TheRPGSite

As a GM, how do you handle it when players in a party are interested in different things?

For instance, suppose some players want to poke around town, while the others are impatient to get back on the road to adventure. Inevitably the latter group gets impatient, or the former feels that they weren't able to investigate as they wished.

How do you finesse this? Just announce that it's time to move on to the next stage of the game? Or assign the role of party leader to somebody so they can move things on when the time is right? Etc.

Or do you just sit back and let them meander around until everybody is ready to move on?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;777214Or do you just sit back and let them meander around until everybody is ready to move on?

Mostly this, with some gentle nudges, but usually some characters will get ready and herd the rest onwards.

I generally prefer to keep enough tension going on that sitting around forever isn't an option.

How much you crank that up is, of course, a matter of taste and what's going on, but my games are definitely organized such that the Bad Guys are moving, and the world isn't just static and waiting for you to get off your butt.

Quote from: robiswrong;777219I generally prefer to keep enough tension going on that sitting around forever isn't an option.

How much you crank that up is, of course, a matter of taste and what's going on, but my games are definitely organized such that the Bad Guys are moving, and the world isn't just static and waiting for you to get off your butt.

But what if they're somewhere relatively safe, like an inn or something?

Quote from: dragoner;777218Mostly this, with some gentle nudges, but usually some characters will get ready and herd the rest onwards.

This

Or just talk to the group about it,

"Hey it seems like Marcia and Steve are happy just talking to NPCs and wandering around town, but Elizabeth and Paul seem a little restless. Am I reading this right? How should we handle that? What do you want your characters to do next?"

I bounce between players. I am cool with everybody splitting up occasionally, but the players have to be cool that I give you 2 minutes, then the next guy, etc.

Also, I learned a GREAT technique from another GM. When a couple PCs are out of the scene, I assign them NPCs with a quick description - I will play the Tavern Owner and one PC can be the Weird Dude in the Corner, another can be the Town Drunk, etc. It keeps everyone engaged.

Most importantly, I know the all important rule of pacing - when there is a lull, have somebody kick in the door and start shooting. Nothing gets the story moving like some random violence.

I once had the PCs bitching too long with a haggle with a merchant so I had the building hit with rocket propelled grenade. Yeah baby, THAT got their attention.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;777221But what if they're somewhere relatively safe, like an inn or something?

The Bad Guys aren't in an inn, are they?  They're pursuing whatever nefarious goals they're pursuing, right?

The Good Guys may be in an inn, but that doesn't mean that Princess Perky isn't awaiting execution, or that the Dread Army of Dreadarm isn't on the march.

Quote from: robiswrong;777226The Bad Guys aren't in an inn, are they?  They're pursuing whatever nefarious goals they're pursuing, right?

The Good Guys may be in an inn, but that doesn't mean that Princess Perky isn't awaiting execution, or that the Dread Army of Dreadarm isn't on the march.

Exactly. So there's nothing forcing a player from deciding to just stand around and inspect some doors for three weeks while the other half of the party wants to get a move on. On the other hand, exploring a vibrant setting is half of the fun.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;777221But what if they're somewhere relatively safe, like an inn or something?

the Inn only seems safe.

If you need to increase table tension, you stir the pot. news and rumours. strange travelers. A theft of a horse from the stables. food poisoning. A fire. Failing all that, ninjas suddenly attack.

Of course, nothing is stopping you the DM from handwaving a downperiod. Sometimes ... nothing happens, which is fine, but there's no need to play it out. In the end it's all about pacing.

In an inn, if they're there for no stated purpose, they get one rumor or hook per solipistic hour.

Sometimes we whip out the drinking minigame too.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;777227Exactly. So there's nothing forcing a player from deciding to just stand around and inspect some doors for three weeks while the other half of the party wants to get a move on. On the other hand, exploring a vibrant setting is half of the fun.

So, if there's nothing that the players are aware of that's impending, then this is true.

At this point you have two options:

1) Put time pressure on the players ("If you don't stop them the DreadArmy will destroy Happytown!")

2) If you don't want to do that, have a discussion with the players about what type of game it is everybody wants to play.

There's always this advice:

QuoteWhen in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.

-Raymond Chandler in the introduction to Trouble is My Business

In a sandbox game I try and let the players decide the pace they want. When it comes to splitting up, each individual gets equal table time. If one character wants to head off alone and the other five want to do something else then the guy alone gets 10 minutes and the groups gets 50 of each hour.

I also try and keep an extra large pile of rumors & adventure hooks just in case the PC's want to spend a lot of time just talking to people. Might as well make it entertaining and worth the effort.

I also try and keep a few playable NPCs around in case someone just dies. They have someone to play until their new PC gets rolled up.

My group has a tendency to spend a whole lot of time arguing about dumb shit so if they spend too long I turn up the heat a bit. Hang out at the Inn too long? A fight breaks out. Taking too long to decide which lead to follow? Some dramatic shit goes down near by. Dickering around about how to get through a particular section of dungeon? Well what do you know some monsters had the same problem.

Other than that I leave them to their own devices. With my main group any decision making process is usually resolved with a little bit of drunken shouting on their part and some patience on mine.

I seldom try to herd players. Generally they'll work out that they need to get going... or not.
That said, the world around them does not stop and wait for their actions... and sometimes men with guns do kick down the door.

Quote from: Simlasa;777319I seldom try to herd players. Generally they'll work out that they need to get going... or not.

I never herd players.

I do light a fire under their asses on occasion.

Quote from: robiswrong;777323I never herd players.

I do light a fire under their asses on occasion.

I play with kids a lot. Sometimes it helps to casually remind them what the central mission was... or point out the passing of time. If they continue to ignore it... no biggie. Environments have their own speed at which things happen... how long it's safe to stand around arguing in the middle of the train tracks.
Also, it doesn't bother me when the party breaks up in different directions or on different sidequests... though I've played in groups where the other Players will freak out if someone tries to go off on their own even for a moment.

Quote from: Simlasa;777327... though I've played in groups where the other Players will freak out if someone tries to go off on their own even for a moment.

I've known a few people who freak out if their friends try to go off on their own even for a moment. Maybe those players are just playing a character who is like those people. ;)

Well, first off, I run a sandbox, so the players get to decide -- for the most part -- what tails they feel like chasing, when they feel like chasing them.  If what they want to do for two hours is have a massive shopping expedition, then that's what happens.  "Adventure" ≠ "Line Battle."

For a second ... eesh, this isn't a hockey game, and there isn't a point where if you don't score a couple goals within the next six minutes, you Lose The Game.  Barring a convention run or some other limited-edition session, there really is no -- and doesn't need to be -- a rush.  (Of course, the NPCs and Big Bads aren't going to be waiting around either, so if the PCs don't have their act together, they're going to lose in time-sensitive scenarios.  But it is what it is -- it's not my job to get the characters off their duffs so they won't blow the scenario.)

Third is having a group that doesn't mind splitting up.  If people were completely intolerant of single-player 15-minute digressions, that'd be another thing.  (Alternately, you probably need your group to always agree on what it is they're doing, which isn't any easier to obtain.)

I had a situation months ago when a player was bored with the "mission creep" other players were pursuing, but didn't want his character to go do something else, and expected me as GM to make the local situation more to his taste.

I'll do that once or twice, but I'll run out of patience with people to whom it's not clear that it's up to the players to play their game. Got a disagreement with team members? Odds are, you can even talk about that in character!

If you part ways, I'll try to give everyone a fair share of time. Playing n.p.c.s can also be an option.

This is less of an issue in the old style of larger campaign, in which a particular group of players and characters gets a session scheduled not just because it's a certain day of the week -- but because they have a worthwhile adventure planned. If they're spending the whole game week hanging around at home, maybe that's not worth playing out. There's a pressure when another 12 or 15 players are also vying for the GM's time!

A novice dm once got so frustrated he threatened to pack up the game after only a fraction of an hour, because he thought we were refusing the scenario he had planned.

In fact, we were all on board with following his lead. If he'd done something like the old tournament modules --  here's the mission, here's the door to the dungeon -- we'd have got right down to it.

Instead, he started us in a tavern and proceeded to overload us with n.p.c.s presenting rumours and intrigues, more or less hard to grasp and largely irrelevant to the immediate undertaking he had in mind.

Our continuing to interact with those characters and each other for a while was just a matter of trying to get our bearings in what was a rather strange environment.

After we mollified him, he ran the scenario. It was a pretty stupid one from Dragon or Dungeon, but we made the best of it. We didn't want to stay in that milieu, however, so the award of a demesne -- presumably meant to keep us there -- was something we handed over to a steward.

Even with players who basically want to please the dm, sometimes  it's best to let go of the reins.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;777214As a GM, how do you handle it when players in a party are interested in different things?

That's up to the players to work out. I'm not their fucking nanny.

I am, however, the guy rolling for chance encounters while they work it out.

Let them carry on - it's their game.

If I get bored, though, I'll ask if there's anything more they can achieve here - sometimes they say no and carry on, sometimes they'll say yes and ask more things.

Quite often, one of the players will try and move things on themselves.

We have played some sessions where the whole session takes place in a single place. Other times, a session can be a single scenario. It depends.

I find it really helps to run smaller groups. If you have a bigger group I find it works better to split the party if at all possible and switch back and forth between different people as when you have more people it takes more time to agree on a course of action. For example when I ran D&D with my students, I found that the smaller groups actually had less deaths and more treasure than the larger groups because they were better coordinated.

Another thing that I found helped really increase speed of play is side-based initiative. Let everyone come up with a plan together and do it makes things faster (and most importantly subjectively seems faster to the players) since you have everyone engaged instead of people waiting for their turns.

Several thoughts:

I agree, generally, with the 'discuss it with your players' thing, primarily.

Also, I like games where you can mechanically 'hook' something to 'frivolous' play.

I mean, sure, some players enjoy fluff and chatting with NPCs. Some players don't.

But there's a wiggly middle where some players are like 'that's nice, but doing THIS means we aren't actually meaningfully advancing our characters/the adventure/the plot.'

One potential answer is _making_ 'fluff' actually matter. Either it is worth XP, or contributes to adventure/plot, or something.

Yeah, some players are still going to be bored, but you might shift things, plus perhaps encourage players to feel better about taking turns with game focus.

If the players are bickering or being really indecisive in town or in a planning stage, I'll just fold my arms and sit back. Not say a word. Eventually they take the hint and get their shit together.

If they act that way when the PCs are in the dungeon or wilderness, it's wandering monster time.

Yes, I almost always let the players just carry on, but keep track of how long they're taking to do things in game-time, and applying any emulative consequences from that.

Quote from: Spinachcat;777224I bounce between players. I am cool with everybody splitting up occasionally, but the players have to be cool that I give you 2 minutes, then the next guy, etc.

Also, I learned a GREAT technique from another GM. When a couple PCs are out of the scene, I assign them NPCs with a quick description - I will play the Tavern Owner and one PC can be the Weird Dude in the Corner, another can be the Town Drunk, etc. It keeps everyone engaged.

Most importantly, I know the all important rule of pacing - when there is a lull, have somebody kick in the door and start shooting. Nothing gets the story moving like some random violence.
.

This. I used to run Daredevils games with 12 + players when we were back at school. the game would run for 2 days 9am -9pm. Some of the PCs never met other PCs or indeed anyone else in the game.

If you want to experiencing PCs split up run some Amber :) I have never had a group of more than 2/3 PCs in Amber form a party (5 players and 1 group of 3) and I have only managed to get all the PCs into one room once in 20+ years of running it.

In my current game M&M 2e one of the PCs isn't very physical so stays at base and hacks in to give support (control machinery massive range and computer hack at uber level etc.)

The key to this is to give each player enough face time to move their plot forward and stop before it resolves. This keeps each player focused on their action not drifting off to do something else and moves everyone on at the same pace so you can link up again.

Quote from: Will;778061Several thoughts:

I agree, generally, with the 'discuss it with your players' thing, primarily.

Also, I like games where you can mechanically 'hook' something to 'frivolous' play.

I mean, sure, some players enjoy fluff and chatting with NPCs. Some players don't.

But there's a wiggly middle where some players are like 'that's nice, but doing THIS means we aren't actually meaningfully advancing our characters/the adventure/the plot.'

One potential answer is _making_ 'fluff' actually matter. Either it is worth XP, or contributes to adventure/plot, or something.

Yeah, some players are still going to be bored, but you might shift things, plus perhaps encourage players to feel better about taking turns with game focus.

The "fluff" which I refer to as Roleplaying :) is the important stuff.

Quote from: jibbajibba;779148The "fluff" which I refer to as Roleplaying :) is the important stuff.

To you. And, mostly, to me.

But hey, you know, people like different things. Newsflash.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;777227Exactly. So there's nothing forcing a player from deciding to just stand around and inspect some doors for three weeks while the other half of the party wants to get a move on. On the other hand, exploring a vibrant setting is half of the fun.

What if the rest of the party decides to leave him behind? Because the player is being annoying to everyone else at the table, and the character is being annoying to everyone else in the party.

"You want to stare at doors all day? That's cool. The rest of us are going on an adventure now."

You are not the marines. You can and should leave a man behind.

re: Fluff : Roleplaying is it's own reward.

Quote from: Ladybird;779185You are not the marines. You can and should leave a man behind.

Agreed. Or just cuff him in the back of the head and say, "Get a move on. We're all going that-away."

the "pace" is whatever you, the GM, decide the game needs to keep things lively. If people decide to meander about - let them. If someone is getting impatient (I actually take this as a queue to make them more impatient with random NPC blathering, being inquisitive about the impatient PC, until they decide to make a goddamn move)... That kind of inertia can develop especially where players feel safe.


... I had a group that clung to the "inn" as this place where they felt "safe" (through no prompting of my own) - but they kind of took it as their "Cheers" away from the realities of their adventuring life.

So I took time to craft all the NPC's that ran the place, the "regular"s etc. then one day they arrived - and all the normal employees had been replaced, seemingly overnight. So the new people running the place didn't know how to do *anything*. The service was horrible, when they went to get a room, they were told, go ahead and pick whatever room they wanted. The staff was useless - and the only food served was meat on a stick (but it was seasoned well!)

All the weirdness made the party really uncomfortable, then one of the enterprising players went snooping around and found the staff all dismembered in the cellar (a couple were still alive) and the "staff" were a band of evil adventurers that took the place over because they were "recognized" by the barkeep. They made the unfortunate decision to look a the spit in the kitchen and figured out where all that meat was coming from...

Yeah... mayhem ensued.

If your party is dicking around, don't feel bad about throwing them a curveball, even if it means killing off your NPC's you enjoy running. They may set the pace, but you're the nitrous-tank as the GM. give'em a squirt.