Tuesday, August 5, 2025

"Deat JB" Mailbag #37


Dear JB:

I think I'm going to give up, I'm running a campaign where I made everything really nice, the world map, the cities, stories, dungeons, enemies, but my table doesn't cooperate. The players are my friends, a barbarian, a cleric, a druid and a bard, but they don't collaborate with the campaign, they always make jokes out of character, they make secret metagames, and this all comes from the bard, druid and barbarian, the cleric is the only one who seems to really want to play, I'm thinking about killing their characters in the next session and making a new world from absolute zero, do I do that?


I Will Give Up


Dear IWGU:

Let me see if I have a full understanding here...
  1. You've create a world map, cities, dungeons, "stories" (I'll assume you mean adventure situations), and enemies for your campaign. 
  2. You're so annoyed by your players that you've all but decided to chuck it all in the bin and start over from scratch (after "killing their characters").
Why on earth would you do something so idiotic? 

I'll get to your "annoying" players in a second, but the only reason to bin a campaign world is because you are dissatisfied with the campaign world. You can ALWAYS find new players...why throw away the work and effort you've already expended? You should be expanding and developing your world, making it deeper and richer, not re-booting. Even if there are things you dislike about your game world, you fix them, you modify, you make adjustments. Why O why would you burn everything down? Are you a child craving attention that you must throw a self-destructive tantrum? Are you going to start cutting on yourself next? 

Dude: grow up. 

Your complaint is that your players "don't collaborate with the campaign" which, frankly, is nonsensical. D&D is NOT a collaborative game. YOU are the Dungeon Master: you create the world, you manage the campaign. Their is no "collaboration." Let's be clear: the definition of collaborate is
"to work jointly on an an activity, especially to produce or create something"
No. You are the Dungeon Master. YOU are the one who does the work with regard to producing/creating the campaign.

If you are laboring under the misapprehension that D&D is somehow a game of "collaborative storytelling," let me burst that bubble right now. It's not. Regardless of what the marketing says. You can TRY to make it that, but you will fail and be miserable more often than not, because it is POORLY DESIGNED for that style of play, mainly because it still bears the fruit of the seeds sown by the original designers and it was never the intention of the original designers to create a collaborative storytelling game. There are other RPGs one can buy that are designed that way, and that function well for that purpose, but D&D isn't one of them, period, end of story.

You want collaborative storytelling? Join a writing club.

You complain that your players "make jokes out of character" and "make secret metagames" (not so secret if you know about it) and imply this is evidence that three of the four don't "really want to play." Are you kidding me? The fact that they metagame implicitly signals that they are engaged with the game as a game...they absolutely want to play! One can only engage with the game in a "meta" fashion by knowing and understanding the game's rules and systems...do you not read all the complaints from DMs about players incapable of grasping or understanding game rules, even after YEARS of play?

And to make jokes is human. You will find all players do this at one time or another. If you're going to let that bug you to the point of quitting, than you're probably not cut out for the job of being a DM.

SO, to sum up: your complaint is nonsensical and your proposed response is childish. You ask the question "do I do that?" referring to killing the player characters and starting the campaign from scratch, and my answer to you is: this would accomplish nothing

Presumably, your players would still continue to be humans who are interested in engaging with and playing D&D, so how would re-building the (imaginary) world change that? What...do you think they are so attached to their PCs that this action would be punitive in the extreme and "teach them a lesson" in how to play the way you want them to play? If that's what you think, you're a jackass who doesn't understand the first thing about Dungeons & Dragons

Rather than waste your time and effort accomplishing nothing, I'd strongly recommend quitting D&D altogether and finding a creative outlet more suitable to what you want to do. Become a playwright, or start an improvisational theater troupe, or write your fantasy fiction serial using all the "nice" content material you originally hoped to purpose for your D&D campaign. Keep your friends as friends and enjoy their company around board games or video games where (hopefully) their natural human behaviors with regard to game playing won't annoy you.

But stop playing D&D. You're doing it wrong anyway.

Sincerely,
JB

6 comments:

  1. I appreciate what you're saying, JB, but you realise that phrasing like "cities, stories, dungeons," etcetera, don't mean to this person what you think it means. Nor does "making a new world from absolute zero." And neither does this person's use of "collaborate."

    You and I, we think these words mean what they mean, but these are all footprints of HASBRO d&d, where these phrasings are merely cardboard cut-outs for the game's structure. This person has no idea what he's saying when he uses the word "collaborate." He's heard it used, been told that's what happens with D&D and... well, that's all the context it has. When he says the players don't "collaborate," he means they don't "play." Like, in a way that anyone would recognise playing.

    He probably has no idea what you would mean by "adventure situations." Those aren't words for him, not if any read I'm making of these environs where the game is discussed can be counted upon. All D&D is "stories"... because this is what a DM does. Oh, I don't mean, the DM tells "stories," as you seem to understand it, or as I would, I mean, cross out the words "running the game," and write in "stories" and assume neither is in any way definitive of something.

    Language itself has slipped completely out of the grasp for these people. They're not using any of it in a way that you can communicate with them. "making a new world from absolute zero" means, in their mind, the same world they have with different players, or just stopping the present adventure and starting over. They have NEVER made a world, they're not saying they're going to make another one.

    I've been watching you backslap these people for months now, but really, you might just as well take your points up with goats or giraffes. Accept that your way of playing D&D, your philosophy, your outlook or any of the things that you're stating here, will EVER be embraced by these people.

    Meanwhile, the rest of us here, reading this, we already know all this and we already embrace it. So, you're really just playing to the choir. We don't mind so much, we are the choir, we do show up for rehearsals. But do you think maybe you could get off this pot and talk about going forward yourself, instead of constantly looking backwards at all this useless dreck?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I know man. Making posts like this is just me "keeping my hand in," so to speak (with regard to blogging). It's also mildy cathartic in a venting kind of way. Oh...and (sometimes) it helps ME crystalize my stance on certain subjects.

      However, I am working on a practical project -- a "how to" book -- that...well, never mind. I'm only a couple chapters in, so probably best not to overpromise.

      Delete
    2. You absolutely have it in you, JB. Never doubt that. You would be my first choice of a person to write a book like that, over me included.

      Delete
    3. You are far, far too kind, Alexis. We'll see what comes of it.

      Delete
  2. If I had any interaction with this person, I would start by asking tons of questions to understand what's *really* going on here, because of the aforementioned gap in terminology and language. It might be that this person is frustrated with a perceived lack of commitment on the players' part, the players might be (unconsciously) rebelling against their DM's rigid "storylines" by making sure to go elsewhere and choose to avoid the railroad which the DM interprets and bad play. My guess would be that the players lack in commitment due to lack of player agency due to the campaign structure, but in order to confirm that I would have to hear way more details.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah. But for the sake of these posts, I can only go on what they write down...that's why I take them at face value.

      However, as Alexis points out, there's an excellent possibility that this person's terminology and MY terminology are vastly different. The 5E brain, generally speaking, is in a very different place with regard to D&D play than where I'm at.

      Delete