| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1LuCantEvenAug 04, 2015 13:47:35 | Yesterday I had my first ever real d&d session, and to be perfectly honest I left it in tears.
A good friend and I play a rogue/ranger pair who work as a sort of sellsword team. We have roughly a decade of roleplay experience each (the literary sort), and have been planning for a couple months now to join a game. We were the first players to contact our DM as far as I know, and had talked with him for weeks up until the game. He's an ok guy, seemed like he'd done his research. I should mention at this point, our DM is new. Very new. That said, he's also talented as far as NPCs and story goes. What he is not, however, is making sure everyone has fun.
Being new to the game and having never role played out loud before, we were nervous, and at times slow coming up with our next actions on the fly. Instead of the understanding we were promised, we were mocked both in and out of character. NPC’s took note of our OOC stammerings and made snide remarks, and comments were made by the DM himself about our lack of enthusiasm and not jumping in enough.
That brings me to the next point. He pushed the game too fast. For whatever reason, he took on 7 players for his first ever campaign. With 7 players, things are naturally going to move a little slower, but he didn’t seem to be accounting for that. Actual character interactions were cut short in order to progress the story/encounters he wanted to cover. Instead of taking his time and making sure all the characters had a chance to react to a scenario though he expected us to just jump in...which, with 7 people talking and no turns, was hard to do in a timely manner without just talking over people and cutting them off entirely. Being polite, we would let the more forceful people take their turns first and wait for an opening...but most of the time never got one. The moment there was a pause the DM decided everyone was done talking and just moved on without us - even going to the extreme of god-moding our characters to get them to where he wanted them to be since we hadn’t time to act ourselves. We felt very run-over throughout the game.
There seemed to be some favoritism shown toward characters that liked to jump in and fight without asking too many questions. Our characters were -not- those characters. Very early on the bolder characters were presented with special interactions and opportunities to speak and act that we felt weren’t being granted to us. One was literally named the ‘chosen one’, while the rest of us were deemed something like ‘tagalongs’. This was not discussed before the game. These more combat-driven characters did not seem to be spending a lot of time on actual character interactions, going through the motions in different encounters before whipping out their swords for the kill. Meanwhile our characters, not so rash, hung back, talked and made time for playful banter. The DM seemed impatient- even irritated- with it, like we were slowing down the story, and it was very disheartening. Needless to say our two did not mesh with the rest of the group very well because of this, and when a big fight broke out everyone ran off flailing their weapons and we ended up just kind of standing there awkwardly. He hadn’t given our characters any motivation to ‘form’ a party with these people much less care about them in any way. He just seemed impatient that we were lagging behind. Eventually we forced ourselves after the group - not because our characters had any desire to do so at that point but because we as players really didn’t want to be left behind in the game.
The whole thing just made me feel frustrated and embarrassed. Everyone else’s turns seemed to go smoothly until he came to us, to the point where I was dreading my own turn. The worse it got, the less I could come up with for my character to do that wasn’t completely outside of their personality. We didn’t make a fuss, didn’t want to slow down the game or interrupt anyone else’s fun...But we weren't having any fun ourselves.
Needless to say, we aren’t entirely sure what to do. None of the players are saying anything...Every one of them is assuring the others and the DM that they enjoyed the game, never mind they very obviously lost at least half the party members at one point due to bad DMing. I haven't even been able to list everything questionable in this post, due to time constraints...and this was just the first, 4 hour intro game. With all that went wrong, I can only see it getting worse if no one confronts the problems or offers critique at the very least.
So, how do you approach a new DM when he’s doing so much wrong? I don’t want to crush his desire to DM, but if we stay I need him to realize this isn’t cool. Or does this game sound like a lost cause, and we should quit? Maybe we just aren’t cut out for his style? We’re so new to this community (and honestly, aren't great with people) that it’s hard from this standpoint to really know.
At this point we’re just waiting for next monday, hoping that game will be better. If it’s a bunch of the same, I can’t say we’ll stay. I’ve heard it said that not having a game is better than a bad game, and after yesterday, I’ll have to agree.
|
| #2MatyrAug 04, 2015 14:19:59 | This is one of the biggest reasons you need to have an effective session 0. Getting everyone on the same page is extremely crucial.
That being said, now that things have started, really the only way to deal with it going forward is through communication. Even if you end up not going back to game, making your opinions clear on what was going on is extremely helpful. Not only for you, but for the DM and other players.
It might help to know the format a little better as well. If you are, for example, playing in Adventurer's League and the DM wants to get through the session in a single 4-hour go there are going to be conflicts with groups that want to take it slow. That doesn't mean there aren't ways to handle it, but it is something you have to take into account. It sounds like your DM had an adventure in his head and is a much more "Director" DM than an "Enabler" DM. The Director gets you to act out the story the script has provided (like a movie) and The Enabler lets you create the story via interaction. They both have their positives and negatives. It sounds like you are going to prefer the later over the former.
To answer the question about how to approach them and be careful: Sideways. Don't say "We don't like this, you are doing it wrong", but rather "Hey this is the style of gaming that we like, do you think that will match up with what you want to do?". It is especially hard for new DMs to go crazy with their improv skills and to bounce things off players. A lot of DMs come in with the mindset of The Director because that is their perception of how it should be and what everyone wants. Whether they will want to incorporate that into their style or not is entirely up to them, and to the rest of the group. If the two of you are hunting for a game of political intrigue and character development (not saying you are, just an example) and the other 5 are looking to kick in doors for a dungeon crawl, there isn't a lot even experienced DMs can do about it. The players need to be on the same page as much as the DM does.
One of the recommendations I would make is to find a Session 0 questionnaire and see if the DM wouldn't mind filling it out for how they expect their game to be and then compare it to what you answer on that same thing. If they seem to be on the same page as you, ask if they would mind if you emailed it to the other players and gave them some minor reward for filling it out (a reroll of a single d20 in game or something). You might find that the differences are things you can reconcile, or you might find that it just isn't the group for you. Both of those things are perfectly fine.
Example: Myself there is a local, very popular, gaming group that focuses almost exclusively on at-table dungeon crawling and leaves all RPing to the forums. I played with them for a couple of sessions and noticed that the party was getting a bit annoyed as my constant focus on RP meant they got less cleared in the dungeon than they wanted to and I completely ignored all the RP online (I don't really like Play-by-Post Roleplays). It didn't mean that they were bad people or that I was a bad player, it just meant my style was not going to mesh well with theirs. The options I had in that situation was either to conform to what they wanted to do (stick to the crawl), convince them to RP at table (get them to conform to me) or play in another system. I decided to play in other systems. |
| #3iserithAug 04, 2015 14:56:23 | Some of these things are DM issues. Some of them are things you need to work on. Be happy that there are some things you can work on because these are in your control to change. The other things will have to be changed by your DM and you don't have any control over that, though I do recommend you talk directly and politely to the DM outside the context of the game, face-to-face, about your concerns. Then ask for his help in resolving the issues. Be willing to compromise.
I'm basing these conclusions on the context provided and my experience as a DM and player. I'm also not sure which edition of the game you're playing as each can have slightly different assumptions and conventions that may affect DM and player behavior.
|
| #4bawylieAug 05, 2015 7:51:13 | My first time. I was 8 years old and the neighbors I played with outside had an older brother who ran D&D.
Danny was 16, smoked, and was a scrawny, ratty nerd. 8 year old Brad thought he was amazing. My mom got his mom to let me try D&D.
Its 1989 and I'm playing D&D with Danny as DM, his 2 stepbrothers (the dudes I play outside with), and 2 other 16 year olds. I'm sure I played a fighting-man, but I think I also had some kind of ninja thing going on. TMNT was huge at the time.
Orcs raided a village and we could hear the screams of a woman and child in one cottage even while the leader of the orcs was getting away with treasure. The older boys chased the treasure. I went into the cottage.
I think Danny wasn't prepared for me to do that. And he made up a little scene of a single Orc menacing a mom and her kid. I got the question "What do you do?" Up until now I'd been tagging along behind the olde boys' characters, just happy to play. A controller not plugged into the Nintendo sort of thing. 'Player 3.' Now here I am and here they're not and its up to me to save this mom and kid.
I remember checking my character sheet for rope. And I tie my rope around chair & swing it like an Olympic hammer-thrower - I want to bash the Orc in the head with the chair. Wrestling was also very big in 89. And I did have hulkamania.
Danny shut me down. He said an Orc could block the chair and obliterate it with just his muscled forearm. He said the chair wouldn't harm it. I think I tried to come up with a couple ideas and he told me they all wouldn't work. In the end, he pushed me to make an attack on the attack matrix with whatever weapon I had. Might've been a short sword.
I attacked. I distracted the Orc enough so the mom and child could run. I think I saved their housecat. The other boys got treasure, I got nothing. Well I got ridiculed.
It was my first game of D&D, I'd never heard of an Orc, and Even though Danny shut me down repeatedly, it did give me a sense of its might and menace. I was gripped. 8 year old Brad could withstand ridicule just fine. Even today, I have a self-esteem my family calls 'Beeblebroxian.' But I never played with them again. They didn't want me back. Who needs a 2nd grader in your cool high school group? (I still played outside with Danny's stepbrothers & from time to time played D&D with just them).
But i was so obsessed with it, I wrote up a little RPG of my own for Ghostbusters. I didn't get the unusual dice, so it was basically ghostbusting via the game Yahtzee. 1989 remember.
Looking back, Danny was a crap DM. Then again so was I at 16. But I got better. And I learned how to approach players of various skills, abilities, and ages. How to DM for them instead of over them. And how to begin from first principles and proceed therefrom.
Anyone can play D&D. I have run games for 2nd graders, a guy with no arms, autistics, and the developmentally arrested. That's not me bragging. That's me saying anyone can play & nobody should be mocked, derided or excluded for differences, even differences in style. Mocking, playing favoritism, it's all elitist garbage.
Most playstyle theories end up complete waffle under examination. All a player needs to do is chase a goal. If you can answer "what do you do?" then I can DM you. I wrote 'Players 101' with Iserith to help out with that. And We wrote 'DM 101' to start off new DMs with the idea of approaching the game in a basic conversation with a method of adjudicating actions.
My 1st game was crap, looking back. Even if 8 year old me was in awe. Your first game was also crap. And it sounds like your DM had some performance anxiety issues he covered with bravado. I don't know if I'd stick with that DM, but I wouldn't quit the hobby. We are working, all of us, toward better games. We want you here (even if we argue with you on the forums). And we want you to eventually bring others on in too. Maybe you'll even be someone's first DM, and you'll know at least what not to do.
Stay strong, try again. Don't let the bastards get you down. |
| #5CrazyMcNinjaSep 08, 2015 1:52:34 |
|