|
Thinking about it, this dude screams ego and hubris to me. And given what you've said, I'm feeling Saturday Morning cartoon villain vibe. Like Bebop and Rocksteady from TMNT were always getting out maneuvered by the turtles but that doesn't mean they werent also chucking literal cars at them either. I'm not sure on the tone of your campaign, but you might get some inspiration thinking back to those shows.
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:1. I've got no qualms with the bad guy party getting their poo poo kicked in to the point of death, but the intent is that hopefully the group will go "Yeah, gently caress that" and run back to their ship (since I'm going to take a page from Paramemetic's book and tell the players that although they could probably take the enemy party minus the half-trained jedi, his presence makes it very unlikely that they're going to win a stand-up fight). Obviously the villains will give chase. The problem with that is that I don't want the players thinking I'm inserting this guy and his buddies as a lovely power fantasy. For what it's worth, although he's very combat capable he's A) not the most cunning guy around and B) he doesn't have a lot of technique. Unfortunately "trying to run away" doesn't feel like it'd be conducive to outwitting him. So what should I do? Bearing in mind that I'm not up on the system you're using - which is to say, I'm not 100% sure how much being a Force user is an "I win" button in Age of Rebellion - the clearest way, in my experience, to make sure it's clear that an NPC isn't a lovely power fantasy is to present them as, y'know, a character. He's great in combat, but he's not very cunning? Demonstrate his failings as much as his strengths. Sure, he might push the PC's poo poo in in a stand-up fight, but when the PCs try to do something sneaky to get an upper hand - hack security, or do a sneaky combat maneuver, or hell, even point and yell "look out behind you!" - have it work, and then make it clear (even to the point of just telling them straight out) that that probably wouldn't have worked against someone who knew what they were doing, but this guy's a little dense. Have the PCs find the slicer rig that the villains used to break into a secure bulkhead just sitting next to said bulkhead, with a sticky note on it with the rig's password. Have them find a pirate that the villains had to kill just lying in a hallway, his extremely powerful and useful repeating blaster (or whatever) just sitting in his lap, because they forgot to loot the bodies. That kind of poo poo. So long as you make it clear through your actions that this guy is great at fighting but bad at sneaky, you're not presenting them with a "lovely power fantasy" - you're presenting them with a puzzle to solve. You'll be fine. Soup Inspector posted:2. How can I keep the fact there's a Force user (and a lightsaber wielding Force user at that!) running around on the ship a secret until the dramatically appropriate time? Since the vast majority of the bad guys use blasters (and the pirate raiders use both blasters and bladed weapons) I was going to describe lots of corpses with either carbon scoring or gouges apparently made by some sort of thermal weapon. But that might tip my hand. How to throw them off the scent? Red herrings. Lightsaber wounds look a lot like wounds inflicted by a bog-standard plasma cutting torch - so have the PCs stumble across some dead technicians who were clearly ambushed, and didn't have time to grab any guns, so they fought with the plasma torches they had on hand (they were in the middle of spot-welding something, or whatever). Then describe all the lightsaber damage they come across as plasma torch damage. Unless the PCs would recognize the similarities between lightsabers and plasma torches - and they almost certainly wouldn't during the Age of Rebellion, when most people haven't seen the drat things - let them assume the most logical conclusion. Soup Inspector posted:3. The ship is heavily damaged and powered down, so when they first arrive on the ship their first objective will be to reach the reactor core and power it up from its low power emergency mode. I was originally thinking they might have to do it for each deck (4 in total) but that could get boring fast (go up floor > head towards the back > mechanics/computers check > repeat). I'm also concerned the chase sequence above could also become repetitive if I'm not careful. I've decided some environmental hazards might be present (such as partial depressurisation, gravity being fucky, etc.) and obviously there's going to be mynocks draining power as well as pirates and the antagonists' henchmen to duke it out with. The pirates and henchmen might even be fighting with one another at points. And if during the chase they spend too much time standing around yakking on a lower deck than the bad guys, the jedi will start cutting through the ceiling to get at them. But are there any other interesting challenges and opportunities I could insert? Droids, my man! A flock of malfunctioning 'mouse droids' (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/MSE_series) that have damaged firmware and are just running around disassembling poo poo (bonus points if the firmware damage is the result of a modified droid that was being used as a spy by Rebel Intelligence), for example. Since droids have independent power supplies they can keep going even as the ship is offline, and depending on how smart they are they might not even realize they should stop doing the things they're doing.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
Keeshhound posted:It probably goes without saying, but make sure he learns from this encounter, too. If he loses because they flank him, next time have him be better at fighting with his team. If they escape because they knew the ship better, have him obviously survey the next place they meet, etc. That was exactly my plan. And if the players do pull it out of the bag and push his poo poo in he'll actually be somewhat afraid of them (which will be both a good and bad thing, since it means that he'll be much more cautious). And although he might be straightforward, the rest of his little gang aren't. Of course, they might decide the Jedi is too much to handle, but his (much squishier) companions look easier to pick on (which is more than fine by me!). Dameius posted:Thinking about it, this dude screams ego and hubris to me. And given what you've said, I'm feeling Saturday Morning cartoon villain vibe. Like Bebop and Rocksteady from TMNT were always getting out maneuvered by the turtles but that doesn't mean they werent also chucking literal cars at them either. I'm not sure on the tone of your campaign, but you might get some inspiration thinking back to those shows. Hm, perhaps I was overegging it a tad. He can be very direct in his thinking, but he's not a complete bumbling oaf either. I guess what I was aiming for was "cocky young man who thinks he's hot poo poo because he can wield the Force and a saber". The campaign is meant to be a more serious one. On which note I suppose I could easily see the PCs exploiting that arrogance... DivineCoffeeBinge posted:Bearing in mind that I'm not up on the system you're using - which is to say, I'm not 100% sure how much being a Force user is an "I win" button in Age of Rebellion - the clearest way, in my experience, to make sure it's clear that an NPC isn't a lovely power fantasy is to present them as, y'know, a character. He's great in combat, but he's not very cunning? Demonstrate his failings as much as his strengths. Sure, he might push the PC's poo poo in in a stand-up fight, but when the PCs try to do something sneaky to get an upper hand - hack security, or do a sneaky combat maneuver, or hell, even point and yell "look out behind you!" - have it work, and then make it clear (even to the point of just telling them straight out) that that probably wouldn't have worked against someone who knew what they were doing, but this guy's a little dense. Thanks a ton for all of those tips! The bad guys do in fact have a (surly) astromech that acts as a hacker, so it's more than possible they could do that. Soup Inspector fucked around with this message at 23:12 on May 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2018 23:09
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:Hm, perhaps I was overegging it a tad. He can be very direct in his thinking, but he's not a complete bumbling oaf either. I guess what I was aiming for was "cocky young man who thinks he's hot poo poo because he can wield the Force and a saber". The campaign is meant to be a more serious one. On which note I suppose I could easily see the PCs exploiting that arrogance... Just find a way to show him going full Kylo Ren: leave an open radio on a dead body, or give the players a chance to look at security cameras, or find some mechanism that they can overhear a conversation like: "Sir, the rebels are advancing, but we can easily stop them if we set up traps and ambushes at these points. (optional: describe a plan that clearly would have worked and totally screwed the party given what they know, or let the guy spell out the party's plan) Give the word and we can have it ready within 30 minutes." "You pathetic worm, I don't care what they taught you at the imperial academy, we are favored by the dark side of the force! I don't need your tricks to defeat this rebel scum. I'll do it myself if I have to."
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
Are you assuming he's going to survive this encounter? Because my players would make it a maximum priority to gank the poo poo out of this guy. Play rigorously fair if you hope he survives, and have a good story for what happens if/when he gets blastered into space dust.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:Just find a way to show him going full Kylo Ren: leave an open radio on a dead body, or give the players a chance to look at security cameras, or find some mechanism that they can overhear a conversation like: I could probably use that with a little modification (since it’s meant to be a ~*~surprise~*~ he can use the Force). Cheers! sebmojo posted:Are you assuming he's going to survive this encounter? Because my players would make it a maximum priority to gank the poo poo out of this guy. I’d like him to survive but it’s no skin off my nose if he doesn’t. If he bites it then tea and medals are in order, if not then they’re still going to be rewarded since goddamn you just had an encounter with a Jedi and didn’t get murdered. If he lives then he and his buddies will be a (infrequent) thorn in the players’ sides, if not then his gang will be out for revenge. If he’s captured then my players’ superiors will be ecstatic. Either way after the session I’ll check in with my players and ask if they want any more Force stuff to show up. If so, and the guy’s dead, his master will eventually show up and start breathing down their necks. If they don’t then I’ll BS something and drop him and his master down the memory hole. I would be very surprised if my players didn’t do the same thing as yours, considering they’re already jury-rigging astromech droids into mobile claymore mines. I eagerly await the Jedi taking a mine to the face.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 11:05
|
|
|
If they gank him and want force shenanigans, I'd have the master show up and try to recruit them. First lesson is free, then Master starts asking small favours...
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 12:29
|
|
|
Any one run Hillfolk/Dramasystem? Any tips?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2018 12:26
|
|
|
I'm trying my hand at some short and snappy "golden rules" to hand to new players. The point is to state a few ground assumptions about my games, especially insofar as they're different from the "traditional" way things are run. I'm expecting most new players I'm liable to meet will come from a pretty standard D&D 3.5/5e adversarial DM background and these are pretty specifically for 4E. But the point is also to not overwhelm or patronize people. I'm probably bad at that.quote:Characters... I'm not married to the idea and I'm prepared for possibly being wrong about the whole approach.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2018 17:10
|
|
|
As a set of assumptions and expectations about the game, that sounds fine to me. Specifically, the bits about character and player actions and interactions sound like they'll be a good dickhead detector.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
The only thing that gives me a little pause is to ask what you mean when you say player characters are "courageous." I assume you just mean that out of character everyone agrees to not just run at the first sign of danger? Because someone being cowardly in-character to play off the others isn't a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
Keeshhound posted:The only thing that gives me a little pause is to ask what you mean when you say player characters are "courageous." I assume you just mean that out of character everyone agrees to not just run at the first sign of danger? Because someone being cowardly in-character to play off the others isn't a bad thing. The rest of that bit - (... and willingly fight stronger enemies, knowing they're usually the only ones who can) makes it sound like it's supposed to set expectations for the tone of the game, rather than being a rule about player behavior. It could be read either way, I guess, but you might want to make it explicit what the intent is. For example: "The characters are brave and heroic. They defend the weak and run towards trouble, not away from it." That might not be something you're willing to compromise on, but you can still have a good discussion about how you achieve the same results with "I am a reluctant hero, mortal peril terrifies me but drat it, it's gotta be done even though I've literally just poo poo myself with fear" and how that's different from "Orcs to the west? gently caress that, I'm going east." "Players don't have their characters attack, betray, or steal from (etc) each other's characters" isn't something I'm interested in compromising on. But I'm talking about player conflict here, not character conflict! Maybe if two players come up with a cool character interaction where they're rivals who make each other look bad without compromising the basic mission/plot/etc, then that's fine. "Player characters can at least pass for heroes" sounds like it's non-negotiable - this isn't a game about self-serving cowardly treasure hunters, it's a game about valiant heroes doing valiant hero stuff. I think this sounds like it's about character actions but really it's about player actions and attitudes, because it looks like it's the core concept for the game, and if people are gonna step outside that, it's not gonna work. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 02:33 on May 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 02:27
|
|
|
Yeah, of course all the characters stuff is really players stuff, it's just all got to do with what kind of characters they should play. "Characters are heroes" is just supposed to be "no evil", "characters are brave" is just "I'll expect you to go into the dungeon and fight the goblins using your abilities instead of setting up a decanter of endless water at the entrance." I just want to put a positive spin on how I word it. "Do X" instead of "don't do Y". Cause maybe someone's had fun doing Y in another game and I don't want to sound judgmental about it.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 09:50
|
|
|
If you outright tell the players have to face stronger forces, then you better make sure you make your encounters winnable. Or else players get all pissy.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 10:02
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:Yeah, of course all the characters stuff is really players stuff, it's just all got to do with what kind of characters they should play. "Characters are heroes" is just supposed to be "no evil", "characters are brave" is just "I'll expect you to go into the dungeon and fight the goblins using your abilities instead of setting up a decanter of endless water at the entrance." I just want to put a positive spin on how I word it. "Do X" instead of "don't do Y". Cause maybe someone's had fun doing Y in another game and I don't want to sound judgmental about it. I get it, you don't want to just say "PCs aren't baddies, and PCs shouldn't avoid fights". I don't think it's judgemental to say that at all, but putting it in a positive way is a great goal. Turtlicious posted:If you outright tell the players have to face stronger forces, then you better make sure you make your encounters winnable. Or else players get all pissy. There's the other part there about "The DM ... does not set the players up for failure..." But yeah, if you say "You will fight stronger enemies, but I will not set you up for failure" and then set them up for failure, people will be pissed. On the other hand, if it's obvious you screwed something up rather than doing it intentionally, most players will be pretty understanding.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 12:44
|
|
|
Keeshhound posted:The only thing that gives me a little pause is to ask what you mean when you say player characters are "courageous." I assume you just mean that out of character everyone agrees to not just run at the first sign of danger? Because someone being cowardly in-character to play off the others isn't a bad thing. I read that more as “the characters as a group are courageous”, meaning that the party will take on daunting challenges, even if individual characters might have RP reservations.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 16:08
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:I read that more as “the characters as a group are courageous”, meaning that the party will take on daunting challenges, even if individual characters might have RP reservations. Better to make that more explicit, I should think; even beyond the whole "I am scared of the tough fight" angle, I think there are reasons for a PC to not be gung-ho for a fight that still let them be heroic. Like, if they're more interested in trying to make peace with the orcs than they are in committing greenskin genocide, that kind of thing. PCs should be courageous, but there's more ways to demonstrate courage than by drawing a sword and charging. And it's okay if that's not the kind of game you're interested in playing and/or running - there's nothing wrong with saying "this is a game about killing monsters, not complex moral quandaries, go kill monsters" - but that should be made clear from the get-go.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
Sometimes courage means kicking down the door, other times, discretion is the better part of valor.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 16:35
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:PCs should be courageous, but there's more ways to demonstrate courage than by drawing a sword and charging. Oh, I agree. I think it should apply to social situations and plot navigation as well. I should add that being courageous should feel courageous to the players and in the world. It’s easy to have courageous acts feel routine over time. Some of that is appropriate with character growth, but it’s something to watch. Subjunctive fucked around with this message at 16:40 on May 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
I also remind my players that their characters should believe in themselves. Wizbang the Warlock doesn't have knowledge on the board about his hit rate and how optimized his Invocations are. He knows that he has the ability to magically gently caress with minds and throw bolts of force around. If he doesn't step in to stop the Skellington horde who will, the Haberdasher?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 17:58
|
|
|
I can see that particular bit is at least causing some contention. So how about something like:quote:Characters have abilities that enable them to take on difficult obstacles and even much stronger enemies. They act accordingly.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
Man I dunno about you but I like it when my players find ways of avoiding combat with things ala "decanter of endless water at the door". I don't think that actually works but I'd rather reward ingenuity than taking a fight when they don't have to. They fight the monsters not because they're brave and seeking to be heroic but because they either feel a sense of responsibility or a possibility for profit. Personal, toe-to-toe combat is something they should treat as a last resort. For 4e those seem reasonable though - that isn't the right game if you aren't focusing heavily on combat so I get it. I'm trying to think of guidelines like that that I'd write and they look different but I'm not quite there yet. Jeffrey of YOSPOS fucked around with this message at 18:16 on May 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 18:13
|
|
|
Yeah these are very specific not only to 4E, but also to my DMing style and in fact even to the adventures I want to run. I do know a lot of folks do like that sort of thing, that's why I want to make it clear that I want to run the sort of game where you engage in combat. "This is a game where combat happens, frequently and at length. This is also a game where you can resolve many things peacefully, but not all of them, and whole sessions without combat won't happen."
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:I can see that particular bit is at least causing some contention. So how about something like: It does make me wonder what a stronger enemy is, if not one they’re yet unable to defeat somehow.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2018 19:02
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:I read that more as “the characters as a group are courageous”, meaning that the party will take on daunting challenges, even if individual characters might have RP reservations. Yeah, it reads as basically “You guys are adventurers on a quest, act like it.” Don’t intentionally dodge every plot hook and try to find a complex way to avoid every encounter because “That’s what my character would do, I’m just roleplaying!” If your character wouldn’t go save the world in a game about saving the world, don’t play him. Let him stay on the farm.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 01:56
|
|
|
Anyone have advice on how best to do a puzzle fight? I've been interested in them since playing Persona 5 but I've put the game down for a while and have forgotten how it does them. What I do remember is that Morgana tells you the gimmick if you don't get it the first time through. More generally, how do I do a boss fight that feels challenging without actually killing my players? Death isn't permanent in my world but I'd rather not. The problem is that my players have such a low HP that monsters that, CR wise, match up with them can deal +50% of their HP in one turn. Even in regular combat I end up knocking 20 or 30 points of damage off attacks. This is in 13th Age if it helps.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 08:10
|
|
|
Mooks. Lots of low level enemies is always the best idea.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 09:22
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Yeah, it reads as basically “You guys are adventurers on a quest, act like it.” Don’t intentionally dodge every plot hook and try to find a complex way to avoid every encounter because “That’s what my character would do, I’m just roleplaying!” Subjunctive posted:It does make me wonder what a stronger enemy is, if not one they’re yet unable to defeat somehow. another good intro statement, actually. My Lovely Horse fucked around with this message at 17:17 on May 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 17:04
|
|
|
I posted up a write up of the wine tasting charcuterie event strike session y'all helped me plan for. It's over in the catpiss thread. I was only able to squeeze in 3 or 4 of your wonderful ideas but everyone had a really fantastic time.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 05:37
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:I posted up a write up of the wine tasting charcuterie event strike session y'all helped me plan for. It's over in the catpiss thread. I was only able to squeeze in 3 or 4 of your wonderful ideas but everyone had a really fantastic time. Your game sounds good and your group sounds good too. Plus you can use all of the unused ideas in a future game.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:42
|
|
|
Do any of you have a system-agnostic campaign planning resource? I'm finally writing my first (short) campaign, having never run anything before, and trying to find reasons not to be intimidated.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:I posted up a write up of the wine tasting charcuterie event strike session y'all helped me plan for. It's over in the catpiss thread. I was only able to squeeze in 3 or 4 of your wonderful ideas but everyone had a really fantastic time. That's amazing.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
A friend of mine, who was a DM, got annoyed that his players were kinda hammering through his combat encounters and "not taking them seriously". So he planned a super-tactical ambush of them that ended with 2 dead players and the remaining 3 running for their lives. I told him that the better thing to do would just be to tell his players that he's trying to design a campaign where the combat encounters were Serious Business, did they want that? I don't think I've ever heard of a story where the GM tries to "teach players a lesson" through mechanics and it doesn't end up being a poo poo show.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:A friend of mine, who was a DM, got annoyed that his players were kinda hammering through his combat encounters and "not taking them seriously". So he planned a super-tactical ambush of them that ended with 2 dead players and the remaining 3 running for their lives. I told him that the better thing to do would just be to tell his players that he's trying to design a campaign where the combat encounters were Serious Business, did they want that? I'm a new DM so I've had a hard time making combat challenging and it generally falls on the easy side. I've been trying to make it more difficult, so I've been slowing ramping it up, but I've made every jump in difficulty super clear to my players.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
Stroop There It Is posted:Do any of you have a system-agnostic campaign planning resource? I'm finally writing my first (short) campaign, having never run anything before, and trying to find reasons not to be intimidated. Just general points of advice for beginner planning, really.
"Badguy is in the abandoned mine trying to get the thing. Obstacles X, Y, and Z will impede the progress of the party. Badguy has A and B prepared for them. He is weak to C." You'll be off to a good start. When I started DMing I planned way too loving much. Don't do that.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:10
|
|
|
Advanced mode is that all of those rules are made to be broken but you have to learn how to do it that way before you can break the rules successfully.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
This is something I’m thinking about with regards to the Dungeon World one-shot I’m running soon. Spoilers, I guess: the likely plan is to start the players off in a tavern, ask them an establishing question, maybe add a couple interesting characters and setpieces, and let them loose from there. Since this has yet to become anything more than maybe 2.5~3 hours of gameplay including character creation time, I’m wondering how fleshed out it really needs to be. Should I worry about making the tavern and its characters dynamic and motivated up-front, or let that reveal itself through play?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:34
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:Should I worry about making the tavern and its characters dynamic and motivated up-front, or let that reveal itself through play? Don't start them in a tavern, and don't dangle un-connected plot hooks in front of them to see which they bite on. Both are trite and the latter can be monumentally ineffective if your players don't take the bait (or can't agree which one to take). Instead, establish their background and shared histories during character creation, figure out why they are together right now, and start them in media res. Just pick one and say, "What are you stealing right now?" And once that person answers, go to another player and ask, "to whom does the thing your buddy is currently stealing belong?" Once you get an answer to that, make the situation complicated by asking another player, "what has just gone horribly, horribly wrong with this attempted theft?" And maybe spice it up by asking someone else, "And why is [most obvious course of action] not an option?" And boom, just like that you have started play right in the action. You've brought them right to that point where the poo poo is about to hit the fan and dice are about to get rolled. You've solicited input from the players, so they are already engaged in what's going on and have already contributed to the story in an interesting and meaningful way.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
Glukeose posted:
Depending on what you want, Wikidpad might help you out. It's a word processor-like thing where you can just put brackets around words to turn them into a link, like a wiki. I've found it helpful for me just like, typing out an outline and then being able to fill in details as I go along and then easily refer back to them later. Another thing is https://www.obsidianportal.com/ Longer form structured planning doesn't really have many tools specifically for it, and most of the people here are going to recommend you don't even bother. If you really have to, just do what Glukeose mentioned. Some useful links for that: https://www.dungeonworldsrd.com/gamemastering/#Fronts http://slyflourish.com/looking_back_on_fronts.html Basically, being flexible is generally the better option for your campaign, whether you're a veteran or a newbie. For groups you really know well and that like it, sure maybe you can go that in depth, but it'd be a lot less stressful for you and them to do more big picture stuff than try to exhaustively map out their choices.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 01:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
To elaborate, obstacles X, Y, and Z could be things like, "encounter with two weak and one strong minion," that you've done the stats for and that's it. Then based on what the players latch on to just insert the encounter in front of them where ylu want for pacing however thematically appropriate. A good way to make your villian engaging and compelling is to have them learn from your players' actions as well. If they creamed the last group of minions sent against them, then the Big Bad shouldn't send the same match up. Always aks yourself, "what does Big Bad know about them, and how can that be used against them?" And then, importantly, use it against them. This is collaborative story telling, so let your players fill out the details for you, while you give them the framework. This works for everything from backstory, campaign setting, to details during sessions as you move along.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 02:04
|
|