"Dear JB" Mailbag #23

[a Friday post for folks to muse over during the weekend while I am...hopefully...very busy with playoff volleyball matches]

Dear JB:

So recently we quite a split session in terms of enjoyment. I’m still a fairly new DM so for most of this campaign I have stuck to what I do best which is creative combat scenarios. We usually have about 1-3 fights per session and while it is not the focus of the campaign to fight it has become something they expect. The problem is we have two people in our campaign who are not as suited towards combat as the other 2 so I wanted to come up with something they could excel in as well.

For my most recent session I created a bit of a mystery for them to solve, relying more on talking and role playing than it does bludgeoning people. At first I thought it was going really well, they were meeting people in the town and making good progress, but by the second half of the session the two fighters were not having it. Neither were listening to the conversation they were actively a part of with one of them just laying on the floor while I was trying to roleplay. I tried to get the party moving by foregoing the mystery and telling them exactly where to go next but they didn’t really care.

At the end of the session both the fighter players told me that my DMing kind of sucked and that this story was terrible. The other two players seemed to have enjoyed it but after a 3-1 vote they opted to wander into the woods, leaving the story to do literally anything else than that.

I don’t think that the story was terrible, in fact it was probably my most well put together quest yet. I can understand why they may not be happy with the story since they have done so much fighting previously I made it clear fighting was not the centerpiece. Am I in the wrong here?

My Players Say I'm A Terrible DM

Dear Terrible:

I am going to disagree with 99% of the more than 300+ reddit comments that said (summarizing) that you are an awesome DM and these players are jerks who should be grateful and kissing the ground you walk on. As my kids would say, "They're glazing you, bruh." Your campaign was going well, you shifted gears, you ended up with bored, complaining players, and when put to a vote (?!) they voted 3-1 to abandon your "well put together quest." That sounds like a pretty solid indictment to me.

Or, as my ten year old daughter concluded (after I read her your letter): "He was dumb. They're playing D&D...it involves fighting."

But set all that aside for a moment and let's address the problematic elephant in the room: the "eternal struggle" of a would-be DM to find and retain players.  

The RPG genre of gaming suffers from being both odd and ill-defined; it is not an "easy sale" to potential players. Certainly it wasn't back in the 80s and (OMG) the 90s. And while the recent spike in D&D's popularity has made it an attractive pastime to all manner of individuals wanting to give it a whirl, the majority of these newbs have little clue what they're getting themselves into. People say D&D was a "fad" of the 80s, but for me it seems more "faddish" now than ever before, with all sorts of bandwagon types wanting to geek out and pretend they're elves and whatnot.

Real life is stressful these days. The fantasy escapism of D&D offers respite. Go figure.

But every DM, on some level, has worries about finding and retaining competent players with the proper chemistry to make their game sing. And just like sports teams drafting players, different DMs have different approaches to how they "stock their roster." Some DMs just want warm bodies. Some want friends. Some look for experience. Some look for "good role-players" (*sigh*). But all DMs want players...because the joy we experience in creating our world can only reach its fullest expression when shared with others. And once we have them, there's often (always?) that nagging doubt in our minds that we may not be able to keep them...that they will dislike us, or our game, or find 'something better to do,' or (Lord, no!) find a better DM to play with.

It is a childish and false narrative, but it is O So Human to find these thoughts creeping through the dark corners of our minds. It happens in all spheres of interest and importance: our work, our marriage, our standing in the community, etc. It is a subconscious narrative born of past failures and the idea that (painful) history will repeat itself and we will suffer as a result. 

Hey, folks: life has ups and downs. That's life. Get used to it.

Let's wander back to your issue, Terrible: you run a campaign for four players. You state you're "fairly new" but you have already ascertained that what you do best is "creative combat scenarios." You note that it is a "problem" that two of your four players are "not as suited to combat" as the others...not ill-suited, but not as suited.

You then proceeded to "fix" this problem by going away from what you do best by crafting a mystery scenario that YOU feel is your "most well put together quest" ever. And three of the four players balked.

Why O Why are you trying to "fix" things that aren't broken? Why O Why are you trying to cater to your players? YOU have a perception that there is a problem...when no one (apparently) was complaining...and then when people say your "solution" SUCKED you whine about it and try to justify how great it was and complain about how terrible your players are. 

No. 

Listen, pal: you want to be a Dungeon Master? Then be a Dungeon Master. You create the world and the players create their characters, and then you run the game. If the characters are poorly suited to the rigors of your world, they will DIE and then create new characters...presumably characters more viable to the world you're running. 

Now, it could be that YOU are the one who is the person who is actually interested in running investigative, mystery adventures, NOT the players themselves. And that is your prerogative as the person running the table! You have the power! You are in control! HOWEVER, note the following:

1. D&D is not a particularly good RPG for investigative and mystery scenarios (though, there are many other RPGs that do fine in this regard), and
2. The players currently at your table may NOT be interested in this type of game. And presenting them with adventures they dislike will (probably, eventually) cause them to leave your table, as is their prerogative.

And that's FINE if they do. It doesn't mean you're a bad person. It does not mean you'll never DM again. It does not mean you'll never put together another group of players. It simply means that THESE players are not interested in the game you want to run.

And wouldn't you rather have a table of players that ARE interested in the game you want to run?

Do not cater to players. Do. Not. Run the game you want to run...enthusiastically, with verve and vigor. Love your game; love your world. It's the only way you'll find the energy to endure the work...real work!...of being a Dungeon Master.

The players will come and they will be far more engaged than if you are wishy-washy on just what kind of game you're running. Players want to play (duh). The game has rules that limit the boundaries of what is permitted. Embrace those limits: they set parameters and inform understandings of what the game is as well as what it isn't. If you start knocking down those fences, you will find your game morphing into something undefined and untenable. Bad, bad news if that happens.

Fortunately, it's not the end of the world by any stretch of the imagination. You created a scenario that the players bitched about it. It happens. Forget about the players...write the scenarios you want to run. If the players aren't on the same page, they'll leave. Which will make space for players that are on the same page. And, ultimately, with regard to players, that's the best you can hope for.

Sincerely, 

JB

"Dear JB" Mailbag #22

Dear JB:

My player "John" and I had an argument at the very beginning of our session yesterday. I DM for a party of eight and they are about half-way through my homebrew campaign. John decided that the current character he was playing, "Galahad," no longer had a reason to travel with the party because of XYZ. He has stated that he'd like to return to playing as that character at a later point in the storyline. Therefore, I made it clear to John that Galahad would be going off on his own to investigate XYZ, which he agreed to.

The party received a bunch of letters, one of which was from Galahad, describing what he has found, where he is going next, why he is going there, etc... John got very angry about this because I wasn't allowing him to choose what Galahad is doing, despite him already playing as a new character that was introduced. I tried to reason with him that since Galahad was merely going from place to place, learning new information, there wasn't really any need for player input. I also tried to justify it by saying that since he is no longer playing as Galahad, he would effectively be just an NPC. We already have characters in the world that were once PCs that I now play, and when they show up to meet the party, I allow their respective players to voice them once more.

John, dismissed everything I was saying because "it is MY character." Another player "Luke" even chipped in saying that John was in the right and that it is just common sense. And so, I exclaimed that Galahad would then just sit right there, having done nothing and not learned anything, until John would pick him back up to play as. This only angered John more and Luke then stated that since what Galahad was doing was ultimately unimportant, that I should let John just make the decisions of what to do and where to go. But how in the Hell am I supposed to let John make decisions for something so bare bones?! A+B=C kind of scenario and John expects me to let him decide Galahad's actions?

I only intended to have Galahad send letters over time to just give the world a feeling of livelihood. As a DM, I feel that I don't have to do that since the party is already busy with other things. For a year and a half, I've DM'd for this story for the party and had no complications with any of my players. Suddenly, this makes our second big argument in the same month and I'm starting to no longer enjoy DM'ing. He and I talked last week about behavior and we came to the conclusion that we were both stressed from outside sources. Yet, after our confrontation last night, I just couldn't find any enjoyment in our game and I found myself being pretty snappy with everyone, which I apologized for. Give it to me straight doc: am I in the wrong, if so, how should I handle this?

Player And I Had An Argument

Dear DM:

Your issue...much like 90% of the issues I see in the Mailbag...stems from a fundamentally warped perspective of D&D. I point you to the first paragraph of your letter:

"He has stated that he'd like to return to playing as that character at a later point in the storyline."

Emphasis added by me. 

You are NOT writing a television serial, nor are you writing a 300 page fantasy novel or fantasy novel series. You are (ostensibly) a DUNGEON MASTER. You are running a game, NOT telling a story. There is no "storyline."

Let me help put this in perspective for you:

Say that you were, in fact, a writer for a TV series. And one of the main actors in your sitcom/drama came up to you and said, "Hey, my agent just got me a movie deal and I still want to be part of the show, but I need six weeks off for filming." And let's say the actor was a solid guy/gal who was popular with the audience and you didn't just want to fire their ass. Well, then, you'd write the character's absence into the script..."Oh, X is on their honeymoon in Italy (or whatever) and we'll pursue other storylines till they get back." This would, of course, be your prerogative as the head writer, director, and producer of the show.

Now let's contrast that with a weekly poker game. If one player says, hey, I need to take a few weeks off but I'd like to buy back in later, you wouldn't say, "Great, but leave your money on the table so we can keep playing with it." You'd (instead) say, no problem, take you cash and we'll see you in a few weeks.

Do you see the difference? 

Hopefully you do because, when you can shift your perspective to viewing D&D as a game, then the issues here (as with 90% of the issues in the Mailbag) become non-issues.

John: My PC Galahad can no longer travel with the party.

DM: What do you mean? Are you leaving the group?

John: No, I still want to play, but I want to play a different character for a while. However, I'd still like to return to Galahad at a future date.

DM: Okay, what do you think Galahad will be doing while not adventuring with the group?

And then John (or whomever) will give an answer that should (hopefully) give an answer that effectively freezes the character until he's ready to be "thawed out." Examples might include: shacking up with a girl for a while, putting some of his money into a farm or business and trying a less dangerous life, or simply "wandering" in search of himself. He could also just "take a job" as a stablehand or tavern barkeep (or whatever) or something in his own field of expertise: clerics could work in a temple, magic-users acting as scribes, fighters as town militia, etc. 

Now, if you're like me (a hardass that runs 1E), you'll still keep track of the character's monthly living expenses while mothballed until his treasure counter hits zero...at which point, no further action need be taken. It's assumed the PC has found some way of supporting themself in a non-adventuring way. And when John decides to once again play Galahad as his PC, the character is no worse-for-wear (although possibly older, depending on how many campaign years have passed). Regardless, a player character that is not being played should have NO IMPACT on the campaign. Out of sight, out of mind, and of no concern to what's going on at the table.

"But-but-but, my campaign arc needs so-and-so to be a part of..." NO. Stop. Just...stop. 

YOU are the DM. You are a Builder of Worlds...you are THE "Creator God" of your campaign. Make an NPC. Make a hundred NPCs. That's your prerogative. You do not need the player's character for your designs. 

Again: D&D is a game. It has rules. There are specific circumstances that might transform a PC into an NPC under the DM's control (some examples include mind control effects or a dead PC being raised as some form of undead). But OTHERWISE a player character should belong to their player until A) they (the player) chooses to leave the campaign (or is booted), B) they (the player) decides to permanently retire the character from play, C) they (the player) chooses to pass off the character to another player (which might be the DM), or D) the character dies in one of the many permanent ways inherent in the D&D game, including failing a resurrection survival roll.

Note: I said "should." This is an assertion, not an explicit instruction found in the text. However, it makes good sense for the following reasons:

1. It avoids issues/disputes (like the one that caused you to write this letter).
2. It provides a check on abusive DMs.
3. It frees DMs from having to adjudicate the actions of a PC in a manner that players will perceive as "fair."
4. It provides players with true agency (within the parameters of the game), allowing them to operate with less fear and more engagement.
5. It places all participants on a somewhat more even playing field, i.e. the DM has absolute control over the world (within the bounds of the game systems), while the players have absolute control over their characters (within the bounds of the game systems).

For all these reasons, I've found it a best practice to act in a "hands off" approach to player characters outside the scope of actual play (that is, play away from the actual game occurring at the table). 

Remember that a PC is not a character in a story (we are playing a game not telling stories), nor is it a simple pawn on a chess board. Rather, a PC is an avatar of the player, the vehicle by which they get to experience the fantasy world in which play occurs. In a very real sense, the character IS the player...no matter how much distance they attempt to put between themselves and this fictional persona. Galahad IS John...it is John if he were an individual of a particular class, race, and alignment, living and adventuring in the imaginary world of your fantasy campaign. As such, players readily identify with...and become attached to...their characters. And this identification/attachment only grows stronger over time, with more play, as more time and effort is invested.

You start arbitrarily making up stuff their character is doing in their downtime, and you're bound to ruffle feathers. Hell, Rob Kuntz is still pissed about what happened to Robilar!

So, yeah: you made a mistake here (and the players were understandably outraged because of it). However, I'd say the mistake stems mostly from a false perspective of what D&D is, and a false understanding of your role as a Dungeon Master. D&D is not a story being told, and you are not a writer/director of the story.  And the player characters are player characters...their actions are chosen by the players, not the DM. That is why there is a distinction between player characters and non-player characters. 

As to "how to handle this:" my advice would be to apologize and say "never mind, none of that happened." And then move on to running D&D for the current batch of PCs at the table. Because that's what they (the players) are all there for: playing D&D. Just do your job as a DM: Dungeon Masters build (and run) dungeons (and worlds)...not stories. 

Sincerely,

JB

"Dear JB" - The Rejects

Not every D&D reddit post is worth going in the "Dear JB" mailbag; here are a few:

[note: this is not an April Fool's joke]

So basically I'm in a campaign and our party consists of A sorcerer (me), a monk, a fighter, a barbarian, artificer and a rouge. We are all level 2 and we just beat our first encounter and we realized oh shit we don't have a healer (our artificer has one healing spell)! I thought I could subclass into cleric for healing spells but I don't know if sorcerer and cleric mix well and I want some outside input/help! Please help!

Help! We Didn't Coordinate!

Um...your party is all level 2 and you JUST beat your first encounter?

My character has a personal weapon taken from a family member that was slain (it's complicated) but she is a Dex based fighter with no strength and it's a strength item, a trident. Would you allow your players to narratively shorten the haft or lighten the weapon to make it Dex based? Or is that abit of a stretch?

Modifying A Weapon In Character

"Narratively shorten the haft?" That's not a thing. 

My Fairy Divination Wizard level 17 wants to be an Archfey, its like my personal quest besides killing all the evil witches from the Feywild. I know its a DM call, but I want you guys to give me some ideas and a bit of lore, what kind of stuff could my character get by achieving something like that? I know that Archfeys have a little bit of the Feywild territory for themselves and stuff like that.

My Character Wants To Be An Archfey

I hate you 5E.

Good day to all! All my successful characters were strange, crazy, idiots, and outcasts. But I had a great experience with them, as well as nice interactions with NPCs and party members. And here comes the problem. For my next campaign I'd like to play a detective who saw life and different crimes, worked undercover. And I just can't imagine him interesting. He supposed to react and interact normally some strange and scary things are not so strange and scary for him. I just have a pic of him in my head and wanna do something with that, but playing a normal person is way harder for me than someone strange. I want to ask what makes others interesting. How calm, normal, logical, not too emotional person can be good.

How To Play A Normal, Healthy, And Sociable Characters?

If you have to ask what "normal" is....

Dying and being resurrected. How would that change you?

*sigh*

So my DM is a full time college student and works full time but still makes time to DM for my DND group. We've only done about 4 sessions (2 of them one-shots) and I got to asking him about background music. I'm not to worried about the music knowing he's working and going to school and probably doesn't have a lot of time to prepare a full playlist for every encounter. So this morning at work he got to saying that I should put together a playlist, 'since I watch the most anime'. I'm ok with this and will make a playlist on YouTube for him. My question is, does anyone have any advice to make this playlist easy to navigate.

Playlist Advice

Are YOU in college? Because that's not the correct spelling of the word "too." The rest of your post is nonsense.

I've never tried dnd before, I kinda know how it works, I have a few concepts for characters, not even drafts, my main question is how should I go about creating a character? And if you have an active dnd party and consider inviting me, I'd be more than happy to join, I hear dnd players are a welcoming bunch

I Want To Start Playing Some DND

This is trolling, right? On the off-chance it's not...have you read the instruction manual?

Am I Playing DnD Wrong?

[post deleted by JB]

Yes...yes, you are.

We were doing a dungeon crawl where the DM matched us mostly against skeletons. During a break from play (the session was quite long), I thought I'd look at the skeleton stat block on my phone. After finding out just how low their INT scores are, I extensively used Mind Sliver for the remainder of the session to target their INT saves. Another player caught onto me doing that and asked why I started using a cantrip I haven't touched in the first half of the session. I explained my thought process, to which they said that's metagaming and that I shouldn't look up enemy stats.

Is It Actually Frowned Upon To Make Decisions Based On Enemy Stats?

As D&D is a game, "metagaming" is an acceptable form of game play. However, many DMs (including myself) would not allow a player to access a Monster Manual for intel during play. Also, how does a "mind attack" spell have any effect on a mindless skeleton?

I Rolled 3 Nat 1 In A Row…It Wasn’t Fun

Quit D&D now before you are further disappointed!

I have been playing D&D with a group of IRL friends for a few years (I am not the DM), and one of my friends has been consistently making their characters share the trait of being hypersexual, and by this I mean that they roleplay their character as someone who (in-game, not OOC) finds 99% of NPCs attractive, constantly flirts and tries to initiate romantic or (non-explicit) sexual encounters.

How To Deal With The Hypersexual PC At The Table

*sigh*

My Player Said My DM Style Is Unfair.

Boo-fucking-hoo.

How Do I Tell My DM I Don't Want To Play Anymore?

Say: "I don't want to play anymore."

Player acts aloof and does things against the party just because. "But their backstory is why they act like that"

Does Backstory Excuse Shitty Player Behavior

No.

I'm new to D&D. Our DM has dinged us twice with "If you ask if you level up then you don't level up" and we've missed 2 levels from this under the milestone system. Which was a surprise to even his regulars. He said 'it's an unofficial rule of the game'. Is that true, has anyone heard of this? Once was when I just mentioned something about leveling in-between sessions and another when a fellow player asked directly at the end of a session. So we have got the feeling we might be facing CR5 stuff as level 3 next session, is that how it works? Before someone asks, the DM is in his late 20's.

If You Ask If You Level Up Then You Don't Level Up

Mm. Mmmmm.

What could the motivation be of purposely killing half your party with Thunderwave?

Maybe he/she hates 5E?

Should I Kick This Player Out Of My Campaign?

Should I Bail On This Campaign?

Two for the price of one! The answer to both is: if you have to ask, you already know the answer.

TL;DR: I joined my wife’s group after watching her 4 year long amazing campaign and her DM bashes my character every single session despite her saying that this character is essential to her overall story and everyone’s back story.

I'm Pretty Sure My Wife's DM Hates Me

I'm pretty sure he does, too...especially since you refuse to see him as your DM, despite now being part of the campaign.

I Designed A Puzzle, But Don't Know What For

*sigh*

So I just started a campaign for people in my major this is second session and I just have some whiskey so I drink it anyway turns out that when your drunk playing d&d is really fun and roleplaying is a lot more expressive apparently this was one of my players best session ever. So to all DMs alcohol.

Dungeon Master Pro Tip Get Drunk

Helps when reading Reddit letters as well.