I think I may be that GM

I think I may be that GM.

>write a 10-page setting packet and expect players to read it

>make players fail action because they don't get in character enough (ex. they ask guards if they work in location A, and then ask if they want to fuck in location A their next shift)

>don't want to engage with a character's backstory/dreams because it just shits on the world at large (he wants to make a crime syndicate despite the many gang/organizations/syndicates that already exist in the setting)

>constantly wanting to kill myself over their baby-tier plans (Burn the building if it's made of wood, kill everything inside if it isn't)

There's just no subtlety or fun with this group. They're all having a good time, and I'm just regretting saying I'll gm for them because I'd have more fun watching random youtube videos than play with this group. I've tried discussing shit, but they've made it clear this is how they have fun, so I should just relax and go with the flow.

change setttings.
make something akin to mission impossible/splinter cell, where a random guard can heavily btfo the group and bruteforce will get one of them killed instantly and reroll.
the other will then try to not bruteforce into everything

if you're looking to be a GM for different kinds of people, you will have to adapt to the tone and campaign for different groups. it's just the way it's gonna be.

If you just want to play a specific way then ditch them, even if the are close friends, because eventually your lack of interest will spill into the campaign and make it fun for 0 people. I think there is still fun to be derived from d&d even if you're not playing everything you'd like to, but honestly that's how I feel.

>write a 10-page setting packet and expect players to read it
Unless this is all information a character should start off knowing, there's no reason why you shouldn't be feeding this information via RP

>don't want to engage with a character's backstory/dreams because it just shits on the world at large
If you don't want PCs to mess with your world, go write a fucking book

>constantly wanting to kill myself over their baby-tier plans
Maybe make their actions have consequences. Arson and murderhoboing have so many repercussions it's impossible to list them all.

So yeah, you are that GM.

>write a 10-page setting packet and expect players to read it
Dude, nobody cares about 10+ pages of lore and shit. Most people who play DnD just wana get in a dungeon and fight stuff. Keep your world simple. Leaning on tropes and archetypes isn't a bad thing. What story you do present should be done in-game, not in a huge wall of text before the game starts.

>make players fail action because they don't get in character enough (ex. they ask guards if they work in location A, and then ask if they want to fuck in location A their next shift)
That may potentially be in-character. It's shitty, but it may be in-character.

>don't want to engage with a character's backstory/dreams because it just shits on the world at large (he wants to make a crime syndicate despite the many gang/organizations/syndicates that already exist in the setting)
Write a book. If you don't give a shit what your player characters want for themselves, why should they give a shit what you want for them?

>constantly wanting to kill myself over their baby-tier plans (Burn the building if it's made of wood, kill everything inside if it isn't)
What are consequences?

> (he wants to make a crime syndicate despite the many gang/organizations/syndicates that already exist in the setting)

He wants to do a thing entirely setting appropriate? What a dick.

>Dude, nobody cares about 10+ pages of lore and shit. Most people who play DnD just wana get in a dungeon and fight stuff. Keep your world simple. Leaning on tropes and archetypes isn't a bad thing. What story you do present should be done in-game, not in a huge wall of text before the game starts.

I normally try to lean on one page at most for the majority of the setting. There's more text for races, classes, and the likes, but I try to keep those somewhat succinct and I don't expect the majority of players to read anything beyond their own shit.

Honestly, it's probably shitty on my part and my players probably begrudge it, and I often find myself wanting to scream 'read the setting notes'.

>he wants to make a crime syndicate despite the many gang/organizations/syndicates that already exist in the setting
This one I don't get. Other people have demonstrably succesfully started criminal organizations, why wouldn't the player character be able to do that too?

>Read the setting notes"

There was a videogame that did this. It was called Destiny. It made you go to an external website to read the game's lore instead of presenting it in the game itself. Everyone hated it. Wana know what any of the banners in pic related mean? I can guarantee half the playerbase of the game doesn't actually know because they don't care and are never given a real reason to care or read up on it of their own accord. Walls of text disassociated with the game itself are BORING.

You are correct. Stop tormenting those people and go write a book.

>Dude, nobody cares about 10+ pages of lore and shit.

I do. One guy I played with wrote a fantasy not-India with pages and pages of setting information, and I ate it right up and asked for more. If it's a homebrew setting then the more information the better.

>write a 10-page setting packet and expect players to read it

Wowsers! A whole ten pages? And you have to read it yourself?

>make players fail action because they don't get in character enough (ex. they ask guards if they work in location A, and then ask if they want to fuck in location A their next shift)

Yeah, "role-playing" totally sucks. It's way better to just say "I use Persuade. Rolled a 15." Very engaging, very interesting.

>don't want to engage with a character's backstory/dreams because it just shits on the world at large (he wants to make a crime syndicate despite the many gang/organizations/syndicates that already exist in the setting)

"Alright, so the setting it is medieval fantasy with like elves and dwarves." But I want to play a psychic alien dinosaur with laser guns from the future FUCK YOUR NOVEL.

>constantly wanting to kill myself over their baby-tier plans (Burn the building if it's made of wood, kill everything inside if it isn't)

Plans? Dude, role-playing sucks, just say "I use skill I have. Rolled a 15."

Seriously, though, you're GMing alright as far as I can see.

Hi OP.

Faggot

Hey look ! It's OP !

Depends also a lot of the quality of the setting, I've avoided a campaign because the setting notes (well, almost the setting book) was cringy af, full of eventual DMPC, bad stereotypical tropes and shit... That's why I prefer most of the time pre-existing settings where the dm set his own tone and mood.

Someone didn't like their history class, did they?

Oh, I'm sorry I wanted to play DnD, not show up to someone's house to read 10 pages of poorly written historical fanfiction. Please forgive me for wanting to have fun.

Most of these sound like a group issue, except maybe your setting booklet.

I run a game in my own setting, and have probably twelve pages of information. To be fair, it's a booklet of legal sized paper, folded in half and stapled. Only one side of each page has text, the other is a map or illustration. I have a page for each nation, with really basic info about its government, a couple major towns and geography, and some stuff on the nations' culture and religious practices. Things a character from that place would already know. I also have a couple pages for other information like unique creatures, major organizations that everyone would probably have heard of, and other miscellany, just to get players into the right mindset. Each page of text is probably four or less paragraphs. A simple digest of need to know stuff.

Anything beyond this, and no, players don't care to read all that. It's better to show it through the players' interactions with the world.

>not wanting to show up to someone's house to read 10 pages of poorly written historical fanfiction

>>make players fail action because they don't get in character enough (ex. they ask guards if they work in location A, and then ask if they want to fuck in location A their next shift)
>>don't want to engage with a character's backstory/dreams because it just shits on the world at large (he wants to make a crime syndicate despite the many gang/organizations/syndicates that already exist in the setting)


These two are bad habbits. You ever watch an episode of Who's Line when everyone just kind of stares at one antother, stamers for a bit, and the rips out some lolsorandom shit? THAT is what it looks like when you try to force people to rp everything. Don't to that. There are social skills and stats in most settings, let the dice decide if the char puts their foot in their mouth or not. Just give 'em a bonus to the roll if they roleplay well.

The second one is easy to fix as well. If there are two many in exitence, then let him start a fucking gang war to take one out. Watch some Sons of Anarchy and Breaking Bad to get some ideas for the complications that will come with trying to build, and grow a criminal enterprise at the expense of another criminal enterprise.

With players it's all about handing them plenty of rope. They'll obligingly hang themselves for your amusement, every damn time.

>write a 10-page setting packet and expect players to read it
I've done this before, like twice. I thought it was good but my first group didn't really like me and my second group was really there for a casual social thing so they didn't get to into it.


I don't blame either group: the first was my fault and the second is just not something they wanted to do. When the first group quit I didn't bitch and when the second group didn't read it I just explained shit in game that needed explaining.

As for the rest of it? You are That GM, promptly quit and don't do it again until you've put serious effort into being less shit.

>10 pages
You do a one- or two-page setting summary, and then attach the relevant info for class/race when you send it to your group. Everything else gets told through the game. Don't expect the elven archer to read your summary of dwarven runesmiths because he doesn't give a shit, his character doesn't give a shit, and it's more fun for both players to have the runesmith surprise him.

>Don't expect the elven archer to read your summary of dwarven runesmiths because he doesn't give a shit

>I don't blame either group
>when the second group didn't read it I just explained shit in game that needed explaining.

I don't understand why you still play with these people, or why they still play with you.

Good Idea:
>writing a 10-page setting packet

Bad Idea:
>Expecting players to read it

Good Idea:
>make players fail action because they act completely out of character

Bad Idea:
>make players fail action because they don't get in character enough for your arbitrary subjective tastes

Good Idea:
>Not engaging with a character's backstory/dreams because it just shits on the world at large

Bad Idea:
>Not engaging with a character's backstory/dreams because he wants to add an element despite many similar elements already being lovingly crafted by your skilled hand into your perfect setting

Good Idea:
>Constantly struggling to challenge and encourage your players to change up from simplistic tactics like burning the building if it's made of wood and killing everything inside if it isn't.

Bad Idea:
>Constantly wanting to kill yourself over the players' actions, mocking them as "baby-tier plans", never actually doing anything to promote scenarios that require more sophisticated execution, and then crying to Veeky Forums when you realize it's all your fault

>and then crying to Veeky Forums when you realize it's all your fault
OP is fucking done, because here it is gents.

So the way I handle lore.

Everybody gets a 1 page overview containing everything they need to know.

Anybody that took training in a certain knowledge skill gets another page based on that skill. I.E history , nobility , arcana etc.

That way everyone has a basis of knowledge and characters who want to have additional knowledge they can turn to that may be useful. Anything else is discovered in-game.

It also lets the bard or whoever more confidently go 'oh so this is the noble sign of the house of the lion ' rather than having to slow down the game by rolling for it. And it encourages players to take proficiency in skills they may be low at due to poor abilities. So the noble fighter will still have a thorough working knowledge of the various noble houses etc that his background gives him rather than rolling a 1 and forgetting what the symbol on his own shield means.

I don't think it's terrible to have all your setting info together. I play with people in person, so there's no "sending." I have a booklet, if a player says, "I'd like to be a noble barbarian type," I direct him to the appropriate country/region/race. If a player says, "I'm not sure," I suggest they browse the booklet. Honestly if you have adults who won't read ten pages (assuming you double spaced and used columns because it's easy on the eyes, especially if you illustrate or at least include found relevant images, also) then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe board games are more their speed? Dominion is rad as hell.

...

user the dude you're responding to was responding to, and I totally get why both groups didn't want to read it. Sometimes people just want to get in there and play and that's cool, but acting like writing it at all is a bad idea is dumb as hell.

There's a difference between you the GM having setting notes so you know where shit is and what it smells like, and forcing your players to go through a doc that has no relevancy to them and only a cursory one to their PCs. If they ask, tell them. If they don't, they don't care so don't throw a tantrum to force them to. It won't work.

>Dude, nobody cares about 10+ pages of lore and shit. Most people who play DnD just wana get in a dungeon and fight stuff. Keep your world simple. Leaning on tropes and archetypes isn't a bad thing.
THIS
I love creating settings like every other GM do, but out of few dozens of people I ran for, I had literally only one player ever who was genuinely interested in the world I've created and he's a lore and world creating junkie in general. Unless you're playing in some already big and well known setting, like 40k, Star Wars, LOTR or something, most players really don't give a single fuck about lore as long as they don't need it for something..

This
>Does a PC need to know information about the setting?
Tell the player that his or her character knows
>Does a player want to learn about the setting?
Give them (part of) your GM notes
>Does a player think his or her character should know some information?
Be the judge and give the information if they are right

I had a player that wanted to play an Elf historian. Whenever he wanted to tell an interesting story (that his character knows) I stepped in and told a story (sometimes more or less related to what they're doing)

You're definitely that GM, and, as another GM, you disgust me.

>not show up to someone's house to read 10 pages of poorly written historical fanfiction
But user, you've probably read 5 pages of fiction in this very thread just now!

Why are you even here?