|
EthanSteele posted:I'm gonna play Chuubo's, anybody got any GM or player tips for that one? Sorry if I totally missed a dedicated Chuubo thread because I'm blind and stupid.
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 04:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 03:21 |
|
|
If by pretty much dead you meant actually impossible to post in. Thanks for finding it for me though! I'll have a look through it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 04:54
|
|
|
EthanSteele posted:If by pretty much dead you meant actually impossible to post in. Thanks for finding it for me though! I'll have a look through it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:I'm gonna start a game with the PCs' favourite tavern burning down. Motivation established check, broad PC characteristics established check, lampshade hung check. I started a Dungeon World oneshot with "The inn is on fire. Why is the inn on fire?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 08:07
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:I don't actually want them to have to fight the phoenix more than 3 times, I just think it would be really fun to put them in this ticking-time-bomb situation and see how uncomfortable I can make them. ETA: This setup (your baking phoenix pie) segues nicely into the various "The inn is on fire!" suggestions earlier.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 08:11
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:I really like that idea, and if anyone else has ideas for deep concerns these supplicants might have I'd love to make a bit of a list. He queues without complaint, but he is nervously fingering a strange device with an antenna and a dial that says LEFT and RIGHT.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 08:29
|
|
|
Fantasy trolley problems. Efb. lofi fucked around with this message at 09:08 on Jun 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 09:05
|
|
|
sebmojo posted:Is there a S'ant-a Cla'us (fantasy spelling) Am I a butterfly dreaming it's a human, or a plate of sashimi dreaming it's an octopus? Do you have a moment to sign this petition about murderbears? Should I get my hair cut in this style, or go for a man-bun? Is it racist if I dress the staff in my bar up as goblins? We've updated our privacy policy, is it okay if we keep in touch? Is it morally wrong to pretend to have a deep phiposopglhical quandary just because you fancy the abbot? Twist ending: when they reach the abbot he's getting into a heavy fireproof suit. He winks at them, slips the helmet on, leaves the meal uneaten and beckons them into a secret exit. As the monastery goes up in flames, he offers them 10% of the insurance payout.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 10:42
|
|
|
A bit late for this one, but there's One Weird Trick that I like for first sessions and oneshots: flashbacks. Have a short session ready, start in media res, have action scenes go down, at key moments go "this reminds you of when..." or somesuch and have brief little roleplaying scenes that let players show some personalities. For example, when a character shines in competence flash back to how they joined the party, when two players argue over a course of action flash back to a previous conflict they had, stuff like that. The interludes should be short and snappy, and because players want to know what happens next in the now-timeline, they won't have interminable RP conversations. Because the outcome of the flashbacks is largely predetermined (you're here together) they're pure flavor and not bogged down by decision making. It's a nice way to make sure the session isn't all action while pretty much resolving the usual pacing problems of way too much talking and exposition before the fighting happens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 11:13
|
|
|
"Are you gonna eat that?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 12:07
|
|
|
So... due to poor decisions while sleep deprived one of my players got hold of a two card deck of many things, drew one and got comet (So he's now level 5) and mixed the other into a normal deck of cards. I generated what card it was so I knew which one he replaced and it's the sun card... I think I can work with this though, this particular player has always been a bit over powered due to min-maxing stuff etc. and having the played 5e before a bunch. He's more or less serving as a trump card for the rest of the (new to 5e) players and my secret weapon to guide the party. Current campaign is the Lost Mines of Phandelver, they're just finishing up Cragmaw Castle and are moving onto Wave Echo after. I've been playing up the Black Spider as more of a BBEG than the campaign normally has him and the aforementioned player had his entire Monk/Cleric order killed by the guy and some demons leading to him having some kind of fuzzy memories about it due to a combination of the psychological effects and being hit on the head a few too many times. I was thinking I could handle the Sun card by having him regain his memories and former power and have him and the Black Spider duke it out at the end of Wave Echo, the other plays having to deal with his minions etc and with him retiring and sending the party on a quest about some bad poo poo he'd forgot about (Soulmonger Curse) or if he loses have the Black Spider teleport the party to Chult. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 14:10
|
|
Luminaflare posted:So... due to poor decisions while sleep deprived one of my players got hold of a two card deck of many things, drew one and got comet (So he's now level 5) and mixed the other into a normal deck of cards. I generated what card it was so I knew which one he replaced and it's the sun card... Sounds like poo poo for the other players. Cool I get to kill minions while the hero does the work. e: Have Gandalf show up instead.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Hm. Good point. Lesson learnt, don't DM after being awake 20 hours.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 21:34
|
|
|
The deck could have been cursed right???
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 21:57
|
|
|
Could always actually be a card out of the deck of illusions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:The deck could have been cursed right??? Luminaflare posted:Could always actually be a card out of the deck of illusions. Don't do this. If you let poo poo get out of hand, talk to your players about it, explain that you were sleep deprived and figure out a solution that everyone's happy with. Nothing good will come of springing a "Gotcha!" on them because you accidentally gave them something you shouldn't have.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 23:36
|
|
|
I could use some advice for a 5e game I just started running. I'm a pretty inexperienced DM and have never been a player. I think I made some of the beginner mistakes mentioned a few pages back for starting a campaign. Part of this is because I was counting on having a very experienced help the group along and facilitate the group coming together through role playing. But that player decided to make a character who is stand-offish, reluctantly cooperates with the rest of the group, and acts put-off by the encounters I have designed so far. In the last session, I had the group do their first dungeon proper, after having a few combat and skill encounters peppered throughout the previous sessions. It was your stereotypical "pass these trials to demonstrate your ability and integrity" dungeon, and each trial ended with a question to get the characters to reveal some of their motivations and history to each other (since they successfully managed to not talk to each other before this point, as players are wont to do). My experienced player skirted around answering these questions by arguing on a technicality. The questions specifically referred to their "soul" and the player said that their race (Triton) has no soul, and so it was impossible for them to answer the question. The NPC asking the questions relented that while the character was being truthful, it was not in the spirit of the trial and then asked the other player characters if they found the answer satisfactory. I think because they are all new players, they agreed in deference to this more experienced player. Sooooo.... I guess I'd like to ask for some advice on two points. 1) I'd like to solicit for ideas on how to make this character's lack of a soul something of consequence, without it being a punishment or opening up too many other shenanigans for the player to exploit. 2) Does anyone have any ideas for how to get someone to bring their stubborn and difficult character into the fold without allowing them eat up all the oxygen in the room? By the way, I have already talked with the group about this dynamic and they all seemed to be ok with it. It might just be myself as a DM that is frustrated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 20:00
|
|
|
Best bet is to talk to the player - tell them you could use their help and experience to engage the others, and figure out a way to make it work for both of you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 20:12
|
|
|
You're as much of a player around the table as everyone else and you have just as much of a right to be frustrated and to try and change things to fix that. I wouldn't try to fix this by working around their stubborn and difficult character. Instead, I'd talk to the player directly, one on one, and ask them to make their character less stubborn and difficult. With character traits like that, it can be hard to distinguish between character behaviour and player behaviour, and it would be an enormous courtesy to a newbie DM to make a character who plays nice - you've got enough on your plate without constantly having to judge his level of standoffishness. I would definitely mention how you were counting on him to tie the group together, and how you realize you didn't actually tell him that but the way it's playing out now is making it harder for you to run the game. Don't even try fixing this stuff within the game. You'll just keep tugging in different directions and it's better to have the talk before tensions run high. "Characters must work together as a group" and "if your character wouldn't work with the group, don't play that character" are really common ground rules for exactly this reason. About the situation at hand: it's often a good DMing approach to judge the party's solutions to problems by whether everyone thinks it makes sense. In this case, though, your NPC was the adjudicator of a literal trial. You would have been well within your rights to have them say "technically true, but not in the spirit of things" and leave it at that. DMs should ultimately want the PCs to win, but if there's gonna be a trial there needs to be a realistic threat that they might fail it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
Uhh, these tritons? Unless I'm missing something, they aren't soulless and your player's lying to you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2018 23:30
|
|
|
Leraika posted:Uhh, these tritons? Yea those are the ones. I guess I should have checked, although I think my player was just creating some lore behind the race. I wanted to give the group control over the culture and history of their respective races, so I decided to not push against this player doing something that was along those lines. It's why I'd like to take the decision and give it consequences within the story in some way. And thanks for the suggestions to talk to the player directly about my concerns. I know that's always the obvious advice, but it helps to be told it directly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
That player is being kind of a show-off dick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
sigh... yea that's how it feels. I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
Fishes_Swim posted:Yea those are the ones. I guess I should have checked, although I think my player was just creating some lore behind the race. I wanted to give the group control over the culture and history of their respective races, so I decided to not push against this player doing something that was along those lines. It's why I'd like to take the decision and give it consequences within the story in some way. If he was being cool and cooperative this is a really good instinct. But it really sounds like he is being obstinate for the sake of it. I'd just talk to the player and see what is up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
Fishes_Swim posted:I could use some advice for a 5e game I just started running. I'm a pretty inexperienced DM and have never been a player. I think I made some of the beginner mistakes mentioned a few pages back for starting a campaign. Part of this is because I was counting on having a very experienced help the group along and facilitate the group coming together through role playing. But that player decided to make a character who is stand-offish, reluctantly cooperates with the rest of the group, and acts put-off by the encounters I have designed so far. I had a person playing a character like this in the first time I DMed a longer campaign and it honestly made everybody playing the game kind of miserable. Talk to the person playing the character, try to find a common ground for the player to feel like their still expressing the character but not being a frustrating killjoy
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 02:39
|
|
|
quote:As a result of their isolation and limited understanding of the Material Plane, tritons can come across as haughty and arrogant. They see themselves as caretakers of the sea, and they expect other creatures to pay them deep respect, if not complete deference. This attitude might grate on others, but it arises from a seed of truth. Few know of the tritons' great victories over dreadful undersea threats. The tritons make little allowance for such ignorance and are delighted to expound upon the great debt others owe them. Tritons also have a tendency to emerge from their isolation under the assumption that other folk will welcome them as respected allies and mentors. I'm gonna put it like this: it takes some serious roleplaying chops to pull that off without grating on your fellow players as well. A lot of people are gonna see that kind of official background as a free pass to be a dickhead. In fact, it's gonna be what attracts them to the race. It's like that Douglas Adams quote about governing: anyone who wants to play a Triton probably shouldn't. If I had a player who wanted to play one, the attitude I'd expect him to take would be something like: "my teammates are obviously in over their heads, the poor guys need guidance and training, naturally it falls to me to lead them to greatness. Their ways may be backward but they can't help it, after all." Be a team player. Hell, be the team captain. It even totally works with the experienced player/new players dynamic! Do be prepared to come to blows over this and to boot him sooner rather than later, if necessary. This is a way this can work, but it needs his cooperation. As for in-game consequences: no soul is commonly understood to mean no resurrection if he dies. If that's okay with the player, let him have that background fact. Obviously don't set out to kill the character, but be firm on it if the dice do fall that way. e: here's a plot hook for you: the party comes to a seaside town where people do know what the Tritons did for the world. They are overjoyed to see one of those legendary guardians grace their humble town with a visit. And they have a quest for the party that a) means they'll be punching above their weight just a tiny bit and b) is tailored mainly to the non-Triton PCs' abilities. Obviously, refusing to accept this quest would mean a serious blow to Tritons' reputation! My Lovely Horse fucked around with this message at 08:43 on Jun 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 05:47
|
|
|
Fishes_Swim posted:Yea those are the ones. I guess I should have checked, although I think my player was just creating some lore behind the race. I wanted to give the group control over the culture and history of their respective races, so I decided to not push against this player doing something that was along those lines. It's why I'd like to take the decision and give it consequences within the story in some way. I feel like something as big as 'hey my race is soulless' needs both a really loving good story behind it and to be cleared with the GM first. Good on you for rolling with it, I guess, but definitely be careful, especially if he tries to weasel more mechanical benefits out of it (off the top of my head: immunity to charm spells, immunity to fear). My Lovely Horse posted:I'm gonna put it like this: it takes some serious roleplaying chops to pull that off without grating on your fellow players as well. A lot of people are gonna see that kind of official background as a free pass to be a dickhead. In fact, it's gonna be what attracts them to the race. It's like that Douglas Adams quote about governing: anyone who wants to play a Triton probably shouldn't. I mean, they seem to basically be noblesse oblige elves underwater, which is less disruptive fluff than a lot of races I can think of.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 08:00
|
|
|
Fishes_Swim posted:And thanks for the suggestions to talk to the player directly about my concerns. I know that's always the obvious advice, but it helps to be told it directly. If you wanna give him an easy out, shade from another PC isn't the same as the DM setting up road blocks. In character, deadpan next time he pulls that poo poo, "You know, for a dude with 18 Int Slagathor the Slow here sure is a dense fucker." When he calls you out for disrespecting him just point out that as a Chaotic Halfling Rogue you're simply playing your character. If you do this he will escalate/keep being a dick. Decide if you wanna dunk on this guy for fun or make the game more harmonious before you actually start needling him in character.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 09:31
|
|
|
Also don’t do that if you’re over the age of, say, 15 because that is some supremely childish poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 10:22
|
|
|
For some reason I zeroed in on the part of the Triton entry I quoted, but I've read through the whole thing now and it seems like playing one as "standoffish and reluctant to cooperate" is just flat out a waste of a great race concept.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 10:32
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:For some reason I zeroed in on the part of the Triton entry I quoted, but I've read through the whole thing now and it seems like playing one as "standoffish and reluctant to cooperate" is just flat out a waste of a great race concept. quote:...the assumption that other folk will welcome them as respected allies and mentors. How does anyone get "standoffish and reluctant to cooperate" out of that? That's the guy who leads from the front (whether or not he knows what he's doing), and is always giving what he conceives to be helpful advice (again, whether or not he knows what he's doing). When things gently caress up, he wants to have an after-action breakdown and give a pep talk about how well everyone did and not to get downhearted, but then also goes into detail about how everyone else could have done better. He says "110%" a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 12:11
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:How does anyone get "standoffish and reluctant to cooperate" out of that? That's the guy who leads from the front (whether or not he knows what he's doing), and is always giving what he conceives to be helpful advice (again, whether or not he knows what he's doing). When things gently caress up, he wants to have an after-action breakdown and give a pep talk about how well everyone did and not to get downhearted, but then also goes into detail about how everyone else could have done better. He says "110%" a lot. Yeah this is pretty much how I read the lore. I can see how someone could get loner-type out of it but that’s much harder to role play. And it’s way more fun to be the bumbling overconfident “leader”
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 12:48
|
|
|
That's the type that, in a middle of a fight after the Wizard casts a spell, goes, "remember what I told you, it is levi-oh-sa! Not levi-o-sah," except: 1. The wizard never asked for help. 2. The Triton has never cast a spell in their lives.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 13:02
|
|
|
"Well done, I'm so glad you feel able to contribute! We'll put that in with the other ideas going forward."
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 13:06
|
|
|
I haaate that kind of person, I’d find it hard to not give them poo poo as another party member. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 14:00
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:I haaate that kind of person, I’d find it hard to not give them poo poo as another party member. "I'm not a 60 percenter, I'm a 30 percenter who's giving you an extra 100%"
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 14:27
|
|
|
I had a player on my table who felt it was his responsibility to "introduce conflict in the party." "Oh, the DM introduces bigger conflict, but interesting inter-party conflict is good!" He's not wrong, but that poo poo comes organically from the world and the DM, no extra mile needs to be gone for the players. As a rule of thumb, I now make sure my players have a reason to adventure together and backstory that involves one another to create character arcs. It's easy to strain a relationship between characters when they are fleshed out and, amusingly, the kinds of characters players come up with to gently caress on one another are rarely fleshed out at all beyond their obnoxious gimmick. As soon as a character seems to be going down a road where they are antagonistic towards the party, or where they are antagonistic towards the DM in the form of trying to sabotage the scenarios and so on, it's time for the conversation on "does your character need to be here and would the party tolerate them?" Players who use "I'm just playing the character" get told that the character they're playing doesn't seem to work with the adventure, that it's disruptive generally, and that it's not gonna work. If they bitch about "well you're not letting me play who I want" then we're right back to "why do you want to play a character that is disruptive to the table" and if that is their goal, then better they find another table to play at.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 14:32
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:I had a player on my table who felt it was his responsibility to "introduce conflict in the party." "Oh, the DM introduces bigger conflict, but interesting inter-party conflict is good!" Inter-party conflict is good, and more interesting than just Good-vs-Evil, but inter-PC conflict isn’t a great way to get there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Inter-party conflict is good, and more interesting than just Good-vs-Evil, but inter-PC conflict isn’t a great way to get there. Yeah, I agree. I'm aware of that as a DM and don't need the players to try to introduce their own stuff in there. If it's agreed upon in advance between the players and they know how they want to play it, it's one thing; but when one player decides he wants to take it upon himself to introduce that, it's never gone well that I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 15:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 03:21 |
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Yeah, I agree. I'm aware of that as a DM and don't need the players to try to introduce their own stuff in there. If it's agreed upon in advance between the players and they know how they want to play it, it's one thing; but when one player decides he wants to take it upon himself to introduce that, it's never gone well that I've seen. Why would the players need to agree about inter-party stuff? They’re only playing one party I presume, so they can react to inter-party stuff however they’d like, including not at all. It’s inter-player/PC (intra-party) that needs to have metagame agreement IMO.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2018 15:12
|
|