I'm having a strange problem with one of my gaming groups. I am running Hoard of the Dragon Queen and here is the behavior I have seen thus far.
Situation: Start of the Adventure - the party crests the hill and sees the town under attack by raiders and a dragon
Party Response: A dragon? That's far too dangerous. Let's wait until the attack is over and see if we can help the survivors.
I finally managed to convince the players to enter the town. They slowly approached and hit the first encounter with a family under attack by kobolds. They decided that this was something they could win and saved the family.
Situation: Seek the Keep! The rescued mother states that they must seek safety for herself and her children within the keep.
Party Response: The party refused and decided to hide in the nearest house to "wait it out" as it was too dangerous to be travelling in the town while there was an attack in progress.
Situation: The Sally Port - The party hears about the attack on the sally port.
Party Response: They insist that it is the job of the guard to hold their own keep. They "volunteer" to man the top of the tower in order to free up more guards to stop the attack.
Situation: Dragon Attack on the tower. There is a roar from the top of the tower and a blast of lightning.
Party Response: Hide inside the tower and refuses to face off against the dragon. They grit their teeth as they hear the screams of the dying guards.
Is anyone else running into the problem of ultra-timid players? I can understand wanting to role-play in a somewhat realistic fashion, but at this point I am wondering if I should just abandon the campaign alltogether and just have the party wander the wilderness fighting boars and sickly orcs.
Any advice is welcome.
It sounds like the players don't want to get there characters dead?
So have you tried to lure them out with something like "You see a goblin holding a small child. From your guess it's like he wants to kill the child unless someone stops him!"
Also, the guards can recognize them as adventurers. In a realistic manner, the guards could kick them out of the keep to do some actual helping and to make room for more innocent people.
If there guess is that it's to dangerous with the dragon blasting rooftops, send the dragon away for a while, lower the noumber of raiders and "make them an offer they can't refuse". Like the promice of a nice magical sword laying in the dirt. Only to discover it's a childs toy. But once there out of the keep, show them they can hold there own! Send a few raiders there way, let them fight them off and send some more. Let them get the taste of goblin blood 
If all else fails, a DM can always remind players (out of character) that they are adventurers, not playing hide and seek.
Either players are feeling forced and not buying into it, or it may be a telegraphing problem. But it could just be the module (and how the players, PCs, and you the DM interact with it)
I mean, feel free to have the dragon to a fly-by and blow up the house they were in when they tried to wait it out. Or kobolds set fire to it. Know what DOESN'T catch on fire? The castle 
Also works when they cowered in the tower (that situation seems easy to convice PCs that the castle is safer to rest in, and then force them to pop some shots off at the dragon, though their decision may have caught you off guard, so you weren't prepared for it!)
But, this is also the problem with modules in general. It could be your players (in OR out of character) are scared of dragons, as they should be. Did they know what this module was all about? Is this a common thing for your group? Did you have a "session 0" to talk things over? What are their motivations (again, in or out of character)?
Some people might hop on the "defective adventurer" bandwagon. And that might be true! But it's not always the case in something like this (someone else had a thread about this, actually)
autolycus wrote:
Thanks for the advice and encouragement, all. This is a new one for me. Most of my groups are very gung-ho.
I think the problem with this particular table is that they have a different view of how the game should work out.
I got them as far as the fight against Cyanwrath when I was told in no uncertain terms by a couple of players that they would find it unacceptable if their character was killed. One of them stated flat out that at no point should they even loose a fight or a challenge. Ever. Otherwise the story of their character would be ruined.
I asked how they could ever have a recurring villian if they were never foiled in at least some way. And was answered by a shrug and a "you figure it out."
This is something I might expect from very young players. But the average age at this table is around 40. Gotta say...I'm stumped!
I'm seriously considering just handing off the batton to someone else. But I don't like quitting when there might be a win somewhere in all this.
The Basic Rules address this (page 2):
There’s no winning and losing in the Dungeons & Dragons game—at least, not the way those terms are usually understood. Together, the DM and the players create an exciting story of bold adventurers who confront deadly perils. Sometimes an adventurer might come to a grisly end, torn apart by ferocious monsters or done in by a nefarious villain. Even so, the other adventurers can search for powerful magic to revive their fallen comrade, or the player might choose to create a new character to carry on. The group might fail to complete an adventure successfully, but if everyone had a good time and created a memorable story, they all win.
My response to them would be: "Whether or not you ever lose a fight or challenge is up to you. But if you sit in the basement all game, you will never receive XP and you'll never tell the story of your character. How do you square this?"
How many of these players have big back stories for their characters?
autolycus wrote:
Okay. I think maybe I'll see what happens if I cater exactly to their demands. Maybe it will convince them that they are asking for something that, in the end, isn't really what they want.
This guy will appear, asking them to collect 10 rat tails and 10 boar tusks.
Pic is from a one-shot I ran a couple years ago when someone told me that 4th edition was too much like an MMO. 
Oh, nearly forogt. This guy will be waiting to take the rat tails and boar tusks.
Haha! I've never played WoW, but I have played some MMOs and I'm kind of upset I never thought to do something like that!
Ugh, those pictures are so great!
As for your problems, it appears that this isn't exactly the Module for them. The Cyanwrath encounter, from what I hear and have seen, if very "hit-or-miss" in terms of effectiveness (some find it emotional and dripping with dire storytelling, others find it annoying and rail-roady). It also sounds like you haven't gamed with them very much (at least not as a DM) so they have yet to trust you fully. My players know me well enough that I won't outright kill them at the start of an adventure that involves a dragon. They know that my style is more of a "unless the dice are REALLY unkind or you do something REALLY stupid that I have telegraphed against, then you won't die" kinda deal. Maybe they haven't gotten there with you yet, possibly afraid the characters they spent time making (and giving history) would die to a random dragon breath. My players would expect to have the NPCs take most of the blows from that encounter. Yes this is them being "meta" but why can't their characters have or adjust their own goals, appropriately? I WILL give you hooks! But you must also take them! To compensate, I also let them create their own ideas/hooks/adventures, too.
As for the "I NEVER lose" as a character concept? Well...that PC better prove it...
Anyway, this is a big jumble of unforunate mis-matches in expectations between 3 parties: You, the players, and the module. Hopefully you can hash it all out to EVERYone's satisfaction. I don't want you to just feel bored by giving in to the demands of the players!
I would just lie to them to get the story moving. If they feel they need a safety blanket then just give it to them and continue on as normal.
There scared of the dragon. You wait on the hill for a few minutes and see the dragon driven off from the castle and fly away.
Doesn't mean the dragon can't come back when they're talking to the govenor later on.
They think there's too many enemies around to risk going outside?
You wait in the house for half an hour. The sounds of battle grow fainter and more scattered it's seems to have quited down.
Then you continue on with the adventure as written without them being the wiser.
They won't defend the sally port cuz they think it's not their job?
You hear a groan fom the defenders as the sally port is overrun. You then have the dwarf save the sally port and be hailed as a hero while the PC's are asked to help hand out some food to the forts brave defenders.
Trick them into fighting while alone and have the NPC's tell them what they think of them based on their actions.
That's how i'd do it.
I'd totally have Cyanwrath snub them during the final encounter too.
Who are these clowns? I asked for your bravest warriors, not common hobo's who've drifted in on flotsam of our glory!" Send out that dwarf i heard so much about.
Timborama wrote:
Its not turtling. Its the fact this module throws level 1 characters up against an army and a dragon from the get-go.
We went in but we told the DM that our characters wouldn't do this, since we have no attachment to the town and its suicide.
We then avoided what we could, took short rests, and generally refused to follow the tempo the adventure outlines until around level 3.
In short it needs a much better introduction.
Our DM ended up changing a lot of the stupidity in this initial module and let us level up to three (as opposed to using the recommended milestone leveling), and now its much more enjoyable for us.
The module is fine for those who play more narrative style games, where the PCs never really have to fear a TPK for the sake of the "story", but those of us who are used to more sandbox type games where the DMs don't pull punches take one look at that town and say "No way."
DaveDash wrote:
DaveDash wrote:
iserith wrote:
D&D isn't always about the story. I've read enough fantasy novels and played enough story driven D&D over many years now that I'm over it.
If I want to partake in a set of scripted events to follow some narrative where my actions have little consequence ill play on of the numerous good story driven computer games out there.
What my group gets out of D&D is the sandbox experience which cannot be found anywhere else, players are free to do whatever, but they face challenges from a real human intelligence instead of some dumb scripted AI.
This matra that 5e hammers into people about the story is all well and good, but not everyone enjoys or follows that mantra.
Having a Dragon scene 1 that blatantly ignores the party to me is a huge blunder in the suspension of disbelief, and a massive turn off. Its like the opening scene of skyrim, cinematic scripting that is fun when you're a teenager, but now Its just dull.
DaveDash wrote:
The Dragon would relish at the opportunity to pick off any stragglers that separated from the group, since his objective seems to be "Keep everyone in the keep so my minions can loot the town". This incidentally also means the smartest course of action is to just wait for the raiding party to leave.
The DM is forced to play the Dragon stupid to keep the players alive, that kind of thing is a big no no at my table.
There are also numerous other glaring issues with this module, such as having your main food storage OUTSIDE your keep. What idiot designed that?
Also this is the realms, where are all the powerful patrons? A dragon shows up and its left to a bunch of level 1s to deal with the situation? I don't think so.
DaveDash wrote:
My party was 3rd level going into the town.
All of them were given an additional bond from the back of HotDQ: two were called to the town by Loesin Erlanthar, one had dreams that drew her to Greenest, one was going to investigate dragon cultists for Ontharr Frume, and one was the grandson of a dragon slayer looking to follow in his family's footsteps.
They had been through parts of Lost Mines - enough to get them two additional levels before moving on to their destnination - and had been anxious the whole time to get to their destination (Greenest).
DaveDash wrote:
Nope. The goal of the Dragon is to keep everyone in the keep. As written it should attack adventurers who are slaughtering its minions down below.
You can and in fact change what's written to make this more plausible. I wouldn't even bother having the Dragon there at all, instead replace it by a large force of raiders that keep the guards pinned in the keep. You then remove a whole host of issues. This is assuming your group is like mine, and less like iserith's.
Now iserith, you need to take your own advice. My group isn't comfortable with that kind of story driven playstyle, smile, nod, accept, and move on. No amount of arguing this and that is going to change that fact.
Since my group and the OPs group thought the same, I'm offering insight as to why. Chiding that style of play as something negative is ridiculous coming from you, giving your main advice on these forums is "See what your players enjoy..".
autolycus wrote:
DaveDash wrote:
iserith wrote:
So yeah. Its not turtling players, just bad module design. Like I said.
Every time you have a BBEG within combat range of players you need to think very carefully on how to handle the situation. Which is why its just good practice to avoid such things in the first place.
autolycus wrote:
autolycus wrote:
Thanks for the words of encouragement and even the counterpoints to my worries. I'll keep them both in mind as I move forward.
Yeah, in my world kobolds take on the color of any dragon they revere if it is within a mile. They also get some elemental special effect as well. In this case they all had occasional sparks flashing in their eyes or between their little kobold horns. Once the dragon left the town the kobolds all turned brown and were much more likely to break and flee a battle - as it was obvious their patron was gone.
It will also provide a good moment of "uh oh" when the party is fighting a band of kobolds who blow a war horn and - a few rounds later - all change to a dragon color.
Cyanwrath had a tiny bit of this power. Any kobold folowers within 50feet (five heads!) of him likewise turned blue.
The low-level cultists were all wearing multi-colored robes (as they had not been chosen by one of the 5 orders of the church of tiamat) and weren't particularly dangerous. When the party snuck up on them they were often talking about which color they wanted to join - kind of like bickering over whether Slitherin or Griffendor would choose them.
One in five cultists (always thematic) were Cobalt Cultists weilding rods that crackled with electricity. They didn't do much more damage than a scimitar-wielding cultist (and had a worse attack bonus) but because of the electricity they had advantage against enemies in metal armor. So the party learned to put the leather wearers on the front line when fighting them.
I also added in some heavy artilery in the form of Armored Thrall Wizards, who were naked humanoids with bolted on metal plates and one crystaline (steampunky) eye. They wielded chains that threw lighting arcs and if about to be killed would rip the chains in half, killing themselves and creating a small explosion of energy.
I stole liberally from Hack & Slash for many of these ideas. Aaaand now I'm rambling.
I guess my point is that maybe all this detail made it seem like things were more dangerous than they really are. Like how some DMs will briefly describe things that are unimplrtant and then go into terrific detail on something that turns out to be a trap, or mimic, or other deadly horror.
Once they see that I'm kinda detail oriented all the time it may lessen some of the anxiety.
I just read the thread. I'd like to say that both iserith and DaveDash make good points. I appreciate the interchange tremendously. I think the reactions of players can be a combination of the effects you are all describing.
My group and I are still playing the adventure. For us, the flaws, bonds and traits are really helping us roleplay and find ways to deal with the situations. The beginning stages of the campaign are certainly intended to make PCs feel small, vulnerable and overwhelmed. Some like this. Some don't.
Many times while we played the first episode of the adventure, we all tried to find ways to hide, sneak, stay out of sight (well...all except the Dwarven fighter), but we still moved the story on and accomplished our goals.
Iserith's advice in this thread is great material for all DMs and players out there. Communication and setting expectations is everyone's job. A good post mortum can really help the DM understand. Sometimes when I DM, I feel that the group feels one way, but after the game when we talk, I find that they actually feel a completely different way (sometimes things even work better than I think - other times not so well).
And, autolycus, I love your modifications. The detail is interesting and frightening. My Pc would definitely be more hesitant to engage with a bunch of those color changers or the armored wizards. In our sessions, we quickly learned to run away from groups larger than 6 or 7 (especially when the wizard was low on burning hands). In fact, my character had to shout out and literally pull another PC to get him to run with us when we saw a group of 12 foes (including 1 or 2 drakes) moving down the street.
autolycus wrote:
DaveDash wrote:
MonsterEnvy wrote:
DaveDash wrote:
DaveDash wrote:
A town being attacked is *not* a 'suicide mission', unless you decide that your 1st lvl characters need to kill every single invader.
It doesn't matter if there are a dozen draco-lich's invading, as long as you stay sneaky and only ever fight kobolds/mooks. Which is what we did.... saved the family, then tried to get them to the keep.
You don't have to fight every bad guy... we managed to run from/avoid an encounter or two while getting to the keep. We rescued the folks in the church and barely killed any of the bad guys around it. It *would* be suicide to take on the entrie raiding force.... so don't do it. But you *can* help out the villagers (IOW play the module) while being careful without risking TPK on every turn.
I don't understand players that are afraid to do anything risky....
So I went back and reread the module. It is very clear that the dragon is "unenthusiastic' about the attack, and its "chief contribution has been its Frightful Presence'. The dragon does *not* consider this to be 'his fight', and "isn't keen on tangling with adventurerers for somebody else's benefit" The Dragon isn't even willing to get close to the keep when it thinks there are only peasants involved.... of course it leaves when the players show they have a 'bite'.
There is no need to 'rewrite' the module to get these effects... they are part of the module. We don't know what is motivating the dragon to be there... but we do know he is not willing to be much more than window dressing for the attack. Dragons are pretty self centered... he isn't willing to do much work just to help somebody else....
Jeeze, I must be heavy handed. When my players do that kind of stuff, the alternative becomes worse.
Situation #1 DM reaction to the party response: "After the dragon makes an attack on the town starts scouring the countryside. It is far away right now but it seems to be looking for people to kill outside of town now. You realize that it's coming your way. You might want to try and hide but there's very few places to do so out here. Your only path to safety is to try and get to the safety of the town. Maybe you can hide in a building in the town.
Situation #2 DM reaction to the party response: Have the family killed and then casually mumble to yourself, from behind the DM screen as you write, "OK, that's 5 potential visitors that they can no longer save, subtract 125 from the end of module experience..."
Situation #3 DM reaction to the party response: "The mayor nods in agreement to the visitors and says to his guard, four old men and a young teenage boy. "You'll need to handle this alone. You're our last hope. If you fail, The hoards will pour into the keep and kill everyone. May Tymora be with you this fateful night, and if you fail, know that you did all you could." All of the men he is sending to the Sally Port are wounded. Two, in fact walk with a pronounced limp. The boy can barely lift the sword he was given and he has trouble adjusting the helmet they gave him to put on his head. The guard looks determined but useless."
Situation #4 DM reaction to the party response: This is, precisely the right tactical manuever. I wouldn't penalize them in any way or attempt to coerce them otherwise.
I never assume that the PC's are good. They need to be motivated in other ways. Greed and blood-lust are good, but I gave out backgrounds from the back of the module. The players should have reason to be in Greenest and save it.