|
Captain Walker posted:Might have better luck in one of the D&D threads. D&D threads like the 5e thread are less about questions about the game and more about goons spewing white hot rage for anything that isn't 4e. So I figured I'd ask here since it's mostly a DM specific question.
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 11:06 |
|
|
Trast posted:D&D threads like the 5e thread are less about questions about the game and more about goons spewing white hot rage for anything that isn't 4e. So I figured I'd ask here since it's mostly a DM specific question. The 5e thread had a pretty good discussion of the DM's Guild for a few pages. It's worth asking over there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
Trast posted:D&D threads like the 5e thread are less about questions about the game and more about goons spewing white hot rage for anything that isn't 4e. So I figured I'd ask here since it's mostly a DM specific question. Ain't that the truth...
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
If you have a problem with how the 5e thread functions you might want to bring it to their attention rather than belly-aching to a separate group of people who largely don't post it in it and don't care.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:If you have a problem with how the 5e thread functions you might want to bring it to their attention rather than belly-aching to a separate group of people who largely don't post it in it and don't care. I believe that's been tried a number of times already, to varying degrees of miserable failure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
Cool, well I just went over to the thread and checked and it's a neutral discussion about how 2e D&D didn't need a grid, a link helping a guy find a virtual tabletop, and some general misc poo poo (like questions about bounded accuracy and martial powers) going on. No bashing that I could see, but maybe I'm not as sensitive as y'all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
It goes through periods where there's actual constructive and interesting discussion, which is why I keep reading it. But read it long enough and it feels like all discussions eventually devolve into complaining about how terrible 5e is. But you're right that this is not the venue for discussing the problems with another thread. To answer Trast's question as best I can: It's my understanding that the DM's Guild will actually be where they sell and distribute Adventurers League content going forward, and it'll be available to everyone, not just those who play in organized play. Further, they've said that they'll be looking at submissions to the DM's Guild to find new authors to work with for Adventurers League content. I believe the authors of the new AL stuff will also be earning royalties on the sales of those adventures rather than being paid in a straight work-for-hire situation. Someone on a recent episode of the Round Table on the Tome Show podcast feed said they thought this would probably mean they'd make slightly more money than just being paid straight up by WotC. DrOct fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
DrOct posted:It goes through periods where there's actual constructive and interesting discussion, which is why I keep reading it. But read it long enough and it feels like all discussions eventually devolve into complaining about how terrible 5e is. That about tracks with what I've been able to read. The owner of the store where I've been playing and DMing is a bit put off that Wizards is going to charge the stores for the Adventurers League content now. He doesn't want to make a cover charge because that would drive people away. He's going to try a tip jar after talking to the players and the other people who DM.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
I think I've become too emotionally invested in the PC characters at my main table. I've planned out lots of cool stuff into the plot to enable character growth for these characters and now I find myself not wanting to kill off the PCs before I get to show them all the cool stuff I have planned for them. Some of the issue is probably my not wanting to throw away things I've put plenty of work into designing. Have other GMs run into this feeling and how do I get over it so I can actually follow through deadly encounters?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:I think I've become too emotionally invested in the PC characters at my main table. I've planned out lots of cool stuff into the plot to enable character growth for these characters and now I find myself not wanting to kill off the PCs before I get to show them all the cool stuff I have planned for them. Some of the issue is probably my not wanting to throw away things I've put plenty of work into designing. Have other GMs run into this feeling and how do I get over it so I can actually follow through deadly encounters? If you kill one (like actually killed them not just knocked them out,) kill them all, add more dudes, make it deadlier. When everyone is dead, you can just say they are unconscious or whatever, and continue from either The Wolf's Den, or a prison, or something similar like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:I think I've become too emotionally invested in the PC characters at my main table. I've planned out lots of cool stuff into the plot to enable character growth for these characters and now I find myself not wanting to kill off the PCs before I get to show them all the cool stuff I have planned for them. Some of the issue is probably my not wanting to throw away things I've put plenty of work into designing. Have other GMs run into this feeling and how do I get over it so I can actually follow through deadly encounters? Early in my campaign when a PC would've died we just had them be saddled with a storyline injury that had consequences for a bit. Later in my campaign the party just swung by the afterlife to break the dead PC out and the dead PC got a chance to chat with their dead relatives. Even later in the campaign when things were too important and fast-paced to worry about a dead PC we just decided that if anyone "died" they would just be wounded and a person/place they loved would be destroyed in the fighting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 07:42
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:I think I've become too emotionally invested in the PC characters at my main table. I've planned out lots of cool stuff into the plot to enable character growth for these characters and now I find myself not wanting to kill off the PCs before I get to show them all the cool stuff I have planned for them. Some of the issue is probably my not wanting to throw away things I've put plenty of work into designing. Have other GMs run into this feeling and how do I get over it so I can actually follow through deadly encounters? My approach is not to plan things for the PCs. Plan things for the world, and for things the party care about, but only think one or two sessions ahead when planning PC-centric plot - after all, there's no way of knowing for sure that the player will want to take their character down the road you have planned anyway. Additionally, remember that fights don't have to have the PCs' lives at stake in order to be tense. If the stakes are 'does the hostage die?' or 'does the baddie complete the ritual?', you can still give it your all without threatening the PCs' lives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 09:09
|
|
|
As well as that you can always replace the status "dead" with the status "properly knocked out". If one PC gets properly knocked out, nothing can get him back up until the fight is over, if the whole party does, they wake up captured by the enemy or thrown into the slime pit or whatever is appropriate, first order of business is escaping and getting their stuff back and then just carry on. Or you keep "dead" and when a PC dies, the party has to go into the underworld to save them. Unless it's likely to happen a lot but then the underworld becomes a comedy bit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 09:15
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:I think I've become too emotionally invested in the PC characters at my main table. I've planned out lots of cool stuff into the plot to enable character growth for these characters and now I find myself not wanting to kill off the PCs before I get to show them all the cool stuff I have planned for them. Some of the issue is probably my not wanting to throw away things I've put plenty of work into designing. Have other GMs run into this feeling and how do I get over it so I can actually follow through deadly encounters? Honestly why even worry about it? Encounters don't really need to be deadly; I would even say that for most players, character-death is more of an inconvenience than a big deal story-wise. Only a particular kind of player gets really attached to their character. Most get psyched about the prospect of rolling a new character within the hour. As others have said non-death stakes are usually more effective than the threat of death anyway. Hell, if an enemy in D&D knocks out the party, the enemy can take their stuff. That's usually more of a blow than character death ever would be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
As has been said by everyone else, you as the GM generally control the stakes of any given scene. If permanent character death doesn't sound good to you, just don't have such stakes come into play. Tension can be had via various other means.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:00
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:I think I've become too emotionally invested in the PC characters at my main table. I've planned out lots of cool stuff into the plot to enable character growth for these characters and now I find myself not wanting to kill off the PCs before I get to show them all the cool stuff I have planned for them. Some of the issue is probably my not wanting to throw away things I've put plenty of work into designing. Have other GMs run into this feeling and how do I get over it so I can actually follow through deadly encounters? Someone on this forum--I don't remember who--gave me a cool idea a while ago called "marked for death." If a PC dies during a battle where the stakes aren't high enough for PC death to be suitably dramatic, they don't die. They're hosed up pretty bad, but they live. Instead, they're "marked for death," and the next time the party is in a situation where the stakes are high enough, they're definitely going to die, no way around it. You and the player should work together to find a suitably dramatic death for their character in that high-stakes situation--maybe they have to sacrifice their life for their friends, or they're the hero the main villain kills to make everyone really hate the villain, or go metal as gently caress and have them mutual-kill a dragon or something. I like it because it retains the danger of "smaller" combats, while simultaneously ensuring that every PC has a chance to die a memorable, cool death. Alternatively, if you're playing in a fantasy setting, maybe resurrection is possible? If a PC dies, the rest of the party (along with a guest star played by the dead PC's player) can go on some epic quest to bring back their friend. Turn the potential loss of a character into a cool adventure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
Alternately: If you want resurrection to be a thing, but still want death to sometimes be a threat, then there is a reasonably common means to bring people back (so getting chumped by a random encounter ain't a problem) but also a reasonably common way to counteract this, so that you can still have assassination plots and murder mysteries and things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Not everyone has my kind of luck where one of my players is playing an actual messenger of the goddess of death and the question "why are the PCs so special that they can be easily resurrected" becomes a lot easier to answer 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Or have the only PC that keeps repeatedly dying secretly be a member of an ancient, reincarnating race in a campaign setting where resurrection is usually something that only happens to villains. e: Seriously, no one else died in that campaign. Everyone else got knocked into negatives once or twice, but she'd die like every third session.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
As a character in a high magic campaign, I designed a "life" insurance that allowed people to pay in a fraction of the cost of a resurrection spell monthly and leave a small piece of them self (lock of hair, toe, etc) to meet the material requirements on deposit, under the guarantee that should their death be confirmed they would be resurrected and restored on the prime material plane. Once enough merchants, noblemen, ship captains etc bought in on the whole thing it made way, way more than it lost. Of course, most of the party has bought policies, meaning that it would take really, really serious effort to permanently kill one of them. The downside of course is that the primary antagonists in the setting pretty much have set up the same thing, meaning the only way to kill someone with any non-trivial cash flow is to murderhobo them until their rates are stratospheric, steal or otherwise interfere with their policy, or get the direct intercession of a god or Demi-God. It's a high level campaign in a magical universe, so even if a character dies they're generally just sidelined. Still, it keeps combat fresh knowing that you can be a failed save away from death. This sort of solution is obviously not really for low or no magic settings though. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
TheOneOutside posted:The downside of course is that the primary antagonists in the setting pretty much have set up the same thing, meaning the only way to kill someone with any non-trivial cash flow is to murderhobo them until their rates are stratospheric, steal or otherwise interfere with their policy, or get the direct intercession of a god or Demi-God. You just have to figure out where their soul/essence/whatever goes between "dead" and "resurrected" (I mean, it's gotta go somewhere), and then you murder their body here and their soul there in quick sequence. Lots more planning, but probably overall easier than interfering with the presumably extremely well protected life insurance fortress-city.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 05:44
|
|
|
On the other hand. Magical Heists.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
Souls can pass through the domain of the god of death of the world, the Raven Queen in Greyhawk whom then has the job of shipping the soul off to the proper place. The god of death is invested in making sure souls end up where they are suppose too, so a PC might just be waiting in line when resurrected. Never steal a PCs gear or prized item? Stealing a soul is just as much fun. The paladin in hell adventure is all about getting a stolen soul back. Need encounters for the PCs in-between said deadly encounters? Having to do quests for clerics to raise dead is classic and having to do quests for wizards or genies for wishes is pretty common too. In the past I have had PCs solve a riddle from Lurue the Unicorn patron, seal a portal from the elemental plane of fire in the elemental plane of air for djinnis, and accept poor terms from Baba Yaga for raise dead actions. One game a few players got obsessed with the potion of longevity and philosopher stone combo that could make a resurrection potion. Death and figuring out how to get a person back to life is pretty standard in any fantasy setting. Players not fearing death is like the last chump card a DM has. Or rust monsters, there is always rust monsters. edt. One time Salim the Sailor (henchman to the cleric) had to wait like 3 weeks for the Red Hood (PC wizard) to show up for a session to get a Stone to Flesh cast after an encounter with a cockatrice. No Luck Needed fucked around with this message at 06:25 on Jan 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 06:18
|
|
|
System Metternich posted:Thank you for all the suggestions and good wishes, I'm already looking forward to trying out a thing or two with her! This is cool and good, bless you! Also, if she doesn't mind some mechanics, try FATE. Even combat and pointed arguments are fun as hell in that system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
Turtlicious posted:If you kill one (like actually killed them not just knocked them out,) kill them all, add more dudes, make it deadlier. When everyone is dead, you can just say they are unconscious or whatever, and continue from either The Wolf's Den, or a prison, or something similar like that. I once had a DM fiat a TPK after none of our good-aligned party would ally with Asmodeus. It was a "join me or die!" moment, we all yelled "Never!" and he was like Ok you're all dead. He might have wanted to play a "get out of hell" scenario. Or at least that's what he cooked up in the other room while everyone packed up their stuff (and thought of better uses for Wednesday night.) For real, if you're going to tell a prison break or "escape the afterlife" story get everybody on board first. E: fixed a thing moths fucked around with this message at 15:27 on Jan 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
moths posted:I once had a DM fiat a TPK after none of our good-aligned party would ally with Asmodeus. It was a "join me or die!" moment, we all yelled "Never!" and he was like Ok you're all dead. I'm conflicted on this. On the one hand, a guaranteed TPK sucks. On the other hand, "escape the afterlife" would be a pretty fun caper if GM'd well and the players are into it. I think I'd have played out the fight with Asmodeus's minions first, then Asmodeus himself (who would probably be a hopeless boss fight, but if the players are on board it'd be suitably dramatic), and then, perhaps most importantly, not end the session on the TPK. Have everyone wake up, a soul separated from their body, in Asmodeus's personal hell plane, and make it clear that it's possible to escape before ending the session.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
I have a player in my campaign that enjoys playing a weirdo and during the last game decided she was going to start flirting with and cozying up to an advisor to the Duke of the area where they group had been working. The advisor wasn't interested and her character was pretty gross (appearance) and coming on pretty strong. I rolled with it because her roleplay was pretty funny and had the group laughing. However she's made it clear that her character is going to seduce this guy and she has a whole plan to do it. And she's definitely going to go big and weird. I don't have a problem with her working within the adventure to prepare for her seduction. She's managed to use some shopping trips that were furthering the quest at hand to roleplay her goal and work towards it, which the other players found interesting and funny. My issue is that she's very likely going to do something that would logically be a really horrible idea. Like break into a castle at night and wait in the guy's room and then kidnap him for a gondola ride or something. I'd rather not have all the players, or frankly even one of them, arrested for breaking into a Duke's residence or something like that. Even if they manage to get away with it, I'm left to roleplay a guy who is intensely creeped out by a (mostly harmless) weirdo. She's not going to rape him or do anything that crosses what I think the group would consider good-form boundaries, but she will essentially be the Steve Urkel to this advisor's Laura Winslow. What I'm wondering is how y'all would handle this. On one hand I could just tell her no, she can't do any of this, but so far it's been basically harmless and entertaining for everyone to see her making a fool of herself. I'm inclined to let her go ahead as long as it doesn't A) Threaten the team's ability to continue their questing B) Shift the focus on something she wants to do and bore the other players. C) Get too weird and force me to roleplay some uncomfortable rear end poo poo. I also considered letting her run her plan and if she's successful, tying the advisor into the Big Bad's plan somehow and letting her cause story trouble for the team. Just want to reiterate that this isn't really a 15 year old's "I want to act out my sexual fantasies within D&D and make everyone creeped out." It's more "hey my character is a clumsy oaf with bad social skills it would be funny to see him try to romance someone eh?" I don't want anyone thinking I've got a creepy weirdo making everyone uncomfortable at the table. I'd shut something like that down in a second. I just don't want her getting everyone jailed, killed or bored. Any advice?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
I wish my players got that excited for anything, you better just roll with that poo poo. Lean into that good wind, brother. Treat it like a heist and have them plan everything out. The handmaiden? She thinks this is the most romantic poo poo, like straight out of her bodice ripping novels, and helps you sneak in. the old duke next to his chamber? His wife kidnapped him too, he's not gonna interfere with this wooing. And what's that in the room? Other kidnappers. They want to ransom him, but what??? He's already been kidnapped and they're gonna take it out on the players.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
poorlifedecision posted:My issue is that she's very likely going to do something that would logically be a really horrible idea. Like break into a castle at night and wait in the guy's room and then kidnap him for a gondola ride or something. Great stories are full of things that aren't logical. Go for it. You are not simulating a real fantasy world here, you are creating a fun narrative with your players. This sounds like a fun narrative.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Just fade to black whenever you get to something you don't want to describe, it's simple enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Yeah the "veil" is something in Monsterhearts for just this reason. Being a socially awkward weirdo with a crush is fun tabling. Just make sure that anyone at the table can call a fade to black before someone tries to describe how their character would blow a guy. I'm thinking about getting into 5he's AL now that my flgs lost a toxic GM. How much prep do the modules need? Can I get away with not bringing a chest of minis? Razorwired fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Jan 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I'm conflicted on this. On the one hand, a guaranteed TPK sucks. On the other hand, "escape the afterlife" would be a pretty fun caper if GM'd well and the players are into it. If you are playing gonzo fantasy, it's trivial to throw powers that utterly dwarf the PCs abilities to overcome them. That's not really the point, and it's boring to just kill players unlucky enough to run into them. I assume he was trying to force some "soul searching" (so to speak) moments for the PCs, and make them make bargains they would later regret. But you've got to have buy-in from the party, that they're not going to just want to play "lawful/good aligned heros" to the very end and expect to always triumph. Or you can play it this way, just kill the PCs, and hope the players learned their lessons about being pig-headed. There is a reason all of the "great" wizard PCs of Gygax' campaign ended up Evil aligned.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
poorlifedecision posted:I have a player in my campaign that enjoys playing a weirdo and during the last game decided she was going to start flirting with and cozying up to an advisor to the Duke of the area where they group had been working. The advisor wasn't interested and her character was pretty gross (appearance) and coming on pretty strong. I rolled with it because her roleplay was pretty funny and had the group laughing. However she's made it clear that her character is going to seduce this guy and she has a whole plan to do it. And she's definitely going to go big and weird. If you know it's all going to end horribly and are worried about wasting time/derailing the party but don't want to stomp on that player's (encourageable!) energy, take moments while she is enacting her plan to talk to the rest of the group. Things like, "Ok Player B, you get a feeling this isn't going to go well at all. What are you going to do if she tries to sneak off into the castle?" Basically, draw the rest of the characters into her antics by making them clear of the potential impact on them. It goes great with the "crush" motif of "oh god, this guy we need for our heist is off chasing girls". Then when things DO go bad, they've got something to do, and the responsibility for making the world not totally unplayable doesn't fall completely on you to handwave away.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
Harrow posted:I'm conflicted on this. On the one hand, a guaranteed TPK sucks. On the other hand, "escape the afterlife" would be a pretty fun caper if GM'd well and the players are into it. Oh poo poo yeah. MAKE SURE YOU DO THIS. IT'S SUPER DUPER REALLY REALLY IMPORTANT THAT EVERYONE KNOWS THEY'RE NOT ACTUALLY DEAD BEFORE THEY GO HOME. That poo poo kills games.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 08:38
|
|
|
Just have them go through the hopeless boss fight, get their poo poo rolled in a couple of rounds, and once they're all dead, read them some narrative about their eternal souls awakening on a plane of torment together. Put a gem or a portal or a scroll that can get them back to the mortal planes "within reach" and bam you have a prison break adventure. You can even make it interesting with special mechanics because they're ghosts or whatever. Planar games can be super fun if your players are used to boring old dungeons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 13:07
|
|
|
PublicOpinion posted:Early in my campaign when a PC would've died we just had them be saddled with a storyline injury that had consequences for a bit. This is what I do. If a scenario runs a non-freak risk of a PC dying, you have to make the stakes apparent, and if you didn't (or it's early in the campaign), the best way is to give a dude a deathly injury instead; in some systems, this might limit his options at levelup or give him a penalty for a long while, in others, DM fiat some sort of a disadvantage for a while. Gives the other players more stake in the encounter at hand, and it establishes that anyone can die in the campaign. As a bonus to making encounters tense, if anyone dies afterwards, they aren't annoyed at it. dex_sda fucked around with this message at 13:49 on Jan 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
It's always possible to fudge rolls when you don't want a PC to die just yet. My games usually include the possibility of PC death, but outside the game rules I'm restricting their ability to die during the first quest/session or two until they get used to how this particular game has to be played. Unless they do something incredibly stupid and suicidal, they just suffer injuries of varying severity. For instance, during my short-lived zombie apocalypse game I had a player respond to jumpy cops shooting their NPC companion by dumping the whole magazine of his pistol at them. This would have been a bad idea even if he didn't have practically zero skill in Guns and was shooting at guys in body armor holding AR-15s in the middle of a huge crowd. Instead of rolling combat properly and having him get shredded, I just assumed a single bullet from the hail of badly aimed gunfire from the cops (it's the NYPD, after all) hit him in the arm and rolled damage normally for that. The bullet went straight through, temporarily crippling it and dealing some nasty but non-fatal damage that he'd have to deal with during the rest of his escape. Then a horde of zombies crashed down on the cops, giving them the opening they needed to flee.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
Hubis posted:If you know it's all going to end horribly and are worried about wasting time/derailing the party but don't want to stomp on that player's (encourageable!) energy, take moments while she is enacting her plan to talk to the rest of the group. That's basically what I was worried about. She gave a general rundown of her plan to another player who told me that it was really thought out, funny, but really worried him in terms of consequences. Seems like just saying yes and not punishing them for doing it while still making there be some kind of challenge is the best idea. Ominous Jazz posted:And what's that in the room? Other kidnappers. They want to ransom him, but what??? He's already been kidnapped and they're gonna take it out on the players. This is actually an amazing idea that I didn't think of. I have every reason to believe that if he was kidnapped she would flip and run with a rescue quest. If I somehow tied it into keeping them moving on the major quest I think it might be really entertaining for everyone. I'll play around with some of these options. Thanks all!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
So I'm kind of bitter. Both of the games I tried to DM for are probably dead in the water, because none of the chucklefucks in either can afford one effin day a month. gently caress it, I'm done.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 11:06 |
|
|
Iceclaw posted:So I'm kind of bitter. Both of the games I tried to DM for are probably dead in the water, because none of the chucklefucks in either can afford one effin day a month. gently caress it, I'm done. If they are parents, I can see this happening. If not, well, they just don't care enough. It happens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2016 00:58
|
|