"Dear JB" Mailbag #39

Dear JB:

When discussing rolling stats and how I wanted the characters to use the point buy system suggested on the D&D Next website. Players really didn't like this by some mumbling under their breaths. In fact, one said if he didn't have a character "with at least two 18 stats" he would suicide the character and re-roll. Implying he would do this until he got the stats he wanted. I communicated with the whole group that I wanted everyone to have fun but this type of power gaming is very difficult to run and make encounters fun and challenging but not turn into a total party kill. They still want nothing to do with it.

This whole situation has turned DM'ing off for me. I've been a DM since I was 16 (50 now). DM'd more than actually played. Idk. Guess I'll just play role-playing video games instead of tabletop D&D.

(Edit) I should add that the suicide character situation came about when discussing alternate stat rolling ideas. The group wanted to roll 4d6 reroll the 1 and 2, keep 3 highest dice. They didn't want to be Heroes, they want to be Demi-Gods in my opinion. 

(Edit 2) In person gaming. These are people I've gamed with for years. Just getting tired of the power gaming. Would rather have story telling adventures. 

Power Gamers Ruining D&D For Me

Dear PGRD:

I am so, so sorry. So sorry that you started DMing 34 years ago. If you learned your chops in 1991, you were learning from 2nd edition AD&D and that was one broken-ass game system when it came to explaining what the Dungeons & Dragons game is all about. TSR did you wrong, fella, and unfortunately, you've got some "un-learning" to do.

I mean, clearly you do, because what you're describing here is far from functional play. If you've been playing "in person" with these guys "for years," and they've come to the conclusion that they need high stats in order to have viable characters, these are based on expectations they've learned sitting at your table, and is typical of the schizophrenic nature of 2E that keeps one in the "game side" of the game, while all the while trying to make adventures sound like grand epic narratives (generally with railroad tactics). 

And now you've decided to lean hard into 5E's narrative ascendant bullshit and the players still want to blow shit up, or want to make sure their skill use is effective enough, or their sword-swingers are pumping out enough damage, or WHATEVER the reason is they feel they need great fistfuls of "18s" to play the game you're creating? First off, let's talk YOU:

WHAT DO YOU CARE WHAT THEIR STATS ARE?

Why does it matter? I mean, why does it matter At All?  Since getting back into AD&D, I've seen my son roll not one but TWO characters with "18/00" strength (and one, I believe, had an 18 constitution to boot). Doesn't matter: both DIED before they reached 2nd level. Having "18s" in your abilities doesn't mean jack or shit in D&D land. You can have all the 18s in the world and still get taken down by a passel of kobolds or have the life force drained out of you by a wight or vampire. Minor bumps in effectiveness are no proof against poor or stupid play.

Are you worried that one player is going to "upstage" the other players? Again, ACTION and BEHAVIOR over the long run will count more for whether or not players are respectful or resentful of their peers. And part of the DM's job (sorry to have to tell you) is MEDIATING the SOCIAL DYNAMIC between the players. You point out to the table what one player's character contributes to the party (that's your job, if no one else at the table has the balls/leadership to do so). The big honking fighter with all the muscles can't pick a lock, or heal an injured party member, or fire off a sleep spell. All the characters are designed to have their place in the adventure. And even characters that have duplicate abilities, build in redundancy, extending the resources of the party, allowing for "deeper delves" (i.e. longer sessions) that contribute to EVERY PARTY MEMBER'S SURVIVAL.

No player should resent the guy who has a couple 18s just because they're highest stat is 16 or 17. Their reaction should be: Oh...that's going to be the guy who kicks in the doors, OR that's the guy who does all the negotiations, OR whatever. We are establishing a TEAM here, and each party member is a part of that team, bringing (and utilizing) their specific strengths. 

So what else are you whining about? "They want to be demigods, not heroes." Again: boo-hoo. This is D&D. If you're playing 5E, then players are already closer to demigods than heroes in older editions, but it DOESN"T MATTER because the game has been SCALED to the power level of these powered up characters. If it doesn't scale CORRECTLY (and maybe it doesn't, I'm not a veteran 5E DM, so my experience with that edition is minimal), then again I will say: I'm so sorry. Play AD&D (first edition) instead.

The FIRST priority of a Dungeon Master is to the game they are playing. Regardless of the edition being played. The rules must have integrity. The rules must be respected. Without rules, there is no game, and you are just sitting around a table shooting the breeze. 

Does 5E allow players to roll characters with multiple 18 dice scores? Than one must assume the designers have taken such a potentiality into account with the game's design and it is FINE AND DANDY if such occurs. Who are YOU to gainsay the designers? Just let it go.

The SECOND priority if a Dungeon Master is to the world they are building. Here is where you, as an experienced DM should be focusing the bulk of your attention. It seems to me that you haven't yet grasped this concept, in part (BUT ONLY "IN PART") because of your focus on "telling stories."

The fact of the matter is that you haven't yet learned or grasped an essential part of Dungeon Mastering. Which, given that you have 34 years of experience with the DM's role, might sound like a substantial put down from Yours Truly. DON'T FEEL BAD. 34 years into MY career as a Dungeon Master, I DIDN'T GET IT EITHER. I know this, because I can read my blog posts from 2016 and see it with my own eyes! It's only towards the end of 2017 that I started to get a true inkling of what the hell I was supposed to be doing...and it really didn't crystalize till a year or two after that.

The issues with 2E...and 3E and 4E and 5E and, heck, even 1E!...only serve to confuse the matter for would-be Dungeon Masters. It's not your fault. Hell, it's not the fault of ANY of us who want to be Dungeon Masters yet can't quite grasp it. BECAUSE THE DESIGNERS THEMSELVES HAD A HARD TIME DISTINGUISHING, LET ALONE EXPLAINING, WHAT THE GAME IS AND HOW AND WHY IT FUNCTIONS AS THE GREATEST GAME OF ALL TIME. Instead (and unfortunately) for the most part they were blinded by dollar signs when they found they could sell this "thing" like hotcakes, and they tweaked their designs to MAXIMIZE PROFITS. Every company that has controlled the D&D brand has (eventually) fallen down this rabbit hole. Taking the time and effort to actually train Dungeon Masters just isn't a company priority; raising the corporate bottom line IS.

So, PGRD, since my own book on how to be a Dungeon Master isn't yet ready for publication, you're just going to have to take my word on this (for now): FOCUS ON YOUR WORLD BUILDING. Use the rules; build the world. Remember what the game is about: adventurers seeking fortune and glory in a dangerous world. Give them the dangerous world with the potential fortune and glory. And then let them go in it and see what unfolds. You won't care at all what their stats are.

NOW, you did say this:

"...this type of power gaming is very difficult to run and make encounters fun and challenging but not turn into a total party kill..."

Which I can interpret a couple different ways:

A) "I don't like doing the work required of a Dungeon Master," OR

B) "I can do the work required to challenge the 'power gamer' but the lazy ass players who aren't willing to up their game are all going to get wrecked."

If it's the former, then it may be that you need to take a break from DMing for a while. Maybe you should play in someone else's (5E) game where the DM is willing to be a dancing monkey to facilitate players sitting around doing their posturing/play-acting and engaging in collaborative "story telling." Let some other rube do the heavy lifting that WotC (and the expectations set by scripted live-stream games) places on its Dungeon Masters. Be a player for a while...make your tiefling artificer with "daddy issues" and piddle around for a few sessions. Relax and recupe, man.

However, if it's the latter interpretation, then I'm sorry but you have to stop molly-coddling your players. These are people you've been playing with for YEARS...it's time for them to get their shit together. Make adventures that the power gamer can cake walk (for very little profit), and more challenging/profitable adventures that will benefit your hardcore players and rough-up the "tourists."

That's how D&D works.

Now I know some people claim that they can make D&D work in other ways, and if they can: great. More power to them. Play the way you want if it works. I know my approach works: that's why I keep trying to hype it to people (here and elsewhere).

*sigh*

Run the game the way it's written. Build your world: the world YOU want to create/build. And then invite the players in (players are the THIRD priority, after all). Forget all about the "story telling." That's not why we're here, man. You want to write a story? Fine. Go write it.

Sincerely, 

JB

Play-Testing Complete

Still at Orcas. A fine, fine day with plenty of sunshine, hiking, good fellowship, and the eating of seafood. So much seafood.

(*sips wine*)

We also finished my final play-test of the tournament module that I plan on debuting for this year's Cauldron convention. My own players (kids..they're just kids) did quite a bit better than those (adults) who sat down at my last play-test, suffering only three deaths and coming away with some 60k+ in treasure. But it was a pyrrhic victory due to...well, I'll let your imagination fill in the blanks when it comes to the whys and wherefores.

Diego was miffed (for the most part) because, in the end, they'd left so much treasure on the table. The adventure is downright fiendish...I am VERY pleased with how it functions, as it should bring a lot of grief and suffering to the players if run correctly. I need to polish up the text a bit to make sure there's proper instruction for the DMs as to HOW to run it. But this shouldn't be an easy "cake-walk" in the same way (some) people referred to last year's module.

[and just to be clear: when I ran last year's adventure for my home group, it ended in a TPK]

[which reminds me: best line of the evening tonight: "Yes, we suffered two deaths so far. But one was a suicide and the other was, also, technically a suicide." Oh, my. We laughed so hard the kids were worried I was going to faint...]

For a group of 6-8 Euro 1E aficionados...yeah, maybe they'll find a way to break the thing over their knee. And that's fine; that's part of the game. I've been seeing players wreck my crafty machinations since I was a kid...it is what players do (duh). But my job is to make them work for it; it's no good if they find things too easy. 

Iron sharpens iron. And I want my players to be honed to a hair-splitting razor.

SO...polish the text for clarity and context (in terms of running) and then I'll get it out the door to the Cauldron organizers who (it seems) have appointed me "tournament director" for this year's con. Which just means (I think) that I get to decide the winner of the tourney. Which is, like, cool and everything (so long as they provide the medals)...but I'm less concerned with 'winners' and 'losers' and more concerned that people just have a good time running (and playing) the adventure. THAT is what we're all there for, after all.

Besides, I have three more adventures I have to write/prep/test before I leave town. ALSO, I should probably get on the task of buying my plane tix to Germany. Jeez, I'm a disaster!

Okay. It's after 1:30am and I need to get some sleep. Tomorrow's our last day here and it promises to be filled with pickleball and homemade pizza (among other activities), before I'll be catching a ferry back to Sea-Town (by way of Anacortes). It is time for BED, folks...hiking Mount Constitution, watching the Sounders drub LA Galaxy, and spending a couple hours in the dungeon really takes its toll on a person. 

Besides...my wine glass is just about empty.

(*drink*)

; )

Orcas

No, not "Orcus." Orcas. As in Orcas Island. Four days (and three nights) I get to spend up here in perfectly optimal weather, surrounded by some of the most beautiful scenery on the planet. Current temperature is 82, but the ocean breeze coming over the water makes it O so nice. The house I'm staying in is massive and gorgeous and perched on a cliffside facing north...taking in the beautiful San Juan Islands (and, on a clear day, Canada), Not my house, of course, but...well, mine for (most of) a week.

A momentary respite from the drama and  challenges of "real life."

*sigh*

God has given me many gifts.  I have so few complaints compared to my abundance of blessings that it seems not just ungrateful, but downright mean-spirited to voice them.

But, man, I needed this vacation. I mean, I really needed it.

While I (mentally) recuperate here in what must truly be my favorite place on Earth (yeah, I'd probably be willing to change Seattle for "island life"...and maybe we will after the kids are grown and gone)...while I rest up here in anticipation of what will be a VERY busy and stressful next couple months, I hope that you, my dear, sweet readers will know and believe me when I say how much I appreciate you all, and the support and attention you've given me over the years.

I wish you nothing but the best. My love to you all.

"Dear JB" Mailbag #38

Not dead, just in Portland for (another) soccer tournament...life is been especially hectic lately with tournaments, club volleyball tryouts (the boy), last summer excursions/trips, prep for school and the upcoming soccer seasons, and (of course) familial law suits. 

At least I have my health.  ; )

Dear JB:

How do y'all play intelligent, wise, and/or charismatic characters when y'all aren't personally IRL are not those? 

Like, if you play a character who has a notably high score in one of those stats, such as a artificer/wizard for intelligence, monk/ranger/druid/cleric for wisdom, or paladin/bard/sorcerer/warlock, what do y'all do to play them if you wouldn't personally describe yourself as intelligent, wise, or charismatic? 

Or in summary, how do y'all RP as characters with mental traits that you personally IRL do not have?

Curious

Dear Curious:

I have known very, very intelligent, very educated people who were VERY stupid and VERY ignorant about any number of things outside their field of expertise. I've known very sleazy, cowardly, rapacious and dishonorable people people who nevertheless had something that attracted and drew others to them (consider, perhaps, a certain someone living in a certain "white" house at the moment) or who proved effective leaders, highly capable of inspiring people despite being gruff, abrasive, and taciturn. Finally, I've known more that a few "spiritual" and "wise" people who still made a plethora of unwise decisions...mainly with regard to their health (smoking, overindulging in alcohol, being morbidly obese causing numerous ailments, etc.)...and there are plenty of examples of deeply devout, pray-every-day types who unwisely put their faith in charlatans and hucksters who bilk them out of their cash.

D&D is a game, and the game has systems in place that measures the manner a character is effective in a number of game-related ways. In AD&D, intelligence is largely a measure of how well a magic-user can learn learn spells, although it is also determines a character's capacity for learning new languages. That's all it does! Wisdom measures a character's mental fortitude to resisting mind control, and (for cleric types), allows them to call on their Higher Power more often when it comes to the performance of miracles (i.e. spells). Meanwhile, charisma measures the je ne sais quoi of a person when it comes to being likable (reaction) or commanding the loyalty of others...it doesn't mean the person is particularly attractive or articulate or silver-tongued or empathetic, just that people LIKE them and TRUST them...which could be for all sorts of reasons!

What players (and DMs) need to remember is that D&D IS A GAME and, for better or worse, these abilities, despite their evocative names, are just as abstract as "level" or "hit points" as a measure of character effectiveness. And when playing D&D in the correct fashion, that's the thing that matters. It doesn't matter whether the magic-user knows how to balance his checkbook, or knows the history of the realm, or the proper etiquette when partying with a kobold tribe; what does matter is how hard it is for the dude to learn to cast a fireball spell. Because we're going to need that fireball spell at some point (probably). 

We want fighters with higher strength scores because they are better fighters; we want clerics with better wisdom scores because they're better spell-casters...get it?

So, Curious, I realize that you are a 5E player and so you have a different idea of how D&D is supposed to be played and so "RP" (what other role-players...like myself...would call "play acting") is an important thing to you and your friends. But this is just another example of how DIFFICULT that type of play style is. If you think a character with high intelligence should act like some sort of genius planner/schemer on par with a Batman or Lex Luthor, you're asking something very challenging of any improvisational actor (considering especially that literary characters like Sherlock Holmes are written over a long, thoughtful period of time by authors who craft their stories in a way to show and emphasize their "genius" powers of the mind). And, for the record, that's NOT the kind of challenge the game was originally supposed to foster.

Meanwhile, as a Dungeon Master, I'll tell you that there's little that's more annoying than someone taking the OPPOSITE tack: making utterly stupid decisions with their character or behaving in a disruptive fashion just because their character has a low score in intelligence or wisdom or charisma. This is utterly ridiculous! Read Harold Lamb's Khlit stories about the curmudgeonly old Cossack who, despite being uneducated, completely illiterate, and rather blasphemous in his faith, still exhibits more crafty intelligence and experiential wisdom than any of the foes he faces in his adventures.  Just because your fighter has an INT of 5 doesn't mean YOU (as the player) need to choose stupid, stupid actions in the game or behave in a manner that will get you (and your party) killed...it just means you're never going to "dual class" as magic-user (or anything else with a score that low!).

So, forget the "play acting;" you should think of your character as your personal avatar: your vehicle for exploring the game world. Which it is. And just as different vehicles have different capabilities (different strengths and weaknesses) so, too, does your "imaginary person." In this vehicle, you may be capable of swinging a sword well, or learning the most complex of spells, or commanding the loyalty of a huge number of followers...regardless of what YOU (in real life) can do. And that should inform and influence how you play the game with that particular character. 

I'm not seven feet tall: I'm not going to be playing in the NBA. I don't have graduate degrees from M.I.T.: I'm not going to be a brilliant mathematician. That's just how it is. I, as a not-perfect-at-everything human, am forced (in this life) to work with what I've got. So, too, a player must work with what the dice (and their few choices during chargen) dictate.

Now, I realize that some of the folks who play D&D differently from myself are going to say something along the lines of:

"But JB! Playing D&D with the same old sorry tropes of strong, dumb fighters and wise holy clerics and powerful (but otherwise incompetent) wizards is B-O-R-I-N-G! We want to change things up, make interesting stories with interesting characters. This creates DRAMA without which the game grows O so stale. Without the type of "RP" you describe as "play-acting," the game is just crunching the numbers of hit points and people dying in holes for imaginary gold pieces which are little more than counting 'points.' Your old style method of playing D&D fails to account for the fact that the community...and the game itself (which cannot exist without the community)...has EVOLVED. These questions of how to play characters are important, because role-playing (what WE call role-playing) IS the game, That is what we sign up to play; that is what we WANT to play. If that's not what the game's about, then it isn't the game for us...get it?"

Oh, I get it.

Unfortunately, for folks who insist on playing D&D is this new, "evolved" fashion, I have no help for you. I have no answers to your questions. I have no advice to offer you (other than "play differently"). The issues that arise from your particular style of play are not issues that have to be dealt with in my "boring" style of play...but happily, neither I nor my players find our "un-evolved" style particularly "boring." 

Your preferences are your own, but don't base your paradigm on a false premise. You want to "RP?" Great. Best of luck to you. But the problems that arise from attempting to play a game with mercurial and/or limited rules aren't solvable by retaining a laissez-faire attitude towards the objectives of game play. Sorry.

Sincerely,

JB

Playtest Results

So, somewhat surprisingly (given that I provided incredibly short notice to people) I had several players show up to last night's playtest.

Vance, Shaina, and Matt were all "older adults" (read: my age, give or take a decade) who were familiar with AD&D. No 5E players sat down at my table but, to be fair, I was a little late getting to the shop and by 6:20 (when I arrived) a lot of tables were already "full up." Matt, bless his heart, was there early waiting with beer in hand for my arrival. As soon as I pulled my 1E tomes from my backpack, he sauntered over to introduce himself.

Vance and Shaina arrived a few minutes later, having just seen my blog post about 20 minutes earlier (!!). I'd actually met them before, at the last DragonFlight convention I attended (2019, I think? Yep)...we'd all sat in on several games together. Anyway, it was both flattering and impressive that they'd show up at the drop of a hat, so I hope I gave them a good game.

[they did say they had a "fun time"]

The adventure was written for six to eight players, as that's the usual number to expect at a Cauldron table, so it was going to be a bit tougher for three. I made adjustments to one or two encounters, but for the most part they handled things in a fairly clever and cautious manner, successfully navigating some 15 out of 24 encounter areas (by "successful" I mean "surviving"). Vance lost two characters over the course of the session, including Bruti the dwarf (a pre-gen from Dwellers of the Forbidden City that I have made a staple of my pre-gens since Cauldron I)...the first time I've seen that character fall in battle. Unfortunately, Bruti was carrying most of the treasure they'd found so when they did decide to retire (being low on hit points and out of healing magic) the party ended up with little to show for their efforts; maybe something like 20,000 gold pieces worth? Out of a potential 500K+.

[due to "circumstances" Bruti's body...and the treasure...were unrecoverable. Mainly because the other party members fled the scene as quickly as possible]

SO...good times. A 40% mortality rate is, perhaps, a little higher than I'm looking for (20-30% is about right) but, again, they were working with a smaller party than expected. Over all, I'd say the group played competently. It will be interesting to compare their results with my own play group (the kids) next Friday; they'll have four players, including one complete newbie (a never-played-before friend of Sofia's). 

Should be fun. Or a bloodbath. Or both.

ANYway...I am slightly (slightly!) disappointed that I didn't get any 5E players at the table; I was expecting to have to give my "conversion spiel" to folks, and missing that opportunity feels, in retrospect, somewhat like...well, like a missed opportunity.  But, yeah, that was my own fault for not giving enough notice (on the shop's discord channel and elsewhere). I was contacted by more than a few people (via email) who had interest in playing but already had other plans for the evening.

I promise that NEXT TIME I'm running a public game (and I hope to run at least three more playtests before the con in October) I'll let people know a couple weeks in advance. 

Now I just need to finish writing those three adventures.

; )

Thank you very much to Matt, Shaina, and Vance. I really appreciate you folks coming out and playing...it made my evening!

Playtest

Tonight I'll be running D&D for (presumably) random strangers.

I've finished writing the tournament module for the 2025 Cauldron convention and need to test it. Around the Table Game Pub in Edmonds has an open table "D&D" night on Wednesdays from 6pm till close, and they've told me there's space for me to run a game. 

We'll see if anyone shows up.

[I am suddenly reminded of the first time I tried to run a B/X game at my...now defunct...local game shop and having no one appear. When was that? Oh, yeah: August 8th, 2010, almost 15 years ago. Perhaps history will repeat itself...at least this time I was able to leave a couple messages on the shop's discord channel]

My own players (my kids) want me to run the game for them next Friday (when we have their friends over for a sleepover) and I will, but as this is the tournament adventure for the con -- and will be run by more DMs than just myself -- I'd like to get it tested as early and often as possible before I release it 'into the wild.' 

One VERY interesting thing: the "open D&D night" is open to all editions of the game but MOST people that show up are running/playing 5E. Taking a 1E adventure to Cauldron (where the people are expecting 1E) or running the game for my players (who know what to expect) is going to be a different experience from having to "re-train" 5E players on the fly. Yeah...I'm very interested to see how this turns out.

Hopefully, people will show up.

Regardless, I'll post a follow-up telling how things went.

; )

"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