"Dear JB" Mailbag #31

Dear JB:

I just wanted to make this post to remember players to appreciate your DM's. 

I started 10 years ago and formed a group. I started mainly because I wanted to play d&d but since I like building worlds, acting and story telling, I started DM)ing.

I put together a group and did a campaign in 3.5. It was a short campaign because I didn't like DM-ing 3.5. too many rules, too much math.

I did the next one in 5e. I created a completely new world, pantheons, history, continents, countries. I let my party choose where to start, I did session zeros on what to expect. What I expected,...

After 3 years I burned out. The rules lawyering, the min maxing, the not paying attention got to me.

I talked to the players, especially the ones whose behaviour disturbed me and after a break we did another campaign. This time we did one from a book because I did not feel like doing so much preparation anymore (in hindsight, already a huge red flag). 

The first few months were great but after a while all behaviour returned. 

• Stopping the game for half an hour to keep googling and checking for the exact ruling and not being happy with a ruling I made to keep the game going. 
• Making a too powerfull character from books I didn't approve. 
• Trying to trick me as DM by witholding information. 
• Talking amonst eachother loudly while I was describing the scene 
• and so on.  

The campaign is done, the finale was rushed because I just wanted it to be over for the summer and I said d&d is now done. 10 years of DM-ing and I'm over it.

I am going to take a big summer break, then clean out my "mancave". And I will quit d&d.

Appreciate your DM, they don't always have it easy

Quit DMing After 10 Years

Dear Quitter:

There are a lot of people who are going to tell you, 'Oh, this is so sad! It sounds like you had terrible players! You shouldn't blame the game...you should just go out and find new friends.' I know this is what a lot of people are going to tell you, because you posted this letter on Reddit and that's what the scores of comments I could stomach reading (I stopped counting around the 60-70 mark) said.

I'm going to make the assumption that you don't really intend to "quit" D&D. People who quit things, quit...they don't talk about what they're GOING to do...they just do it. And later on if people ask, hey didn't you used to...? They reply "Yeah, but I quit."

SO...assuming that's the case (that you still want to play D&D) and given that you'll probably end up in the DM's chair again (because you "like building worlds, acting and story telling") I can say with some confidence that, in all likelihood, you're going to going to continue running into the EXACT SAME PROBLEMS, regardless of who the players are at your table. 

As is most always (always?) the case, the problem is YOU, pal.

I'm going to go point-by-point through your complaints and explain your missteps. If you can correct these things, then you can have a fun, enjoyable time DMing. If not, you might want to consider quitting for real...or, at least, quitting the Dungeon Master role.

[I'm going to ignore your complaints about 3.5 because you have decided it's not your cup o tea, and simply address your "5E' campaign(s)]

1) You complain about "rules lawyering" which you describe as "stopping the game to check for exact rules and not being happy with rulings you've made to keep the game going."

You are playing a game. A game has rules. Do you know the rules? This is a non-issue if you know the rules.

If you can't be bothered to learn the rules, and just make shit up to "keep the game going," then YOU are the asshole here, not the players. If you KNOW the rules but don't want to play by them, then it is your responsibility to INFORM the players of these changes in advance so that they won't be questioning you and asking for reviews.

If you DO know the rules and you ARE playing by the rules and the players are STILL questioning you, then there is an issue of TRUST going on here. A player might say to me (the DM), 'Hey! I don't think that ability works the way you say it does!' But if I KNOW the rule, I can quickly reference it, show it to the player, and rub their nose in it...and after doing that once or twice, they'll get tired of questioning my authority and it won't be an issue any longer.

As the DM, it is your responsibility to become a subject matter expert on the game you're running. Ideally, with regard to the game rules, you should be the most knowledgeable person at the table. If you're not, you should get on that!

2) You complain about "min-maxing" and players making "too powerful" characters using non-approved books.

If 'min-maxing''...generally described as "the optimizing of a character by selecting certain skills and attributes, often to an extreme degree"...is something you dislike, you can always play a different game. Specifically a game in which min-maxing isn't possible.

You can't hate the players for the foibles of the game. As the DM, you choose the system you run; don't like the system? Choose a different one.

However, your complaint about "non-approved books" is just...dumb. You are the DM; you say what goes in your game. I have made it clear, for example, that PCs in my game are limited to the character types available in the Players Handbook. If someone showed up to my table with a Drow (from the Unearthed Arcana) or an anti-paladin (from Dragon magazine), the character would be prohibited from play.

To put it plainly: this is not a problem with the players; this (again) is a problem with YOU. Why are YOU allowing your players to dictate what they can and can't bring to the game?

3) You complain of the players "trying to trick you" by "withholding information."

What the heck does this even mean? How are the players "tricking" you?

Are you saying that the players are withholding vital information from their character sheet...like how many hit points they have remaining or how many spells remain un-used? These are things YOU can track yourself, as necessary...I track a running total of damage sustained by each PC over the course of a session, and it's realy not difficult. 

Are you saying your players are refusing to reveal their character sheet to you, so that you are unaware of what they possess or something? This would be pretty silly (and I'm not sure how this would lead to "trickery"); as the DM you can ask to examine a player's character record at any time but, seriously, is that really even necessary? In my experience, players tend to be forthcoming with this kind of information, because they don't want the DM to disallow some ability or piece of equipment they've bothered to record.

Or maybe you mean the players are hiding their plans or motivations from you? Which is...well, that's a stupid thing to complain about. We aren't mind readers, and nothing forces the players to tell you what they're thinking. And who cares what they're thinking...as a DM, I only care about what their characters are doing. And if they don't decribe their actions to me, it ain't happening in the game. So...what? I don't see how this would be failing to meet some expectation of play.

But perhaps by "withholding information" you mean players are keeping rules information to themselves...how a particular spell or magic item works, for example, or an unusual combat maneuver...in order to "spring" some sort of "surprise" on your carefully crafted encounter. Is this what you mean? Because if it IS then there's an easy solution: KNOW THE RULES OF THE GAME. Jiminy Cricket...you say you've been DMing for ten years and the players are pulling the wool over your eyes because they know the system better than you? I'm sorry, but that's (again) all on YOU, pal. 

"Tricking the DM?" In 40+ years of play, I've never been "tricked" by a player. Surprised by some daring or clever or lucky action that succeeded against all odds? Sure. But "tricked?" No. 

4) You complain about the players not paying attention to you and of them loudly conversing with each other while you're trying to describe a scene.

At its heart, Dungeons & Dragons is a game of information exchange. The DM provides info to the players. The players react to that information and inform the DM of their characters' actions. The DM then provides info on the result of those actions (i.e. how the imagined environment changes in response). Back and forth, back and forth. That's game play.

If the players fail to pay attention or choose to ignore the information being provided, they are going to end up making decisions and taking actions with less-than-complete information...quite possibly with negative consequences for their characters.

Them's the breaks.

My players tend to listen carefully when I am talking, because they don't want to miss any vital piece of information they might need or that they can take advantage of. But I also make it clear "hear we go, we're playing now." I don't launch into a description of what's going on while players are in the middle of a loud conversation with each other. Knowing when to speak and when to be silent are part of the DM's craft...just as known how to listen is part of the players' toolbox.

If the players fail to listen, they'll face the consequences of their actions. These consequences may be as small as having to ask me to repeat what I said (which drains the clock of vital playing time...meaning less D&D!) or may be as impactful as a TPK. 

Again, them's the breaks. I just run D&D...that's my job.

But I'm getting a vibe that this complaint is something more ego-driven than anything else. You say that part of your reason for wanting to DM is because you like "acting and story telling." It is possible that your players are tuning you out for another reason: they are BORED. And that boredom could stem from you grandstanding as an actor or from relating long narratives as a part of describing the "story" you want to tell. And if THAT is what's going on than my advice is going to be fairly curt:

Stop playing D&D wrong.

Players come to the table to play D&D, not to be entertained by some sort of theatrical performance or have a story told to them like when they were kindergarteners at the library. If they wanted THAT kind of thing, they could sit at home and stream "live play" videos (like Critical Role). 

And please don't tell me that this is EXACTLY the kind of experience they're seeking out, that this kind of sham play is the current and authentic way of playing D&D and that I don't know what I'm talking about. I KNOW that ain't the kind of D&D your players are looking for. How do I know? Because they don't pay attention to you and talk loudly with each other when you're trying to "describe a scene." 

There is ample evidence that you are running a badly run game because your players have checked our and don't give a shit. That is on YOU. These people came to play D&D, did they not?  You didn't force them to show up, did you? They're not employees of a company that you own and their jobs depend in them participating in a D&D session, right?

So if they really DO want a "Critical Role" experience, and they're so checked out that your frustration has reached the boiling point (as evidenced by your letter) than you must be pretty shitty at running D&D in that fashion. Maybe your real frustration is that you're not Matt Mercer.

Quitter, your complaints about your players all seem to stem from a single root cause, namely the way in which you run your D&D game. You've been DMing for ten years and yet you don't know the rules well enough to shut down your players questions, you allow your players to run roughshod over your table rules of what is allowed, you are "tricked" by your own ignorance, and you fail to hold the attention or engagement of the people who've signed up to play. All this is an indictment of YOU, not your players. You can find yourself new players, but if you don't change the way in which you DM, you will most likely end up with the same frustrating results.

Sincerely,

JB