That could be, Simlasa. I know the games they ran in 3.5 were all along the pure hack and slash line. They're not against altering their style a bit, but I think it may be a "reflex" reaction once the game begins.

Apparently all the careful went over to the group I DM for. PLEASE! Take-It-Back!

No. Really. They have been super ultra cautious to the point one player is starting to come across as paranoid of 5es combat system/balance at this point. I dont mind them thinking things through. But theres been times where theyve been overly cautious.

As for the other type of pell mell wack-a-thon.

Some ideas.
1: Do not award EXP for killing things that didnt need killing. Definitly enforce 5e's low low low treasure chances too.

2: Present options where negotiation is better and then ENFORCE the consequences when they slaughter the village for their pocket change. Repercussions.

3: Try talking. "Ya know guys. There is more to this than wack-a-thon ya know?"

etc.

Shit I'll trade ya for a pair of cautious ones Omega!

Enforcing the consequences is part of what's getting them killed. I'm perfectly okay with that.

I'm really thinking that you and Will's suggestion to eliminate or virtually eliminate xp for killing stuff is the way to go.

I've always been a kind of a stingy bastard when it comes to magic items and treasure, so that's no prob.

When I've done the "Ya know guys..." thing they all just laugh and say "Yeah shit, you're probably right".

My lovely wife is a creature of 3.5.  I'm slowly getting her to grok the older style.  But... Slowly.

I was reading aloud to my wife from my OD&D clone rules tonight. When we got to stuff about marking down rations, hiring henchmen, rules for parley with monsters... That kind of stuff, she stopped me and said something like, "that really sounds like a waste of time. I don't want to worry about whether my character ate today."

We talked about it and I understood from our talk that the value of preparedness  in the older style game was lost on her entirely. She saw it as silly minutia. She asked "so the rest of the players have to sit there while I role play eating breakfast?"

We talked a little more about it and she understood why some perticular and seemingly unimportant rules were spelled out.  Still not sure she "gets" it and less sure she will learn to enjoy it.

Your players may be of a kind with my wife- skip the "boring" stuff and get me to the killing floor!

Speak plainly with each of them, first in private, and then as a group. Ask them whether they like puzzles and mysteries. Ask them whether being cautious is fun for them or not. Listen to them carefully, so that you can know to what degree they 1) have bought in and 2) want to buy in to the older way.

Only then can you really get a handle on why they keep suiciding against your dungeons.

Over time game styles have changed.

Initially it was about what you would do if you were in that situation

Then came imagine what this PC would do in this situation

Then came how can I maximise the amount of damage I can do in this situation within the rules of the game

Then came the rules have been altered to mean that everyone will do about the same damage and be as relevant to the situation if they can cleverly manage an arsenal of powers and we want to avoid PC death as that is a bit un-fun and time consuming

Now we are in the post modernist phase of RPGs where you can play whatever you like, all four flavours and a lot of other flavours are avilable. The trouble is because the frame of reference has shifted players all expect different things. There is no "truth" it's all relative.

So the shapeshifting magic casting multi-attack blow em all away round 1 3x killing machines are no less clever than the 10 foot pole crowd it's just their clever has shifted from "what would I do to get through this alive" to "how can I construct the most efficient PC from this rule set". The "what would my PC do in this situation" question has been replaced with "what is the best power combo to use to defeat this critter whilst not wasting my arsenal of resources".

None of these are superior to the others it's just a case and context thing.

I am a "roleplay" guy so my PCs often do stupid things if that is their character and I don't think "Oh I will do something stupid here for drama/story" I just get into my PC and so do what they would do. Some of them are sneaky bastards a few are more Leroy Jenkins....

1. Announce that you are playing Rolemaster Standard System from now on.
2. Guide them through the three hour process of creating a character.
3. Chortle as they get a dagger in the eyeball from a goblin in the first encounter and bleed out in 3 rounds.
4. Let them make new characters and watch as they play them very, very carefully.
5.
6. Profit

Remember, system matters, people!

Good solid ideas Scott. I'm a child of the "resource management" type of rpg. Teamwork. Strategy. Preparation. Tactics. Coordination.

Yeah jibbajibba, I'm a roleplayer like you. I get into my character and do what is appropriate for that character. Clever, stupid, or whatever.

That is a pretty decent way of spelling out the differences. I can see how that has happened.

My group is a good group of younger players. Solid, good, fun people. I think if I give it enough time and use a few of the ideas that have been presented, that it will all work out just dandy.

I'm not sure I entirely agree with you Shadow.

They have spent 3+ hours on their 5E characters. They love making characters. The first session ended with a near TPK against some cunning goblins and an opportunistic snake.

I've had players in Harn that didn't learn the first several times through either.

I'm not so sure that the system necessarily matters all that much, but regardless, we're using DnD 5E. It is a system that we all like and are happy with.

I'm thinking that the type of bait dangled is going to make all the difference here.

I haven't been awarding EXP in my first 5E game (Lost Mines of Phandelver) with all my beginner friends and so far it almost feels like they don't believe me when I say you only get EXP for tasks. Well, and random encounters. Maybe I should axe that too.

The same thing happened with "enforcing the consequences." I told them beforehand about it, but when it actually was happening some of them thought I was out to get them. But it's starting to sink in now.

Even giving EXP for tasks kind of warps the game though, because instead of "hey let's kill these guys for EXP" it was "let's go complete X task, not because it's in character or any in-game reason but because we'll get some EXP."

Maybe the best option is to not give out EXP at all on a regular basis, and don't let them know the methodology to it exactly? That way they will only make decisions on the basis of in-game factors.

There is also the conceit of the game: older games are more about average people just getting by in the wilderness and coming up in the world. Today's' games are all about people selected by destiny to be heroes. So the mindset that breeds is completely different.

Are they having fun even though their PCs are dying?

Are they learning anything? AKA, do they care about PC death?

I don't see the point in being stingy with XP or magic items. If they want some magic goodies, run a stealth mission to steal some great ones. Then, if they die foolishly, they miss out on them.

They are having fun despite characters sometimes dropping like flies. Character death doesn't seem to make a big impression on them. That's fine as far as I am concerned. They are a bunch of goofballs (I mean that in a good way). I think it would be nice if they would, at least sometimes, play a little more carefully so that a character can make it beyond 5th level.

I'm not getting any complaints about lack of magic items or such. I'm not all that stingy with xp, just mostly magic stuff. In point of fact I'm not getting complaints about anything. It's just my experience that is a little lacking.

Quote from: jibbajibba;811413I am a "roleplay" guy so my PCs often do stupid things if that is their character and I don't think "Oh I will do something stupid here for drama/story" I just get into my PC and so do what they would do. Some of them are sneaky bastards a few are more Leroy Jenkins....

Same with me. I'm doing a Half-Orc Barbarian in my next game, with an int of 8 and a wis of 10. I doubt he is going to be coming up with clever plans. Now, he might follow someone else's clever plan, if he trusts them, but his first instinct in combat will be to charge the nearest thing.

Quote from: Simlasa;811408I wonder if the Players might be of the mindset that "This is how D&D is supposed to be played!"... I've seen that before, approaching it as a skirmish wargame and nothing more... any other playstyle 'Isn't D&D'.
I've heard similar things in recent online games I've played in.

It's not that they're playing it as a skirmish wargame, it's that they're playing stupid.

I play lots of skirmish wargames.  Play stupid against me and I'll hand you your ass in a bucket.

"You guys are playing like a bunch of fucking morons and it's not fun for me.  I quit."

Quote from: Emperor Norton;811434Same with me. I'm doing a Half-Orc Barbarian in my next game, with an int of 8 and a wis of 10. I doubt he is going to be coming up with clever plans. Now, he might follow someone else's clever plan, if he trusts them, but his first instinct in combat will be to charge the nearest thing.

When you deliberately roleplay a character in a non-optimal way, what do you want the GM to do? Are you okay with him going at you full throttle, or do you view that as "punishing" your roleplaying?

I had a player once he's motif was playing a klutzy, ditzy character that constantly got into risky situations. They didn't last long, because of that. But they got upset because they thought I was punishing them for putting themselves in those situations.