What to do when your D&D players don't care

Video Statistics and Information

Video
Captions Word Cloud
Reddit Comments
Captions
A few weeks ago, I stumbled on this Reddit post from Vesper3556. "What's the point of DMing? And was my experience typical?" This person recently ran their first campaign, which lasted about six months and then fizzled out. They said that everybody seemed to have fun, but the players just kind of didn't engage with stuff. The DM put a lot of effort into creating an interesting world and interesting encounters, which the players then ignored in favor of fighting and looting. There's a quote here that I really wanna highlight, because I think it cuts to the heart of this issue. The DM says, "Eventually, it felt like I was just providing them with content to consume and entertain, rather than it being a collaborative and emergent experience." This person posted about this problem because they had seen a lot of complaints from DMs having similar experiences, and wondered if this was just the way things are. Not a failure on the DM's part, but "a weakness in the game itself." Are DMs always going to be more invested than players? Is it our lot in life to pour our heart and soul into a game that players merely tolerate? I've been thinking about this question a lot. D&D in particular is a game that puts a lot of weight on the game master's shoulders, and even for people who enjoy those responsibilities, it can be really disheartening when you work so hard and your players just don't seem to care. This kind of experience drives some people away from running games completely, even if they're really passionate about it, or perhaps especially if they're really passionate about it. Now, it's worth noting that people don't tend to go on Reddit to talk about how good their games are. It's like reading Google reviews for a gas station, nobody writes one unless something seriously abnormal happens. The same thing is true in spaces like D&D subreddits, they tend to have a negative slant, because those are the people who need advice. So even though I do think this problem is pretty common, that doesn't mean it's happening at the majority of tables. I promise you, plenty of people have great games where everybody's happy. In my opinion, there are three factors that lead to experiences like the one that Vesper3556 described. By correcting these three things, you, too, can be one of those people who's too busy enjoying your campaign to post about it on Reddit. (gentle music) To quote my favorite talking hat, "Not all your friends are D&D friends." No amount of communication, no perfect session zero, no incredible feats of Dungeon Mastering, can make a game right for an entire group of people who don't want similar things. If you were hoping that this video would provide you with the magic bullet solution to forcing people to care about something they don't care about, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but that is impossible. The DM in this Reddit post made the extremely common mistake of thinking that just because the players were their friends, they would have a good dynamic together at the game table. But as they share in the post, the DM was focused on worldbuilding and roleplay, and the players were focused on combat and looting. The DM worked hard on creating a fully fleshed-out world for players who didn't even wanna have backstories. These are two fundamentally different types of D&D players. And neither of these types of gameplay are wrong! But they are wrong for each other. In this case, it was like the DM was preparing a five-course meal for players who wanted to come over for cocktail hour. Then the DM got frustrated because the players didn't touch the food, and instead went hunting through the fridge for mixers. If you wanna prepare a five-course meal, you need to invite guests who are foodies. And if all your friends are cocktail people, you need to either learn to enjoy making craft cocktails, or make a few new friends whose interests align better with yours. Now, it isn't always this black and white. I enjoy running a lot of different kinds of games, so for me, this just means that I have certain people that I am more likely to invite to certain types of games. I know which of my friends will enjoy a dramatic, roleplay-heavy, emotional game, and I know which of my friends will thrive in a more light-hearted, comedic one. I've also learned to not invite someone to a long-term campaign until I've played with them in a one-shot or two, so I can get familiar with their style and their interests. I know this can be a tough pill to swallow, especially for people who want a very specific kind of game. It means that you might not get to play D&D with some of your friends at all. And if you have limited access to players, it might even mean that your options are playing with the wrong people, or not playing at all. And I get it, that sucks! But you are setting yourself up for disappointment if you start a game with people who don't want the same things you do. There are people out there who are desperately seeking a DM who will make a five-course meal for them. But you won't find them if you keep playing with a group that isn't hungry. Metaphorically. You know what I mean. After the break, two more factors that stop DMs and players from sharing an amazing game. But first, today's sponsor. (ominous music) (monster roaring) - Who dares disturb the Map Dragon's lair? - I was just checking out your hoard. I was told that you have the most impressive collection of maps in the land, but I think Czepeku Maps might have you beat. - I have never heard of such a beast. - Oh, they're not dragons. They run a Patreon for hand-drawn fantasy maps and tabletop battle maps. Their subscribers get to request and vote on which maps get made next! And you can get print-quality files, or download animated maps that are already set up for your favorite VTTs. - Surely they cannot have more maps than I. I sleep in a nest of maps. Maps litter the cavern floor. - Yeah, that seems kinda a fire hazard, honestly. But Czepeku releases new map packs every single week. Not just a single map, but tons of variations for things like seasons, time of day, and weather effects. Their full archive is more than 5,000 maps! - Hmm, if I defeat this Czepeku Maps, my hoard will truly be unrivaled. Where must I go to burn their flesh and take their treasures? - You don't actually have to burn anybody's flesh. You can check them out and even buy individual maps at czepeku.com. Or get access to the whole archive for just $5 a month. - But what if I want to burn someone's flesh? - Oh geez, would you look at the time! I'd better be going! Okay, let's assume that you have selected players that you think are actually interested in the same kind of game as you. Step one, check. But even with the right players, you still might experience different levels of investment. Vesper3556 says they were looking for their players to get invested in the story, and interested in making decisions and affecting the world around them. They set up this image of players passively consuming the content that the DM creates, instead of sharing in the creative process. Several commenters related to this, even ones who said they had good players who were engaged and interested. The top rated comment on this thread says "DMs just like DnD more." Now, I don't know whether or not that's true. I suspect that this varies a lot from table to table. But there is a sort of obvious issue here, which is that we tend to care more about stuff that we had a hand in creating. That's why everyone loves telling stories about their own D&D games, but not everyone loves listening to them. So when a Dungeon Master creates an entire world and then presents it to their players, it's unlikely that their players will be as passionate about it as they are. If you think about it, it's kind of weird to shut players out of the worldbuilding process, and then suddenly expect them to become collaborative storytellers once the game begins. Maybe they don't feel inclined to participate in writing the story, because they weren't invited to participate in writing the set-up. When you have created the entire story so far, what else can players do but consume it? That's why I'm increasingly interested in involving the players in worldbuilding. Let each player create their own character's hometown, let the Wizard tell you about the magic school where they were trained, let the player with the Soldier background come up with the details of which countries are at war and why. Not only does this give players a stake in the world, but it also shows you what they're interested in. When I created my character Penelope's hometown, which is a cute little underground farming village, I included a big, spooky lake that was rumored to harbor some terrible beast in its depths. This tells my DM that when we visit Penelope's hometown, I don't need it to be a little farmer's market, cottagecore shopping session, I'm interested in something ominous and dangerous there. Likewise, I think there's very real value in asking your players specifically, "What kind of story do you wanna tell together?" If the whole table brainstorms and decides that they wanna play a game where they're the crew of a pirate ship, seeking a legendary treasure while on the run from the royal navy, then you know for sure that they will be invested in that game. Because, they're the ones who came up with the idea in the first place! Hey, just a quick note from editor Ginny — I sort of pitched this like a universal solution, and that is not accurate. Not every player is going to enjoy world building. Some of them will feel like it’s just extra homework, or won’t have ideas, or will feel too much pressure. This is not gonna work for every table. But, it might work for yours! It’s an option, it’s a tool in your toolbox. Okay, back to the Ginny who got more sleep. Of course, as Reddit user CaronarGM so aptly commented, "You can lead a player to plot, but you can't make them engage." You can try to only do the essential worldbuilding, you can invite players to create the setting alongside you, but even then, it's up to your players, session by session, to decide how they want to engage. So the final, crucial factor is managing expectations. That feels like a buzzword, so let's talk about what that actually means. When I say "managing expectations," I mean that DMs and players need to agree on what this game will be like. What will sessions look like and feel like, what are your goals for the game, what does each person need to do in order to fulfill their role at the table? Most obviously, this allows people to actually meet those expectations. Your players can't read your mind, so they won't know that you want them to, say, write thoughtful backstories if you don't tell them. But another important part of communicating your expectations is that it gives others the chance to recognize if they don't want to meet them. Sometimes communicating clearly means that somebody decides it's not a good fit. And that's a good thing! Because the alternative is someone playing a game that they don't enjoy, filling a seat that could be filled by someone who actually wants the same things you do. In the case of the DM who made this Reddit post, their players needed to know that they expected backstories, they expected roleplay, they expected character growth. And if they aren't interested in that kinda game, knowing about these expectations in advance allows them to say, "No thank you, that's not the game for me." It's worth mentioning that the DM wrote, "The players seemed happy with most of the sessions," but I can't help but wonder if they ever actually asked them. It's pretty tough to give players what they want if you don't know what that is! Now, I think a lot of people pay lip service to this concept, but still don't know exactly what it looks like in practice. So I'll give an example of an exercise that I recently tried in my own session zero for a new campaign. In this exercise, we went around the table and I had every player share one thing they would like the game to be, and one thing they would not like the game to be. Players said things like, "I want the game to be heartfelt, and I don't want it to be grimdark." But they also said things like, "I want it to be spontaneous, and I don't want it to be restrictive." This left me with very clear information about what to shape the game around, and what to avoid. And thankfully, these descriptions largely matched up between the whole group. But if one person had said, "I really want a grimdark game," then part of managing expectations means being willing to say, "This might not be the right game for you." But there's one more thing that I don't think enough people talk about, and that's DMs managing our own expectations. The fact is, your players cannot possibly engage with, fall in love with, or pay complete attention to every single thing that you want them to. There will be times when you create things that players ignore, or actively mess up. And there will be things that you want from your players that even the best of them can't or won't do. Yes, if you communicate your expectations to your players, they will be more likely to meet them. But if you're only going to enjoy DMing if everything goes exactly like you imagine it, then you should probably not DM! This is an improvised game, shaped by a half dozen different people with different interests and personalities, and guided by random dice rolls. You will never have complete control over it. So part of being satisfied with your game is just accepting that. So, what is the point of DMing? Is it even possible to have a game where the players are as invested as the DM is? In my humble opinion... kinda? It helps to play with people who want the same kind of game that you want, but it's also important to meet people where they're at. It isn't your job to provide a story for players to consume, but likewise, it isn't their job to be exactly the player you tell them to be. We're all here to have fun, which usually means meeting in the middle. I think a lot of us have this fantasy of the perfect D&D table, and sometimes chasing that fantasy can get in the way of enjoying the table that we have. A D&D party is a pretty big number of people to all magically want the exact same things. Everybody's gonna have to compromise a little. As one Redditor commented on this thread, "While no D&D is better than bad D&D, pretty good D&D is better than no D&D." Those sure sound like words of wisdom to me! If you're feeling inspired to communicate clearly with your new players, or even with players who aren't new, make sure to check out this video next. It's all about what to cover in Session Zero to make sure that you and your players are on the same page.
Info
Channel: Ginny Di
Views: 125,162
Rating: undefined out of 5
Keywords: ginny di, D&D, DnD, dungeons & dragons, dungeons and dragons, tabletop gaming, tabletop games, TTRPG, roleplaying games, roleplaying, DM tips, D&D tips, D&D advice, DM advice, cosplay, world building, original character, tabletop roleplay, tabletop roleplaying, d&d worldbuilding
Id: tSHb-nmp_MM
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 12min 53sec (773 seconds)
Published: Wed May 01 2024
Related Videos
Note
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.