|
Baronjutter posted:Session was a gong show. Even after a decade of running or playing 3.5 poo poo I had seriously forgotten what a god drat chore it was. Arrived at 7, didn't start playing till 9 because we had to sort out exactly how their classes worked and remember how exactly ECL works because of course no one is a standard race or class. Then once we start playing, every rule or ability that comes up results in 5-10 min of looking poo poo up, reading, cross referencing other poo poo. No, no no no. At the end I just flat out said that I'm totally willing to run a game but it won't be 3.5 or any system that needs a library of books. I told them the basics of my super simple home-brew system and everyone's down. Going to "convert" their characters and keep playing. Play Basic.
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Session was a gong show. Even after a decade of running or playing 3.5 poo poo I had seriously forgotten what a god drat chore it was. Arrived at 7, didn't start playing till 9 because we had to sort out exactly how their classes worked and remember how exactly ECL works because of course no one is a standard race or class. Then once we start playing, every rule or ability that comes up results in 5-10 min of looking poo poo up, reading, cross referencing other poo poo. No, no no no. At the end I just flat out said that I'm totally willing to run a game but it won't be 3.5 or any system that needs a library of books. I told them the basics of my super simple home-brew system and everyone's down. Going to "convert" their characters and keep playing. Play a different edition of D&D, maybe? Play 4E. Play Darker Dungeons. Maybe even sebmojo posted:Play Basic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
Dungeon world. Play dungeon world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 13:24
|
|
|
What recommendations do you guys have for dealing with certain... player types? I played some Atomic Robo the other day with a bunch of pre-mades and one player was combat-oriented, whereas the rest of us... weren't really all that great at combat. Lone player decides to turn almost every encounter into a combat encounter and ruthlessly tries to command the group around. I understand that the way the character appeared to be built, the player probably felt like he didn't have many other options. But that player had a particular type of personality where he wanted to quarterback everything and I could tell the rest of the group wasn't really enjoying that so much. When said player started complaining to the GM that "THERE WASN'T ANYTHING FOR HIM TO DO" (nevermind the fact that he could have read his character sheet beyond the word "Combat +5" - Atomic Robo does allow for players to be OK to Mediocre at a lot of different tasks through the 'good' mode, 'average' mode, etc.), I could tell that this player was uncomfortable with things. How can you try to head off these sorts of problems? I'm thinking about running a Call of Cthulhu campaign sometime soon and I know from personal experience when one player decided to make someone super-combat oriented, they got super-disappointed when they realized that Call of Cthulhu is more about investigation and deduction than it is about shooting cultists. Also, they became a little more disappointed once they realized that killing people had ramifications far beyond the typical D&D Orc Genocide combat encounters that happen in other systems. Also, how do you deal with alpha-players who want to bluster and cajole the party into doing what they think is *right*?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
The GM Advice Thread: Have You Tried Talking To Them? Kind of sorry to be a dick but nothing in your post indicates that anyone had tried discussing what people want out of the game, asking the bossy guy to give other people a chance, or explaining to the fighty guy that he has other options.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
Lynx Winters posted:The GM Advice Thread: Have You Tried Talking To Them? My example was a one-shot game at my FLGS that I wasn't running - we didn't really have the chance to address any of the issues through the conflict resolution efforts you named over the course of our four-hour tour, and since I was unfamiliar with the system I couldn't really speak as an authority to address them as a player either. I saw it as a potential problem situation that could crop up in a game of Call of Cthulhu that I want to run, because I've played with other groups and seen what happens when you put trigger-happy alpha-players in a game that doesn't really center around blowing people away. I'm just asking for advice like: what can I do before the game even starts to head this off? What can I do in-game to alleviate it? I think the catch-all advice "talk to your group" is plenty useful, I just wanted to try to draw upon the collective wisdom of the forums to see if there are more specific bits of advice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
Talk to them before the game about the type of game it is? Talk to them about what they want from a game? Get them talking to each other about what they want from the game? I'm not really sure what you want beyond 'talk'. And stop saying 'alpha-player', you sound like an arse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
quote:And stop saying 'alpha-player', you sound like an arse. I don't see why. It's a good a term as any for a pretty typical type of player: the kind who tries to take charge of the party and make decisions for others. They don't necessarily have to be trigger-happy tough guys, but the important part is that they want to steer the party's decisions in their own direction. I've seen some who even take the status of de facto leader and simply act as if everyone else is following their orders, and then get snippy when someone tries to argue with them or do it their own way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
What do you even mean by Alpha? Are you talking about dogs?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
Zereth posted:What do you even mean by Alpha? Are you talking about dogs? With the connotations the term has in modern culture, it's as good as any. Even someone who doesn't believe in the "alpha male" dynamic will still understand the concept, and understand it when it's applied to a type of commanding player.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
The problem with that kind of label is that it ascribes intent and fault to a perceived behavoir. I've been accused of quarter backing because I once asked a cleric if he would please heal me after three rounds of bleeding to death. It was the only time I asked anybody for anything. I told the gm later and he admitted he was tired of seeing "quarter backing" players derail his game. He was projecting his frustrations on to me. So no, there is no easy solution to "alpha players" because the commonality between members of the supposed group is fluid and unclear. So you have to talk to them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
I find the best solution is to just yell up the stairs from the basement, "Mommmmmmmmm, Kyle isn't playing it riiiiiiight!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:The problem with that kind of label is that it ascribes intent and fault to a perceived behavoir. I've been accused of quarter backing because I once asked a cleric if he would please heal me after three rounds of bleeding to death. It was the only time I asked anybody for anything. I told the gm later and he admitted he was tired of seeing "quarter backing" players derail his game. He was projecting his frustrations on to me. Quarter backing? I'm not familiar with that term outside of football.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
LuiCypher posted:I'm just asking for advice like: what can I do before the game even starts to head this off? What can I do in-game to alleviate it? I think the catch-all advice "talk to your group" is plenty useful, I just wanted to try to draw upon the collective wisdom of the forums to see if there are more specific bits of advice. I've had groups where I was the commanding player, and it got solved with a bit of side-banter at the table (players saying things like "QN, would it be better if we just handed all of you our sheets?"), and I've had groups where the GM has directly confronted the player and resolved the situation. But I've quit groups because either nobody would intercede or it didn't help and everyone gave up. As the GM, it's your job to take of strife at your table more than anyone else sitting there. The thing about commanding players is that most of them don't realize they're doing it when they do, and they don't realize it's taking other people's fun away. When you talk to a player about it, nine times out of ten they'll just feel terrible about it, and then you can, as the GM, can offer to work with them to resolve it. It can be a hard pattern to break, really, so after the initial confrontation, patience and gentle nudging will get you a long way. If the player is unwilling to work with you, though, you should consider ditching them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
petrol blue posted:Talk to them before the game about the type of game it is? let me tell you the truth of THE RED DIE brah
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Quarter backing? I'm not familiar with that term outside of football. The idea is that, rather than having all the players work together to win, one player runs the whole game by telling the other players what to do. I don't know enough about football to expand the metaphor. It's either that the quarterback in football is a diva and nitpicks everything about the game, or that the quarterback carries the ball just like the "quarterback" board game player carries the entire game. Like I said, not a sports guy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
ActingPower posted:The idea is that, rather than having all the players work together to win, one player runs the whole game by telling the other players what to do. I don't know enough about football to expand the metaphor. It's either that the quarterback in football is a diva and nitpicks everything about the game, or that the quarterback carries the ball just like the "quarterback" board game player carries the entire game. Like I said, not a sports guy. Close! In playground-level football and on some occasions in professional football, the quarterback literally decides what everyone will do based on his read on the defensive scheme and what he feels like doing about it, and tells his whole team what they will be doing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
homullus posted:Close! In playground-level football and on some occasions in professional football, the quarterback literally decides what everyone will do based on his read on the defensive scheme and what he feels like doing about it, and tells his whole team what they will be doing. Ah, gotcha. That makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 04:54
|
|
|
QuantumNinja posted:I've had groups where I was the commanding player, and it got solved with a bit of side-banter at the table (players saying things like "QN, would it be better if we just handed all of you our sheets?"), and I've had groups where the GM has directly confronted the player and resolved the situation. But I've quit groups because either nobody would intercede or it didn't help and everyone gave up. As the GM, it's your job to take of strife at your table more than anyone else sitting there. The thing about commanding players is that most of them don't realize they're doing it when they do, and they don't realize it's taking other people's fun away. When you talk to a player about it, nine times out of ten they'll just feel terrible about it, and then you can, as the GM, can offer to work with them to resolve it. It can be a hard pattern to break, really, so after the initial confrontation, patience and gentle nudging will get you a long way. If the player is unwilling to work with you, though, you should consider ditching them. Thank you for the advice! I realize to a lot of people, the solution seems obvious. But I'm a newbie GM and the most experience I have is playing a bunch of one-shots either with friends or a random group of strangers - I don't really have experience with long-term campaigns with a group. Things that might be obvious to you are not-so-obvious to me. Hence why I come to the GM advice thread and ask questions, because I know there's a solution out there even if I'm not experienced enough to see it/know what it is. petrol blue posted:And stop saying 'alpha-player', you sound like an arse. I figured if 'alpha' and 'beta' are terms used to describe the general personalities of people, then 'alpha-player' might be good shorthand for describing a player who (either knowingly or unknowingly, though more often than not unknowingly) takes command of the game and is basically telling party members *what to do* in any given situation. Maybe it's a little bit of a ham-handed or inelegant term, but it got the point across and that's pretty much what mattered to me at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
I'm considering running a game of Only War; however, instead of being footslogging soldiers moving from warzone to warzone with little motivation other than "THE EMPEROR DEMANDS YOUR SACRIFICE", I want to theme it around a Planetary Defence Force - the underfunded, locally-based little brother of the My question is, how do I encourage players to interact and become emotionally attached to a setting? The world they'll be fighting on will essentially be their homeworld, and I'd like to convey this and make it relevant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
Have everyone include an NPC that they're fighting to protect in their backstories or something, probably?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
MaliciousOnion posted:I'm considering running a game of Only War; however, instead of being footslogging soldiers moving from warzone to warzone with little motivation other than "THE EMPEROR DEMANDS YOUR SACRIFICE", I want to theme it around a Planetary Defence Force - the underfunded, locally-based little brother of the Give them prompts to fill in. I'd start with local stuff, and move outward. Stuff like: What's the name of the bar where you guys hang out after your shift? What does your brother do for a living, and why does his wife hate you? What's the name of the next town/city/hive over, and what sort of rivalry do they have with your home town? What unique service are the people of your world proud to provide to the Imperium? What famous place on the world do you dream of visiting, and what's so special about it? Adjust the questions to suit what you've already established of your setting, and don't throw them all out at once. Just like one question per player per session is plenty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
If the players have a big part in creating the planet, they'll likely be more attached to it, so I'd do something like first session is spent on shared world gen, define the planet as a group (general type, factory planet, death world, etc), then each player makes a city/group inside it. That way, everyone has something that's 'theirs' to protect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 08:43
|
|
|
MaliciousOnion posted:I'm considering running a game of Only War; however, instead of being footslogging soldiers moving from warzone to warzone with little motivation other than "THE EMPEROR DEMANDS YOUR SACRIFICE", I want to theme it around a Planetary Defence Force - the underfunded, locally-based little brother of the 1. What is the name of your PC's home town? Who do they know that still lives there? 2. What is the name of your PC's first significant romantic partner? Where are they now? 3. Where did your PC's family go on 'family vacations' on the rare chances that they could take them? Et cetera. Ask questions like those. Let the players hand you all kinds of juicy emotional investment hooks. Then after a few sessions it's "Okay, after your base was carpet-bombed by Orks, command is temporarily stationing your unit in Townsville; you'll be a local garrison and defense force, and you'll be quartered with Townsville residents who have
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
This could get complicated, I'll try and break it down as best as I can. What my party knows: On one of their first outings, they defeated some goblin bandits, and the next day they found five medaillons in front of their inn rooms, bearing the symbol of a sword and falcon, which they took along. Some time later they defeated some hobgoblins raiding a local quarry and learned that the medaillons were the symbol of the Blade Falcon, a local bandit for whom the hobgoblins were doing the raid. Most recently they defeated another group of goblins and found a note saying to kill the bearers of the medaillons, should they come across them. As well as that, the nearby city is a capitalist hellhole where even watch services are privatized, and those who don't pay their fees are significantly more likely to become victims of robberies. Go figure. What's behind it (technically subject to change): The Blade Falcon is the hobgoblins' boss as well as local bandit leader. His minions plant those medaillons on people who cross his plans so naive adventurers who show them around can be identified and eliminated. [It's not the best plan but I improvised the medaillon bit and this was the best I could think of.] The party has thrown a stone in his plans' gears twice now and he wants them dead, although he doesn't actually know it was them both times, nor who they really are. They always kill all the goblins. What I have planned further (subject to change): The Blade Falcon is also secretly an unassuming city official and is behind the corruption in the city. Both the city guilds and the bandits funnel money to him. A local group of revolutionaries has figured this out and was banned from the city for their trouble. They still have a revolution ready to go, but the Blade Falcon needs to disappear before they can start it properly, because without him, the city watch and bandits will quickly turn against each other. Making him disappear is where the party comes in. One of them is looking for the local Assassin's Guild, and their boss - in hiding together with the revolutionaries - will be only too happy to give him the job as an initiation. The problem I have is that this whole thing should ideally be resolved by the end of our next session (~6-7 hours of gameplay), that it seems like a huge exposition dump instead of a naturally developing story, and that the whole Blade Falcon thing frankly isn't working out as well as I thought it would in the first place. Long story short how do I make this thing work over the course of one game day? I'm also prepared to cut or change any elements I need to make this short and snappy and still satisfying, but now that I've come up with a plot I'm mentally stuck in it and would need one of those patented TG outside views. The only things not negotiable are what the party knows and that, for character reasons, there really should be an assassination mission for them involved. My Lovely Horse fucked around with this message at 12:49 on Jul 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 12:45
|
|
|
If the plot you have for the Blade Falcon isn't working, just forget about it. If the players have been keeping up with you, they probably have their own theories on the Blade Falcon. Pick one of those and roll with it. They'll feel smart for having figured it out, and they'll think it's cool you planned this rad story when you just tossed out a bunch of your prep. If they're really lost and just think they're killing lots of goblins, maybe just have them discover the Dreaded Lair Of The Blade Falcon, which has too many gobbos to kill, forcing them to plan a special assassination mission to get past them. Then when they kill him, they discover fat sacks of money - money clearly sent from Capitalist Hellhole City!
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 14:23
|
|
|
Discovery after the fact sounds great. Maybe I'll replace the out-of-nowhere revolutionaries with regular smugglers who just don't want to pay off the Falcon, and he's starting to put pressure on them so they hire the assassins. Cue assassination encounter, afterwards the party discovers a pile of cash and evidence in his abode and then they'll at least feel like they did something to address the corruption as well. And I'll have a fresh revolution plot to reuse later. They don't really have much in the way of their own theories, only one of them has mused how maybe they could even patch things up with the Falcon. Which could actually work out alright this way, they'd have to teach the smugglers a lesson instead of him, but hey, element of choice, I'm down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
Whatever you do, try not to plan too far ahead. Make broad strokes. You've established a Big Baddie, which is fine, but try not to think too much about story except for what the PCs could possibly learn or come into contact with over the next session. You'll find that it's more fun to just go with whatever weird theories the PCs come up with. Don't invest a lot of time into a story that the PCs may never discover. Some of my favorite moments have come about from weird poo poo the PCs have done which completely threw a wrench into my pre-planned plot. Instead of forcing plot onto them, just roll with it. Sometimes you'll trash whatever you had planned because the PCs did something even better. Right now my favorite story arc came about from a PC in a Pathfinder game doing something completely unexpected... I put the PCs in a room with a portal to parts unknown. I dropped hints all the way through the dungeon that something horrible came through the portal a long time ago so disturbing it might not be the best idea. Instead of listening to me the lowly level 6 party goes through the portal and lands in the Abyss. And it turns out it's a one-way portal since the return gate has been destroyed. Shortly after arriving they stir up a bunch of poo poo and end up attracting the attention of a powerful demon. Much more powerful than they have any business fighting. But I did warn them about the dangers of what the portal held. So at this point I figured they'd use their "oh poo poo button" (a luck blade with 1 remaining wish... no, I didn't give it to them, a previous DM did). Instead of wishing their way back home they wished the demon attacking them was transported to their home city where an evil king had taken over. That was way more interesting than what I had planned so I just went with it. After that it became pretty clear what the story arc had become: find your way home and return to the city to "rescue" it from the new demonic threat. That was way more interesting than what I had planned anyway. And it had the added bonus of creating a whole new dynamic within the party where half of them wanted to return the maker of the wish to the city to stand trial for his crime. I liked how things were so open ended so I ended up running everything past that point in a very Dungeon World-esque way: very little future planning, broad strokes of plot, and lots of on-the fly stuff. "PCs: The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems" has sort of become the unofficial motto of this campaign after that point. The party just keeps doing ridiculous things that open up more story arcs. And the game is better for it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
Oh definitely. I like to preplan and think up scenes that might turn out interesting but I'm always prepared to drop stuff if it doesn't mesh with what my players decide to do. I'm just not very good at short-term adapting, it works a lot better on a session-to-session basis.  Think I got a grip on this scenario now: The Blade Falcon is the goblins' boss and uses them to blackmail the watch ("sure you can defend the city but do you want constant goblin attacks to drive away merchants?") and bandits alike ("it's not like the watch will protect you in your forest camps"), they've all come to a favourable arrangement, only the smugglers don't want to pay up and hire the party through the assassins' guild. That's all stuff that can be revealed through incidental findings rather than a big old exposition dump and it sounds like it just about fills one of our game days.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 12:25
|
|
|
MLH it sounds like you had a good idea but your story beats were a little too soft in propelling the players towards a well-motivated showdown in the number of sessions available. I've found that, unless the system specifically supports unravelling a mystery via bread-crumbs (ala gumshoe), it is better to give each encounter or interaction a clear takeaway and clear pointer to the next beat. If this seems too linear, consider that unravelling a phantom-menace mystery is really just "find out more and more stuff until you figure it out". The interest of such a thing is more in the discovery and conflict along the way than in choosing how to solve it. It is essentially "search a room" writ large and, just as with searching a room, you don't want to block the game until players happen to choose to search in the right place, and you don't want twenty rounds of saying "getting warmer" without a payoff. For your scenario, there is alot of interest and tension in the relationship of the Blade to the setting, so you want the players to get to the point ASAP so that they can realize what is going on, choose their moral stance, and decide on how to handle the situation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
Sort of a worldbuilding question. A couple sessions ago my players stumbled upon a derelict old chapel, complete with weathered murals depicting various objects of worship. After a few rolls they were able to identify three of the four murals - the fourth too worn to decipher - depicting key figures in the history and formation of the region, long since deified and more than likely dead. Fast forwarding to last week, they've manged to fight their way tooth and nail to the top of a local mountain range where rests the fabled imperial archives, the last great bastion of knowledge in the land. Now recuperated, their first order of business is to learn whatever they can about these people, in particular the one they couldn't make out. Which is a problem for me as I'm still trying to nail down the specifics of the last guy.  Advice or general suggestions to get me brainstorming would be appreciated.Here are the three dudes they already know about and what they know about them: A Benevolent King Human, depicted in warm tones and colors, very fatherly iconography. A Masked Magician Giant (which in this setting is more than just a large human), depicted in cool tones and colors, seemingly a philosopher and something of a "Firebringer." A Quiet General Human, depicted in stark tone and colors (black, white, gray, and red), an accomplished warrior who stands alone. Obviously there's more to each of them, but since this is all my players know, this is all that's set in stone. Considering the stark simplicity of the general's portrait - following the duality of the (warm) king and the (cool) magician - I feel it should be someone or something best represented in vibrant splendor, but am not sure what that should be or what office they held. I'd prefer to avoid a third human though, along with most of the bog standard races. Thinking maybe something fae?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
You also have a natural leader / supernatural leader dichotomy. So why not go with a glamorous Fey Queen, cloaked in beguiling magic and surrounded by adoring slaves?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 08:55
|
|
|
e. misunderstood the question.
Pththya-lyi fucked around with this message at 09:23 on Jul 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 08:56
|
|
|
A faerie destroyer: the oncoming force of entropy. The storm that flattens houses, the vines that swallow ruins, the worms that turn corpses to dust. The statue in the chapel was defaced because the god was later interpreted as a malevolent god of death and destruction, but she's not: she's more about clearing away dead wood so that new growth can begin. E: Wait, What if the old empire fell because she'd deemed it to be dead wood? And it tried to destroy her in an attempt to avoid her judgement? And her wounding is the reason undead exist (I'm assuming your setting has undead): she's no longer capable of properly ending mortal souls, so some can return and wreak havoc. Whybird fucked around with this message at 09:19 on Jul 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
The glamorous fey queen was my first thought as well. Her being generally adored makes a nice counterpoint to the General standing alone. As for her office, maybe that's the thing: she never really had one or even actively contributed much on the same level as the other three, but what with the beguiling fey magic and glamour the general public revered her just the same. She could be a patron saint of the arts, though, or a mix of both. I'm thinking along the lines of, in 3,000 years someone digs up one of our buildings, and they find murals of Nelson Mandela, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, and Lady Gaga. Maybe there's a darker side to her, too. Think Dionysus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 09:49
|
|
|
Why not something with more of a bardic flair? A Beguiling Singer A brightly coloured entertainer who gathers enthusiastic crowds wherever she goes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
The Merchant Prince Not as much vibrant splendor as excess personified: an almost-morbidly obese man in ornate, somewhat flamboyant clothes, sitting on a golden throne - more impressive than the one Benevolent King sits at. Magistrates, philosophers, soldiers, priests, peasants, burghers and nobles alike kneel, scrambling for coins depicted on the floor. It's easy to miss within the arabesque, but a single child is depicted in the back, laughing at the entire occurence. Now that it's restored it feels... Different than the other ones. Perhaps self-indulgent in its needless, if admittedly beautiful detail. Perhaps surprisingly unflattering for those depicted. Yet upon closer inspection it is no puff piece crudely forced onto the chapel - it was definitely painted by the same hand that did the other pieces. Why does it belong in a chapel? There's certainly some kind of story behind this one. PS. If you want to keep the natural-supernatural dichotomy it's super easy to tweak it - you see, it's not really about the money. It's only the symbol of naivete, greed and short-sightedness of those who got beguiled. The ornate clothes - it's not fashion, it's robes of long-forgotten/foreign priesthood. Make it a Faustian thing. Make it a Trickster thing. Steal poo poo straight from the bible and mythology.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
The Cowled Figure A man, his face hidden by deep cowl, and body covered in voluminous robes stands proudly, but also full of malice. His body is half turned as if to hide or diminish his presence, his one hand hidden behind, the other within its sleeve, yet reaching forward, full of menacing intent. He is a figure of secrecy and danger; a portent of ruin and secret oaths; a disciple of death and finality. You realize there's no particular reason it needs be a man, or even a woman, as some inhuman creature could easily hide within such an expanse of cloth...and yet...you cannot shake the unerring feeling that it is indeed a man. His watchful gaze seeming to reach out to you from beyond the featureless bit of stone work that is his face. Wherever you are, wherever he is...you are being watched. ------------ Also looking for recommendations for adding a little suspense and horror to a campaign. My friends have volunteered me to lead our first foray into D&D 5e this summer as the books start rolling out and I'd love to do something dark and foreboding.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Bad Seafood posted:Sort of a worldbuilding question. have you considered a colorful dragon? (the answer is always dragons) it can be the world-eater or something? ate the souls of the people in the empire and now its coming back for seconds. The general could have been the one leading the armies trying to stop it and partly succeeding, providing a nice contrast visually between the rivals    
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
The Belgian posted:it can be the world-eater or something?  My turn. What system would people recommend for a relatively rules-light game where the PCs are normal-person-powered: I love FATE and DW, but they're both very high-power systems. Failing a better suggestion, I'm thinking Unknown Armies, and that's about as heavy as I'd want to go rules-wise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 02:37
|
|