Kind of an odd thing to ask advice on. We have some new players in our group but I am noticing a recurring trend I am not 100% sure if it is a problem as such. These players are the worlds nicest people and in that regard no complaints whatsoever.
When they said they wanted to play I asked them what their character concept was and made some PCs for them and worked them into the group to compliment the party. No real problems there.
Then we started a 2nd game as we wanted to play the Lost Mines of Phandelver. They had some solid ideas on what to do and then we start adventuriing. I knew one of them liked doing daft things for fun but I told them you do not have to make the most optimized PCs ver just stick a 16 in your prime stat assign your scores and go goofy after that if you want to take weak feats or buff your lowest ability score etc.
One of them takes a cleric, wants to play support. We start playing and it turns out said cleric has 14 wisdom and 13 strength. Spell selection was also really bad and seems to think support=healingand wwastes spells on things like healing word on PCs who do not need it due to wanting to attack with 1d8+1 mace. Does not take the guidance cantrip or cast bless in combat.
The fighter at least has the stats in the right place but takes a dual wielder strength based fighter. Damage is kind of low but its not to bad I suppose.
Anyway they run into a party oof gnolls with level 3 PCs and RAW it is a medium encounter. DSice rolls go really bad, no tactics are used and I roll very good with the Gnolls. 3 PCs down, 2 of them dead remaining PCs nova to live. One of my other players can see where things are going and offers to DM. I come in with a light cleric as I get heavy hints from the other players we need a decent cleric.I take a human light cleric with the healer's feat. I heal, burn, use guidance/bless/faerie fire etc. I knew what I was going to play for a while and I do not mind playing support.
1 Cleric of Lathendar (Me using light cleric)
1 Sorlock (Sorcerer/Warlock)
1 Rogue (assassin)
1 Fighter (archer)
1 Wizard (enchanter)
We continue the LMoP, hit level 4 andd clear out cragmore castle and go on to wave echo cave. Cragmore Caslte is not to hard but we notice some problems occuring. We have a lack of a front line fighter. We did not need a wizard buit got one anyway as the Sorlock was doing a decent job at that and I thought the light cleric would be leaning that way as well. The assassin is getting played as a skirmisher but has no one else to key attacks off in terms of sneak attack. Said assassin keeps running away from the frontline using his cunning action mobility thing. Whoever is left on the front line usually my cleric gets swarmed.
Also the large holes in the front line are not overly usful for eldritch blast when the DM parks monsters beside the archer and Sorlock. Having a buff cleric using concentration spells is not such a great idea either. We almost get a TPK in the mines in one of the encounters and only becuase the DM threw us a bone and did not pursue we managed to limp out with 2/5 PCs bleeding out including the cleric. Turns out the wizard also has 11 dexterity.
The surviving PCs from earlierin the session were partly designed for a different party dynamic as we had 3 melee PCs and the Sorlock was the archer/arcanist type PCs.
Similar problems are also starting to crop up in the other game. Both clerics have out right stated they do not weant to heal people as they are playing CN types(CE for idiots IMHO) and are selfish. The party synergies are kind of letting them keep things togather and the bard does doing the support in that game including the healing it seems. The clerics will use healing word in emergencies but thats about it. They are usually busy hoarding their spells or having to nova to get the group out of the frying pan.
For the most part it doesn't bother me to much as I am the DM but one player took over the the job for one of the sessions as he was getting sick of his PC getting left in the lurch and pasted all the time. My light cleric is out damaging the wizard in addition to healing and buff support. Using cantrips on clustered groups of enemies seems to be a better idea than using burning hands, thunderwave etc which the wizard did not take as spells anyway.The split as such is 3/3 or 3/4 with the 3 as such knowing what to do in terms of the basics. They are power gamers to some extent but do not take the most powerful classes but they like doing a decent job at whatever they decide to focus on. The other 3/4 can't seem to manage basic things like heal your party or put a 16 in your prime.
So is it worth saying anything or having the players who know what they are doing try and offer advice? I can see a blow up happening soon as 3-4 players are basically just mucking about.
Zardnaar wrote:
I think I see two possible "problems" there.
1- 5th Edition requires character optimization. Yes, in a way it does. With bounded accuracy it's the version of D&D so far that puts more weight in having the right ability scores at high values. That's not to say you can't play without optimization. But the right optimization in 5th will make your character go from Joe-the-Commoner to Conan. At least as far as ability scores are concerned. And the game, the way it was designed, seems to me like it expects you to optimize at least to a certain level. If your players want to play a more "free-form" and less optimized game then probably you should rethink the overall gameplay to appeal to that style, meaning probably a combat-light game with more emphasis elsewhere. That's doesn't mean a game without challenge as there are several forms of challenge you can offer, though.
2- The premade adventure might not have been a good choice. Because of reason 1 above, it might be that those premade adventures aren't for this group. I've had all sorts of groups in the past, some without casters at all, some without "frontmen" at all, and even once a group consisting of ONLY thieves (and it was 2e where thieves suck in combat). All of those worked just fine. But you have to adapt the game somewhat to what your players want, and the players too need to understand they'll need a different group dynamics. My 4-thief group was all about stealth, investigation, infiltration and whenever possible avoiding and working their way around combat scenarions to reach their objectives. However, playing a premade adventure "by the book" might not fit well the playstyle your players are seeking, or that particular adventure might just be too hard a challenge for that specific party formation. The adventure might have been too tightly designed with certain expectations in mind to be a reasonable challenge. So instead of saying "it's a problem because we don't have class X and Y in the group," or "it's a problem because player X didn't put 16 in Y ability," I'd just try to re-write the premade adventure in a way that seems more fitting to that particular group of players. Or just scrap that adventure and do something else your own.
Gatt wrote:
What you should do is put aside the adventure for a bit, and have your DM run an arena against various monsters and encounters. Let the players experiment with different spells and character concepts, and learn how the game works first, without fear of perminent death. This is what we did to learn the 5E mechanics, and even though we are experienced players, if we didn't do this we would have struggled in our first 5E game.
EDIT: Sounds like your players are also goofing around and being wasteful of resources.
Sounds like you might have a few players who take the game seriously. And a few players who do not. The casual players are just going to piss off the hardcore players and vice versa. Try to split them up. Nobody is right or wrong--they just have different expectations about what makes for a fun night at the table. Also, I would suggest modifying your game to match your players rather than the other way around. For example, if the party has no cleric or the cleric plays in a suboptimal way, consider modifying the healing rules so that all players have Second Wind, or make short rests 5 minutes long, etc.
We just had 3 tables start here with 5E (and 3 with Pathfinder), 2 using HotDQ and 1 homebrew. About 50/50 split with very green players and somewhat experienced players, although all 3 GMs are experienced. Aside from random death at level 1 we're not really seeing this problem, the players listen to advice and co-operate so their tactics aren't at fault. However, all three GMs are quite obviously bending over backwards because of how bloody awful the balance is and how little leeway the system gives you and are making horrendously stupid choices for the monsters, which has a huge impact on how lethal they are, in order to not annihilate the party.
A lot of this is due to low level problems though. Balance will get better in a few levels, although one hit kills like the crit on a CR5 bullette are still around, they're much rarer. However bad tactics will get you killed at any level, so your party is dooooooooooomed.
I would probably be tempted to either add in a front line Fighter type NPC to hold the line and/or just reduce the difficulty of the encounters to give them a chance of working out what they want to do.
But really, CN characters? Why are they with the party if they do not want to work with the party?
Shasarak wrote:
Alignment should never be allowed as an excuse for bad behavior, whether that alignment is CN, NE, or LG.
Sailing_Pirate_Ryan wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Just to clarify, which players are the "problem" ones? The novices who don't min-max but are having fun? Or the uptight/impatient veterans who worry about things like DPR and build optimality?
Zardnaar wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
The hardcore players haven't considered simply investing in some escape capabilities (a potion of flight, or atleast a horse) and if things go really bad, they just ditch the fools? Or is that against the social contract of the RL group?
Or is the OP asked with the 'gotta make everyone super happy - no one can be even a tiny bit less happy at any point' mantra in mind?
How did they manage to get to Level 3 ?
I disagree with some posters here.
There are two root-cause problems with the party;
1. The attitudes of some of the characters - not being a team player actively drops party survival and success chances off a cliff
2. The lack of a front line melee character - i.e. bad party composition for combat encounters
In my games I would deal with these issues in character, as they both manifest that way. I am also lucky enough to have mature roleplayers who are happy with some internal party conflict being part of the game, so have seen internal wrangles get roleplayed out to the benefit of the characters etc.
Firstly - as I beleive you are a player, not the GM?... I would suggest your character start pointing out the bloody obvious - that the survival of everyone is suffering due to the unwarranted bias with the healing support. Be as forceful as your character alignment allows with this - the people responsible are playing with people's lives and deserve getting their faces torn off for such behaviour.
Second - demand the party either hire a front line melee NPC in the 'interim' and/or restructure themselves to incorporate one, as it has become clear the risks are too high without one, and that as an adventurer the inherent risks to life and limb are already as high as can be tolerated, without amateurs bumbling around takiing on challenges their team are not suited for.
Make your character's contribution to the group contingent on these issues being resolved to your satisfaction, and stick your heels in if some idiot or devious character disagrees.
To be clear - your character will be on firm, provne ground with such observations and demands and only a dangerous person and/or fool would disagree once the obvious had been laid out.
It's an IC problem - deal with it IC...
BoldItalic wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
BoldItalic wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
iserith wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Here's a suggestion: instead of trying to train new recruits in how to enhance your own fun, think about trying to make sure the new recruits have fun themselves.
Elfcrusher wrote:
Elfcrusher wrote:
With so much conflict and mismatched expectations, I can't help but wonder what was discussed during Session Zero, if there even was one.
Shirebrok wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
I did not ant to use my spells either to heal people as a cleric and thats why I took the healing feat. I also made it clear I would not reward stupid decisions so do not expect spells if you do stupid stuff all the time. Its not because I want to be an asshat with my spells its just better to use bless or faerie fire than to take the damge in the 1st place. But to use those spells I can't be getting swarmed and KOed all the time.
I dont know if there is really a problem here, besides some guys wanting to goof around a bit, and other more hardcare players not mixing well. Social contract issue I think. Split these guys into appropriate tables and all will be well. The hardcore get their hardcore game, the casuals get some quick fun for as long as it holds their interest (possibly converting to more hardcore style over time, who knows).
Zardnaar wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Moot_Dundle wrote:
Killing a NPC by GM fiat so the players think it was done by dice is just tricking the players.
In the end it just teaches them to fear GM fiat.
See, the best way to do a GM PC is to make sure you kill them in cold blood once the characters have grown attached
My favourite story of this is some players who were playing as orcs in a peaceful orc village. In the town was a stupid ogrillion who used a whole tree as a weapon, who was sent with the party whenever they needed muscle to back them up. And he always had a good excuse to not be in their boss battles (Such as "Too big to fit through there!"), and would sometimes dispense worldly wisdom, like "Don't each those mushrooms. Did once, ended up falling through elder's roof". And even as they grew stronger, out of all of the town's inhabbitents, it wasn't the skilled hunters and gathers they'd rely on, but this ogrillion.
Anywho, in the end, it turned out the village elder was a Drow in disguise, and the ogrillion stumbled in on him having to redo his transformation spell, resulting in a confrontation where the ogrillion was fatally wounded. And as he was narrating the ogrillion's final words, the GM realised that not only were the players deadly silent, but one of them was about to cry
If you can break your players down to tears over a character's death, you've done a GM PC well. Don't kill it just by a wyvern, tie it into whatever their final fight or current enemy is. That way when they find him, oh boy, the revenge they will wreck on them will be glorious
Some random suggestions on how to not give new players a horrible first experience with D&D:
1) Let them build their own PCs. This is how we all came to love rpgs. Dont take it away.
2) Dont try to tell them what spells/classes/abilities to choose. The freedom to do what you want is what sets this hobby apart from computer games.
3) Dont try to tell them how to play at the table. Playing with mathematically correct tactics isd not more fun than just rolling and shouting. Quit on the contrary actually.
Mecheon wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
kalil wrote:
Mecheon wrote:
Noon wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Hurin88 wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
No matter how suboptimal the party composition is, no matter how poor the individual characters are, no matter how clueless the players are, a DM can still make the game fun for everybody. Even without any healing at all. Even if nobody has a stat higher than 10. Even if the 'party' consists of a single player.
You don't have to run the adventures as written and be a slave to the dice.
FFS.
Unless, of course, you are simply out to prove that 5e sucks.
Orethalion wrote:
Just an FYI I was the heal bot cleric and chose to do the support role thing with buffing etc. The other players more or less made my job that much harder which was less fun for me as we were doing a published adventuere and the other DM had not run 5E before so was more or less runniung LMoP verbatim. I was using Guidance, bless, faerie fire and enhance ability+ healing via the healing feat and last I lookedI think most people would appreciate having that sort of character in the party.
The Rogue for example is alsop having trouble doing much of anything as he doesn't have someone else to enable sneak attacks for example so his DPR falls off a cliff, I can't use buff spells reliably as every other hit tends to disrupt them, the warlock is having trouble casting spells as well because enemies just move up to her and beat on her.
As i said we almost had 3 TPKs the other night and lost 3/5 PCs 2 to death and one due to retirement. We have a session tonight with the "good" party that has the roles covered, the other session IDK how many people will sho as 1-2 other players are having similar thoughts so losing half the party due to others not playing or feeling somewhat useless may happen. I don't expect perfect tactics, optimised PCs etc but not bailing on PCs so they get surrounded and KOed in one round and things like that doesn't seem to unreasonable. We know various monsters in 5E hit like a truck and you do not want to screw around vs bugbears or whatever.
I'm going to suggest to the DM we probably want to start over with new PCs at whatever level we start the game at. Adding a DMNPC seems silly when we might lose 1-3 players including a DM.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Noon wrote:
Noon wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noon wrote:
Solution was discussed tonight and we reconfigured the party.
Half Orc Champion Fighter
Light Cleric
Transmuter Wizard
Druid (moon?)
Rogue:Thief
Pangur wrote:
Noon wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noon wrote:
Noon wrote:
Noon wrote:
In related news...
Apparently, Noon needs to make a series of dice rolls behind his DM screen, at the start of the adventure, because the intended plot for the evening revolves around the king being murdered by a rival's most foul assassin. You see, the NPC king actually can only die if the NPC assassin can first manage to roll successfully to infiltrate the NPC's castle, and on subsequent check(s) to kill the NPC king.
Whew, good thing he rolled well enough to pull it off or the whole impetus for that adventure might have been foiled...
<--- this is me rolling my eyes so hard it hurts my eye muscles...
Orethalion wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
I'll use fiat if I find I made a mistake. Meaning I may have miscalculated a "planned" encounter and it turned out to be way too much for the party with barely a chance for survival. Doesn't happen much as I'm quite used to building encounters by now, but it can always happen, especially with a new edition where I'm not yet very used to new difficulty standards. If it was the players who pushed themselves into an impossible fight, however, it's their own problem (as in "I don't care if there are 57 Ogres in that keep, let's just kick the door down and attack"). But if it's one of those encounters that as a DM you "throw" at your party to get some story hook going, and I happen to have miscalculated the power level, this is a case where I would easily mess with things on the fly to give the players a chance. If possible, though, I'll find another solution other than simply fudging rolls. I could provide some means of escape for the group mid-fight, some NPC or group of NPCs could show up to help the players in the fight, etc.
Pangur wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Noon wrote:
My guess is the DM is playing the NPCs like 20 year 5 war veteran marine style elite combat shock troops. This is a real problem when the DM has a lot of mastery of the rules while the PCs don't. And it's really a very unrealistic way to play monsters.
I just have a very hard time wrapping my head around the idea that a DM finds it impossible to make 5e work when the PCs don't optimize so they're doing 5-15% more DPS(about what a bless or 16 prime stat is worth). Seriously, tone it the F down. It's no wonder you have players bailing. This is called killer GM syndrome. It's not your job to kill the PCs, but to create an adventure that works with them. That doesn't mean you have to fudge rolls, but it does mean you should balance the encounters bases on the party skill level and play the NPCs appropriately.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Noon wrote: