I should keep in mind that if this keeps coming up it isn't worth my energy to do it anymore. After the break I'll try to bring it up again and see where we stand. The thing that sucks is they are all friends and one is my brother. My brother has given me the worst of it so I tend to avoid talking to him about it. If I ever do end it, I might just play a game with the two that have been loving it and haven't been giving me that issue. What's funny is that one of my friends who has loved everything about the game has gotten the worst beatings and circumstances happen to his character. He had his hand torn off during their first dragon fight and was captured by the cult and was half transformed into a dragonspawn before the party saved him.
RivaGrayEyes: I appreciate that and I do what I can in my free time to improve it! No one had offered outright as we were all new to the game and I got into it knowing I wanted to DM (Damn Matt Mercer for making it seem so effortless lol). I have made mention for some of them to try their hands at DMing. My brother did it twice before. The first time he hated it and vowed never to do it again. Though I encouraged him to try with a different friend group and it was a hit so he isn't adverse to the idea. I have another friend who is gearing up to do a campaign after me and has DMed a few combat arena games. So some of them do have interest and have DMed some games before but not the extent of a campaign. They don't go the lengths I do though I never expect that from them. Anytime they DM I always support however they wish to rule things or whatever they wish to do. I even helped one pull off a doppelganger infiltrating the party by having my character captured. It was fun and unexpected by the others. It seems there is a difference in attachment for one shots and campaigns. I think they are afraid of their characters dying, which I tell them might happen and I've done all I could think of doing to prevent that besides plot armor. It's kind of the reason I'm lost. They understand how much I prepare and that I'm interested in their characters growing in the campaign. I have set expectations. I offer advice after session for ways to get around certain tactics used. Some have experienced what it's like to DM in a small capacity. I realize campaigns and one shots are different breeds. I do like the idea of having them design a battle map and encounter and then me just running it. I don't mind letting go as it frees me up to think of other things. I think I'll suggest that to them when I finish recharging!
Thank you!
That's a good point. Typically I give reasons for the way I had things planned. I could try doing it again and just listening and getting to the bottom of it. I just hope they don't get annoyed as even the mid campaign session 0 it was really hard to get their honest opinions of things as I had to bring up comments they made to other members about the game before they gave me an honest response of easier combat. I guess what was frustrating is I did that and it wasn't easy enough still lol
You are right that there is a difference between some of them of what they expect. A rather big one in my opinion. As two want a gritty and more realistic world and consequences with an unrestricted open world. Which I'm fine with. Another likes challenging combat though gets frustrated when it is and just didn't do what they could have to help themselves. For example, the slavers fight I said they could have just moved out of the smoke. His response was how were they suppose to know that. One is just along for the ride with whatever is present and just wants some cool things for his character. So I've given opportunities through patron jobs to do just that. The other two literally want to be railroaded and told what to do and don't want the difficult fights. They say it's fine when I ask and when it comes to it they get annoyed by being a situation that brings disadvantages that they can do stuff to avoid. So when I got that I was trying to figure ways to compromise with all the differences in wants which was hard as they weren't about giving solutions. So it was me saying I can give a little bit of that for each person but they can't expect it in every session as it would be impossible for me to do.
Some players get really attached to their characters. As in, if they died, the game is kinda ruined for them. Others are like, "Hey, I got my extra character sheet here if I die! Kinda wanting to try out a new build anyway. Let's go for it!" It's preference--there's no right or wrong here.
If some players are really averse to losing a character, you might privately discuss with them other options that losing a fight could bring. (i.e. you may lose treasure, you may get captured, you may have to fork over 1000 GP to get resurrected--possibly becoming indebted to someone powerful, you may get cursed somehow and have to find a way to heal...)
I tell my players that no consequences to losing would make the fights less exciting, but if they don't want to roll a new character, I'm not going to make them do that. That's just the game I play, though. You'll want to talk to your players, and ask yourself if there's a way you can resolve different feelings about character death.
I can definitely try reaffirming that to some of them. I am a pretty firm believer in failing forward and as much as I like the fear of death on the table to ramp tension I never really try to kill them. I always have some means of a fail safe in place. They are typically stocked with diamonds for revivify and the druid has someone related to his backstory that can perform resurrections for them. They just need to find the diamond. What it's beginning to seem to me is the ones who get frustrated don't seem to like any sort of setback. I could never imagine putting a curse on some of them as even the aboleth disease one of them acquired for a day was having him frustrated with me as he needed to constantly soak himself with water while trying to infiltrate a place. Sometimes I feel like I can't win with some of them lol
Well, sometimes you can't win with them, and some players are just not into tactics!
It seems like you specifically want to encourage movement. You've clearly tried a lot of ways to help them use tactics, and I don't want to minimize that. You of course can't force them to move.
Would you consider a (maybe temporary) house rule of dropping opportunity attacks? This would allow players to try out more movement. They wouldn't have to sacrifice doing damage on their turn, or take a hit, just because they moved. Rogues would still have a dash bonus action (or could just attack twice with weapons), so it wouldn't short them too much.
From a player's perspective, it can be difficult to wait 10-15 min for your turn, and then spend it on a disengage.
So basically, remove the penalty for moving, and then each turn say, "Okay, you attacked, and where do you want to move?"
That's something I really never considered. I can understand that it does feel like you aren't doing much if that's how you use your action after waiting for your turn. I'll try proposing that to them and see what they say. Thanks for the advice!
So reading the above you said that you throw overpowered fights at them they are supposed to lose and underpowered fights at them to make them feel powerful as they are supposed to win.
so why would they need to play through those fights? You have decided an outcome already. Rather than planning fights that are correctly levelled and could go either way.
Your players frustration’s sound like they are coming from feeling a lack of choice, you are putting all your prep effort into setting up encounters and set pieces that are rollercoasters if the players strap themselves in. Sounds like the players don’t want a rollercoaster, they want an RPG.
I only ever prepared one overpowered fight for them. That was the beholder fight for them at level 9. They were 6 characters and one follower. This mission was optional. They didn't have to take it at that moment. It would have come up later at another time in some capacity. They know I really like to play the characters as best as I can, I'm really not that great but I try to. They chose to undertake it because the pact devil offered them 35000gp. The NPC really wanted it done and, it's a devil, so they like contracts that bind people to them for one thing or another. I put it out there thinking they wouldn't take it. After hearing the gold price attached to it they did take it and formed a blood contract on it. Should I have not offered it? I probably shouldn't have is what I feel like you both are getting at. Okay, lesson learned. Can't play NPCs like that as players will expect they can take it on even when they know it's power level. That was the only one I knew there was a chance for them to die and so I gave them three provisions in the contract to aid them if need be. They weren't meant to lose as it wasn't mandatory to do it. After signing it I told them this would be really difficult and they need to have a plan. They could die, but they have these things to fall back onto so they can succeed at a cost. They chose to try and do so without. I was hoping for the best. It didn't turn out that way and they had to evoke it. They won but with a consequence. This is where they realized I would let them die if it came down to it. Some were angry others were fine and said they just have another story point ahead of them is all. I talked to the ones who were upset and explained they didn't have to say yes. I was playing the character as if they would give whatever to have it done and they took what was offered. They understood, if only begrudgingly. I learned that they do not like that. So it has never happened again. They still owe a summons to the pact devil, however, as I didn't retconn that because the others liked the idea.
As far as not giving them choices I feel I am competent in giving that if only I can find better ways to do so sometimes. The first mission in LMOP they decided to skip the cave and instead take the wagon and sell the goods. It was funny and made for an interesting turn of events when another group saved sildar and brought him back. I typically leave it for them to decide how they do things. Even going so far as telling a drop-in player who told them they derailed the campaign that they didn't, we just meandered down a different path. I let them bend spells if it makes sense and have them push action limits in moments of desperation. I try to say yes more than no when it's reasonable to do. It's not always met kindly but, that's alright, it's typically a short hiccup.
My players playstyles are widely different and I have had to mediate actual screaming matches between them at certain points. We are all friends. We are just used to competitive strategy games rather than cooperative ones and it has taken time to steer that frame of mind toward cooperative play. We do have one friend that isn't the nicest in communicating his opinions and I have had to talk to him about it. It got to the point where I had to tell him he needs to meet us cooperatively or he can't play. I don't really like being a mediator though it's not something I'm new to. The "apparently" different playstyles comes from the fact we are friends rather than strangers. The two hardcore gamers come from a strategy and war gaming background. They would prefer a complete sandbox adventure which is why they usually take things outside the adventure path. No issue there. Those improv moments were pretty great and it was good practice. One has told me he would prefer a railroad and just be narrated through seems and get to the fights. He said he wanted some easier fights however, like steamroll fights, so I have put those in there. My opinion is the same as to why are they fighting it if there is no question they will win. He wanted it. Was it boring for the two hardcore gamers, slightly, did he and the other laid back one have a blast decemating the bodies of their enemies, absolutely. I have another one who is in and out but is just along for the ride and doesn't care about the difficulty as he just wants cool things. So I've used his character as a half NPC half player character that we agreed on and he gets cool things from his patron for it. My brother, our druid, gets upset when it seems there are no other choices. There typically are other choices and we have had issues before because when one bad thing happens it becomes the end of the world. We have had talks about it. I give him advice outside of the game. It still comes up, however, but he has gotten better. The other laid back character, our friend who isn't the best at communicating in a friendly manner gets annoyed at the slightest things and tends to attack people verbally. He has been the center of most arguments at the table. He doesn't do it to the other players anymore, he just talks about how terrible I am to them when they have cigarette breaks.
Cue in our last encounter that is for our Paladin player that wanted easier combat. I made this encounter easy to trivial with the aid of the DM tools available to me. I was hoping for a balance of easy fight, though I still get to use some tactics so I can have fun. 3 enemies versus our party of nine. 6 players, 3 npc dwarf followers. They had a chance to surprise them if checks came out well. They had rub into shrieked fungus before so it wasn't a surprise element they haven't dealt with. I tried being detailed on my description to see if it would click. It didn't and they alerted it. Enemies covered the area with smokescreen on their first turns so they could take advantage of their blindsight. The party kept fighting blind so I tried narrating how difficult it was for them and showed them where the smokescreen ended. They stayed in it and were frustrated. Our not so friendly friend asked how do I expect them to do anything if I force them to fight blind. I didn't. They just decided to stay in the effect making them blind.
I get that I'm obviously doing something wrong. Maybe I am not giving them choices. I must be as blind as a rock because I can't find where I restrict choices. I've been told I give too much freedom by my one friend so I have been trying to find a balance of railroad and freedom since the two more hardcore players wouldn't like the railroad. I was asked for some easier fights and I tried delivering that while maintaining something I could have fun playing. I didn't deliver it and I'm at a loss of where to look so that's why I finally decided to go to the forums for help. I understand they are playing an RPG. They have different opinions on the RPG they want to play and I've been fiddling around trying to find the right balance for everyone.
I'll definitely look into the worf effect and if it seems like something I can implement I will bring it up to them to have the final say. I typically let them decide what we change as far as rules and what we don't. If they don't like the feel of something I try to start a conversation around it to make something work.
I actually like battles I don't know what the outcome is. I'm not a veteran DM nor a veteran player. I paid to have a DM so I could have experience as a player to understand their perspective better. It was a cool campaign and I learned a lot but not enough. The big boss battle we had 2 sessions before this last one was exactly that! It was exciting and I didn't know which way it would swing. The tone of the next session was sad but they all played into it and had a wonderful RP moment about their losses leading up to this point and I gave them all inspiration because I was proud of that effort they made when they typically don't RP much. I don't force them to either if that ever comes up. Just ask them to describe as best as they can.
I'm sorry if I wrote too much. I have a problem with putting a lot out there as I like to hit all the points as best I can. I'm burnt out. At a loss. And just really wanted other opinions of things to try as I know I have failed in many respects and will probably continue to do so going further
I really do appreciate all of the advice. I'll try the NPC idea out. As I do give them followers but I let them play them as they like controlling other things. And maybe you are right that they don't want improvement. They probably just want an easy stress free experience with some choices and consequences. Maybe not too intense consequences though. Sounds like I'm back to the drawing board again. I know the two hardcore guys would rather have that experience of improvement and difficulty and reasonable failure. I'll try bringing this up specifically and see where we can compromise.
Also, I don't really mind if they improve or not. If they don't play smart it's really not too big of a concern. They just have things to deal with. The issue is frustration coming back at me and/or blame for the situation while trying to play the enemies. If that didn't happen I would be happy to be in front of my material figuring out how to make it better.
That would burn me out too. Honestly, I'd be in tears. I've never had a player act like this, even when I was a really inexperienced DM.
It's okay if players have "Here's how the game could work better for us" or even specific "I didn't like how xyz played out" feedback, and you start a friendly back and forth of what might work better. That's valuable, and it's a great thing to ask of your players, but unproductive criticism hurts. I'm hoping that at least some of your players are appreciative, and just want to express how to have a better experience.
You are under no obligation to DM for someone--even a friend, for free (or even paid). DMing is like cooking for someone. If you cooked for someone, and they tossed it on the floor, or told everyone, "Yech, this is gross!" would you still cook for them?
It's okay to say something like, "You know, I know we're friends, but I can't keep DMing for you. Thank you for playing, but this just isn't working for me anymore." You don't have to give them a reason, or argue it out. Just spam, "It just doesn't work for me."
Then talk to your group and let them know that you accept ideas for improvement, and let them know you really want to be better, but it just didn't work out with this player. Don't start a war, or vent to your group, just set your boundaries for what behavior you will accept. If this player started screaming matches, perhaps some of the other players will be relieved.
Other DMs here probably know how to handle such a situation better.
Unrelated, on the possible "no opportunity attack" house rule, I'd probably allow opportunity attacks that result from using spells like dissonant whispers, command, or fey presence. I picture creatures bolting in an unthinking way, as opposed to a warrior who is moving past opponents more carefully.
So to echo the advice already given but you need a session zero - you have all your players pulling you in several directions and you are trying to please them all. You won’t.
it sounds like you have fallen into the trap that many do in trying to emulate what you see in live plays, it’s not bad but it’s a fools errand. Most of the good live plays have DM’s with years of experience as both DM & Player. You don’t have that.
I am not trying to put you down by saying that, you seem to be beating yourself up for not being the perfect DM. You need to take a step back. Right now the things that are going wrong in your campaign are going to keep happening, you can try some of the solutions offered but with respect to all the suggestions they are temporary fixes for the current symptom. The problem is that you are not on the same page as your players and your players are not on the same page as eachother.
you are on the fast track to burnout right now
I would also say that your concept’s of what is sandbox and what is railroading are huge exaggerations.
its not railroading to have plot hooks that players are expected to follow, a DM preparing one good well thought out encounter arc is better than a DM preparing 7 rough ideas and improving them so the player has “choice”
railroading is when there is only one action, one solution and all agency is removed.
The guest player was right when he said your other players are subverting the campaign. Sure you were able to make it work and have fun, but you also could of had fun doing the planned thing without any pressure to improv something new. Just because (to your credit) you made it work doesn’t mean it was better than the players cooperating with the adventure hook.
tldr - through no fault of your own you are in over your head, rewriting rules, dropping features and planning for a group you can’t trust to follow your plans because your group is not on same page. The only long term solution is to get them on the same page with a session zero.
Agreed! For example, on having players follow a hook. I had a kid (very creative and entertaining player, but sometimes tried to test me a bit) who upon hearing the quest declared, "I think I'll head off into the woods that way instead!" (Actually, he first declared he was going to slay the pixie, and I said, "Roll for initiative." On the spot, I decided she had backup in the trees that the players couldn't see. He replied, "No! No! I didn't mean it!" So he didn't end up trying to slay my quest giver.)
And I smiled and said, "Sure, go for it. The woods are lovely this time of year. Your character can have a very peaceful walk. But, if you want to slay cool monsters, you should listen to this lady."
And he LOVES slaying monsters, so he went with the quest and we all had a blast. I don't consider that railroading. His character could have walked off, and I would have just run the real adventure for his companions until he decided to join. I didn't feel obligated to come up with a brand new adventure "off that way." That's not where the action was! If everyone had gone along with his plan, it would have been a pretty short, uneventful session!
Now, allowing for player creativity. I had an NPC usher them to the entrance of this colosseum they were supposed to infiltrate. Our rogue said, "I want to use my flying potion and sneak in over the top." (The player was going for the right goal, but had creative solution I did not anticipate. Player creativity like this entertains me so much, and causes me to have to think fast! At this point, I would consider it railroading to say "No. You all have to go in the way my guy showed you.")
So I let them sneak in from 2 different directions (just one fight for each group, so they didn't stay separated long).
I had planned on the players being under a force field when they emerged in the arena, but decided on the spot the rogue who snuck in from above would find a guarded control room for the arena. He broke in, turned off the force field, and set the terrain of the arena. (I had already planned on letting the kids set up the battlefield with legos, but now it was "because our rogue 'hacked the system.'")
For the record, it took a while to learn how to manage all this well. I had a lot of things fall flat over the years! Also, although the one player was mischievous, he always took my rulings cheerfully, and was excited to play.
You guys give really good advice!
I think the reintroduction of a session 0 is the best place to start and see where we can get. I recruited another player to help out because I have had trouble getting the communication going and full participation present. Hopefully if we have the other player helping to lead an open conversation it will help to ease the others into it. Its a typical trick I use with the kids I work with at my job.
Unfortunately, as much as I have sympathy for the one friend who has been hard to deal with, I have been more on the side that we just don't play well together. There are underlining circumstances for why I haven't been able to just give that hard line decision. I am also big on giving people chances and attempting to redirect. That might be something I need to bring up to them and be strong handed in what I decide.
I'm glad my idea of a railroad hasn't been that far off from the three of yours. I've definitely not been the best at designing it fully but its been my goal. Part of the problem might be that I'm a self-learner. I came from a low income family and so if I wanted to learn something I typically had to find a way to teach myself. There are a lot of differing opinions on what a railroad and open world is for TTRPG. They are all very similar. They differ a lot on the details and what feels right for each group. Our group needs to figure out what feels right for us and how to work together in that.
You are right, Lyxen, that i'm happy when others are happy. Probably too much so that I don't ask myself if its fun or worthwhile for me anymore.
I appreciate the time you all have taken to help me with this. It means a lot!
Remember that as a DM you are a player at the table too, and you are just as entitled to enjoy the game sessions as anyone else at the table.
My advice to many DMs that believe they are not getting the respect due to a DM is to announce that in a few sessions you will step down and let someone else DM for a while. This is advisable so you can remember what it is like as a player and you might come up with new ideas for encounters.
Best of luck.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
MusicScout: Thank you for the kind words! I have so many character concepts I want to try out! It will probably be some time before I get to play in a campaign though I will be excited when it comes up. I think this break will be a good thing!