Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.24536929 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

I'm a game master for a party of 7, and while I work my ass off for my party, most of my players are on their cell phones, having loud side conversations, or even taking naps during play. In addition, many of these same players are intoxicated or under the influence of other mind-altering substances by the time we've begun. I'm at my wit's end for bringing these players in line enough to focus and some of the focused players are getting frustrated by the distracted ones. I need ideas to keep them focused, awake, and off their phones without having them angry at the DM or the other players.

>> No.24537056

>>24536929
Man up, tell them, they can play, or they can leave. You work your ass off so they can come and play, if they're not going to even pay attention or play though then they can go do something else.

I've never had this problem myself but I consider myself lucky.

As to the drugs/alcohol, you shouldn't be allowing that in the first place. Call me a prude but I have drinks maybe once a month and have never even smoked a cigarette let alone weed or other stuff. Smokes are alright as long as they don't do it at the table, but if they want to get high tell them to do it elsewhere.

You're the DM, you have the right to say who plays and who stays. If they're not cool with it, then don't DM, you're the one doing the hard work no reason it shouldn't be fun for you either.

>> No.24537101

>most of my players are on their cell phones

No.

>having loud side conversations

No!

>or even taking naps during play

NO.

Loudly and aggressively lay down some ground rules. No electronic devices for non-game related purposes, side conversations be kept to appropriate volume and are to be called off if they become distracting, and FUCK naps during play.

It sounds also like you've got a lot of players. Feel free to cut the worst offenders loose, you could do without 7 people at your table. Aim for 3-5 players, that seems to be the sweet-spot.

Also: run brisk-pace non-vocal background music during your games. You'd be amazed how much some simple background music helps direct player attention.

>> No.24537122

>>24536929
> I work my ass off for my party, most of my players are on their cell phones, having loud side conversations

Dohoho! Pretty average group of play-

>or even taking naps during play

Completely unacceptable. Stop the game. Take it online. Achieve more net fun. Gold star for effort so far, though.

>> No.24537154

>>24536929
>seven players
>it's hell
Prune it down to the best four.

>> No.24537194

>>24536929

>> No.24537374

>>24536929
James?

>> No.24537414

>taking naps during play

What kind of a massive collection of douchebags is this?

>> No.24537438

>>24536929
I was running a Deathwatch campaign and just flat-out called it because of that shit.

Dead in the water campaign.

How in the FUCK can someone have no consideration for something like this.

>"wut, have to do puzzles for a bit? brb nap xDDD"

>Jaded GM general

>> No.24537464

Threads like this make me glad that I only play with my family and a couple of very close friends.

>> No.24537511

>>24536929
id take a massive case of fuck those guys

>> No.24537542

>most of my players are on their cell phones
>having loud side conversations
>or even taking naps during play

Well you could...

>In addition, many of these same players are intoxicated or under the influence of other mind-altering substances by the time we've begun.

Wait, why do you even bother?

It sounds like most of them just want to hang out, not play an RPG. Are you sure they actually *want* to play, or are you trying to ram the hobby down during your hang-out sessions?

If anything, the unspoken side of this story sounds more like you're trying to force them into a game that none of them really want in on in the first place.

>> No.24537925

I feel if it starts going over five players there's too many to make the game meaningful.

Trim that shit down a couple or more and you'd have a more active group I'm sure.

>> No.24538123

Here's what you do OP, listen carefully. Single out two of them that you can get together on a day that's not a game day. Hit 'em with both barrels of your finest GMing ability. Make sure they have fun- so be certain you're not railroading but your game is still stimulating.
Next, suffer through game day. Don't make any ultimatums. Run your 'private game' again, and begin doing the same thing with another pair of players. See if there are any improvements at the game table. They might be more excited once they know how fun your game can potentially be. If there are no improvements then stop showing up on 'official' game day and merge your two side parties.

>> No.24538141

>>24538123
The idea here is that if you individually 'enlighten' a few people their enthusiasm should carry over to your main party and if it does it might rub off on the others.

>> No.24538266

>>24536929
WIth the cell phones, I used to have randomly generated natural pitfalls appear.

If they were on the phone too much, while the party was in the city, I'd say, "You've been caught with the Brick of Ignorance, roll a save," which would only be a natural 20 to save.

If they were in nature, it'd be something like, a hunter's trap or quicksand.

If they were in a city, they'd find out later that night they were caught offguard and a pickpocket got one of their sweet items.

If they were in a dungeon, they'd get nailed by a trap.

Stuff like that. Make it fun though, don't be passive aggressive, you don't want an uncomfortable party.

>> No.24538286

>>24538266
lol... started typing that, got distracted (ironic) then came back.

Realized I was all over the place. I think it made sense though.

>> No.24540165

>>24538266
That sounds super passive aggressive to me.

>> No.24540329

>>24536929
Secretly make a "Battle Royal".
>Say: "You guys I'm been thinking, seven players is quite the bunch, so I decided to cut the party down to about 4-5 players"
>Then explain that when a player dies, he is dead for good and the player can't not longer play in the group.
>Also say when you are down to 4-5 players, they can get the chance to join the game again with one of the existing players dies.
>And just to show you not fucking with them, do something dick'ish the first session after the rules are applied, do not kill one of them. But bring them in a "oh, you would know that if you heard what I told you an hour ago" situation.
What you get:
>Maybe one friend who says: "Okay I'll just leave the game, it wasn't anything for me anyhow".
>Hopefully their attention.
>A natural selection.
What if:
>Party becomes a backstabbing group of bastards.

Better pray you play Paranoia.

>> No.24540362

general rule: never play with more than 4 people at once. Also cut down on playing nights if you meet regularly.

Make sure its not your fault (bad plot/hook). Some people really need extra motivation, but once they/their characters have a defined goal, they feel more connected to the whole thing and actually try to acomplish something (and cell phones / sleeping will no longer appear beneficial to them)

>> No.24540390

>>24540329
>esl

jajaja

>> No.24540463

>>24536929

Our games would often get like that because of the downtime between each player's turn in combat (while playing Shadowrun, if anyone is curious). Especially with 7 people, if they feel like they only have minimal time actually engaging with the events, they may wind up incredibly disengaged. Try experimenting with ways to involve players when they otherwise would be sitting waiting for events to resolve (ie. allowing other players to roll dice in combat to potentially add a +1 modifier to the player who's actually fighting).

Or find a game where they can all participate all the time. Dungeon Crawling isn't for everyone; if they're truly not into it, there are plenty of indie board and card games of varying immersiveness and strategy that you guys could play. That's ultimately what my group moved towards doing.

>> No.24540541

I think the number of player is a big issue but, lets assume its not.

Try using any means to trick them, for instance, putting caltrops or jagged terrain and whatnot if they dont listen just tell have them remove the damage they should be listening. I also like to use particular lexical choice when i describe places to subtly hint things that may be overlooked if they do not pay attention. For instance;
You enter the town of fuckmesilly, large wooden houses with hay roof stacked together create alleys going turning left and right as a snake. In those alley veiled by the shadow of nearby structures you can find just about anything a weary man could want to find. Overall, it seems like a nice village to settle down and have many childrens as it is graced by the presence of gorgeous woman with peculiar dresses and honest mens who would relieve anyone of their heavy loads.
(This really sucked i dont normally dnd in english but, i think you get the idea)

But yeah, keep them on their toes, try pulling new tricks out of your bag every game (Diseases, poisons, terrain, weather or other various environemental hazard, hint creatures with things like holes in rock or bones on the ground and spirit flying) Description are great for immersion but, if your descriptions have no impact on the game other then immersion you are doing it wrong.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action