Cfrgtkky

Being a DM is all about balance, both in the short and long term.

Not really "game balance," that's the least interesting part of the job. But you are quickly finding out the opposing forces that you have to balance to some degree when you run a game.

On the one hand, a RPG isn't about you telling others a story, they expect agency and for their characters to be the heroes and make choices and all that. On the other hand, the DM is a player too, and has their own things they want to get out of the game. In addition (the third hand?), players have to respect the other players and not outshine them/steal spotlight time. Similarly, good DMs (and people in general) take feedback, but also people who give feedback need to understand how to do it respectfully.

It sounds like you know all this already which is good for a novice DM, but you're having trouble finding the balance between these that seems to satisfy you, the hero player, and the other players.

Setting Expectations

I will point out that no one's expectations are "wrong" here. There are a lot of folks getting into gaming from online freeform gaming, which I might describe as often being "wish fulfillment gaming," where if you want followers and a magical sniper eye and all that well sure, you just get it. Old school Gygax era D&D DMs would already have had a 'blue bolt of lightning' come from the sky to discipline this knave for daring to want something other than what you put in a dungeon chest for him. And there's a broad spectrum in between those two extremes that people come from and have as default expectations.

I find the best way to do this is have a discussion with the group about what everyone wants. And it's ok to take into account that you're novice, and to remember that not every DM has to be the same and not every campaign that DM runs has to be the same. Be honest and humble, but stick to your guns about what you need.

An example approach you could say "Hey all, let's talk about what we want out of the next game. I'm just getting started DMing so I'd like to do my game by the book, with you all being new adventurers just getting started. If your backplot has followers or is rich or is the king of England or whatever you need to figure out why none of that is around and you're out grifting for goblin gold with these other people. I'll be using magic items from the books and handing out treasure using the rules, we can get more wild in later campaigns. What would interest you all to see in the game?"

If anyone doesn't like that, hear them out, but you can say "well, that's what I plan to run for my next game. If you don't want to play in it, maybe someone else will run something more to your tastes." You can all collaboratively discuss the setup, but in the end just like they don't have to play in it if they don't like it, you don't have to run it if you don't like it. Your game, your rules.

Try Something Else When You Want To

Another approach is to embrace it and play a different game. D&D 5e is pretty traditional in structure. There are more indie/story-games that operate more on the "everything makes up whatever they think is gorilla vs shark level cool." You don't have to run that, or you can run it and something more traditional, in alternation or at the same time. I often "mix it up" by running short freakier games between longer campaigns of traditional games, people get the different experiences and also get the wish fulfillment more out of their system. You don't really even have to not play 5e to do this, you just have to take a different approach and not care about the rules. My first game of D&D was in cars going back and forth to Scout camps, we didn't have dice. We all got our various desired weapons (multiple people had Whelm and Blackrazor from White Plume Mountain, one person just had a crossbow but it was just as deadly) and we spent most of the time fighting each other with the DM just making up results. Sounds more like what hero player expects, you could try it on for size.

But the important thing to teach everyone is that they should explicitly discuss and agree on this kind of game mode, and that anyone's next game can be totally different. "Next game everything will be so by the book it hurts and you'll all be super poor and scraping by in the gutters of Waterdeep and if you look funny at a guardsman they'll beat you to death. Go!"

Playing Nice

A final word on taking criticism. They are hurting your feelings, and any time folks are getting hurt feelings the answer is usually a mix of people talking nicer and people thickening their skin. When they say "ooo when I run a campaign it will be all gnomes and dumplings" or whatever their deal is, they're not criticizing you (and it sounds like none of them have lifted a hand to DM yet anyway so they're kinda talking out of their you-know-what). If you've set a game tone with them per the above, when they complain "I wanted a magic sniper eye and you're being a meanie" you can remind them "Hey, you agreed to how this game was going to go." And it's also fair to express to them "Hey, it hurts my feelings and causes me to consider not running the game if all I her from y'all is how you'd do it different and how I'm doing wrong. I'm learning, please be supportive or keep it to yourself." That's absolutely fair.

And urging people to have mutual respect is a basic interpersonal thing that people struggle with, it is brought to the fore when RPing because it's a close and intense activity (if someone disses your clothing at a party you can just wander into another room, but at a D&D session you are all expected to closely interact the whole time), work on that but don't sweat it. Some people are raised by wolves or spend too much time learning how to interact with people from the Internet and they aren't good at it, so it's OK to say you expect to be treated respectfully but you also should ignore more of their unintended slights.

TL;DR

In conclusion, keep at it. Try different things, both to spread your wings and so people get their various itches scratched over time. It's your game, you don't have to be a dictator but you can be confident about running the game you intend to run and take player feedback into account in your own way. Give and demand respect, that's good for your life not just your game.

Ask two questions: one of yourself, and one of them. It is up to you how you go about it as you know your friends and I don't.

1. Ask yourself "Am I enjoying this?". If not you are breaking the first rule of D&D which is "this is supposed to be fun". You might want to think about what a game that you enjoy would look like.




2. Ask your players if they are enjoying the game you are running and would they enjoy the game you want to run in the context of the answer to the first question, as neither you nor anyone alse will run a game very well if you don't enjoy it. (You might also ask them whether they would enjoy the game you want more or less than the present one.)

Then you need to talk to your players about the answers to these questions and get their buy in to the game you want to run, modified by the game they want to play. If there is no making these things work together then you should face that fact, and not beat yourself up trying to do something that isn't going to work out for you. Otherwise you can hold them to what you have all agreed, use it to ask them to modify their behaviour when it isn't working.

The advice by Korvin is excellent. Learn the Julian way to run a game. The fact that you are being so thoughtful about it suggests that you are/will be a good DM, just don't tie yourself up in knots about it, it's a game and it's for fun.

First, I wholeheartedly second everything KorvinStarmast and mxyzplk said, but I think they are omitting some things and underemphasizing others.

The main point is fun for everyone at the table.

The other answers suggest this, but I think it is worth emphasizing because I think it is the core of the answer. The goal is for everyone to enjoy the game and everyone should be working cooperatively towards that.

I want my players to enjoy the game, so if they say they want something crazy, I will generally start working to make sure they have opportunities to get it fairly quickly unless that something would hamper the fun of the game. If a player wants something that would make them significantly more powerful than the other players that will probably interfere with the other player's fun so you should not make that thing available right away. But the answer could also be to give the other players something equally powerful.

Of course, you have to also remember the balance against the challenges. If you make any, much less all, of your players significantly stronger it might mess up your balance against the challenges the characters face. But talk to them. They might be implicitly suggesting they want a higher powered game and the answer may be to just up the challenges equally. Or it might be to let them have what they want, but only when they reach a power level where it no longer creates balance concerns.

And while I am freely advocating largely giving the player's what they want, that only applies if it does not interfere with your own fun. If what they want destroys your ability to enjoy the game, then feel free to say no, just make the decision based on what seems most fun for everyone rather than some conception that you have to play the game in a certain way or even because of what the rules say. And I would feel free to explain it that way. When appropriate, don't hesitate to say that a certain request would interfere with the plot so it isn't appropriate, at least not yet...

Remember, it is equally valid to play a gritty game where the players risk death at every turn and an almost super-heroic one where the players are larger than life and many other options. The key thing is that everyone needs to have at least compatible conceptions of which of the many valid play-styles is in use and everyone should enjoy the chosen style.

Remember that games and shows are different

I'm not a huge follower of Matt Mercer, but I know enough of his work to know that he is highly conscious that he is creating a show for entertainment with a group of players that personally have skills geared towards creating shows. He has a different focus than you do (unless you also have an audience).

Of course Matt Mercer and his group want to have fun, but they often do things for the sake of making a better show rather than only worrying about fun and they have a highly skilled group doing it.

Generally, especially as a new GM, it helps to stick more closely to the rules than his show does or than similar shows do and you will have different motivations when you do modify them. By all means, use house rules if they help you (I do all the time), but chose your house rules based on what is most fun for you and your group of players, not because they make for a more entertaining show for an audience or just to speed things up (unless your group decides together that they want to speed things up).

I've found that this is a pretty normal experience in new D&D groups. Adapting to being a team and not having players decide that there's something they want their character to become is tough, because it requires a completely different type of "writing" than normal. I think the important thing is to remain firm on rules; the players are likely pushing you as you establish new norms in the group.

If you don't want the problem player to keep pushing, keep using your gentlest and firmest "teacher voice" to say no. I would be willing to bet that after a bit more gaming, they'll figure out what the standards are at this table and settle down. (If not, you may need to outright tell them to cut it out.) You may also want to peruse the responses on this question (which you may notice I asked, while in a similar sort of pickle regarding players with a lot of backstory; the response was overwhelmingly "chill out, some people would kill to have this kind of player involvement", which I've tried to take in stride).

Additionally, I believe firmly in what KorvinStarmast recommends, which is out-of-game communication. It's been absolutely vital to every game I've ran. In general, I've found my players to be much more trustworthy with metagame information than I expect them to be. Obviously, this is table-dependent, but if your party has the same level of story buy-in as you see with the cast of Critical Role, giving them more chances to get involved in shaping the story and knowing where it's going can get great results. I have a number of players who actively set their characters up for rough situations, or even outright failure, because they have a sense of where the story is going, and they want to create more drama.

Finally, D&D with new groups is a kind of a trust fall. It reminds me of a video of a guy trying to convince a little dog to jump off a bed and into his hands. Starting out, your players will likely have a hard time committing to the jump, because they're not sure if you, as the DM, will let them fall. Coaxing them into that rhythm is difficult (and, in one case, required the judicious application of madness traits). Give them time to trust that you'll create interesting things for them to do-- and then make sure you do it!

Start a new campaign with your own setting

In my years as a DM, I've learned the following lessons which may help your situation:

1. Give the players what they want—within reason.

In as far as the game rules and treasure guidelines allow, give your players the gameplay experience they want. This will keep them happy, which is ultimately the DM's goal.

This doesn't mean to simply hand over everything the players want up-front: their requests may form the basis of a quest or adventure, which gives them a goal.

Does the character's backstory explain that they are an experienced veteran, even though they're only level 1? That's fine. That's just background lore, so it's not game-breaking. Level 1 characters are already exceptional and often have years of background and training.

Do they want an item to make them better at sniping? Perhaps they have to quest for it. Their military unit had one, but it was stolen and they have to find it to take it back; or they have to find a wizard who can create one, and do him some great service in exchange for the item.

2. Invent the setting as you go along to meet the game's needs.

Your players may not be as interested in Matt Mercer's campaign setting as you are. A big mistake I've made in the past is to assume my players are as interested as I am in a particular campaign setting. To paraphrase Matt Colville, the setting is not the game.

Invent the setting as you go along, based on the needs and requirements of your players.

Does someone want to be from a certain guild, background, race, family, or organization? Add that to your world. Does the next adventure require a city? Now there's a city. Let the players' backstory inform your game world.

Does the player have an idea for a major campaign feature? Take it under advisement, and even consider incorporating their creations into the world. Remember that while you're the ultimate arbiter of your world, there's no reason your creative players can't contribute.

The only real restriction I'd recommend is that you shouldn't let people directly create campaign concepts that empower their character unreasonably.

3. Don't use gestalt. It's overpowered.

I recommend against using gestalt character rules. It defeats the division of character roles which can help to make sure that every character feels useful and important. It makes your characters more powerful than intended and the game becomes increasingly about victory through character optimization rather than player skill.

This would mean that you need to start new characters from level 1, since players will find it unfair if you nerf their existing guys. Perhaps let them carry over any XP they gained from their old characters.

4. Different players want different things, and that's normal.

The Dungeon Master's Guide, p.6, ''Know Your Players'', describes different categories of players who each have different motivations. It's okay for one guy to want to explore a lot of lore, while another wants to build the most powerful character.

In particular, the guidelines describe a Storytelling player type, who enjoys using their character's background to shape the story of the campaign, and the Optimizing type, who wants to make the most powerful character they can. The guidelines give you some good advice on how to appeal to these players.

5. Study the Dungeon Master's Guide

Read the Dungeon Master's Guide thoroughly. It contains the distilled knowledge of decades of DM experience and will serve you well as you run a game.

Julian,

I'm a really new DM as well, I kind of assumed the mantle for similar reasons. A DM we had lined up didn't work out so I discarded the character I had created with the group and jumped in as DM. I also chose to use published adventures/settings for the same reasons you mentioned. Apologies if I am off-track, but it sort of seems like you got the DM title without the respect for the role from your players. Sort of a "we want to play this kind of a game, if you're the DM, make it happen for us". I would suggest the following (In my humble opinion)

1. Scrap the gestalt characters. This has been mentioned repeatedly so I'll just echo it. If they all want to play rogues, then either have them multi-class or play a rogue based campaign


2. Establish a clear guideline for how decisions and progression will be handled. I told my PC's from day 1 that I would be using strictly encounter/resolution XP to mark progression, sure they whine a lot about not being level 2 already, but I stick to my rules and in this way, they won't be OP Godlings facing Goblins and Kobolds in this level 1 adventure.


3. If someone is habitually stealing the limelight, steal it back and shine it on someone else. Pick the least engaged RP or encounter player at your table and throw a little something in a session designed specifically to entice them to the front row.

At the end of the day, there's much better advice here than what I am giving, but just stick to your guns.

TL;DR:

Don't gestalt, start over, establish your personal rules for the table and stick to them.