D&D Players SUCK. This is why.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 жов 2024
- Immerse your games with James' RPG art! / jamesrpgart
Start your para-social relationship with me: ko-fi.com/defi...
Is my DMing out of touch? No, it's the PLAYERS who are wrong! Here's the best advice I can give you from firsthand experience running games for actual Dungeons & Dragons' players.
Credit where credit is due:
Video Editing by Skyler at / @theadhdm
Set the scene with James' Patreon! www.patreon.com/jamesrpgart
LARRY!
bro, that sponsor segment was SMOOTH, respect
you got the THAT GUY bingo sheet?
DMing has taught me that I suck at communication and my players suck at listening.
Sorry what? You're not making any sense.
No no, bees' got a point
Huh did you say something? I wasn't paying attention
sorry I was on my phone what's up
I understand this way too much. 😭
Thank you for describing the Chris Player, i have one at my table and shes a really nice person, but quite quiet, mostly just draws stuff happening at the table, so shes 100% paying attention since shes drawing funny sounding NPCs all of the time which is really fun to see the result, but i was scared i wasn't giving her enough time to shine, but her and her brother have been constantly playing for 3 years now and that phrase "if the players keep showing up means your doing something right" really hit for me, thank you
I feel like you get this playstyle most by people who learn about the hobby by watching youtube campaigns. They want to be a part of the game and the group, but what they enjoy is mostly listening in, being able to influence decisions or comment on whats happening and get a response out of it.
For some of them, it is like watching a livestream. And what they want is being able to say their piece, and the people in the stream not only react to it but accept them as part of the ingroup.
I have some players like this, and I enjoy their company and them being at my table. From time to time, I involve them more ... but it really clicked for me at some point that they just want to be there and that this is great for them. And that I really dont have to change much at all.
Its just so important to ask people what they want from the game, what they think they enjoy, how they got the idea that it would be nice to start playing and so on.
Bit of rambling, but Im sure you get the idea!
make sure to throw the spotlight on them now and then though!
@@nicodemus1828384 Oh yeah, absolutely. Its an art. :D
I'm very much like the Chris-type. I tend to stay quieter while other players go about roleplaying. I find it just as enjoyable immersing myself as a listener.
Not to mention, it is generally difficult to get a word in edgewise in an online voice call regardless lol
@@MrMatthias Hey we got the same name so I was very confused for a second haha
Thanks for letting me know, its one thing to just feel this and guess whats up and another to hear it people really say.
For players like you, as a DM, its kind of an art to involve you at juuust the right time. I like that, tho :D
Why Bow feats working with guns is bad: Bow feats are primarily about Hitting more accurately, and shooting extra arrows for free. Bows take a lot of resources to add extra damage to, so other than Deadly Aim feat, the damage not scaling up much goes well with the lots of extra attacks. Guns target Touch AC, and do more damage, but require reload actions. If you can use all the bow feats with guns, you can skip the reload actions and cause way too much DPS.
Luckily, I spec'ed into the entire Pathfinder Build Master Feat Chain a decade ago.
immediately scrolled down looking for this comment the second he mentioned it lol
It's also the reason why Fickle Winds went from being an obscure spell to a GM favorite.
It's funny because you don't even need to allow the bow feats to make guns do that. Just Rapid Reload and paper cartridges and you're set. Gosh I miss playing Pathfinder. Maybe one day I'll convince my group to fire it up.
Making something OP from something strong is easy and ruins the game.
Be like me, and take the challange of using your powerplayer talents to make something average from something underpowered.
Mine also turned out to be well fleshed out characters. Win/win.
@@Scarletraven87 okay, now I'm interested to hear about your build :D
I have a player that would constantly run into danger head on, and he was not a tank, he was a squishy rogue, as a DM I had to save him from dying in several occasions, and one time he said something in roleplay that changed my perception of what he was doing, he said in character: ''Every time I'm about to die some mysterious force always saves me, I must be immortal then''
That moment I realized he was not trying to die, he was trying to teach me a lesson, let player action have real consequence in-game. I let him go down, he failed his death saving throws and then he was dead, then the paladin used a revivify spell scroll he had and fail the arcana check, the bard gave him bardic inspiration and guidance and I though that was it, but he roll lower than a 4 on all of them... And then the paladin used a very important blessing that an NPC of his background had giving him for accomplishing a quest that he was saving for an important moment, and that was one of the best roleplay exchanges I remember, and I owe it all to that Chris. The game is only better because of it, and I am a better DM because of it.
Definitely have one of those, but they're unaware of the consequences instead 💀
Very beautiful story/moment, though 🙏🏻 Sounds like it was dope for the table
Now that is a dense and big brained rogue
if you really want to save them, then don't save them
I need to stop "saving content." Thanks for the reminder. Great Video!
I gotta say, this is the most difficult thing I could give up, especially in terms of a long form mystery when the payoff could be of the "I am your father" variety. If the player bails before then... oh well. If I just divulged every secret of a campaign, I'd have nothing left to give, and I'd probably burn out sooner than later.
Sorry, no can do. The players are just gonna have to stick with me.
@@commandercaptain4664 This might be the main difference between plot driven vs sandbox.
My jaw DROPPED when the Larry reveal happened! NEVER have I had a player do that! To be fair, my campaigns have only been homebrew... BUT STILL!
I learned that lesson back in the late 80s with D&D B/X, which is why I basically don't run pre-written adventures. And when I do, I change them a lot to both keep people from "cheating their precognition" and because 95% of the time, a pre-written scenario will not fit the table of players I have.
(Looking at you Tyranny of Dragons/Rise of Tiamat. Not only was half the stuff in there just WRONG because it was trying to be written before 5e was totally finalized, but it totally didn't account for a table of experienced players who would find the highest DPS builds very early.)
Had a DM during the session 0, which I had to get going because he had skipped it, just drop on us he likes cracking jokes with his friends and players about how he caused 9/11 and how much he enjoys gassing the jews. Furthermore, he WOULD be inserting such scenarios into the game and we 'just had to get used to it.' WHEW! He was honest but MAN what a bombshell I'm glad I dodged.
Mine too, Homebrew is superior! Then again, I only ever DMed like 6 sessions
Unfortunately it suspect about 10 per cent or more of the players I run games for online have this habit. It is surprisingly easy to access all the published 5e adventures with minimal effort. Therefore I have recently decided to only run published modules for friends and family or players I know from outside the online community. If it's online folks that I don't know very well, I'll still run games but not published adventures.
Never put it past a Larry to sneak a peak at your notes when you least suspect.
Great video as always. Communication helps with every single one of these types of players:
Jake: Knowing what Jake wants to accomplish with his min/max, what he thinks it does (vs what you think it does) and also settling any rules ambiguities beforehand
Jen: Talking about when and how you plan to use her backstory and if you get the sense that she needs more earlier, doing that work
Chris: Checking in once in a while to settle in your mind that he's getting exactly what he wants without a need for more
Bryce: Let Bryce know that to the extent he gets a harebrained idea for the future to let you know ahead of time. I think the most dangerous things for DM's is to knee-jerk shut down instigators and you can avoid that by keeping an open line of communication about intention.
Larry: Well maybe if you talk a bit more you can figure out you need to boot him a few sessions earlier.
All those flicked Meeples will eventually rise up against your authoritarian iron fist comrade.
Once they get unstuck from behind the desk, under your Xbox, and from the cat.
I understand why someone would fudge a die roll, but I just can't grasp why anyone would read an adventure module ahead of a game session. Like, why are you even bothering to play?
I fudge dice rolls all the time, I'm a DM and I swear I have a rigged die, it only rolls 17-20 while DMing
Personally, I have to actively avoid the temptation because to put it simply: I am curious! As a many times DM, I don't read campaign books to figure out how to win, I read them to fantasize about all the cool and interesting characters that would fit, and have one or two character traits that would be really dramatic for an encounter that comes up much later down the line.
To "win".
The same reason why they power game I suppose, it's kinda dumb and makes me feel sad.
@@ДмитрийБотухbut the win feels vapid and unearned. I play for the struggle, and I am sick of players who don’t seem to get that.
A player once told me during an encounter "the monster is dead" because he was tracking the damage done and was referencing the monster manual... I reminded him both that this is my monster and also that the HP has a range and the number listed is the average. The other players made sure it didn't happen again.
Did..
did they kill the other player?
@@soadiko13now i can only imagine 4 guys in LARP costumes all jumping on a guy in a back alley jojo-style
@@soadiko13 they would have been totally justified in doing so imho
So obviously this isn’t normally ok but there have been DMs I’ve played with who had invincible monsters but didn’t tell us we were dealing no damage.
There is a point where you’ve dealt 500 damage to a single enemy and you look at the dm with perplexed confusion
@@azurewraith2585 usually in those situations players normally ask the dm "does it look like we are doing damage?" Or "does it look weak?" Those are pretty common things to ask, then again, the dm is still in the wrong in that situation
The worst player I ever had was essentially a mix of dark-jake and dark-jen. The most frustrating part about him was that he always wanted to be the main character so hard. He always wanted to play the most special-est little guy. Once when I told him that a campaign only had the PHB races, he genuinely threw a tantrum and showed up with a warforged.
The lesson I learned from him was basically that as the GM, you need to be firm. A no can't ever mean maybe. A no means "no, and I'll be enforcing this"
I tell people out of the gate that my games do not have erotic roleplay. That's a great way to alienate a bunch of people. Session zero is huge.
For Larry types, it would cause them to double down on the effort.
@@ДмитрийБотух Oh yeah, Larrys see a line in the sand as a goalpost to be crossed. At the very least, setting those lines gives them no recourse when you kick them straight from the group for crossing them.
Agreed. I'll flirt, allow seduction. Anything past that is an instant fade to black and move onto other characters. We've treated sex as plot device or story moments without ever roleplaying it out.
Agree. It doesn't belong in a normal D&D session.
@@jasonwismer2670 not everyone is afraid of sex lad
Every DM meets a Larry eventually... He is the Anti-GM... What you said about feeling relief when finding out that player isn't coming... Perfect description.
An important lesson I learned early on was that you should be careful about playing NOCs to forcefully, because some people are sheepish - you need to consider your player's personality, and it has nothing to do with game mechanics.
I ran a game for a group of players where they took part of a coup ran by the youth against the clan elders. They killed the Jarl, and were then verbally confronted by the Druid (is in Kelt-ish spiritual leader, not the class.)
I played him as authoritative, extremely confident, and filled with frozen rage.
And my players just crumpled. They couldn't look me in the eyes. They apologized for everything they did and straight up quit the campaign, feeling that they have fucked everything up.
None of them were confrontational enough, or felt comfortable enough as their characters, to engage with that high intensity roleplay.
Let your new players feel supported and gain confidence over time before engaging in very adversarial roleplay, since that can feel much more "real" than combat.
I think this is an under-talked about aspect of dnd. A lot of people play for fun; and sometimes when the DM (or another player) gets too intense RP-wise it’s questionable if it’s truly roleplay or if there’s some real emotions bubbling up behind the acting. It’s also just uncomfortable to have someone appear extremely angry or distressed with you. Many of us get that in our personal lives already and play ttrpgs for respite.
@@badjokezach6359then don’t play at my table. I personally play ttrpgs to be able to be confrontational with bad people and be extremely kind and protective of good people, because I have such a hard time standing up for myself in real life. Does that make sense? Basically, I never want another player who plays to be able to shut off there brain and “have fun”, because that is antithetical to what I personally find fun. I don’t find success without needing to face things which actually challenge me, or actually cause me to want to see harm come to someone, fun. I might be a problem player, but I don’t find entering an “abandoned” mine, learning goblins live there and deciding there lives are forfeit (because it is an “abandoned” mine after all and it will live up to my expectations, damn it), fun. I will never see that as anything but, “they are defending their home and lives from intruders”. That’s not fun to me, it makes me feel icky.
I did something similar. My group met with a foreign high position military guy in a border situation but that had been set up secretly due to a covert scrying operation. I proceeded to go through verbal interrogation techniques such as repetition, and misdirection. They started getting annoyed and confused....but were giving the guy more info so i just kept going. It apparently really pissed them off and led to a final issue where they attacked a guy at a tavern because he wouldn't go at that moment.
I learned that while playing the character is important...it is also important to remember to give players the spotlight and leeway to make their own decisions.
I learned not to have more realistic and timely systems.
I learned to only ever have one night ambush and to just sum it up with a quick die roll.
I learned that pacing is very important. Realistically you build things up over time. One character wanted to be part of the countries elite spies, but was very low level so i figured they'd do what you'd expect, observe them from afar and slowly test them then finally initiate them into the group. Realistically, we never got there, too much bloat. Have something cool and do it. Players...are impatient, and honestly you can only get away with such a thing if there's enough going on to keep it interesting. Players just hate downtime, and you need to accommodate for that. Some groups get bored without 2-4 fights a session, others prefer one every 1-2 sessions, but you need enough plates spinning and keys jangling to keep them interested.
I also learned my fights and stealth encounters are pretty good, so happy with that.
I also learned to either run a serious campaign or a silly one. Don't really mix them too much, it goes poorly, for me anyways.
What does nocs mean?
@@BreadCancer no idea.
My number one tip for DMs no matter the system or style.
Know when to say “No.”
Oh yeah. Sometimes "Yes, but" just can't cut it.
As both a player and DM of D&D for about 8 years, I immediately liked the video and wholeheartedly agreed with the title before I even watched the video.
In my experience, the power players are the backbone of the parties. Thanks to their overwhelming strength, they allow the other types of players more room with quirky builds and less combat centric ones.
Nothing wrong with power gamers. Too many people think they are a problem for some reason.
Felt that with my group. They warned the paladin in every major fight due to having the best damage and health AND decent mobility on top of that
See that’s the perfect balance in my opinion, it gets a little dicey though when you have more than one power player. I think 2 max depending on the party size can still work, but past a certain point it can get messy. Now it’s either the enemies get absolutely steam rolled, making combat feel more like an obligation than a challenge, or the DM overcompensates with the difficulty. (Balancing is hard to begin with so I don’t blame them, that’s just how it goes sometimes.) This isn’t a universal thing, just something my group tends to struggle with from time to time.
@@benvelveeta6803in 5e it does ye.
Yeah :) I like to make quirky character builds, but I often “powergame” by accident…
I think I have a better quote than:
"If you have a good idea, use it now, you never know which game will be your last"
(Sometimes a plan needs a longer burn to have the intended effect and can't be used immediately, (although you should never get too attached to future planning anyway, you can never plan for the player))
But my revised version is:
"Listen to your players equally and present them all with hooks for their characters in session 1 or 2.
Keep them all engaged with stuff that means something to them and your much less likely for a spontaneous last session.
Get each player hyped to keep playing each week."
(As players grow invested in the world, plot, NPCs, and their character, you can slowly start to make longer more intricate plots and scale the reward for mission size slowly over months as they level)
You are missing one player type that I struggled with for a loong time. The player who was just not intelligent enough to understand and learn the rules. He was a nice guy. Friendly, reliable, a bit on the quiet side. But he never managed to learn the rules. No matter how long he played the game and how often we explained the rules, he forgot them the next minute. But he always insisted on playing complicted classes like spellcasters (never knew what any of his spells did or remember what he had prepared for the day). His character mostly just tagged along, kind of just copying what the other characters were doing. Being not very helpful in any kind of encounter, but not really being a hindrance either, unless, sometimes, whenever he happened to have an idea of his own, putting it into action immediately and always causing a lot of trouble for himself and/or the rest of the group. He still holds the unbeaten record of the most character deaths (mostly his own) over any span of time. I mean try beating dying 14 times over the span of 14 in-game-minutes!.
As I said, as a person he was a nice, friendly, helpful guy and a long time friend. That is why we kept him in the group for many, many years. But his grasp of the rules and basic common sense was so bad, I often wondered, how he managed to survive in real life.
Eventually I didn't invite him for my new campaign and everybody else breathed a sigh of relief. Our games have gotten much less stressful since.
That's most of my players lmao. They never know the rules, bother learning outside of sessions and have to constantly check their attacks, etc. Ofc they only check on what to do when is their turn instead of having made the strategy before.
@@carlosamado7606 Timers can help. Encourage them to learn their class, tell them "you're up next after X person goes, figure out what you're going to do" etc
@@carlosamado7606 Well luckily, most of my players know the rules. Often better than I do. And for this player it wasn't for lack of trying. He actually spend a lot of time outside of our sessions, reading through the rules. He just couldn't remember them. He would run afoul of an attack of opportunity one round, then do it again the next round because he forgot about that rule within minutes. That was one particular rule that he never remembered. Even after playing Games with attack of opportunity for more than ten years. He would (needlessly) trigger aoo several times each game session. I mean he would remember the rule, when it hit him, but he'd forget again a few minutes later.
@@JacopoSkydweller I think, forcing that player into a timer would have made things worse. His problem wasn't that he took too much time to decide what to do. His problem was, that he simply couldn't remember the rules and when he made a decision, it was usually a bad one. I guess his player decided that Int and Wis make for good dump stats. But it is really hard to deal with such a person. He is a nice guy. He tried. He just couldn't. And that stressed everyone else out.
I understand the pain and frustration: we had a rogue in our group that NEVER, EVER used cunning action and if I remember correctly she was not a newbie... The biggest issue is that she did not filled her character sheet correctly (I can't tell if she was lazy, didn't bothered or other) and I discovered this later on near the ending of the campaign when she was basically no longer playing.
Anyhow, on one hand I feel dirty because my min-max side wants every help it can get during a combat and would have loved to see her shine a lot more during combat, on the other hand I don't want to force anyone to play a class "the right way"...
NGL, that little bit about writing the lesson learned by Jen at the start of each journal is fantastic. I've lost tons of great ideas over the years from my own missed opportunities or people leaving.
There’s 2 types of rules lawyers.
1. The guy who knows the rules, and will say them when it comes up (whether they get disregarded or not in the end). I’d like to coin the term, “rules consultant.” They’re often minmaxers who play the game fairly.
2. The rules “lawyer” who will either blurt the rules out only with the intent to be “right” and/or make the GM look bad, or only when it benefits them and ignoring when it doesn’t. I’ve been guilty of doing this time to time but I try to keep my trap shut when the DM is bending the rules to benefit the other players. I don’t mind bending the rules when it’s fun for the table or to tell a good story. When a “rules-bent” ability is way too strong or just oversteps onto another players’ toes, I’ll try to advocate for the rules.
Now there’s nothing wrong with bending it once for a cool moment, but a lot of the time, the rules are the way they are for a reason.
To be fair though, that's not your call to make, if you were the DM, then yeah enforce the rules all you want, but DMs are basically the Law itself, so it's kinda just a timewaster to argue with the. Yes, even if they concede to your wishes.
@@themanysirs1814 Who said I'm arguing? If a DM wonders about what the official rule is or how an ability works, and if I happen to know, I'll often say what I know, then that's that. But I try to only speak up about the rules *when it's asked.* Especially *when I'm asked.* When people WANT to know what the official rule is. That was my entire point, which I think you could not have missed harder if you tried. The first one is the HELPFUL type. Again, that was *my point.* There are good and bad ways to be a rules lawyer. Or in the good case, a rules consultant, I guess, is the more accurate term. I am fully aware the DM is law and even the universe of the campaign world itself. Do not misrepresent or misconstrue my actual point, which was clearly laid out in my first post.
The first one is someone who says the rules when asked. If the DM wants to know the official ruling and you happen to know, I don't see any harm in saying it and saving them some time looking it up. And if they say otherwise, that's fine.
It's also good to mention this is best with someone you trust, I've found. Or at least someone you know has good experience with the game system.
The second one is the actually toxic person, the one who'll try to manipulate people and argue the rules in their favor solely. If everyone enjoys the alternative, great. If the official ruling is more fun for people, also great. That was my point. But knowing the rules is helpful even when you want to rule otherwise. These people don't actually know the rules and may be actively cheating: fudging rolls (while not a DM), will "alter" abilities and go behind the DM's and the other players' back to gain a perceived "advantage" in the game or campaign.
Sometimes it's hard to tell if my DM is using the "rule of cool" or he forgot or misinterpreted some rules.
As a general rule of thumb, when playing online through a VTT and I'm undecided about why my DM is not going RAW, I write to him privately so he can "ignore my message" (or reply he knows it is not RAW), or correct himself without the need of me "humiliating" him on the rules he forgot or did not know (which is never my intention, I'm a DM myself).
One of my latest corrections was a "mini-boss" using "misty steps" and a very high level spell in the same turn: while it would have been cool to see how much powerful that "mini-boss" was, it wouldn't have been that much fun for our warrior to be nuked in a moments notice when said "mini-boss" was in an unreachable position and behind total cover a few seconds ago... Plus this could have become a precedent for future "combos" both on player and DM side.
@@CarloArmato Yeah unless it’s a ranged focused character, I can’t see that being very fun unless the warrior’s player leans hard into how absurd the warrior might look getting so frustrated in character chasing the “mini-boss” around the field all the time, and even then that joke would get old and fast.
Sometimes, corrections need to be made.
I am the first one who will bring up the correct ruling or remind people if it is forgotten. However, if the DM rules differently, I will not object. I shall bring up the correct rules regardless of if it hurts or helps me/the party.
All I desire is that the established rules are followed. One-off exceptions are fine so long as they are clearly stated as such.
It's like herding cats.
oh so is that why people always bring food
It's just like the Army
"stop running and let the flerkens eat you"
Phil, first-timer, didn't know the laws yet, just described what was going to happen after he made a roll. I was totally surprised, never ever had a player done that before. Being a benevolent Go...DM, I graciously allowed it to play out his way.
Ever since I am pondering the question: Why not allow players more narrative power? There certainly are dangers :looking at Larry: but executed well, it might revolutionize the Game.
New players are my favorite players. They're not locked down by the weight of knowing what's optimal. They often see the game in their imagination vs. what the "rules" tell them they can do.
Gimme a new player any day.
there are also games that are more narrative focused like SHadowrun Anarchy, although you could push it with 5e, the game isn't made for this kind of play. Although i love to let them describe how they catstrophicly fails with fumbles \o/
I am of the perspective that's what optimal play is. When you have experienced players that all have "GM" powers over things that happen. An understanding when to control things and when not to. Even having input on other PC's actions.
I like players I can do this style of play with the most.
And I'm a massive fan of Thrilling Intent which runs this style of game.
You can give players more narrative powers anytime; usually after a roll - or even bending rolls which is kinda what heroic inspiration tries to bring to D&D
Little late but this is actually a DM story rather than a player story. So, i was forever DM for my group for over a decade but anytime a new friend or old wanted to borrow the mantle just for a precious little while i was always happy to just be a player for a while. And while i never forced my self into a "co-dm" seat, i was always happy to play back-up RAW rules adjudicator if that was what my friend wanted and asked for. But one of my friends, Chris for this example, went the opposite way. He wanted no one to guide on rules at all, which again im okay with. When you are the DM you are the final and ultimate arbiter, better or worse.
Chris told me and the rest of our friends he wanted to run a 3.5 dnd game in his own custom setting, but he wanted to unschackle the power a little, to go ahead and play whatever races we wanted, even Level Adjusted races without penalty. With clarification, he meant, if you want to play any monster as your race, go for it, just use the base monster as your base characyer before adding levels. His literal words were "trust me, ive been pouring over the rules, i know how to keep it all balanced nonkatter what you all choose." Hearing this i shrug and build a troll barbarian for a little brain dead Bryce/Chris action. First couple sessions go by reasonably enough but things feel fishy. My fatigued forever dm brain could tell something wasnt right but not what. Then the hydra dragon encounter. In the midst of this epic "mini boss" encounter, where spells, counter spells, wild attacks and feat-chain enabled shenanigans were flying i finaly caught the fish. None of our rules or characters mattered. The dice results were smoke, the dieing minions were mirrors, and our DM was a full on Wizard of Oz. I said nothing. I played on. The other players confided that something felt amiss in the post game convo and i politely confronted chris 1 on 1 later.
To this day, Chris INSISTS that he was running everything by the book, pre-set dc's on custom monster blocks and quests according to plan. Mind you, i had literally identified mid game at least five impossible shifts in DC's and enemy damage against us. But Chris would have none of it. And to be clear, the game was fun enough because it was still hanging out with friends, going on adventures amd quests and experiencing this world. But i knew the cjaracter sheets we built were meaningless and over time everyone else came to the same conclusion on their own. We were all a power-gamey but ultimately tame group so the fun faded fast enough once we all knew the math and mechanics was fraud. It wasnt as fulfilling, we werent really overcoming the challenges. When the game got to the next major story break, i asked if everyone was feeling like returning to Icewind Dale, a regular area id run games in the forgotten realms and it was a unanimous, hearty yes. Even from Chris.
Chris was and is a great friend. And i love the guy as a player. Even as a story writer and quest builder. But i know i never want a DM like Chris. I want my character to matter too, really. It was like the most extreme example of dice fudging imaginable.
Aside from all the Larrys I have met over the years, the players that never seem to grok the rules are what truly bother me. I am patient to a fault, but when we are in Session 20 of an OSE game and a player is STILL asking me what to roll to attack (and slowing down the game as a result), there isn’t much I can do. 😢
As a GM, a player and a slow learner, it is important that I do things, or I never learn them. Perhaps if you tell them which charts to reference and have them do it, whenever they ask, they will learn better.
Patience is great, but use time out of the table to reach this player and develop tools for them to grasp the rules more easily. Maybe ask them to arrive 10 minutes earlier than the others and revise with them their character sheet, or make a reference chart with the most common action choices for them to pick on each of their turns. Hope that helps!
We now need a t-shirt or button that says, "Don't be a Larry."
Wow your that guy that guyed harder than any that guy I've had the displeasure of meeting
The hardest lesson I learned was from my first dm. He was so bad It made me think "I could do better than this guy" dm'd 1 game and been a dm since. He was terrible as a player too constantly trying to do fantasy drugs, use people's actual phobias against them and sexually harassing npcs and party members (ya know our friends and partners), he was also obsessed with chaos and random effects and kept asking to add in homebrew items that worked like Wild magic sorcerer but for free and while playing a bard.
The hardest part about being a long-time dungeon master, who has started playing D&D as a player, is convincing yourself that your AREN'T Larry.
If you have met all the other types of player you can replicate some of their best moments. You can instigate a lot some sessions and chill out more in other ones, be consistent on your character but try a more unorthodox build, since you're very familiar with the normal builds and their min max variations. Most importantly, try to give some players the spotlight, if you air pass so other players can dunk sometimes you'll very likely be loved by the rest of the party and the dm
If that still doesn't clear your doubts, assure other player that you're open to criticism
thats called impostor syndrome m8
@@brunop.8745 indeed
And the guy who will try to rewire the button, so that it only affect the villain.
The only horror story I got is, recently trying to get a group of us ancient nerds (I'm the youngest in my early 50s), who haven't played in decades (if ever), to get a game going, any game really, but I was in inspired by the Daggerheart open beta and was leaning that way. I downloaded the Daggerheart pdf, brought the 5e DMG, PHB, MM, and Tasha's, I also had the Cyberpunk Red starter box. We show up for the session zero to discuss our options and all that jazz. The guy who was going to GM says we're going to play his homebrew version of Shadowdark, without even letting me finish listing the options I brought (a few of the other people brought systems too), didn't even pretend to have a discussion/consensus, limits the class options to three fighter, rogue, and bard, says we have to play human or dwarf (he actually said we could play halfling but he would kill them before they got to the gauntlet). When I tried to bring us back into a discussion about other systems and again tried to sell the group on the open beta, he launched into a diatribe about how 5e "your just superheroes". I tried to bring up that Daggerheart isn't D&D, it's still in the middle of being built and we could make the power levels whatever we want, and the WHOLE group should decide on that kinda stuff (system, power) together. And he launched into another diatribe about how I was "just a looser hermit with a power fantasy". The whole thing was super devastating. I mean YES he was right I am a "Looser hermit with a power fantasy"! That's the point of a game where you Pretend to be a Powerful whatever! But SO IS HE!!! The difference is my fantasy involves my friends ALSO getting to feel powerful, his "power fantasy" is him having power over the rest of us IRL, taking our choices away, forcing us to do what he says. I Haven't spoken to any of the people there since (some of whom I have known for over 35 years), I lost all respect for the"gm" (whom I have also known for over a decade) and doubt I will ever be able to be cordial with him again, the rest I will see again and still be friends with (we're all old and have lives, professionally at least) I think we all needed to process, it's only been a couple months. Anyway, just a little reminder that "That Guy" isn't always a player, and No TTRPG is Always better than Bad TTRPG (and sorry for writing a novel in yer comment section)
I hope you find a group where you can all have fun together.
As a counterpoint, accepting DM restrictions can be good for the kind of campaing they are trying to roll. You could give them the benefit of doubt instead of bringing your expectations so heavily to the table; after one or two sessions "the way the GM wants", if the game isn't fun, THEN you could talk as a group and try something new; but if you already gets there all confrontational, then you are not helping either way, it will just become a stubborness battle and nothing will sprout from that (not to mention possibly flushing down the toilet all the work the GM had prepared).
The group should have fun together, but veteran or not, Its always ok to let powers be imbalanced (specially if the power is going to the GM's hand) It is kind of how the games run most of the time.
I hope you can find better ways to build the game you want to play; in addition, I hope you can be more humble and accepting of games that are not exactly what you expect - you may be surprised! And if not, if the game sucks, you can give the feedback *after* trying your earnest to run the game other ppl want, as respectful as you can be; and you can always walk away if nothing works out too, no hard feelings. Its just a game, after all
Notes
Powergamer
Gets enjoyment from figuring out how to make powerful characters.
Provide locks to their min-maxed key.
Rules might look pointless on paper but makes sense while playing and vise versa.
Roleplayer
Gets enjoyment from getting entrenched in their character and seeing where their story plays out.
Use the hooks they give you to provide them with character progression.
If you have a good idea, use it now. You never know which session will be your last.
The Quiet One
Gets enjoyment from being social and taking part.
If someone keeps showing up, you must be doing something right.
Instigator
Gets enjoyment from doing interesting things in game.
Provide them with enough freedom for them to enjoy themselves, but not to where it steps on others.
If their fun steps on others' fun, step in by having a private conversation.
Problem Player
Their enjoyment of the game steps on other players’ good time and/or makes others uncomfortable.
As a DM, you should accommodate anyone, but not everyone.
Babè, wake up. Deficient master just uploaded.
Still my favorite dnd UA-camr. Keep up the amazing work.
Being stressed about my first GM campaign, and then I stumbled on your channel. Binged all of your videos in one night. Great job, thx a lot for advices.
Jen actually personifies a problem that I’ve noticed over the last few years: if you want a predefined character arc, write a book. I assure you, as a GM, I’m not going to deliver the story that you envisioned in your head.
Another good piece of advice for Jen: don’t get your hopes up for something that may not even happen, or, to be more blunt, “you’re level one. Calm the f#ck down.”
Jen isn't a problem player though.
Fck you go play with larry. A good story is a story that revolves around its heroes. You dont make a story and then ask a random hero to play it. You make a story for this hero. Thats the point of dming. The players get to choose what they want to play, and you get to make them play such way. You d be lucky to make play a player who is involved in the world and story. The fun as a dm is to make the players happy. Otherwise you are just the one writing a book.
@@jeanzyx1707 you sound like someone’s who’s only ever listened to Critical Roll, and never actually played the game.
While I see your point. You're definitely a blast to play with :)
It's a matter of meeting players halfway. Have them set general goals (adventure/group/campaign) while the DM mixes those with one's game world and NPC goals. Somewhere in the middle of that compromise, fun is had by all.
The problem with Jen is that... it's made unclear why she left, so the video lesson doesn't really land for me. Could've been boredom or obligation, who knows. However she did introduce the multiverse to *LARRY* and for that... _bless her heart_ 😖
the single worst player ive ever had in a campaign was one who played Dungeons and Dragons like a 12 year old plays skyrim on Christmas day
the players were handed a letter from one of the factions (the campaign is centered on picking which faction you think you can trust after they gained an interest in you) into a bonfire. they were only contacted by one faction so if i had not intervened, they would of been doing this solo (borderline impossible in this campaign)
he carried a jug of spoiled milk that he threatened to toss on a guard every time i described that one is in a scene (the players had to scramble to convince him every time to Not Do That)
during a mission with the only faction that wanted to deal with those players (because they have a knack for causing a scene everywhere they go thanks to this one player) they were tasked with causing a massive distraction when given the signal so others can infiltrate a facility and grab some important information, then escape when their little communal stone buzzed.
he failed the mission for the rest of the players. he didn't wait. he instead, minute one of entering the city, didnt bother to look for a place with a bunch of people and instead casted the friends cantrip (this was 5e) on a guard in front of everyone just to ask him how his day was, and waited the full minute duration
im gonna start eyeballing skyrim fans if they ever ask to be in one of my campaigns
i mean the jug of milk is pretty funny tbh
thank goodness they changed that in 5e2024, no more forceful hostile after Friends
I literally just had a "Larry" game. It was eye opening. The final bbeg didnt even fight, he just watched the party remove the chaos incarnation.
Let's play bingo with my list of players!
- Larry? Check
- Main star of show? Check
- "I want gun. With bow perks. And gun should be six shooter. Is that okay on first level?" guy? Check
- That shy person? Check
- Rules lawyer who is there not to play, but just to present everyone that you suck with rules? Check
- Person who plays D&D like vidego game? Check
- People with atention level close to potato no matter what is going on, but is not their personal character arc? Check
- Person wanting to see what will cause me to stop game and ask him "WHY?!" ? Check
- Any many, many more!
Yes, I agree with this video title a lot. The best games I ever had were with... first time players, with little info about game, or community. They came to have fun, not to target GM mental health. I loved when two players went all jolly that they killed scary monster. (It was not even boss, just demonic animal without any powers or big stats).
You want people that will praise your skill in writing and care about what you planned? Take those who just started, have good personality and plenty of free time when you have. Biggest chance to have good time for both GM and players.
My first campaign had a "Larry" and the best way to describe him was that he wanted to "Win at D&D" like a video game. Our DM had invited me and "Larry" to their game (I had never played before), and they were a session or two from wrapping up their campaign. I stated I didn't want to ruin the flow or fun of the game since they were so close to finishing, but I'd love to watch and meet everyone. "Larry" was an "experienced" player and wanted to jump right in. He turned the introduction of his PC into this long, drawn-out meeting, where he tried to force the other players to play an IRL card game so they could even learn his name...it went down hill after that really fast...skip ahead, he ticked off all the other players due to getting the killing blow on the BBEG. New campaign is starting and it's session zero, I was the only person to show up at the DM's house. We had a good time and made the most of it, he was wanting to do homebrew for the first time and not rely so heavily on a book. Our DM convinced the other players to come back but also invited "Larry". The campaign fizzled out shortly due to "Larry". The beginning of every session they had either completely rebuilt their character and had to explain all their new stuff or they would completely change their own backstory and go off and force others to try to RP. Got to the point "Larry" would start to go into a monolog, "I notice a mysterious stranger following me and I walk over to the alley to investigate..." other players "we don't care and keep walking and leaving you behind"...
I was more of a "Chris" because I really didn't know anyone other than the DM but I did have a lot of fun minus the "Larry" drama.
Yep, the Larrys of the world. I had them in my games as well. He liked to play characters that were irreverent or oblivious to how their behavior ribbed others the wrong way (like himself), whether it was incorporating feces into their faith practices, making themselves dangerous to their own party by ingesting too much vampire blood, burning anything he can, or simply leaving midgame with no explanation.
We dealt with our Larry by just not inviting him to any more games. I just regret we didn't do so sooner.
The pipeline from Bryce to Larry is a small line
it's more of a ring than a straw, that's for certain.
@@koalabro6118 Oh no... you're right... my player "Bryce" turned into a "Larry"👀
This video was great. It honestly felt really wholesome. The section about the instigator made me think about how my group’s instigator has caused several of the most ridiculous moments in my campaign and how when the truly absurd things happen, my group gets so into it. I can tell that those are the moments they eat up the most.
Love the video! Had a “Larry” almost drown one of my major NPCs in a barrel of beer lol as a Pay to Play DM, it also adds an element of this, certainly hard to balance all the personalities we might meet!
That big no no Larry did hit hard for me. I fell in love with Icewind Dale RotFM, and read through a good chunk of chapter one, even running a small lived campaign of my own, only for a DM of mine to suddenly have time to run it himself. I’ve leveled with him that I’ve read a bit, and I’m trying my absolute best to keep the info I learned out of decisions I make as a player. The last thing I want to do is spoil the fun for the rest of the party and keep them from making decisions that could alter the game in new and exciting ways. In the other hand it’s been fun since I have just enough knowledge of the setting the DM has shared some fun behind the scenes things that only I’d catch on to right away.
I have friction with my group and the ways each of them plays from time to time, but honestly they’re my friends and we usually get through it.
We’ve really only had one or two Larry’s in our history. Dude’s character was just Guts from Berserk without anything that made the character actually interesting, was disruptive, would EAT ALL THE SNACKS SOMEONE ELSE PAID FOR.
We had a our own Larry in our group. Was the OG DM for a majority of our group, before myself and a few others showed up.
Our Larry was creepy, and very capricious with rules, rulings, and everything. The last campaign I played in where he DMed (Curse of Strahd), he showed many of his true colors.
For one, he would often times fudge things to get the result he wanted. He also liked punishing newer players, making it more a DM vs Player game, especially in combat.
He then got some major main character syndrome, as a DM, using a former PC that was a part of a connected campaign (I DMed Stormwreck Isle for the first 4 levels, then traded DM job for Strahd).
This guy essentially wiped out the entire party but his DMpc, (save for his favorite player), then had the DMpc win in the end.
He was also creepy outside of DnD, and became a problem player for the other DMs, including me. He never really showed care for anyone else in the game, their character, anything. He had a clear ego, one that couldn't handle being wrong or bested. After some of the things he did aroubd and tried with my wife, if I see him again, I'll know what its like to really deal slashing damage. He is that bad.
I had a worse That Guy at my table - edgy guy with issues, who decided this will be his therapy. I bailed after two sessions and told him to get his shit together or I'll never play with him again like that. We haven't talked since.
litlr me
good to know being an edgy guy with issues means i cant play ttrpgs
Stop being a knife so you dont cut others perhaps?
@@hggpiOh no, poor you
@@Noobslayar yes poor me
@@hggpi you... technically can, but will this be healthy tho?
ttRPG is a group activity, so there must be healthy ways to interact with the group. It requires empathy, humbleness and goodwill; sometimes we are just not in this place yet.
It can also be a way to work towards that place; if you are among friends, this can be even more powerful than therapy.
But in any case, it must be a consensus, or at least able to work it out together through mature dialog
Hardest lesson we have to learn as a DM is that you do have to remove people from your game when they are ruining the experience for everyone. There is no miracle trick, or therapy session that will prevent That Guy from pushing everyone's boundaries. Kick toxic people out of your life some might say.
I once had this one player. She wasn't a "problem" player, as she showed up on time and played the sessions and had wacky characters and stuff
the best part about her roleplay is she was always doing some wacky idea and completely blindsiding me, never letting anyone know her next move. the worst part was she was always doing some wacky idea and completely blindsiding me, never letting anyone know her next move. AND also she always had characters with full novels for backstories, which was a headache and a half for me as a GM. i once was in a campaign as a player with her as a fellow player, and in the ONE session we had she nearly gets herself and the party killed several times AND tried to eat a talking cat NPC. honestly feels like she was actively trying to give everyone a migraine
I had several "Larry"s in a World of Darkness Changeling game I once tried to run. My now-ex, who played a literal child that took every opportunity to throw a tantrum. A friend's girlfriend who specifically went for the most disruptive or murder-hobo-y option every time, while also deliberately trying to ignore the main plot even when it came looking for the party.
There's a reason why a double-breakup in the same month led to the game collapsing. And honestly, looking back, that was a mercy.
I'm fortunate that my party for my current Savage Worlds campaign are a Jen and a Chris, and one who is a fine all-rounder. I'm making sure to keep them fed and happy. Jen gets her backstory woven in from the start. The all-rounder get to make his fun quips and basically detective-ing. The Chris, I allow to do weird and funny stuff, and have loot coming in the near future that will help with the most common of his actions (ie, he loves getting the high ground even with an awful Athletics score, so guess who's going to get an item that helps with that.)
It's my understanding that Tomb of A. was written by Gygax with the specific intention of it being impossible to complete, as a form of revenge. So unless the campaign was an edited homebrew version, Larry really did nothing wrong.
Larry is the specific reason why I run a rule bog-standard for all games: No +1 invites. Everyone goes through the regular vetting process, and I WILL reject your friend if they are not a good fit.
In one of the first games I ran, I had a player who felt the need to interject themselves into every conversation because he was "the charisma character."... He was unbearable; he literally intervened during a conversation between a cleric and her god, constantly enacted decisions without the group agreeing first and just generally tried and lie to every NPC he met to the point that I literally had to start keeping a list of what lie he had told what character...
Eventually, the cleric convinced the other players to murder his character in his sleep...
Damn. The CLERIC orchestrated and campaigned for your murder.
Ah, I too had the party Julius Caesar a problem Charisma character. Mine was a case of a (then) new player playing a bard and going in on lol horny bard stereotypes before coming to the conclusion himself with the rest of us that the character was not a good idea to play, and getting full on the execution train lol
@@consensuslphiskI had a different campaign with a trigger-happy Sorcerer.
Eventually I just let him hoist himself by his own petard while exploring a mine.
Me: "You enter the cavern and see a..."
Larry: "I shoot a firebolt at it."
Me: "... You enter the cavern and Larry immediately throws a ball of fire at keg of Dwarven Blasting powder..." *I begin to roll dice*
Oh man. I empathize with this video so much. The whole "friend of friend" sorta forcing their way in and then making things worse. Had this very thing happen once and it wasn't great, the guy would constantly distract others from the game, and tried to bring even more of his friends in (which I flat out said no to). Of course, he was the type to get upset when things didn't go his way as well. I was too nice in letting additional people in early on, and it caused some problems. I've learned as a GM that you have to let yourself be seen as the stern one sometimes and just tell people no.
The scream was spot on.
That ad read was perfect. Loved the ADHDM’s cameo.
loved your cameo in the comments after the video
I've been dming about six years now in my own homebrew campaign and I will say I've learned the same lessons as you for dming, especially with LARRY, my biggest Larry situations though were with people that either were trying to break the game,break people's fun OR act very entitled. I run my games with more of a realistic approach to how things work thus I change rules to accommodate that. one of my most controversial changes recently was changing stillness of minds wording and effects as I find it BS as a DM and a tad broken for monks as well as nonsensical in wording mechanically, i had a debate with my players over it as they don't want me to mess with their toys which I understand. But they were fine, I have run with players that joined my homebrew game knew it was going to be different and STILL complained whenever I made a ruling or did something not in the base rules usually to make the situation more weighty or improve the quality of the game for everyone including myself, my least favorite players are the ones who forget I want to have fun too, the session is not just for the players I made my game to tell the story I wanted to tell with the mechanics and rules I wanted to showcase and people enjoying that makes me happy, when I get viewed as the enemy or viewed as incompetent for my rulings on mechanics or storytelling really hurts and makes me hate dming. But I've overcome.this found a good team with no Larry's and life's been good.
My own Larry was so bad I almost quit the hobby altogether, I've barely GM'd since save a scattered one-shot here or there. Videos like this make me want to try again. Thanks Deficienct for reminding that the struggle is both universal and worth the effort.
Hats off to Larry 🎵 He broke your heart~ 🎵Just like you broke mine when you - said we must part~ 🎵
I taught one of my dm’s probably the most important lesson of all. If you are going to have your villain do a speech make sure they stand a good distance away from anyone in the party that can make a grapple check.
My barbarian rolled a nat 20 and did a Homer Simpson choke on the big bad mid sentence.
Ive never had a good time playing with "instigators" like Bryce. Larry is obviously the worst, but Bryce is like a diet "that guy". Ive had a full group of Bryce; its not fun.
When he makes a decision that DOES hastily hurt the whole party, its never that they're sorry, its somehow the DMs fault for putting out an option that no character would pick just for them to go against roleplay and pick it. Its never their fault for not having a good build, its the DMs fault for not giving their specific build a place in their adventure. The DM has a lot of control, but (in my experience) players like Bryce make everything the DMs fault over theirs even at the best of times, and at the worst of times they choose to antagonise the rest of the party "just to spice things up"
I don't understand why DM's keep allowing people at their table they don't like playing with. If "that guy" is such an issue, than why do you keep inviting them? If I don't like a player at my table than they get booted, easy as that. I'm not gonna sacrifice the sanity and enjoyment of myself and others players just to try and accommodate some thorn in everyone's side.
I have learned as a long time forever-DM of a method to deal with "Larry"s. With regards to their special homebrew who likes to chew on Bones a little too much, teach them that actions have consequences. For me, I created a table of "Unfortunate Outcomes" related to their promiscuity which included results like...
- You spent a night with a nobleman's son/daughter and now the noble wants you killed for "sullying their poor child's good name"
- You caught (insert any disease here)
- PREGANANANT?!
- etc... be creative with it!
As for the module reading... Wow. I like to think of myself as a pretty patient DM, but if I found out a player was just straight up reading the book AS I WAS RUNNING IT, I genuinely don't know what I'd do. Maybe ban them? That's a whole new level of "meta gamer" and also brass on that player.
I have learned SO much from my players. I've had some REALLY REALLY bad sessions, and some really really good ones. I cycled through various different friend groups and players until I landed on my core group.
I had a jen-type player who I did the EXACT same thing with until they eventually left the campaign. when I play, I personally am the min-maxer myself with a mix of theatre kid melodramatic actor thrown in there, so I'm familiar with min-maxing, but another player of mine has casually pushed the boundaries of their character with the most basic, RAW, power gaming ever that doesn't even hinge on obscure rulings, so I've had to learn to adapt and they thankfully hold back in most encounters until people start going down. another player of mine is so much of a storyteller/rp'er, they accidentally end up hogging the spotlight in hour long improv rp scenes, so I've had to learn to reign them in when they go overboard or force other players into the scene to include them. on that same note, one player is so shy and self-deprecating, I actively have to push them into rp moments and constantly remind them to take rp scenes for themselves in the main session, because it's important for every other player to see that character development, even if it doesn't include the other players in the scene. Much like your chris, one player has been so content with the game and their character, I've actually had to give them buffs throughout the campaign to keep up with everyone else through re-rulings and new magic items. One player I'll never forget, was a friend of a friend that wanted to try dnd for the first time, and by not providing a smooth enough entry into the session for them, I scared them away from dnd altogether, which still haunts me. It wasn't even a bad session, one of my better ones... it was just too confusing, I didn't slow combat down and break down all the complex rulings, and being confused and bored enough they just decided to leave of their own accord. Another murderhobo player I had taught me the power of saying no to stupid character concepts and ideas.
overall, my players have taught me humility over pride, that my fun is just as important as theirs, and that at the end of the day, it's just a game and we all want to enjoy it. through a retconned tpk, various problem players I've slacked on communicating with, a series of sluggish, boring sessions during a case of burnout from me, and an entire irl year break from the game, my core group of players have stuck with me through it all and I think we've all grown as a result of it.
my min-maxer pulls punches in fights and doesn't activate his most OP magic items not only as a story thing, but to make easier fights more even so they actually get a turn and I can show off their cool abilities. my theater kid player has grown so much as an rp'er and player (yet still struggles with time management, lol). my shy player is finally not relying on communicating with me through dms on what they want to do in game and instead just doing it. and my content player... well he's just happy to be there as always.
Not only hilarious, but also really insightful --- your advice for dealing with all of your archetypes was spot on, especially Bryce the Instigator (the archetype that best fits me... yeah, I've been responsible for more than one TPK in my time...). Your points about Chris not _always_ needing to be "fixed", using good ideas ASAP, mapping consequences onto the instigator rather than the whole party, and treating min-maxers like the "easiest to make happy" gifts they are rather than struggling to invent ways to foil them, were all excellent.
4:46 that lesson changed my life! It is the single most important lesson any d&d youtuber has taught me in a long time! I have made that mistake so many times and never understood what was the mistake I was making. I was so used to think about narrative timing that I never realized the importance of "If you have a good idea use it now! You never know what session will be your last!"
I have at least two player who left my games who probably wouldn't have if I had made known that lesson. Probably more over the last 16 years of GMing.
Thank you Deficent Master!
I learned to move the game along in some of my online groups before the players start doing something stupid.
Ran a murder mystery in 5e and the players weren't participating in the investigation at all. Except one player who wanted to check out the laundry, which I thought was very clever. I didn't have the laundry planned for any clues, but it made sense. I described how they found wait staff clothes with grease on them like what you'd find on pipes in the walls, indicating that the killer was a member of the staff and using the secret passages the players already knew about, then confirmed by three different NPCs. This player then went to the boiler room, looked at the raging inferno inside of the boiler and said "It's not grease, it's soot, and the villain is a guest known for pyromancy and is hiding in there." All the credit I gave to the player being clever went right out the window. Hard cut to this player wanting to cast Reduce on themselves so they can fit into the heating duct from their room and climb headfirst into the boiler while it was on. I told them they'd take heat damage along the way, running the risk of losing concentration on their Reduce spell and getting stuck in the duct where they'd be forced to take more heat damage while being unable to get out. "I'll be fine. I have a plan!" Never told me what the plan was and I could think of no conceivable way out of their predicament. One of those players who won't tell the GM what they're doing until they find out their master plan doesn't work the way it should.
I learned a couple things there: I should not give my players warnings that they're going to do something stupid and will die from it, that's a lesson they NEED to learn on their own; and more importantly that instead of letting them try to piece the clues together, and figure out which direction to go on their own, I need to just tell them what they found and the direction it points them, then narratively guide them there on my own. "You found a clue that pointed you toward X's manor. You'll arrive at the manor in Y amount of time, unless you want to do anything else here before you leave."
lol the lesson here is to always mix up the puzzles in games. Nothing is more satisfying than making “the solution from the book” get you killed and forcing the player to call you out, not realizing they are snitching on themselves. That’s how you deal with Larry
I've played with Larry. He was the DM's partner. That campaign didn't last long.
I think the worst "That Guy" is maybe the most common one but i learned to hate those slightly .
The videogamer ones .
You get murderhobo , Loot-kleptomaniac , EXP-Addict and super strict ruleslawyer in once .
There are degrees to it . Almost everyone who played Videogame-RPGs has tendencies to this type of That Guy but if you explain them that it is more simulative instead like a videogame and they actually start to understand that you got good player on your table . But when those people dont get it , you will surrender and hate them .
I had few of them and they are quite limited on their understanding . Mentally healthy but they just dont got the spark even when the whole table explained them how TTRPGs are actually played .
My best friend (and first GM) taught me my most valuable lesson. Good GM's don't always make good players.
But, this entire video is why I made my own rules system and creating an adventure has come down to having 3-5 locations, a handful of NPC's and villains, rewards ready. But as for the details, my players lead me to those on the fly. I have a goal and they may not make it based on their choices but it has made GM'ing so much easier. Also, not initiative, that helped too
I just started watching ADHDM videos so it was wild to see him here suddenly too! haha Great stuff from both of ya'll
As a player: I learned that we all have the potential of becoming a LARRY in someone's game. Though, some more than others. Communication can either mitigate problems caused by players or kick a particular character out sooner rather than later.
As a budding DM: I learned if your only tool is a hammer, then every player looks like a LARRY. Knowing who fits better in your game helps, but also utilizing the info used here in this video (and other sources) you will find out that your players might need to handled in a different way to bring enjoyment to your table (or find out that the player is a hard core LARRY and needs to be kicked! Out of your game that is...and irl).
Regarding rules lawyer filibusters, I had a 3.5 campaign where I had a player getting build ideas off of forums with readings of the rules with which I rarely agreed. I had been DMing about 18 years at that point and have a degree in philosophy. I can read a rulebook.
The rules arguments became a weekly problem. They lasted as long as half an hour sometimes. I had to institute a table rule. If a player and I disagreed on a rule, they could take a minute or two to state their position, from the text, and I would check it out and make a call. But that call would stand for the session and we would move on so we didn't bog down the campaign in rules debates. After the session they were welcome to any bottle on my shelf and any cigar in my humidor if they wanted and we could argue until the sun came up, AFTER the game. I would make the cha ge if they could convince me of their viewpoint after the fact.
The player left about two months later. It was a shame, but it meant we could play the damned game, so there's that, and I've never had a player disagree with this approach since.
On behalf of Larry’s around the world, I apologize for LARRY’s unacceptable behavior. That’s very uncharacteristic of Larry. Perhaps LARRY was under the influence of a Helm of Opposite Alignment or maybe LARRY was charmed.
That binder at the start has one of my favorite pieces of art from the Dungeon Crawl Classics book and that's no small feat, for that book is filled with amazing art!
I had a human-limb-collecting barbarian lion man in our game that we had to make excuses for, and I preferred him over our Larry Bard
I never had a "that guy" but i image its like the trolly proplem you can either kick "that guy" out and everyone else will enjoy them self but not "that guy" or keep "that guy" and everyone is gona leave or not enjoy them self but "that guy" will enjoy them self
I had a Larry. He was a new player that got introduced to the friend group a few months prior. He was wishy washy on his character until I wanna say 2 hours before our first session, hit on the NPC questgiver (a 13th level Shadar-Kai rogue) a fair bit, I for some reason let him use a homebrew paladin subclass he found on the internet with the help of another player (after I homebrewed up a really cool rogue subclass for him), he had frankly way too much AC for his level (partially my fault), got into both in and out of game arguments with other players over stupid things and refused to do his own character sheet, despite me guiding him through the process. Everyone in the group had been part of a pokemon RP server with the guy for a while and he made… odd and creepy decisions pretty frequently and we all collectively got tired of his antics.
Right before a major plot point and after a level up he didn’t put in and gathering the consensus of the rest of the group, I finally kicked him from the game, canceled for the week to redo some prep and had another friend and fellow player from another table and the same RP group I propositioned the game to join the party in his stead before the major inciting incident to kick the proper plot off. Now my Larry is just scheduling.
Kenku have been a running joke in campaigns with the same sort of general group for a while because of this player.
Learning to say no. Some players will ask for all sorts of things. Usually I will work with them if I think a thing is too strong (especially if it's from a UA or homebrew) to make it more in line with every one else, but some times you just gotta say no. "You want a c0caine warlock? no"
Oh
My
God
I knew exactly what a "Larry" was the moment you mentioned his name just from the way you said it. A GM's worst nightmare 😂
I had a player who always wanted to be the "independent agent" player. He would always refuse to ally himself too closely with the other player characters. And would constantly try to go off by himself to run side adventures or talk to nonrelevant NPCs that only exist for world building. (Real example: in an XMen game he hunted down Iron Man, Thor, and the Fae Courts / Gaellic mythology. In a game set in upstate New York. Bayville, NY from XMen evolution.)
It doesnt help that player characters dont know what genre they are in, even if the DM throws it at their face
My worst experience also came from Tomb of Annihilation. I was a fairly new DM (first mistake) dming for a friend and two people off roll20 I didn’t know because of ‘Vid (second mistake) and running a beefy module (third mistake… among a hundred more). We ran Phandelver and some others so started at level 6ish. This dude was the most rules lawyering min-maxer that just loooooved to use every tool known to every splat book to just undo a puzzle. Locked chest? Oh, our thief can- SMASH. Stone door? Well, the fighter found this orb that might- EARTH GLIDE. Maybe I should have an encounter to break up- LAMEMAN’S TINY HUT. Dude had a solution for EVERYTHING and while I respect using characters well, when others don’t get to play because you’re a Swiss Army knife with a skeleton key for every problem, it’s not very fun for the table.
@@turtlecheese8 My brother in Christ, if your encounters can be solved with a single spell then you're part of the problem. Don't resent your player for being good at the game: instead improve your own so that you're on his level.
*pushes button* I rarely ever hear my name used as an example on other channels. I did find it somewhat relatable. Thank you for doing that! 😁👍
You know, I always thought a LARRY wouldn't be that bad, if anything bothers you about him or his tendencies, just talk to him about it.
But oh boy, having an actual LARRY is really different from that. Being a friend of a friend, it's even harder to actually say something about it and not sound like an asshole.
And the relief of him not being there on the very few times he can't come, it's real.
10/10 video. Immediately sent to the discord groups, pinging totally random people with it.
Also great sponsor. James has a very unique style that makes for a more grounded game. I like him a lot, as an artist. And I like that his scenes are specific (CoS, LMoP), but generic enough to use in a lot of games.
Can vouch, have had all of these types of players at my table at least once over the years and learned all these lessons either as a player or as a gamemaster, except for a Larry. I only recently had the displeasure of having a couple of Larry players, nearly believed such tabletop horror stories were exaggerations, BOY WAS I NAIVE. By god, when I finally put my foot down and said Larry players left the respective games, everyone was happier for it. The games thankfully survived the unpleasant encounter, so I'll still count it as a good learning experience in the end.
Oh man, the timing of this video is so good for me 😅
I'm currently running DnD 5e campaign, with a party of one experienced player and four first timers (coming from Baldur's Gate III). So far it looks like people had fun at the table, but I feel like their style of play differs so much it might hurt the experience at some point. I try to present the scenarios as most "immersive" as possible, with the right music and voice acting, because it would be my preffered style of play. And even if I see that two of the players enjoy engaing as their character as possible, the rest of the group put a little effort in doing so. From my perspective they play just like they would be playing video game with a discord: they make funny comments during the serious encounters, talk in a manner "we should long rest" instead of "we should try to rest for the night", etc. One of the players even decided to play a character with different gender than its own, but it puts so little effort to roleplay, that I feel it could swap its gender again between a sessions and it would make no difference.
To be clear, I don't have a problem that I prefer more immersive DnD and most of my players seems not. My concerns are that we don't have one clear style of play, that everyone would follow. I actually tried to remind the players that I have prepared the sessions to be more - based on this video - "Jen style" but most of the players still would still play like they would play a video game together. Next session I'm planning not to remind about anything and try to adapt to style of each player separatly and also I'm going to start a discussion about our expectations at the table after the session.
Thanks for the video. I'm honestly not the biggest fan of the format in "10 Tips to Make Your D&D Adventures Suck Less", but this one felt more like previous videos, that I enjoyed much more. In the end, you always help us run a better games, while having more fun with it. Whichever style of video you want to put in, keep going, your content is never a wasted time ♥
Also, can we stop calling "that guy" by a "that guy" and start calling "that guy" by Larry?
I can handle a Larry. I can't handle the: Wait what's going on? Wait, how far away are they? Okay let me read through my spells. Okay, um, if I cast this one will it completely defeat all the bad guys? No? It just does what it says it does? Huh, you're lame. Okay, I guess then, oh what about this fireball spell? Oh my friends are by the bad guys? Why didn't you tell me that? You did? Oh I guess I didn't realize that was a friend icon instead of bad guy. Okay, hmm, well I guess I'm stuck? Guys, what do you think I should do?
That player. That's the one I can't handle.
That player is the one that has me taking a magnet to their phone, PAY ATTENTION MOTHERUFUCKER 😂
All kinds of players can be handled somehow, they are people above all. Private messages, agreements before session starts, or even the eventual "you've been promoted to spectator" are solutions for this situation.
But please talk to them first. They are people; even if they are purposefully trolling, there MIGHT be a reason and a work around the issue
I feel like “That Guy” has ruined the internet and most online gaming communities as well. Maybe I’m wrong but you’ll never change my mind 🤷♀️
It's very funny you mention Larry; My son and his girlfriend playing dnd with a coworker, Coworker is DMing, her boyfriends brother wanted to play, his name is Larry. And he made this character to play in this group with the DM dming for the first time, just to be a backstory for a BBEG is going to use in a different game and literally is going out of his way to murder children. There is a lot more to this story but that the geist of it, hilarious it's a friend of a friend situation and his name is Larry. LOL.
Unfortunately, no Larry's were harmed in the making of this video
I love how much of a irregularity my players are. they make my campaign feel fresh and exciting
Hi DM it's Sarah, loving this!
So happy to get one of your videos in before the big con. Just curious, did you change the names to protect the innocent? Is Larry really Larry? Does Jen understand you had plans for her detailed backstory?
Oof, yeah… I’ve played with a Larry. It was a campaign at a public library, so kicking people was really out of the question, but yeah. After watching this, I’m pretty sure I’m a Bryce. (I’ve got a bit of Jen in me too though).
I've had all of these personalities at my table (except for Larry, thankfully). Thank you for the insights into online play! I'm excited to try them in my next session.
From now on when im feeling sad DMing for some reason ill think. "Well at least i dont have a LARRY player".