>Player tells me point blank that he doesn't care about what the NPCs backstories are or why they're doing what they're doing and that he wishes that they were "at least twice as fast" to point us in the general direction of the next thing to fight
I hate GMing and I don't want to do it anymore
Shit I don't know why this is hitting me as hard as it is but what is the fucking point
It's because your player is an unappreciative cunt. He also wants a different kind of game, but he is a complete asshole about it, so if anything tell him to fuck off.
I don't care if you're friends since kindergarten, tell the faggot to go to someone else's game where he can kill shit and go on. Added benefit of your game becoming murderhobo-free.
It's okay, anon. People like that are just assholes and should probably be playing a different game.
It probably isn't your fault.
If it is only this one player, kick him out and find someone else.
Are you one of those faggot GMs who can't stop fapping over their NPCs? Because that sounds more like "fuck, stop reading us your fanfiction and get on with it!" than "i don't care abouit this game!1!"
Tell him to fuck off and go play video games if all he wants to do is kill shit.
I would throw that faggot out and laugh when he begged to come back.
Even if he thinks that way he is either too immature, too stupid or too big of a selfish asshole to keep his dumb mouth shut. You are better off without him.
GMing can be a chore at times. For me it is a labor of love (forever GM of 25+ years here) but you shouldn't have to battle with your players as well.
Even if my players don't like something I expect them to be respectful and mature enough to share it with me in a tactful way. This is suppose to be a collaborative story telling experience. To have that takes mutual respect. We don't always have to agree but I'll be damned if I allow some snot nose player to come into my home, sit at my gaming table and behave like a spoiled bitch.
Tabletop gaming is about give-and-take between players and GMs. Players have to want to help GMs have fun too. By outright declaring that he doesn't care about the effort you put into the game, he clearly doesn't care about the game overall and should - best-case scenario - be removed. Someone who doesn't care is someone who shouldn't be there.
Granted, that shouldn't give your carte blance to foist shit NPCs upon your players. Remember, give and take.
I wouldn't want a 2 minute meta explanation about an npc, nor would I like monologues explaining the backstory for no reason. You should introduce relevant characters over time, not as huge info dumps.
Because sometimes it's a chore and people misunderstand their motivations for coming to a game. Some people just want to hit stuff over the head repeatedly and murder it, because for them that's fun.
It's not so much fun for everyone else, and so there's a mis-match.
Tell this player that you clearly want a different type of game than they do, and that they should go enjoy themselves doing whatever they want or run a different game because you clearly disagree on what's important.
I had someone tell me that they didn't want to play 7th Sea because "in 7th Sea you can't kill and loot people because there's no real rules for killing people and taking their stuff".
Which is both a) wrong and b) not important, because it's not what 7th Sea or that game was supposed to be about.
Just amiably part ways, and if you ever need another player in a murder-grind-killfest, maybe they'll join back in.
I have a player who doesn't remember NPC names, ever. Constantly mistaking them, calling them something else, or even 'Word Salad Man'. At first I thought he was kidding because he knew it bugged me, but after a few weeks I called him on it and he straight out said that he doesn't really care about them at all and that's why he doesn't remember them.
It's left me wondering if he's a shitty player or I'm a shitty DM.
It really matters on why he doesn't remember the names. If it's because he finds the NPCs unintresting and one-note, then it's your fault.
If it's like the sperglord from the OP and "I jus want to kill peoples", then it's his fault.
I'm whats known as an elite Dungeon Master. That means I don't just create adventures. I become them! I'm an artist. My campaigns are multi-layers tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which quite frankly would simply be too strong for your hobbiest gamer.
I don't know, we're only hearing OP's side of it.
I suspect OP has done too much worldbuilding, and of the wrong things. The players don't want to hear about Bob the Mayor's marital troubles. Worldbuilding is a trap for a lot of newbie DMs, it can be fun to just build up random stuff about the world, but then when your players don't give a shit, or worse, actively set fire to it all, you just hate yourself.
I try to restrict my worldbuilding to first setting up a framework for the world, just enough bones that I can sensibly fit whatever I need into the world later on, and then figure out what the game needs and build only that.
If OP were to take the time he spent building elaborate backstories for questgiver NPCs and instead put it into elaborate dungeons, traps, and set-piece fights, I bet the players would be elated, and he'd feel a lot better about himself because the time he spent was appreciated.
In the end this is all about communication between DMs and players -- it sounds like the players could have spoken up sooner and more tactfully, but what we've got is that there's a difference of opinion on what style of game they want, and this is something that should have been worked out a lot sooner.
But hey, at least they spoke up eventually, In my experience, it can be hard to get your players to tell you anything about their enjoyment of the game, because everyone's afraid the DM will flip his shit and quit.
Sounds like the thing the player took issue with wasa that the NPCs spent too much time on themselves. I would like to know what brought about the comment, as i've had GMs take absurd amounts of time on their NPCs and refusing to just send us on our fucking quest.
IF YOUR PLAYERS DON'T REMEMBER YOUR NPCS, OR DON'T CARE ABOUT THE BACKSTORY, THIS DOES NOT MEAN YOU OR THEM ARE NECESSARILY SHIT.
ALTERNATE REASONS INCLUDE:
1. YOU'VE MADE THE MAIN QUEST LINE SO COMPELLING THAT THE PC(s) CAN'T BE ASSED TO DEAL WITH YOUR NPC(s) WHEN SOMETHING IS AT STAKE.
2. THE PC HAS A SIMILAR GOAL-BASED REASON TO BE DISMISSIVE, FULL OF WANDERLUST OR HURRIED. THE RANGER IN MY MOST RECENT GAME STARTED PLAYING NICE WITH NPC(s) AFTER THE QUESTLINE REGARDING HER LIFE GOAL OF HUNTING A SPECIFIC CREATURE WAS COMPLETED.
3. TIME PRESSURE PLACED BY YOU, THE GM, COULD CAUSE THIS REACTION.
4. SESSION LENGTH IS SHORT AND WE'RE SPENDING IT A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT ON NPCS. ESPECIALLY IF THIS IS NOT WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY ADVERTISED.
ALTERNATIVELY ONE OR BOTH OF YOU COULD BE FUCKUPS. FUCKUPS INCLUDE:
A. YOU'RE MAKING THEM SPEND AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME WITH NPCS THAT THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT. IF THEY PAY OR ASK SOMEONE FOR DIRECTIONS IT SHOULDN'T ALWAYS BE PULLING FUCKING TEETH. YOU'RE LITERALLY SLOWING THEIR WANTS AND PUNISHING THEM WITH BACKSTORY THEY DON'T WANT. SAVE BACKSTORY FOR IMPORTANT OR RECURRING NPCS.
B. THE PLAYER THINKS THE GAME IS MORE ABOUT ADVENTURE THAN SOCIAL INTERACTION; IF THAT'S THE CASE, YOUR PLAYER MIGHT NEED TO READJUST ATTITUDE OR LEAVE.
TAKE A GOOD HARD THINK ABOUT THESE POSSIBILITIES, SIT DOWN AND TALK TO THE PLAYER OR GROUP ABOUT EXPECTATIONS AND THE COMPLAINT. FIND OUT WHAT THEY WANT. IMPLEMENT IT.
If your NPCs aren't interesting, you need to look at how you're making them. For a minor NPC who won't be appearing much, I recommend giving them just one trait, and try to make it broad.
For recurring NPCs (or one of the aforementioned minor NPCs that the players won't let go of because they love his schtick so much) you should give them a second trait, or maybe a third if they're going to have a portion of screentime.
Let your NPCs grow in play, rather than being front-loaded, like an old-school PC. It'll save you writing time, and ensure the players aren't stuck with NPCs that can't wait to tell the PCs about their tragic past and stuff.
It's quite common for /tg/ to give terrible advice. Denunciations of systems based on theorycrafting from skimming a PDF and one session on Roll20; hot opinions about how the DM/player is wrong; suggestions on worldbuilding or history or mapmaking that just plain suck.
It happens, you have to take shit with a grain of salt.
Most players haven't even taken a turn behind the screen, and most really don't want to. I take their "advice" on how to run a game with a grain of salt. I have been forever DM for 25+ years.
Do you smell it?
A kinda smelly smell.
A smelly smell that smells... smelly.
If the group agrees with the player, point them to the 4e rulebooks and Dungeon Delve and have one of them GM. Then find a new group.
Different players want different things. But the most important storytelling advice is "show, don't tell". To get the players to appreciate an NPC, they have to have some form of interaction with them. In this way, they'll notice how the NPC's fate is tied directly to theirs. Say, if the town mayor is sympathetic to them, he might bend the rules a little if they give the proper effort. Then, when bandits attack and threaten the mayor's position, they have a reason to care. At least, in theory.
If you do it right, they will notice it's in their best interest to care.
I once had a GM play out a twenty-five minute long conversation with himself. We escorted a prince across a desert for four sessions, and when we finally reached the palace he was meant to reach we were locked in a conference room while he, an ambassador, and a sultan from the desert nation discussed setting politics and the viability of democracy in a magical world for literally twenty five minutes.
The GM had prepared a twelve-page long script that he read off to us, stopping only to have the characters go "ah, yes" and nod in our general direction if we interjected in the three-way conversation he was having in our general direction to himself.
It was at that moment that I decided that I didn't give a shit about his world or his characters anymore and now I always get weary when other GMs NPCs talk for too long without us being able to meaningfully effect the conversation.
I dunno maybe I'm a shit player because I really prefer that NPCs have a dialog instead of exposition but I had a REALLY bad experience once.
That's horrible. I don't know how people can do this. I get uncomfortable when circumstances press me to have two NPCs talk to each other, and I try avoid it whenever I can.
If I really HAD to do a long sequence (which would probably only happen if the players manipulated things to make it happen so they could fuck with me), I'd have one of the players take up an NPC so I didn't have to talk to myself like that.
My poorly made point was that as a DM, if properly done I am creating a world and you as a player should not and will not know the explanation for the backstory till I am ready to spring it on you. What seems like a 2 minute waste of time to you will be revealed to be important later in the adventure or campaign.
Assess the market. Put out feelers for new players. Discover what your potential options are, and if they aren't much, be prepared to either
- make some compromises and try to meet the player halfway
- adjust your expectations, it might be player inexperience that may improve over time OR more players might enter your area
- consider winding down, moving to RPing online.
This is why I stopped
All they care about is combat
Tried D&D 5e and Delta Green but all they wanna do is go back to World of 4ecraft
All I wanna do is build a good story with friends
>All I wanna do is build a good story with friends
I think this is what the trend on "narrative-based" games is trying to accomplish.
Niche games like Microscope, Fiasco, Ryuutama, The Quiet Year... and to a lesser degree Hillfolk and Apocalypse World, are all trying to create the RPG experience with nearly all of the war-game elements removed. Sometimes you don't even want your character to win, if failing makes for a more interesting story.
Some people are violently offended by even calling these things "games," but they're worth trying with your group at least once.
OP sounds like he's overinvested in his random ass NPC's and their lives and backstories. I've had GMs like that, who spend an inordinate amount of time crafting a world, filling it with very detailed people..who are completely irrelevant to the quest/mission/reason we're in this podunk town. And then they get moody and blame us for not caring about the miller's son who's sitting at the docks looking depressed.
1: DM online
2: Realize that being a DM is like being a chick on a dating site, you can have retardedly high standards compared to how mediocre you are and still score big time.
I can be a complete fucking nazi and pitch incredibly quirky campaigns or systems and I will still have to turn people down that I would have been fucking STOKED to have in a real life group.
Also, whenever someone is being shit, I can kick them, and that's okay because I don't work with, go to school with, or play with their significant other, so the group won't fucking implode.
All I need to do is be there on time every time, not suck and enforce some standards so people don't drag each other down. That's it.
After doing it for like two years I have no idea why anyone would want to do it irl unless they use it as some kind of substitute for going to the pub with their buddies.
>straight up tell my GM's that I only roll-play and won't role-play
>point us in the general direction of the next thing to fight
God I hate this mentality, and I always play hulking berserkers. Just go play a video game while skipping cutscenes and dialog, that is what you want to be doing.
I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are joking. I really hope you are, cause this is so amazingly cringe-inducing if you aren't. This reads like a parody of a self-important dungeon master or something. I prefer interaction with the world through a means other than combat to take center stage, but god damn this is ridiculous.
>Muh precious hobby
Seriously, jackasses, the only reasonable guys in this thread are those two posters who said about "both sides of the story". Imagine them gathering up for a 3.5 game to clean some dungeons, and then this.
Are you just trying to look cleaver or what? You even have a faggot >>43466543 with generic "4 EDITION IS MMO"!
Fuck, this >>43467911 was me and I didn't catch what that anon was doing. 11/10.
No problem just tell the direction but don't tell him of the traps on the way. It will be way more fun. Not for him but it will certanly be fun.
>le /v/ boogeyman
That original retard wasn't even me, I just jumped at the opportunity to shitpost. Of course you won't believe that and follow p with something like "surely you were just pretending", so I guess it's too late now
>>43468354 this is me
I posted before scrolling three posts down.
If >>43462537 is correct then I retract that, stop fapping over NPCs. Most of them are random, unimportant blobs that don't deserve a backstory.
Society has always scorned the truly unique. But that's a burden you choose to bear when you bend the very walls of reality with the power of your imagination. That's a gift to be respected and feared.
I have tried to game with hobbiest gamers and frankly I have transcended their level of sophistication. I made the mistake once of allowing some of the neighborhood kids to play. They stole some of my dice. Those people are human trash. Immediate 10D6 lighting bolts. NO saving throw! I am hard, but fair.
I am not worried about being too lenient. I'm the Dungeon Master. I control worlds, Universes. Every potion you drink, I mixed. Every magic item you find, I put it there. I can help people when I want to. If they are found to be worthy.
I can understand where your player is coming from.
Do you honestly give a damn about the personal backstory of everyone you run in to? How many people does a 'normal' person interact with on a daily basis and have no idea (and not care about) there 'back story'?
This isn't a novel. You aren't writing a book. People care about backstories in books, not in real life. Treat it more like real life.
Focus more on making your npc's act and behave in interesting ways. Work on giving them interesting mannerisms and accents, turns of speech, that sort of thing.
Make them flamboyant, make them charactures.
Make them accessible and fun in two sentences. If it requires a paragraph of explanation (their personality etc) then you blew it.
The exception to this would be someone who is intended to have long term reoccurring interaction with the players.
I disagree, almost every NPC we run into at my table is well fleshed out and more than some boring archetypal card board cut out.
It's not a question of what any one players personal preference is when it comes to how in depth the story should be.
If your tables culture is more focused on combat, treat your campaigns more like a game and just let them slog through dungeons until their bags can't hold any more loot.
In contrast if your group puts a heavy focus on role play then be ready to treat your whole campaign like a book.
It isn't something that's up to any one players (or gm's) preference.
We've all been there man.
As for your player; I can't say if you're possibly doing too much or not, but the way he phrased it makes it sound like he's an ungrateful prick or at the very least just nasty.
Like I said, I'm just the opposite. Typical NPC gets a note as to what kind of mannerism or dress that might make them unusual. They get a sentence about what they want and another about what they don't want (or fear).
The rest I wing as I go.
The exception to this is an NPC that is going to be a major part of the story, someone who might accompany the party for awhile as an example.
I continue to hold that most players do not give a damn about the backstory for the majority of the NPC's they come in to contact with. It is in large part wasted effort in my opinion.
The only time an NPC's backstory should come in to play is if a player actively asks the NPC about it 'hey dude, tell me your backstory'. But what I see is DM's that TELL the players the backstory of an NPC, often in detail. Most players do not care, if they care...they will ask. Until then "Only tell if they ask".
If you had a very high level campaign where you were bringining in the kind of gold it would take to build a city I don't see why not.
I would much prefer such a game on a smaller scale. Like building my own stronghold or temple.