I'm with Lunamancer.
You don't have to be a dick about it... you shouldn't be a dick about it... but Players have their hand to play in guiding the game just as much as the GM.
If the arrival of news of the orc's victory in the siege doesn't make sense then have the PCs reflect that... they either don't believe it or suspect some further element. Take whatever theory they come up with and run with it. Decide there is something afoot, secret allies of the orcs spreading propaganda or whatever. Just because it's not 'true' in-game doesn't mean it can't be a vector of fun. Our Earthdawn group had an epic bit of adventure while looking for a magical bird that turned out to just be a bit of symbolism in a poem.
Sometimes I've gotten friction from other Players who just want the GM to lead them by the nose, because I refuse to jump at every hook and will argue when the information the GM provides doesn't make sense. Mind you, I'm not arguing with the GM, I'm arguing with the other PCs that the informatiion, "must be a trap because of such and such."
You can have a conversation with the GM within the game... taking and rejecting hooks and reacting to undercooked plots by dissecting them, working out your own 'truth' and running with that. Seems to me that any decent GM oughtta be good with that.

Quote from: MES;926283How would you tell the DM?
The thing is that the DM also prepared a lot of text that he would read out and he also served us chilli and beer! So you cannot blame him that he went into the session unprepared. Quite the opposite! Though I think he does not notice that at least I found the plot really boring.

Yes, I would tell him. As a GM, I'd hate it if my players were bored with me games and would change the way I was doing things to improve things. If you don;t tell him then he won't know.

I can see how some people might think the scenario was boring, but I have seen a number of similar scenarios which worked really well. It's not my style, but farm-based campaigns can work.

I would do it the direct way.

"Guys, I'm really bored.  Are you bored too, or is it just me?"  And if it's just me, I then decide if I want to keep going or say "No thanks" and retire from that game.

Not gaming is better than bad gaming, and I find being bored is bad gaming.  But if everybody else is having fun I'm not going to shit on their fun.

Quote from: CRKrueger;9263161. It's not the GM's style, that's been fine for over two years now.

Actually, he said that the group had existed for 2.5 years not that this person had been the GM for 2.5 years.  Lots of groups periodically switch GMs.  This might be the person's first time in the GM chair.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;926321I think your first instinct was correct.

Both the referee and the player who posted about the campaign could do with a couple of hard shots with the bucket, one with iron-bound oak slats affixed to a sturdy chain.

I get an image of an old Jet Li carrying that around and swinging that thing like a rope dart and braining someone with it when they're being an idiot.  I can also see "the bucket" becoming a forum meme.

Quote from: CRKrueger;926316Lunamancer's right, it takes two to Tango. Gonna play Devil's (or GM's) Advocate here...

1. It's not the GM's style, that's been fine for over two years now.
2. When the story was about, as you put it, defending "your" village and "your" family from the orcish hordes, that was fine.
3. When the story shifts to the broader conflict, you find out this isn't a "normal" orc invasion and there actually might be some Evil Druid behind it, some foul being who is driving the orcs to keep attacking your kingdom, your response is Booooring?
4. Defending your family from an orc sword...cool. Defending your family from a evil druid who has an orc nation and magical plagues...yawn.

Really dude?

You can balk at the hook without being the brooding loner, certainly, and that might be better in the long run...but...just maybe...you might want to pretend you have more attention span than a meth-whore, put some trust in the GM you've liked for two and a half years, and most importantly...use your brain, find your courage, learn where this druid is, and go cut the head off the fucking snake before that bastard destroys all you hold dear.

You see, the other way to respond to railroady hooks isn't to balk, but to Engage.  Jump in with both feet, find something about the hook that gives you motivation, and take it.  Make the hook yours, not the GM's.  The GM might be getting lazy, he might be drifting into StoryTeller mode, snap him out of it, by Seizing the Initiative.

Like balking, seizing the initiative of the plot is important GM feedback.  It tells the GM "We are not sitting here while you spoonfeed us your Magnum Opus". Be proactive, not reactive.  Aggressive, not Passive-Aggressive.

Or, if you actually don't care about the druid, go back to building defenses, dig a moat, it will be a good place to throw the plague-ridden bodies of your family and friends.

I won't discuss on this niveau. Thanks for nothing.

Update:
I just talked to the GM for 45minutes. I first started writing an email, which I thought got too long and then I just picked up the phone and called him.

I did not exactly tell him that I found his adventure boring, but I told him, which elements I did not like about it and I decided to focus on mainly three issues, which was story progress, raildoadiness and consistency of the setting. Otherwise I thought the whole thing would have come off too harsh.

I re-read a german guideline to write good adventures ("Das Abenteuerkochbuch", you find it here: http://www.selemer-tagebuecher.de/wp-content/plugins/downloads-manager/upload/Abenteuerkochbuch.pdf) to make my critique constructive.

Basically I had a problem playing "realistically" in his world and I told him, that I wished for more "successes" when playing. I gave him an example of last session, when we basically only found this boy, who was too traumatised to tell anything and his mother who hinted that the boy had bruises, which could not possibly have been caused by a wolf attack. I told him that the NPC he presented did not make the story progress as much as I wished and that he basically sends us from spot to spot, to gather more information. To me it did not feel like we were on to something and that I did not have the feeling that it was in our hands to solve the problems he presented, but in his hands (or better his script). To me it felt like a paperchase and every NPC just knew enough to send us to the next spot in the script.

 I had already written most of the stuff down, I told him, and I tried to make it sound constructive and I tried to illustrate it with examples, still I did not have the feeling that he got, what I tried to point out.

His reponse felt quite unsatisfying. Basically what he stated was that if we wanted to make progress, that we had to work for it and that from his perspective he already had given us hints, through NPCs (like the boy's mother and the "dull-item-information") which we did not work or ask for. His point was that he already helped us out quite a bit and that he wanted to make the world really "realistic" as in "farm-based-style" and to be honest, the way he presents the whole thing is not really my cup of tea.

It felt like we discussed the issue for 30 minutes without finding a solution really and in the end we agreed on bringing the thing on the table next time our group meets. The main problem to me is, that I find his story weak and I don't see a fast way to finish it unless the players agree with me.

We'll meet again November 1st and I will sind you an update, if you want.

Yeah please do, I'm actually curious how this turns out.

But, yeah, if you end up still bored and unsatisfied, just step out. I've done so in the past and unruffled the GM's feathers by explaining it as "this campaign genre just isn't my style, good luck!".

It sucks, but eh, I wouldn't be surprised if your friends, even if they agree with you, decide to stick with it. That's what happened to me and it was infuriating to hear my friends all complain for MONTHS about the campaign about all the things that made me quit in the first place.

I would just stick it out.  For me bad gaming is better than no gaming.   If bad means boring and 'no' means none at all.

How long does he's story run?  

Is this his first time DMing?  How long has he been DMing?
How old is the group? Teens? 20s? 30s?  I am guessing early 20s.  

If you discuss it again ask if he is happy with the progress you are making.  

If he's not then maybe he needs to be more explicit in his clues.  DMs often think they are being way more obvious than they are.  Its cause they live inside their head and you don't.

If he is happy with how it's going, re-evaluate the session.  Did other people have fun?  It might be you.  Think about it.  If it wasn't you, then you options are drop, or tough  it out and wait for him to change.

(on iPhone, sorry for autocorrect errors)

Definitely this is a delicate situation so my first advice is get a sense of what kind of feedback this GM can handle. Some people deal with this stuff fine, some take it wicked personally. I've seen constructive feedback make GMs better but also seen it make them second guess everything to the point you wish no one had raised the issue.

First I would establish what the other players think. If they are having a blast and you are the only bored player, then obviously it is a style or taste issue and you are bettter off finding another group. If most of the players are bored the GM is probably in need of feedback. In this case some helpful criticism could save the canpaign. But I would say know which situation you are in first.

For feedback be sure to point out what does work in campaign (so he doesn't throw the baby out with the bath water). Put yourself in his shoes and think what you'd be receptive to if the tables were turned.

I've found the following to be helpful:

Be direct. Don't be vague or drop hints. Just say what you want. Don't make it about him being a bad GM. Make it about what you want in play and what he could change.

What are his strengths? Can these be built on to make a more exciting game?

Recognize what he can't improve. There are some things he might just not be able to pull off and pushing him to do that stuff could be like pulling teeth.

Identify what you would specifically like to see. "Be less boring" is vague and he is going to flounder trying to figure out what that actually means in terms of prep. Pinpoint for him where things go wrong and how he can improve them. Tell him what you want him to do. Be concrete. if you want more dungeons, ask him to make more dungeons. If you want more choices inside those dungeons, or fewer kobolds in them,  say so. If you want more combat or more events, tell him. Give examples.

MES, you have gotten a lot of good advice in this thread and have acted upon some of it. There is an option that you have not tried yet though.

Let your DM take a break and you DM a few sessions. This way, your DM can fall back and regroup plus it gives you the opportunity to see the game from his side of the table, which may help facilitate communication.

I don't think a lot of people have properly understood, balking at the hook does not mean balking at the adventure.

Like when Luke "The Brooding Loner" Skywalker was asked by Obi-Wan to go to Alderaan, he refused. He had to get home. He had work to do.

That doesn't mean the GM had to shit-can the whole Empire plot. He just has to make it more real for Luke and Luke's player.

Luke's player, by playing true to his character and refusing, gave the GM everything he needs to know to turn Luke's "No" into a "Yes" and make the adventure more compelling for Luke's player. His character hates the Empire. But he can't just walk away from the people who depend upon him, a common concern of brooding loners everywhere.

Empire kills his family. Problem solved. We're back on track.

Sounds awful. If I didn't want to leave, I'd try roleplaying in character. If my character is dumb enough, I could just have him not care, but assuming my character has some of the intelligence you show, I would follow my/your instinct about "Wait? What? That report makes no sense! And who did bring it, seriously? Can we talk to them? Why would the garrison charge out after sending us for help?" And then, why again do we care about the cows? There's a plague? This sounds like an awful part of the world - maybe we should travel somewhere else. If we don't care and aren't getting anywhere, maybe we should think about what we do care about and find more interesting, and go after that. How about investigating what actually did happen at the city where you escaped the siege?

Or, more subtle versions. It is possible to lead GMs by example as players into ways of thinking that make more sense and are more interesting to the players, by not going along with the illogic and uninterestingness stupid forced plot hooks. Require the GM to improve by roleplaying well and in logical and interesting ways.

Quote from: jeff37923;926461MES, you have gotten a lot of good advice in this thread and have acted upon some of it. There is an option that you have not tried yet though.

Let your DM take a break and you DM a few sessions. This way, your DM can fall back and regroup plus it gives you the opportunity to see the game from his side of the table, which may help facilitate communication.

Wow... this is a really good advice. I mean it! I will consider this, thanks!

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;926370Not gaming is better than bad gaming, and I find being bored is bad gaming.  But if everybody else is having fun I'm not going to shit on their fun.

I'm really not fond of that saying. "Bad" gaming can mean a lot of different things, and I'd hate to be in a group where the players would leave the moment things became boring, without giving the GM a chance to get back on track.

If the GM is consistently boring, and not open to criticism and advice, then I'd think about leaving.