AKA "Dear JB" Mailbag #50
Happy December! I am not quite waist-deep in the holiday season, but the water's certainly rising. With a trip to Los Angeles coming in the next couple weeks, followed immediately by a two week "jaunt" to Mexico, we'll see how the pressure ramps up. For today...I'm okay.
[and to be fair, other than the actual commute involved, Mexico should be fairly relaxing]
But I figured I might as well throw out a little something-something for the month of December...just on the off-chance this is my last opportunity to blog in 2025, a year that's been a bit of a banner year for my blogging (the most posts I've gotten up in ten years!). Not sure if they're any good, but at least I'm putting a little time and effort into the thing.
SO...yeah, the post.
I was combing the Reddit "slush pile" this morning, and a common theme was popping up...people flummoxed or bitter or unhappy about being unable to work with (or continue to play with) players, despite attempts to communicate, negotiate, and compromise on various things, and asking how, HOW can they prevent their group from splintering, from completely demolishing the campaign into which they'd poured so much time and effort.
Typical DM problem, right? I'm sure you've heard it before...I'm sure some of you have experienced it before. You spend a few weeks or months or YEARS building a play group, learning to get on with everyone, dealing with people's flaws and foibles (everyone has them, and being able to remain friends AND accept each other for our flaws is not only a sign of maturity, but also a mark of real friendship), negotiating the group dynamic/chemistry, and then BAM...the "rift" occurs. Not because someone has to move away, or gets married, or has a kid, or changes jobs, but because the person WANTS DIFFERENT THINGS FROM THE GAME. Or, to put it another way, has DIFFERENT EXPECTATIONS OF PLAY.
And now it's threatening to derail everything.
How could this have happened in our carefully cultivated and curated play group? Well, IF the play group was "carefully cultivated" it usually only comes up because a new player enters the game (a good friend, or significant other of the DM or another player) and throws a wrench in the machine. However, in newer groups it could simply be that A) the group was formed with the assumption everyone was, more-or-less, on the same page ("we're all best friends, right? We can make it work!") and/or B) because one or more players were ALWAYS dissatisfied but was simply hiding their resentment but has now found the stones to assert themselves in a fashion that's counter to other players' wants/needs/expectations.
Sad when it happens. Usually not "tragic," but it's generally okay to shed a tear for the end of an era.
BUT...is this a preventable problem? Are there ways to "work this out" and "save the campaign?"
The answers to those questions are "yes" and "maybe," respectively. I say, maybe because it can be tough to shut Pandora's box once it's opened. Jim's girlfriend might be a pain in the neck, but kicking her out is probably going to cost you Jim, and might cost you Bill, too, if Bill only plays because he's Jim's best friend (see how that works?). But, sure, it's preventable from the get-go, in a fairly simple manner:
Never compromise.
If you want a campaign that's going to endure, you must be the rock against which the waves of whimsy break. You must be immune to the wheedling and cajoling of players who'd have you modify the game to their preferences. You must be steadfast against a "rule of cool" mindset, instead steeling yourself to be firm AND fair because, when it comes to being a referee, firmness is fairness.
I probably sound harsh. It's not meant to be. Just assume I am giving you this practical advice in a soft, kindly voice...like a parent putting their child down to sleep on a school night rather than allowing them to stay up till the wee hours eating ice cream and watching TV. You may think it's a delightful idea to give in to the player's whimsical request of the moment, but it's not. It's really not.
Do not compromise. If you're running a game of AD&D and someone shows up asking you to adapt some 5E-ism to the game, you must say no. If someone asks you to make the game "less dangerous" or implies there's "too much combat" you have to say, sorry but we're playing D&D here. If you have a personal house rule that you don't allow evil characters or PvP at your table, you cannot make an exception for the player who "loves" Drow or who wants their thief to pick the pockets of fellow party members.
As the Dungeon Master it is your job...your responsibility...to set the ground rules and terms of play. If you want to go full-bore 2nd edition with only "rogue" types getting x.p. for treasure, that's FINE...that's your choice of how you want to run your game; don't let the players talk you out of it. If Sally doesn't like it, she can walk.
I understand that it sounds like I'm extolling the virtues of being a stubborn ass, but it is important to be unwavering in this regard...important for both YOU and your players. Players who know and understand the game that is being run have the freedom to work and grow within the system, playing the game...as opposed to having to learn how to play the DM. Which is what happens when the DM "loosens up" and starts acting in a fickle or whimsical manner. The dice are fickle enough. The game has plenty of whimsy. What is needed from the DM is not someone who's "adaptable," but someone who is dependable and trustworthy.
You only get that reputation by refusing to compromise.
Does that mean your particular game "isn't for everyone?" Yes it does, and there may well be some players who you wish would stay who won't. But making accommodations for people is simply putting off the inevitable...it's attempting to mask a foundational flaw that will fester like an untreated wound. Do not bend: be up front with what your game is, and run your game. There is no D&D game without a Dungeon Master. And there are plenty of players or would-be players in the world. How many people are in your small town? 500? 1,000? And you can't find two or three who are interested in playing D&D the way you want to play D&D? Are you sure you've been turned down by ALL of them?
Well, there's always a few billion people on the internet to solicit.
I'm not going to bother transcribing any of the Reddit letters on this subject because it always boils down to the same thing: DM capitulation. Doesn't matter if they play 5E or "old school" D&D...once you start trying to please people because of the endorphins you get from a momentarily happy player, well, the jig is up. You have to stick to your guns from session 1 (I don't do "session zero") and accept that what you run or enjoy isn't the same for everyone else. And that's okay. Variety is the spice of life...you can play games with one type of person and drink beer while watching hockey with another type of person and make love to a third type and argue politics with a fourth.
Never give in. Never surrender. No compromise. Not for the DM. Other areas of life...sure, absolutely. For Dungeons & Dragons? No. Hard pass.
