Hello everyone! I'm pretty fresh to GM'ing (Only been doing so for 3 months) And I have a question.
Have hosted 3 different campaigns, one of which is ended, one which is weekly, one which is biweekly, and I have a reoccuring problem.
My players are really interested in sandbox-styled campaigns, as am I. However, there's been a really large issue with character-to-character relations. My players (understandably so) wish to do different things from each-other, like, vastly different. I understand this is an obvious side-effect of a campaign without a set goal, but it's completely off the charts. Players have such different interests, that at times, they wont even interact with each-other, or aid other party member(s)' goals.
I've tried to remedy this by taking into consideration the interests of every player's character, and it has helped a very great deal (I.E., you have a typical Mercenary style fighter and a druid in the same party, make quest that both pays well and threatens to destroy the forest if not accomplished.) However, this is feeling like more of a band-aid than a solution, as there is still a disconnect.
One of these games might be dropping soon (a few of my players wont be able to make it anymore) and I'm going to be starting another.
So what I ask is, are there any tips you can give on how to keep my players connected to each-other, without stomping on the freedom that sandbox promises them? Thank you all very much for any feedback!
>>44242824
What you could do is present a few hooks for overarching goals and see if there's anything they all leap at. I'm sure you can think of a few breadcrumb trails for them to look into.
Anything involving large-scale war should interest the druid. Forests are a great source of wood for siege weaponry. It should likewise interest the mercenary fighter for obvious reasons. Or, maybe they'll just find some of the plot hooks interesting as players.
If you ever figure it out let me know. I found it best to let them know that too much soloing on game night isn't allowed and to get their sandbox stuff out of the way 1 on 1 with me on Skype during the non game sessions.
>>44243069
That's what I had been attempting, and like I've stated, it's left the game in far better condition. However it doesn't seem to stick.
Since this game is a true sandbox, with me coming up with hooks as the players show interest, or sometimes forcing hooks into existence, I've also allowed any morality, as it has potential for excellent plot depth. However, I feel like this is beginning to hurt the party. We have one neutral-evil and one neutral-good, and they've fought on 3 occasions, each time getting closer to lethal.
Another thing that has been hurting my players, is that the very little time they get to solo RP things, such as romantic involvements with NPC's, diplomatic arrangements, etc., the other players tend to find a way to mess it up, and usually not in an interesting or enjoyable way.
I would say my player group is fairly new, but I don't blame all of this on them. Should I try to implement some more forcible measures? Like alignment restrictions?
I've also addressed my players to be a bit more lenient with their characters wishes, as to promote more team play. This has worked to some degree, but however, there's still a disconnect between my players.
>>44242824
>newbie GM
>litterbox
>bugfinder
>That Group
You're in for a world of suffering.
Pitching sandbox to your players probably just destroyed all hope for solidarity. Sandbox is a video game marketing term, it doesn't mean much in RPGs.
>>44242824
Why not have get the players together and have a session devoted to making up characters? I don't just mean mechanically. Tell them your concerns and have them discuss goals, and design backgrounds and personalities that align and make for a unified party with common interests?
>>44243488
That's some pretty good advice! I'll definitely implement that in next Campaign. Any suggestions from anyone on how to fix up my current one? The players are very into the story and environment I've provided them, it's just unification is a disaster.
>>44242824
So if ur players all have different goals, you need a goal that unifies them. The problem is it sounds like u can't give them some random question. U need a scheme to make them want to be in the same quest. I had a gm who did this, a create a npc bad guy that fucks with all the members of ur party, individually. Ig ur party isn't together i would run them separately and have this npc or organization mess up whatever the r doing, that way it isn't so obvious. Then have the party meet up and then they hopefully will all be like FUCK that guy.
>>44243541
>u
Kill yourself
>>44243527
Give them a common foe.
Have something happen that makes working together paramount to staying alive.
Tell them out of game that you need them to work together.
Find a new group.
