this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
6 points (100.0% liked)

RPGMemes

12530 readers
476 users here now

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Generally speaking, this is something that an experienced GM can handle in session zero. An important part of session zero is establishing expectations for the style of game to be played: Things like "are the player characters friends?" "Is PvP encouraged or discouraged?" "Do I as a DM want the characters to stick together?" etc etc.

Generally when running DnD, I request of my players to design characters who:

  1. Have a disposition to get along well with their companions. (this can be for any reason: because they're like that with everyone, or because they're loyal to the group, or because they view it as useful to have some friendly scapegoats nearby or any other motivation.)
  2. Be the kind of person who will go on adventures and take risks. (This can be because they're a daredevil, or because they're desperate, or because they're devoted to their duty, or any other motivation.)

Fundamentally, most DnD games are the story of a group of friends going on adventures together. If your DnD game is the story of a group of friends going on adventures, then it's extremely beneficial for your players to build characters who will be friends, and who will go on adventures. Together.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This shouldn't be the GMs job btw, players, roleplaying and backstory are YOUR department, write a reason why your character would end up with the others. Work together.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Disagree. The DM should provide some sort of reason for the party to come together. Some sort of external influence, to bring in any characters that don't start the game together.

But it is the duty of the player to roll with it. Don't fight the plot hook. What's the point?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

DM: As you walk away, you feel a slight tingle in the air before a flash as bright as a thousand suns blinds you for an instant before... nothing. A bolt of lightning has vaporized your body. Miraculously, nobody else in the vicinity seems to have been harmed in any way nor even do they seem to have noticed what just happened, including the fact that you just disappeared. It's as if the Gods themselves, for no particular reason, have arbitrarily decided to smite you out of existence entirely.

Ready to roll a new character?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

DM: "Alright, so your character walks off after refusing to go along with the group. Okay. Well, guess you can pack up and we will see you next session. I don't have anything planned other than what the group is doing, so, guess you won't be playing today. Bye."

Make it sting. Refuse to let them roll a new character and have them do the walk of shame. They made their choice So they can deal with the consequences of them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If you don’t have a reason to work with the group, accept that this is a one-shot for you, which may be retcon’d as needed.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Also accept that you suck at making characters

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

I don't know. One time I joined a game, and I had plenty of reasons to join the party, but the DM started RPing a really rude character, and it's like his method of getting me to join the party was to be a huge asshole to me? I just didn't pick up on it, and when I finally gave my character an ass-pull reason to join (that I could do some good if I tagged along) the DM was like "jeez, finally" and it sucked.

Like, if I'm playing a level 1 wizard, and the DM tells me I'm gonna die if I enter the conflict, it's not really my backstory's fault that I don't jump into the fray. Sometimes you're dealing with an inexperienced DM that expects you to metagame your way into the party. I genuinely thought he was on the verge of giving me the opportunity to convince the party to run away from the dragon, not stay and fight it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Fun fact:

The Expanse books (and eventual TV show) were started as a unique role-playing campaign where the person running it (Ty Franks) would write a prompt, the players would explain their character's reactions. He'd then write a story section incorporating that and the players would say how they reacted and so on.

There was a core group of characters who were the "survivors" early on, but one of the players had to drop out early-ish, so in the next bit of story that character died.

That was carried into the books and TV show, which is why after the core group of characters is established, there's a sudden, shocking death.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Dice-less, narrative games are so much fun. Sadly finding a good group for it is like pulling teeth, at least in my area.

*Sad theater kid noises*

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Wow that really is a fun fact!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Everybody plays RPGs differently, but it's funny how some people don't get the term "roleplaying" and are constantly, relentlessly playing their real selves in the game. So you get barbarians with the sensibilities of software developers.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Like for beginners just learning that's fine.

But the amount of players I've DM'd for who always play the exact same character that is just "idealistic version of self" with different coats of paint is way too damn high.

Forget that for average people it is incredibly difficult to put themselves into the perspective of others, much less hold a continuous train of logic based on that perspective, which is what roleplaying is all about.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

I mean, I think they get the term, but just have a hard time doing it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's natural that we gravitate towards familiarity.

Case in point, how some actors always seem to play the same character, no matter which movie they're in.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yeah that's a good parallel. Lately I've been watching Kaitlin Olson's show High Potential. Even though she's playing a super-smart crime solver, to me it's the same character she played in It's Always Sunny and The Mick. Not that there's anything wrong with that lol.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'm new to my party and roleplaying in general (though I've consumed it as entertainment) and I'm having a slightly different issue. My character was intentionally designed to be a bit naive to match me as a player, and doesn't have high skills in any int based stuff (at least for now) and instead has medical, nature, survival, etc.

A lot of puzzles or traps etc I can as a player try to reason through, but my character shouldn't be able to sus out, and I feel torn between playing the character as it should be or adding ideas to solve stuff so we aren't just sitting there twiddling our thumbs for ideas.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe your char bumbles around the room doing goofy things instead of working hard and logically to crack the puzzle and the dm can make your bumbling uncover extra clues that advance the plot.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This right here is what makes it roleplaying.

You as the player know what to do to move the story forward. Just need to figure out how the character you built would go from Point A to Point B, then roleplay doing it, even if it means they bumble their way through it like a clown.

Let the DM worry about what skills you need, if you even need them at all; the only thing the player has to do is describe their actions and their intentions.

A good DM will make sure you fail forward.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Sometimes it's hard to distinguish between factual knowledge and just cleverness. There's no reason a bumpkin fresh off the farm can't be curious about what makes something tick, so they look under it or break it open - and whaddya know, they find a hidden thing. It's really up to the DM to say no, your character wouldn't know to do that. The intelligence you show when you figure out a puzzle or a trap could make total sense as the same spark that made the naive character want to leave the farm and explore the big wide world.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"Oh, you encounter a desert. There's nothing around for miles"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"I perform a history check to see if there's any historical significance about this desert."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

"Sorry, but, as DM, I don't remember calling for a History check. So, no, you actually don't."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Basically my only rules for character creation are 1) your stuff must be from an officially published 5e rulebook, and 2) it must make sense for your characters to party up. It's really hard to make an interesting campaign for a group of four lone wolves who are totally disinterested in The Quest

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

THANK. YOU.

Players who do this ARE BAD PLAYERS. I don't care what it takes, you WILL find a reason to cooperate. Call it metagaming if you have to. This is a team game, you will work as a team.

Players are expected to make characters that will, for whatever reason, will work together and, for whatever reason, will take plot hooks. Without those two things the game doesn't happen.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What if they leave the party and create a new character to join the party that fits in better? Is that good or bad?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I mean, it's good, but it feels like an over reaction. They don't need to make an entirely new character, they just need to think of a reason they'd cooperate. It can be a contrived reason, that's fine, but they need to work together. Some examples,

  1. Highly shy character "warms up" to at least one other character and sort of talks to the group "through" that character, but you can still (as a player) face the whole table to talk as a group.
  2. Character who is extremely distrusting has met a character before (just tweak backstory) or finds at least one other character implicitly trust worthy. Maybe the Rogue who has been backstabbed too many times trusts the Paladin because they know they're too honest to lie.

Edit: It can also be like "my god told me" or "I just know y'all are a good bunch" lol. Doesn't need to be elaborate.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The guy who splits the party on session 1:

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Hehehe it's so fun when I just have to sit and watch and can't interact, I love iiiiit!

load more comments
view more: next ›