An issue I see more often that I’d like to is GMs who have a campaign idea, and slowly the players either go off and don’t do what the GM wanted them to do, or just get bored and stop playing, usually switching to a new campaign.
I don’t mind when players go off and do what they want to do - It gives me ideas on what to make important. Maybe my goldpiece-phylactery idea will have to wait, because the party is made up of idealists who don’t believe in money. That’s cool, if not ridiculously far-fetched. Maybe one of them starts, non-comically, hitting on people and begins looking for a date. There is nothing wrong with these, and they can make your campaign much more involved if you play into them.
However, the topic at hand is keeping those PCs interested, and there are a few common problems that need to be addressed.
- The GM is focusing more on his/her story than the party’s story.
- The PCs keep tripping over themselves and making no progress.
- Sometimes your story is just not as exciting as you’d hoped.
The first problem is easily the worst one. The other two aren’t so bad, but this one is not only common, it is also toxic to RPGs in general. I understand that many times you want to tell a certain story and have it mean something big, but sometimes that isn’t the story the party wants to be a part of. If you’re going for a story focused on a dark world with no hope for humanity, and the players all play optimistic people ready to save and spare all wrong-doers, someone has to give way to make for a cohesive game (Although that could be a very interesting game). Many times GMs forget that this is a collaborative story, wherein everyone gets to be part of what happens. Please don’t do this, as railroading GMs can sour RPGs to many newer players, taking away from the new players we need to thrive and grow as a community.
The second issue is a bit awkward, as it is partially GM folly, and partially players just not getting it. It is hard to get out of, although getting out of it can make for interesting scenarios and conflicts. This is common when a GM isn’t flexible (or willing to be flexible) towards something in the game, like an item or information which may need to be acquired in a specific way. This can waste a lot of precious playing time, and I advise that if you ever find yourself in this spot to possibly rethink where and what your players need to do. Perhaps changing the objective, or making to easier to acquire will make them feel accomplished, and interested in where it’s all going? It depends very much on the specific group, so keep that in mind.
The final issue is a tragic tale of sadness and woe, of a GM and his/her perfect story with everything ready and perfect, but then the players just stop caring. The wait for the payoff wasn’t enough to them, whether it was because the GM decided to make all travel-time role-played, or due to his unwillingness to change or edit his special lore because you wanted a certain character concept, eventually getting bored of what you made instead. It is probably the saddest reason, as the players can feel the GM’s excitement, but they slowly get tired of what is happening, or lack of progress, and decide it’s time to ask that they just stop, or even worse stop showing up.
I hope that these have given you much to consider. The prevention towards players getting bored is simply asking them how they feel after sessions. I know it sounds simple, but if you don’t, the party leaving in-game might catch you off guard and break your heart. Even if the next session was going to be the climax, it doesn’t mean anything if your players didn’t care enough to be a part of it.
I hope you’re all interested in next week’s article,
Taylor Shuss
No comments:
Post a Comment