Prevent Murder Hobo Gaming: Factions, Reactions, and Non-Lethal Combat | D&D | TTRPG | Web DM

[@WebDM]

Thanks for watching! Get the Stargazer's Guide to Aroria bit.ly/sgtawebdm Get over 200 patron podcast episodes NOW: patreon.com/webdm Preorder our book, Weird Wastelands: weird-wastelands.backerkit.com/hosted_preorders

[@ezrafaulk3076]

You know, 2E Pathfinder has pretty much *all* of what you're talking about being missing from 5E DnD, and that's because Paizo makes it a *point* to engage their fans, find out *what* they want from the game, and figure out to actually put it *in* the game In a way in which it *works* . They have rules for reputation and factions, they have rules for morale, they have two different types of damage, lethal and *non-lethal* , and allow someone wielding a weapon that mainly deals *one* of the two damage types to try to make an attack dealing the *other* type with it at a -2 circumstance penalty, *and* they have rules for rewarding XP for non-combat situations. Basically, 2E Pathfinder's the TTRPG for someone who's looking for the kind of experience you're talking about that 5E DnD doesn't offer; I think it might be worth it to make a video comparing and contrasting the two systems.

[@FlaminTubbyToast]

When are the backer kits heading out?

[@Nate-lq8jc]

I'll never forget the first game I ever ran for my girlfriend. (Her first game ever) She went into a kobold dungeon and found a room full of females and children and eggs. She asked me what this room was and I said; "the nursery." She stopped for a second and said; "oh no... this is their home!" She left the dungeon and since then has treated every life like something precious, only fighting in self defense. I'm so proud of her.

[@erthely_creature]

Love the episode! One way I like to stop murder hoboism is implementing the honor system that you can find in the DMG, which is a great way to implement consequences and rewards that isn't just money and magic items.

[@CitanulsPumpkin]

Personally, after all the times you guys have mentioned Cypher System, I just use the XP system from Cypher in D&D. It solves every single "but I only get XP for combat so I'm just gonna combat" issue in 5e. Treat each XP like it was a 5e XP milestone, hand them out for high social and exploration rolls, nat ones, nat twenties, and any INT rolls high enough to justify me telling the table a paragraph or more of the dense epic deep time lore I've written up for my world. "You rolled a 35 on that history check? Awesome. Here's 5 XP. Now let me tell you about the before time in the long long ago. During the second age, when the invader gods from across the multiverse came to make war with the elemental primes who birthed the gods of our heavenly and hellish outer planes. The first of their victims were the servants of the Water Prime Sogellos. They who once swam the seas of elemental water, bringing laughter and cheer as they guided sailors over the horizon. Now they dwell in the depths, enslaving all who encroach on their lairs and gaze upon their twisted forms." "So you're saying Aboleths used to be dolphins?" "Yes, that's what a 35 on a history check gets you." Plus they get a little XP bonus for ending encounters without stacking bodies to the ceiling.

[@geoffdewitt6845]

Y'all, WebDM has said multiple times that murder-hoboing is perfectly valid. Let's chill out with the, "There's nothing wrong with murder-hobos!" take. I'm pretty sure they know.

[@shitmandood]

Right. I play a chaotic evil half-orc assassin just for show.

[@skell6134]

But also being murder-hobo should affect stuff happening around

[@geoffdewitt6845]

@@skell6134 Depends on the players. If they're basically trolling the world to see what happens, then yes. Otherwise, just let 'em hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.

[@RJ_Ehlert]

If social and exploration are two of the three pillars of play, they need to give explicit rewards in the way that combat does.

[@patrickmullen9485]

Agree. Trying to do those things in D&D, which via all it’s mechanisms and precepts, is a round peg-square hole situation.

[@WisdomThumbs]

Agreed! Exploration and social are easy to design rewards for. If you find two cliffs pressed together and choose to climb them, you’ll find a dried up waterfall and someone’s buried treasure. If you’re kind to the right people and a dick towards their enemies, they’ll give you gifts and favors. Not a fan of money and items as rewards, because your players aren’t satisfied? Exploration rewards them with fast-travel shortcuts (an elf-gate that has to be cleansed of Treerazer’s curse) or a surplus of a supply the players need. Social rewards them with invitations to parties and exclusive clubs, or the players get attached to someone who gets accused of theft (sidequest: social play seems exciting so the players get to talk or fight their new friend out of jail).

[@Daredhnu]

@@WisdomThumbs plenty of players are still going to ignore exploration and social situations unless they reward experience points, the best way to get your players to do the things you want is to reward them with the things they're looking to get out of the game.

[@dweebicusmaximus]

.....what kind of DM do you have that doesn't do that?

[@Daredhnu]

@@dweebicusmaximus plenty of DMs don't give explicit rewards for exploration and social encounters, since the DMG has no concrete rules on how to reward those things.

[@valkyriebait136]

I played that version of Keep on the Borderlands! And I specifically recall going "Why do they expect the party to kill all of these monsters?" because the rules didn't mention anywhere that interaction and working with the group of what are presented as sacks of stats and XP were a good or even preferred option. That's the gap. If you figured it out, good on you! But if that was the intent - things have to be explicit for people to understand them.

[@shitmandood]

As I remember it, you had to kill it all. But there was morale, I think in AD&D. I don't think it was ever used...every fight was to the death.

[@kevinsmith9013]

DM tried this and did a great job... unfortunately we belligerently triggered 3 encounters at once with the multiple opposing factions of the dungeon and flipped the ecosystem on its head. Complete monster societal breakdown.

[@ObsidianOx-GM]

I love giving my party xp for doing things that are dangerous in dungeons, such as disarming elaborate deathtraps, or figuring out age old puzzles without any hints. Because it makes them feel more like Indiana Jones, and less like a play piece on the table.

[@Happy_Jack9606]

Y’all are doing Bahamut’s work.

[@ObliqueReference]

There is one major flaw that 5e has which stymies monster on PC negotiations-- the PCs are too safe. If the probable result of a combat encounter is victory, most players will opt for the combat option because it's fun. Even against high CR monsters, the PCs know that the dice are swingy enough that it can be worth the risk to take a fight. If the only incentive to play a more nuanced game is the desire to not be a 'murderhobo', that will work right up until it doesn't. If combat is dangerous and is a consequence of a failed negotiation, then it both has more narrative impact, more verisimilitude, and more consistent. That is, if you want to play that way. If you're doing fantasy heroes beating up the badguys and saving the day, there's no need.

[@Leftists_are_Losers]

Clue: Never reveal the monsters’ true strength. Intelligent monsters will know the value of hiding their numbers to either appear less powerful than they are or to bluff at being much more powerful than they are. Its like poker. Make sure the other guy doesn’t know what you have in your hand. Deception check vs insight check.

[@kainthedragon1]

I like this comment especially the tone at the end of "if that's your thing..." The guys even say at the end of the video "if all they [the players] want is mortal combat[...] You know what kind of game to run for them. Let them fight..." So yeah, sometimes people just want that. I will say, making combats a deadly risk is a bit more complex as it involves knowing the rules & the player's collective skill/proclivities to properly balance things (more monsters tends to help from my experience, action economy being what it is). I'm actually in the process of shoring up a module's challenge right now, so this stuff is on my mind, including some faction-y stuff (so I'm really glad this video game out).

[@thomasace2547]

My PCs are about to come up against a Dragon If they choose to go right into the fight they might TPK Trying to kill everything is not always the right path

[@lord6617]

I think this is why I have a propensity for playing monstrous races, it immediately shades your party away from being murder hobos... because one of your members is a potential target of said murder hoboing.

[@lord6617]

A reaction roll can tell you a lot about the creatures the players encounter. A hostile reaction doesn't just have to mean immediate attack - it can mean they were just attacked, maybe they have wounded, they might be desperate so they are going to use anything spectacular right off the bat if the players crowd them, etc. etc.

[@TaberIV]

The game Neoclassical Geek Revival has a cool dungeon room XP system. Each room grants 10 cumulative XP, so the second room grants 20XP, the third room 30, and by exploring three rooms in succession you gain 60XP for example. If you leave the dungeon and come back it resets to 10 and you can only get XP from a room once.

[@adamkaris]

It probably has a different leveling system then too I'd assume.

[@gbnilsson6212]

@@adamkaris Not really, if I remember correctly then it's just that the xp required to level up is higher than in 5e

[@imabry1]

@@gbnilsson6212 if leveling is higher than 5e, a measly 20 XP per room isn’t going to do much.

[@gbnilsson6212]

@@imabry1 Just happens to be slower paced game than the hyperfast speed of some 5th edition campaigns. It is all just a matter of taste, and if you found that to slow you could always increase the cumulative XP.

[@TaberIV]

@@imabry1 Slower paced, and I don't think you understood the system if that's your response. The second room is 20 XP, but if you manage to explore 10 rooms that tenth room is worth 100XP on its own. The total there is 550XP then and that's more than halfway from level 1 to level 2 in that game.

[@thetyrantofsyracuse]

Been DM for a long ongoing Ravnica game. Love the setting and factions. I give XP for killing monsters like normal, but I also let them gain XP for giving resources and magic items to their guild. 1/2 the items value as XP. They get the XP the next time they spend a downtime week with their guild, to represent training and such.

[@Vespuchian]

What strikes me most about most of the complaints about how 'limited' 5th ed D&D is that they clearly come from people who have a very limited understanding of all the options there are baked into the game. The PHB and DMG are packed with options and nuggets of wisdom to inspire different ways to play, you just have to read the books to find them. I'm continually shocked by how many DMs have never looked at the DMG beyond the magic item section.

[@IanBoyte]

Most people don't read it because it's honestly not very useful, especially since WOTC is pushing these very large, verbose adventures. It's arguably the worst DMG (that I have read).

[@Vespuchian]

@@IanBoyte I'm curious what parts of it you don't like. I've found it very helpful, covering a lot of the issues people seem to have, as well as a number of the topics covered by this channel. I certainly think WotC could do with releasing a second companion volume, collecting a lot of the extra tools and resources introduced over the edition, and expand on tools for social and environmental encounters.

[@joshuaharmon6684]

I personally prefer 2nd Edition. I buy books from all five editions (yes even 4th) and the pieces I like to reappropriate into my style of gaming. But 2nd edition is the backbone, because it is so intricate, rather than simplified, that it is perfect for blending the best of the five editions. More importantly, it empowers the players by letting them know their capabilities. I've noticed that 5th edition prefers that only the DM is aware of certain information that was once not considered secret. As a result, I've played in multiple 5th edition games with three separate DMs where the players naturally resorted to all being lone wolves doing their own thing,, rather than sticking together as a party, because the value of the other party members wasn't apparent to them without access to such simple information as whether or not they have to roll higher than 12 to hit an ogre and stuff like that. Sure the players have to spend an entire day making their party, but that's something most players are already familiar with back when they first started. And that familiarity is what 5th edition strays away from. In 2nd edition, players are very familiar with the more technical mechanics of their character like proficiencies, hit tables and how their charisma impacts NPC interactions, all of which is nearly entirely unknown in 5th edition unless the DM goes out of their way to adjust it. This is all just a matter of my preference of course. Wizards are the reason 1st and 2nd edition ended, I'm quite familiar with Vecna and Mordenkainen and how problematic they were. 2nd edition isn't perfect, which is why I adapt concepts from the other editions. 5th edition benefits from this new trend of "Everything" books, rather than limiting a book to a single subject, but I'm not fond of the adventure books in 5th edition. Old fashioned modules from 1st and 2nd edition benefit from the choose your own adventure nonlinear method of world building, which keeps the adventure plot from derailing without requiring the players to follow a limited selection of paths through the story. (Unless you're reading a solo module) And I like the encounter powers from 4th edition, and the campaign settings from 3rd edition that still remain (adjusted) in 5th edition.

[@ken.droid-the-unique]

Let me tell you why I was frustrated by the DMG. It is poorly organized. I had no idea where I should have started reading. I've been playing advanced dungeons & dragons back in the early 80s and I didn't need to read all the crap about what is role playing? I just wanted to know how do I play the 5th edition of dungeons & dragons and that crap didn't come in, for the most part, until I read the player's handbook!

[@dynamicbanteranimated8411]

There’s a specific piece of advice in this video that I want to call attention to because of how helpful it can be: pre-counting experience yield for certain encounters or rooms or exploration locales. I have always given out EXP for exploration and navigating social situations, but I usually determine it after the fact, so it’s pretty nebulous, and my players don’t have clear incentive to do other stuff. “Yeah we can go explore that tower, but… what is it *worth*?” But if you approach the system more piece by piece, you’re essentially creating exploration-based challenge levels that can be cleanly equated to awardable experience. And when EXP from non-combat is so lucrative, players will act more in accordance with their characters, choosing to spare or stop when fighting takes a turn or engaging in diplomacy before it even kicks off

[@IanBoyte]

Let's all just go back and play Basic D&D. Monsters made reaction and morale rolls, and exploration had actual mechanics (as much as combat).

[@Finniganmydog]

Everything talked about has solid mechanics in Kevin Crawford’s Worlds Without Numbers….

[@Alex-sf5uz]

Yeah great game just got a copy,

[@deathbare5306]

And Stars Without Number is you want sci fi

[@jimyoung9262]

This right here. Grew up on B/X and 1e and I'll never play 5e because SWN/WWN are just a perfect blend of old skool and modern.

[@renownedbandanawearer1345]

Love this discussion! I’m running Dragon of Icespire Peak and it’s my first time as DM. I was a little disappointed at how cut and dry a lot of the encounters are, though it’s understandable considering the adventure is designed for beginners. I liked how the actions of the main villain have impacted each faction both directly and indirectly and I’m doing my best to find ways to convey that to my players as we go in the hopes it will inspire them to seek solutions that aren’t just combat. I want them know /why/ there are so many orcs around, and I’m excited to see how that knowledge impacts how they interact with them.

[@fakjbf3129]

2:12 I 100% agree that we shouldn't dismiss DnD as just a hack and slash game with little room for RP, but it is important to recognize its limitations. The game is designed around combat, the vast majority of rules are about combat as are the majority of player abilities, spells, and magic items. You absolutely can play a DnD campaign that combines combat and RP, but if you are wanting to de-emphasize combat so that it's only a last resort then perhaps you should look at other systems that better support your preferred play style. We should at least encourage people to branch out and try other systems to see if they like them better.

[@kennethschmidt3402]

Pruitt had jokes today, you guys are so inspiring thank you guys!

[@Spooksmagoo]

I actually really like the Dungeon Craft suggestion of 10xp for every level. 1 for handling a moderate challenge. 2 for handling a serious challenge. Hit 10, and level up after you head back to town and rest, with no roll over. I have really enjoyed it's simplicity and flexibility.

[@ronwisegamgee]

The reaction roll was way ahead of its time, but its full potential wasn't realized until the advent of Apocalypse World. The author took the concept of a 2d6 roll with variable results and expanded it to beyond just initial social reactions, such as fighting, acting under pressure, learning specific information, etc.

[@Xaxares]

The main issue I encountered with "fleeing" monsters is a lot of people, DM and Player alike both assume the following: Monsters fleeing = No xp (you didn't kill them), no loot and you lost resources fighting them. It is not quite true, I agree, but inexperienced DMs and Players often see it that way in my experience and then it sticks as they continue playing. Up until something happens to make them realize different. If ever.

[@queen_nat4586]

As a DM I actually give the players slightly more experience if they find a peaceful outcome to an encounter rather than just murdering everything and looting their bodies. And if monsters run from them I roll to see if they dropped their weapons in their panic, left any carts or other vehicles behind, etc. And still give them the combat xp because they still "won" the encounter.

[@kurtoogle4576]

I've use milestone XP and provide other rewards - Dragonix's Talents (mini feats at levels 1, 3, 6, etc, or alternatively half-feats (no ASI bonus within a feat); Hero Points (used to guide minor story elements); a maximum 3 inspiration range (no more hoarding); and Favor Points (when they roll a 1 they get a point that can eventually be used cumulatively for extra actions). The players love these extra resources, the extra variety of rewards, and RP and purse deep storytelling cooperatively!

[@spiritandsteel]

Great shoutout for Warrior, Pruitt. Such a good show (and a great showcase of the topic at hand).

[@orderedchaostheory]

26:26 so, the 3 pillar XP system UA ? i use it every session

[@TaberIV]

People often think that older editions of D&D embody that "hack and slash" limited gameplay and maybe newer editions have changed that. I think if anything the exact opposite is true. Older versions of D&D have much weaker characters and often view combat as a failure state players should avoid whenever possible.

[@Julian_The_Apostate]

What you mentioned about the weak characters combined with social reaction rolls and morale (I know morale is in the 5e rules but I've never seen it used) I think had a tendency to create more dynamic conflict scenarios. These things are possible in new editions but when you're running around with no negative stats, feats, and special class abilities that can easily mop up your enemies people will take the path of least resistance.

[@VoidplayLP]

@@Julian_The_Apostate and thats why you should give the same things to enemies. If they fight humans, the players can be sure every single one of them will have some sort of feat. If they fight orcs, you bet they won't die in a single hit.

[@Julian_The_Apostate]

@@VoidplayLP That mentality is how power creep happens. Instead of reining things back, you just make everything else more powerful to compensate for the imbalance. I suppose its a way to fix things, but not the way that I like.

[@VoidplayLP]

@@Julian_The_Apostate well players like to feel powerful. I also prefer playing systems where I have a large range of abilities over just a few, it makes the whole thing more interesting to me. Considering that Theres really only 2 options: 1.taking abilities away from players. 2.giving abilities to monsters. Players don't wanna play at your table if you take the abilities away so the only option youre left with is 2.

[@Aavarius]

Have you guys covered Stars Without Number? It's very OSR, still sporting morale checks and reaction rolls.

[@jimyoung9262]

Great system. WWN and Other Dust too.

[@brucemaximus3797]

I love having monsters/opponents run at the first sign of a tilted combat; then my players also have to consider cutting off escape routes if they need to ensure that there are no witnesses/warnings. Fun times.

[@Leftylives]

The "For a few dollars more" version..

[@FabulousResults]

I do think it's at least worthwhile to know what your players expect from the game. If everyone just wants to sit around and roll dice to get big damage numbers, then don't try to force them into a more complex game unless you talk together and they say they're interested in it. Otherwise they might just dislike the new style and try to brute force it to work how they want to play. That's where I think a lot of the "murder hobo" stereotype comes from.

[@spdnb]

Another component of it, I would say, comes from DM frustration. If everyone just wants to sit around and roll dice to get big damage numbers, it would be a more constructive use of a DM's time to organize a game night around playing an online game together (MMORPG or MOBA). Making the setting for a game and coordinating it between multiple players are both hard. I see your argument and cannot say you're wrong, but please understand how hard it is for someone to organize and run a setting, even if it's a preprinted module, only for it to be a slower-paced video game with better VoIP.

[@FabulousResults]

@@spdnb I get it, I'm a DM who has players who really just love to do combat and roll dice. I think there is a healthy middle ground between player and DM expectations in this case, because I do want to tell a good story with RP from the players.

[@spdnb]

@@FabulousResults I couldn't agree more. I feel like ultimately, a middle ground between combat heavy and role play heavy Play styles achieved via group communication is the ultimate goal that everyone involved wants. I just wanted to, I guess, swim upstream against the common wisdom that it's the DM's fault for essentially trying to make the game more than it "is." I feel like even WotC doesn't see D&D as more than a combat simulator.

[@derekstein6193]

@@spdnb Which is unfortunate because D&D was literally created as an answer to the question, "Hey, you know how there are a variety of units in this wargame, some of which are kinda badass? What if instead of playing WITH them we could play AS them? You know, walk around in their shoes and see what their world is like in and out of combat." Murderhobo-ism (and by extension the combat-only style) should be an occasional dalliance, not a primary approach to play. If you just want to roll dice and have a bunch of creatures kill each other on a fantasy battlefield, they already have a game for that; it's called Warhammer! People forget that in a TTRPG, the "RP" stands for "roleplaying". Truly disappointing.

[@stevesmith4600]

You hit on both of these, but you brushed one off, and the other you could have dove deeper into (yet, I'm glad you mentioned it). (1) D&D does not have mechanics that resolve social situations in a satisfying manner. And yes, while you can bolt on other systems or home-brewed rules, the core game was not designed for social conflict. There are other games that do this much better, and in a more satisfying way. And yes, while there are persuasion/deception roles, you're rolling against what? Insight? Intelligence? Some arbitrary DC that the core system provide no guidance on how to determine/set? Now every character needs to be Bards, Warlocks or Paladins, not dump charisma, or have a home-brew system that allows Intimidation via Strength, Deception via Intelligence, or Persuasion via Wisdom? Also, home-brew shouldn't be the answer to major aspects that supposed to be central to game play. Home-brew rules aren't play tested, so if they're broken, or get reverted and you setup your character for them, well ... you're out of luck. Also, I can't come to the table with full knowledge of the game and the type of character I want to play when made-up rules aren't identified beforehand. Yes, home-brew is fine for certain aspects, but not something central and core. You're better off playing The Burning Wheel or any other system designed for social conflict if that's your thing. (2) And you mentioned this, DMs are their own worst enemy. Let's just tell it like it is. The vast majority of the time when it comes to encounters, talking your way out is sub-optimal compared to fighting (because you built a killer, not a talker). It just seems like I have seen way too many times a situation in which the players attempt to talk or negotiate, and the DM just fucks them over because the players put themselves in a vulnerable position rather than making the optimal choice. I really do love your suggestion about factions, rep and NPC becoming hostile if you start killing them. But none of this is baked into the DMG - I wish it was. The game didn't design for it, and the little that exists is poor at best. I don't open my mail with a hammer, and I don't nail together two piece of wood with a letter opener. Use the right tools and systems for the right game and experience you want to have and play.

[@dm_ex_machina3395]

You've assigned a sense of sanctity to the systems used to create a tabletop game. At the end of the day all tabletop games are a relationship between the players and the imaginative space, with rules designed to create a contract not unlike the contract between author and reader or musician and listener. If you applied this sanctity of systems to those contracts then jazz would be a sin. D&D is a game about playing heroic characters. Heroes have to be able to rise to heroic action. So the rules establish that contract. But the DMG spends a huge portion of its word count talking about various tools you can choose to implement if you want. It gives advice and says do with it what you want if your heroic play ends up needing that context. Homebrew is jazz. Its just another way of making the music. And it's just as core to tabletop as the rest of it because it represents one of the most fundamental strengths of tabletop games...the ability to adapt to the needs and imaginations of the players. Otherwise play a video game.

[@Michael-bn1oi]

Ever opened a bottle of champagne with a sabre? Its really fucking cool. Some times by seeing what you can do with the system you have the best experiences. The "right tools" are what work for that group. Nothing is sacred and that is the absolute best part of the hobby. You can hate how I run games, and I can hate how that guy over there runs games, and that is all awesome cause we are all running games.

[@monsieurdorgat6864]

Definitely one of those player-facing episodes. DM's can do a lot to incentivize against murder hobos, but most players I know just want blood for the sake of blood. They never let enemies run, even if it would mean combat ending.

[@barlotardy]

I miss Pruitt's giant Orson Welles beard...

[@Hongxiquan]

get players invested in the setting. Without a clear understanding of the situation players in D&D just revert to the one clear set of rules given in the game, killing stuff and looting the corpses of said stuff

[@EruditeDM]

If you want your players to be more thoughtful about monster encounters and not just go straight to attacking combat every time, use reaction tables for the monsters. Maybe they are open to parlay, etc. Conversely, the players have to learn how to temper or control their own immediate reactions. Just my two cents. 👍🏼

[@nicolaezenoaga9756]

Ohhh this is going to be a good one!

[@Anon-yz1xr]

I always saw "don't play against the rules of the game." not as proscriptive of "you must play it this way." and instead more of a "there's other rulesets, you don't have to burden yourself with 5e for everything when it doesn't have great rules support for non-combat actions."

[@animorph17]

Alright, the moment your argument comes down to "Well lets make the enemy run away after 2 rounds so that we can do something fun" you really aren't making a good case for the DnD rule system here. It's literally telling people they could have more fun if they skipped the game's central and primary mechanic.

[@Daredhnu]

D&D is a combat game, the rules governing it are the most robust, exploration and social interactions have next to no mechanical support in the game, either WotC doesn't consider exploration and social interactions as important or they're just not capable of writing good rules for it, plenty of other games support exploration and social interactions better than D&D does and if you want all of these pillars to be equals then you shouldn't be playing D&D.

[@Dennis-vh8tz]

Big choppa make uz fasta! Hit you. You red. Me red. Red unz go fasta! We both fasta!

[@bholl6546]

I am not a murder hobo. In fact, I built an empire on murdering. I have a nice keep, a city I call my own and all from murdering the ever loving s@!$ out of everything that may or may not seem aggressive. See, a murder hobo is one who murders and has no home. I have a home and that makes a difference.

[@jakethayer5731]

I think it comes down to communicating with your players. If they all agree that they just want to kill something weekly then that’s fine let them do so and find new players to respect your narrative. Otherwise get them to realize the consequences of their actions and how that makes you feel if they respect you as a human they should be capable of respecting the thing you’ve made for them

[@Zakharon]

My go to rule is, if the monster talks to me first, I will talk. But if it attacks me and we start rolling it has sacrificed it's right to live. If you want that monster to live through the fight to have a conversation that is the DM's responsibility, they gotta do something, I am only reacting like a normal person would to a monster trying to kill me

[@josephreynolds1220]

if all the tools you provide your pcs with is a hammer, all they see are nails. yay, 3 hours of meaningless protracted combat...and sessions over.

[@curtisfranzen986]

Perfect example of why you should not murder hobo. The Tale of Ughee the Crafty Smith.

[@patient_6925]

Combat game.... i used major image to fool a gang of thieves that ambushed the party into fleeing by making it look like the town guard arrived

[@lelandwhitehead56]

When people say "You are fighting against the rules", they don't mean that those things aren't worthwhile. They mean that they are not part of the game, and thus has to be made up on the spot by the individual DM or table.

[@teh201d]

I think calling humanoids "monsters" is the first step towards murderhoboism

[@here_bedragons]

Hu. I played 3rd edition for decades but never heard of moral checks until 5e.

[@shawngifford]

I have recently been reminded that different groups of players, or even different player characters, may actually prefer murder hoboism (as covered in the video!). If they really just want to kick down doors and kill orcs, a GM should pay attention to that and decide if they’re down with it or not and act accordingly. Have a group of new players to TTRPGs right now… New players seem to tend more toward it, and slowly pulling in consequences or factions seems to help uncover that there is a living world around them. It’s fun and has made a difference in our few sessions so far. Will they just decide screw it and embrace murder hoboism anyway? Perhaps, but it does set the stage for some interesting drama.

[@shitmandood]

Did they go murder hobo in full?

[@JohnnyMayHymn]

murder hobo for life, don't worry we have speak with dead, dominate monster and animate dead

[@pernicious8523]

Its a matter of interpretation. The rules say defeat. If the party sneak past a group of guards successfuø, and steal the treasure the guards were guarding (or maybe leave a "We were her :P" note), they've really defeated the guards, even / especially if the guards werent even aware of their presence at all. Those guards are defeated and should grant as much XP as if they were beaten in combat. Same with oratory, if you talk the orc horde into leaving with a brilliant and lucky bluff... one orc horde's worth of XP coming your way. Thats my take on he rules :)

[@VoidplayLP]

Its especially important to make sure the players know that a horde of orcs will beat them. PCs are a lot more powerful than monsters in 5e, and the only way to fix that is to make monsters stronger.

[@Calebgoblin]

The thumbnail image was so different that I skipped past the video the first time I saw it #critfail

[@Kosigan86]

Your last couple of episodes remind me of the early ones that hooked me on you guys. Thank you for all of the content you share :D.

[@Acekhan201]

I allow evil characters as long as the table agrees, so that helps. I also find ways to justify REALLY f'ed up villains to still show some restraint. Strahd: I'll parley for THAT artifact I need. Also Strahd: Here's your missing friend's skin for a cloak! Party: OK, maybe the oafish wizard isn't so bad....

[@evilbeardedman]

This is why I use milestone leveling(my 1st campaign's been going for a year now). Players should not care about Exp at any point and they should be rewarded for solving problems, not killing things. I still estimate(roughly) the Exp they get for every session, but I never tell them the numbers. It all started with "let's chase and kill everything", but now they often find inventive ways to solve things without any combat at all, they're more interested in the lore, motivations, and more engaged overall.

[@seymourfields3613]

I was very frustrated in Storm King's Thunder when we lost out on a bag of holding because we talked instead of killing.. I found out two sessions later. The same session my DM said we need to flesh our characters more. We still don't have our bag of holding.

[@williethenerfherder2193]

Sounds like a terrible dm.

[@nicolaezenoaga9756]

@@williethenerfherder2193 Agree. That's not how you get your players to do anything roleplay.

[@seymourfields3613]

@@williethenerfherder2193 he's a first time DM and knows he needs to work on his own roleplay side more. Very RAW, however, and the STK module says after killing the cultists, we get a bag of holding. The next campaign he wants to run is "Old school dungeon crawl" and I think he'll be more in his element doing that.

[@randyfriel3472]

Great, as usual! Keep up the great work Jim and Johnathan.

[@WebDM]

That sucks

[@WayneBraack]

Well one way of mitigating you know a murder hobo party is to always have death on the table. I find modern d&d is kind of easy mode a character have so many abilities to heal others at distance, self heal etc etc. also monsters are rather weaker in their roles. And what I mean by role is rolling a d20 how many of those 5% facets are actually required before you can score a hit so to speak. PCS today have so many bonuses. I've seen games where somebody literally rolled a five and then with their bonuses they got a 15 to hit. Monsters don't always have those advantages and therefore death is not always predominantly on the table in a combat encounter. It can happen but it's it's a lot slimmer chance than in old school style. I think DM's need to not rely on the built-in system for creating combat difficulty and rely more on knowing their party knowing the strengths and weaknesses of the player characters and how the players as a whole play as a group together. And then adjusting your encounters so that death' and PC should always feel this, is a real part of any combat and you could die. Knowing that you could die will give them pause to think of other solutions rather than just charging in and trying to slay everything.

[@VoidplayLP]

A good way to do this is by having monsters fight dirty. A goblin WILL throw crushed glass in your face. The monster manual presents creatures as stupid beings that have 1 or 2 options in combat but thats just not true. You don't need to be a legendary creature to do more than 2 things.

[@WayneBraack]

@@VoidplayLP oh I completely agree. Long ago in an article in dragon magazine they pointed out that the DM's job is to use their creatures intelligently. More than just the simple combat technique that they have as you point out. But you know your encounter creatures be a humanoid or otherwise should be as clever as they can possibly be and resist or fight to their best of their ability. In other words act intelligently versus just running in and being you know combat training dummies for the party to knock over.

[@parttimehero8640]

I'm testing out giving my players exp for different things but especially for things that fits to its class and or subclass. My players had to steal a vial of sacred water from an military outpost. And since they sneaked in and stole it mostly undetected my rogue got extra "rogue exp". In a other case the druid rallied a pack of wolves to help killing the goblin woodcutters so he got "druid exp"

[@TheWipeout32]

Giving the party a unified goal for being together can eliminate murder hoboing too, without needing to sacrifice the combat. For instance, if the characters are all hired individuals working for the king of city-state that is poorly under-staffed and needs defenders because there are a bunch of supernatural threats. They have a place to live and can get involved in the politics of the city-state (the easiest thing here would be to model it after Ancient Athens, but if you wanted some real fun, model it after the Italian city-states), and they get sent on missions to kill whatever is threatening the town. As the campaign progresses and they become more famous they can start going out on their own to accomplish things they want to accomplish or perhaps start realizing that the city-state and its king aren't everything they initially appeared to be. If you want to reduce murder hoboing - if that's what you want to do; to be clear, I have absolutely no problem with the beer and pretzels "kick down the door kill the monster steel the loot rinse and repeat" style and use it myself from time to time - you don't always have to skimp on the murder. You can attack it from the other angle, the hobo angle. Because once the players become enmeshed in the world, and are tied to a place they care about, the verisimilitude of the world can shine brightly.

[@silverbird425]

Morale check in a file cabinet in Alpha Centari, didn't you see it, players? My bard with linguistics is looking for it.

[@deathbare5306]

By the book you get xp for killing them in 5e, going around them and getting XP is subjectively up to the DM so it’s tough as you all point out.

[@jimyoung9262]

To that I say booey...

[@MegaHasmat]

Morale rolls bring to mind the route, not a creature trying to survive. I've found that when you treat combat like warfare your players are more likely to as well, killing fleeing foes is a net positive, regardless of what they might do in the future. You can loot the extra bodies. The mind of a murder hobo sees that as free lunch. As for reaction rolls... just make a decision? If you put a thing there, maybe knowing what the things motivation is will help establish a consistent tone more than "oh it might attack regardless of the circumstance depending on a dice roll sure the chance is smaller in some cases, but there's always a chance they might immediately hate you or be cautiously welcoming based on actually nothing" I feel like a lot of dms are scared to feel like the bad guy, but players want to find conflict, whether that's combat or conversation, as long as you make it interesting they should engage.

[@VoidplayLP]

I think the idea is more meant as the first ever interaction with a faction...basically, if theres a reputation score from 0 to 10 the roll determines where they start. The chart would contain results that make it likely for that result to occur, for example a group of patrolling monsters, a group of hunters, a group of wounded monsters, the faction being actively at war with another faction. Its aimed to provide a bit of randomness as well as an explanation for the current situation

[@MegaHasmat]

@@VoidplayLP I get it, maybe it's just my style that I don't run random encounters without an idea of how I want them to go if they occur. Maybe I'm weird, but it's easier to reckon with in my mind, especially since I don't like to roll a bunch when I could be more actively involved in telling the story.

[@VoidplayLP]

@@MegaHasmat yeah its absolutely a style thing. I personally just use random charts as lists of options that I pick from in the moment.

[@dougantelope5013]

Great video!

[@torinsmith9867]

17:54

[@PMMagro]

Good stuff!

[@Ifrit8054]

I need watch no more. The shock and appalled face I just saw will sustain me for life

[@logansaxby7224]

This was already said but the rewards for this type of play must be the same as combat or the equivalent or it's just not fun

[@VonRavenPatrick]

You don’t need a video about this. If you want to stop them, simply don’t play with those kinds of players.

[@VoidplayLP]

Yeah no, it's not that easy. Often times its simply a lack of information. If you dont have a clue what's going on you default to what youre sure is going to work, in this case killing everything. Most players don't try going for things that aren't even presented as options (I have DMd for around 30 people and maybe 2 of them have actively tried to think outside the presented box). This video is specifically meant to show you HOW to present these things as options.

[@ggggg77273]

Murderhobos are usually the fault of the DM not making social interactions and exploring interesting. If the only fun thing to do in the game is combat, we're gonna fight everything.

[@VonRavenPatrick]

It is that easy. I’ve been doing this for 40 years. It’s a simple matter of compatible play styles. And there’s no one single cause of this. Some players just like to go wild for the hell of it, even in a detailed, highly interactive setting.

[@TheLastWhiteKid]

Can we get your tips on doing a last stand scenario?

[@theldun1]

It is so sad the state of D&D now days where everyone is a murder hobo. People just don't want to take time to role play anymore.

[@arcaneone]

The main reason for murderhobo parties is due to xp being gained almost exclusively from killing enemies.

[@WebDM]

We discuss alternatives to that and also why we don't think that precludes other solutions in the show!

[@bobbobbing4220]

is DND a combat game? if you have to post supplements, guides, videos and and whole mods to make it not a combat game.. its a combat game.

[@janedoe4929]

It didn't used to be like this.

[@sparrowsparrow7505]

"Murder hobo" introduced by Gary Gygax right?

[@Leftists_are_Losers]

Murder Hobo is a new Fighter sub-class ?

[@iratevagabond204]

My brother-in-law asked me to GM a campaign of D&D5E for he and his friends. Never played before, never ran before, but it was simple enough of a system; at least in comparison to my usual fare of Harnmaster/Rolemaster/BRP. A few session in, he came to me and was like "Hey. . .We were wondering . . . where are the dungeons?" They wanted a campaign of traditional dungeon crawling and didn't make that known to me, likely because they didn't know, as they were all first time players. I tried to get them into the setting, giving them all the options in the world to do what they want. Fifth session, I just called it. Told them they should find someone else to run for them. It's just no fun for me to run that sort of game.

[@DabIMON]

Nerds in the comments, I just had an idea off the top of my head, I want to hear your opinions: Combat: Normal XP Non-violent resolution: Double XP Creative kills during combat: Double XP Running away: Half XP Avoiding combat through stealth: Undecided Would this break the game?

[@garrettharper6046]

Do you guys live in different states from each other now?

[@alexwinter8423]

I believe they are just continuing to meet online until the pandemic dies down more.

[@WebDM]

Yes we live about 2000 miles apart!

[@greygramarye7872]

Everyone knows that annihilating every NPC the DM puts in front of you is the way to win D&D. But what this video presupposes is- maybe it isn’t?

[@MrSilvUr]

This is great stuff! But can we acknowledge that the proportion of rules about combat and serving combat has trended upward as the editions have gone up? There's a reason y'all are putting put material to support exploration, and that's because Wizard's has let that pillar of play down. To be fair to the people who say, "D&D is a combat game about killing monsters," the rules about combat and killing monsters sure do make up a lot of the game. All the more reason to appreciate the work you guys are doing to round the game out.

[@drewb1979]

I'll not only acknowledge it, but I propose that others are willfully ignoring it in favor of rewarding superficial roleplay and placing the onus of design on third party developers and supplemental material. At what point do we stop giving WOTC a pass for their, DIY sensibilities? I'm sick of receiving endless player options with very rules support for how to actually run the game because everything has to be so wishy washy so as not to offend anyone's pure "fun".

[@TheSamba37]

Lots of talk about XP, and that's good content, but a lot of what was said is just milestone levelling with extra steps. As a past lover of XP and a person who loves to see that number build up, milestone has improved every aspect of the game for me and my tables, both as a DM and as a player.

[@gbnilsson6212]

Is that milestone as described in the dmg or the arbitrary "gm decides" way of doing things?

[@TheSamba37]

@@gbnilsson6212 both? The tone between those parentheses seems important in answering your question.

[@gbnilsson6212]

@@TheSamba37 The way I see most people do it is essentially: GM decides when we level up, as opposed to the system of reaching various levels of milestones as described in the DMG. The terms have become somewhat synonymous and therefore it can be hard to tell when just written without furhter explanation (I recognize the original comment certainly looks a bit like a loaded question).

[@TheSamba37]

@@gbnilsson6212 the general way I do it is roughly load a story arc with encounters appropriate to make the jump from one level to the next, or just up to a higher level (I tend to jump from lvl 1 to 3, or 3 to 5, single level ups only after 5). When that arc is over, the players level up. Traps, social encounters, and exploration are all included when building it up. If they bypass things, nothing changes for leveling up unless they completely fail to solve the issues presented. Doing this seems to allow/cause/encourage being creative in solutions, planning, and RP in general. Also, I will sometimes make those 1-3 and 3-5 level jumps specifically with players new to TTRPGs. I choose to do this so they don't get overwhelmed with abilities before understanding gameplay and to hopefully let them get in a more creative mindset before they have the abilities to just smash through encounters.

[@gbnilsson6212]

@@TheSamba37 Fair enough! That seems more in line with what the designers intended - interesting take to plan all of that out before the session as opposed to after it, theres a million ways to skin a cat I suppose!

[@animorph17]

If you want roleplay in a dnd setting where it's more than just combat, then what you need is a better system than DnD. That's why my group swapped over to GURPS instead, the DnD system is only meant for combat, only good at combat, and we got tired of fighting the rules at every turn.

[@Seeric85]

D&D is a game specifically built around kicking down doors, killing everything that moves and looting everyting that isn't nailed down. If you are not a fan of that, I would recommend playing one of the many other, (subjectively) better roleplaying systems that are out there. Of course you CAN play D&D without murdering or hoboing, but the D&D ruleset is not really made for that.

[@VoidplayLP]

The sad thing is that its just much easier to find people to play d&d. Especially if theyre new its much easier to get them into d&d than anything else.

[@CrashSable]

Saying 5e isn't all about combat just because you find it boring is dodging the question. The fact is that combat is the only thing 5e supports to any real degree and everything else is thrown in as an afterthought and is only included in order to help navigate towards the next combat encounter. Equally, talking about your own homebrew mechanics as a means of claiming 5e can do more is warping the topic. Your homebrew mechanics are not 5e and cannot be included in the discussion of what 5e supports. I'm not saying that's a good thing or that it's the best way to play, but that is what 5e supports. Other systems play differently.

[@rickeymariu1]

There's nothing wrong with Murder Hobos! Particularly, when you are are fighting monsters.

[@Julian_The_Apostate]

There's nothing wrong with them necessarily, but when a camp of murder hobos sets up across the street from my house I often wish the city would do something about it.

[@ogrbell8297]

That sounds suspiciously like something a murder hobo would say

[@guy-s]

90% of all character skills are combat related. There are 3 main books: book that tells you how to play, book that tells you how to run, and book with things to kill. 5e is a wargame, don't delude yourselves folks. Now, you can play a kissing-game in 5e, but the mechanics do nothing to help (and in many parts you need to work against them). Jim and Pruett are very confused when they talk about this. They mistake that matter-of-fact statement with the statement that this way to play is good/interesting.

[@shitmandood]

Back in the early 80s, the combat engine was pretty much the prime feature for the kids. Not many had computers and it went along with combat boardgames.