|
Arrrthritis posted:
I'd be willing to say 90% of DM's do this if not more. losing a cool battle idea sucks if they decide to go off what you thought they would do (not that it's their fault, it's "their" game). Plus events are generally occured in such a way that they are reliant on the PCs arriving to occur. How often do you happen to show up seconds before the evil ritual is complete? It's not interesting if you catch him in his sleep, and most DMs arent going to have them show up after unless it gets excessive.
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2009 23:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 08:27 |
|
|
Cyrai posted:I'm not sure I'm getting quite what you're saying, but that sounds somewhat complicated. For your first time GMing, simple is much better than complicated. If you're able, try running a few one shot pre-published campaigns to get a feel for how the game works. That's what I'm going to do with the Paranoia games I'm going to be starting, because nobody has played the game before Basically using what has been said above, if he has a ghost encounter planned in a basement and the party doesnt go there, he moves it to the mill instead. If the ghost had an accident in the basement and died, but they dont go there, so he says it fell off the mill and died instead. As long as the players dont get wise to this (i.e. you tell them the ghost died in the basement but it shows up at the mill anyway) its a good idea.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2009 23:52
|
|
|
How do some people make "open choice" scenerios? If you present an evil overlord as a threat to the world, or at least the region, its in their interest to go after him. Didnt by doing that you "forced" them into it? I'm trying to get a feel for making a more open campaign.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2009 11:53
|
|
|
AndItsAllGone posted:The idea is not to limit your players' choices. Let's say you've introduced an evil overlord character like you described--a villainous baron, perhaps. It's true that not a lot of good characters are going to ignore that, but I don't think it's railroading just to introduce a potential enemy. That's part of your job as the DM. But it's up to the players how to handle it. Maybe they want to go to a neighboring rival noble to recruit help, or rally local peasants to overthrow him, or convince the king to remove him from power, or just invade his keep and kill him. Or if they decide to not deal with him and move on, try to have at least an outline of some stuff elsewhere for them to do. True, it can be disappointing when you create a scenario only to have your players ignore it, but that's just part of being a DM. OK I get you now. Give them options but if they think of another way be ready to accommodate it and the proper consequences Bob Smith posted:I'm sort of worried that my campaign will be the same way - the villain has a plan, but he's not a sort of "MUAHAHAHAHA I AM EVIL SEE THIS GIRL TIED TO A RAILROAD" villain. Not at all. Just remind them that theres urgency if theyre the type to rest after every fight. Most campaign villians exist in a vacuum where their plans hinge on how close the PCs are to foiling him. The biggie is though, never make it impossible to win. If he succeeds the heroes should be down but not out. Maybe he completed a ritual that makes him way too strong for them to win at their level, so they must flee and return when they're stronger, that sort of thing. RagnarokAngel fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Jun 16, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2009 15:42
|
|
|
I still wouldn't reccomend going with this. Your idea sounds good in your head because it'd make a sweet action scene in a movie, but its still regulating the party to side kicks even if they're helping in a big way.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2009 06:38
|
|
|
He said he's not doing it you can relax now.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2009 15:35
|
|
|
h_double posted:No, don't "take away" anything, this isn't junior high. But don't be afraid to be politely a hard-rear end about no electronics at the table if that becomes a problem (and definitely don't have any TVs or whatever going in the room). This. I used to be bad about it, I would fool on my laptop during 3e games because during battles there were long stretches of nothing to do. I evantually broke that habit and it feels kind of hypocritical but I enforce it because one guy has a habit of busting out his PSP mid game when he should be paying attention. It's not that he doesn't care it's just it can get boring, and you have other things on your mind. It's only human but you gotta be strict because if he gets more into the distraction than the game it's over, even when its his turn he'll still be playing that PSP.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2009 08:29
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:Laptops remind me of my new idea to stop having books at the tables and instead roll with a laptop having relevant pdf's. That's more or less how it works for me. I keep my laptop but I keep it closed most of the game. I look up rulings if something comes up (got some old school gamers so they're sticklers for the rules) and use a .txt document to track HP totals because its easier than scratch paper. But its closed the rest so I'm not tempted to use it during their turns to browse the net and such, and people dont feel I'm enjoying my computer and theyre not allowed to bring one.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2009 10:06
|
|
|
CDOR Gemini posted:Hello, new DM here for a very green group. We are all pretty big video game dorks, but none of us have played D&D before. We are following Keep at the Shadowfell, but I've been tweaking things to make the beginning a bit more interesting. I have created a weird sort of encounter for next week and was wondering if some more experienced players/DMs might tell me if it's going to suck or not. (I sort of want them to think outside of the box more in and out of combat, and this what I came up with to try to encourage that.) I'm not sure I completely understand. This is at ground level behind the waterfall right? If it's not high up then it won't be as obvious. I'd either make the monster like, mud (so its clear water could defintely hurt it) or emphasis the river rushes rapidly that if anyone fell in they would be surely be taken by the current (obviously emphasis this BEFORE as it feels forced if you tell them after.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2009 17:57
|
|
|
CDOR Gemini posted:Yeah, ground level, in a cave behind a waterfall. In addition to the water genasi making him immediately flee, I had planned to describe the creature's blows as having dried chunks of dirt flying off. I've already emphasized that the waterfall/river is extremely rough terrain, though they could move through it slowly. Is that a situation players are supposed to use strength or athletics checks, though? When/how to apply checks is still something I'm not super-clear on. Checks are generally applied whenever failure is a possibility. In the case of the water if its so rough it could pull them I'd say it's an athletics check.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2009 18:25
|
|
|
Veth posted:How do people handle absenteeism and experience? Traditionally, I've always ran games where, if you aren't present, you don't get any XP. This has been just fine for everyone so far. Recently, one player got pissy that he didn't get any XP for a session he missed. He told me what his character would be doing, which is fine as an explanation as to where the character was during the session, but it seems to defeat the purpose of having people show up to play if it's treated as a substitute. It's lame but holding out on XP is a bad idea. I usually handle it one of 2 ways. 1.If you can get the person's sheet, have someone else play it. You don't like that that's fine I see the argument 2.If you cant get access to it, play the game as it were with the one less person. If you have 5 people, and one doesnt show, run it with 4. give out XP as if fights were won with 4. When the person gets back, put them back on the same level of XP as everyone else. To make it "fair" to people who did show up, let them have first dibs on all money and magic items. The absent player will not get gold unless the group feels generous, and will only get magic items if no one else wants them. It seems unfair to reward people for not showing up, but sometimes life gets in the way and thats not fair to them. On top of that you're asking to end up with a group of varying levels and that rapidly becomes a clusterfuck to maintain. If a person is gone so much that it really becomes a problem, it's something you should talk to them about, or if it comes to it, drop them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2009 17:45
|
|
|
h_double posted:Two options in my group: This is pretty stupid I'm gonna be honest with ya.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2009 16:47
|
|
|
ripped0ff posted:Usually, I don't award full XP for missing a session. Like people have been saying, the games are about fun. That doesn't mean that you have to be at the same XP as everyone. If your main attraction to PnP RPing is XP, then I'd rather not have you at my table. But by that point, if its a casual experience, and XP shouldnt be important, who cares if they get full XP? It's more fun for everyone if everyone's roughly the same power level. A level or 2 difference wont kill you sure, but more than that and the power gap gets nasty. Being useless isn't fun for anyone, regardless of what anyone else is saying. I think if it's honestly such a frequent issue that you feel the person should be penalized (once or twice because mom had to goto the hospital or someone called in work sick and he has to cover is being dickish) you should consider talking to them or dropping them, not conniving to punish them for not participating in your beer and pretzels game.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2009 23:01
|
|
|
ripped0ff posted:Maybe I am just a super young grognard, but I've always played it like this and I've never heard anyone ever complain about it. Hell, I thought I was some super nice and lenient GM for even giving the option of half-XP. No you're worse than Hitler. Repent.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2009 23:10
|
|
|
ripped0ff posted:How the gently caress do you decide when someone wants to play your precious game enough? Semper Fi DnD, motherfuckers. I can't even imagine being a big enough dick to lecture someone on how committed they are to playing DnD. And yet aren't you trying to do that by penalizing XP? "Show up to my game or fall behind. If you dont like it I guess you can enjoy being useless"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2009 01:11
|
|
|
ripped0ff posted:"Why doesn't my little Billy get the award for perfect attendance? He wanted to show up that day, but he was sick!" Since when is EXP "worthless"? Pretty sure its one of the most valuable commodities to a character.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2009 02:05
|
|
|
What the gently caress are you talking about
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2009 02:09
|
|
|
ripped0ff posted:XP isn't worthless. But it's worth is proportional to the amount of XP. If Jim was losing lots of XP and trailing two or three levels behind, that's a problem. But if Jim is pretty much on the same footing and is only about 1000 xp behind despite missing many more sessions than anyone else, it's hardly a punishment. quote:Edit: I actually need to head off to work now guys. I'll be back to get yelled at more later. Keep rollin with those punches
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2009 02:15
|
|
|
You know what the DMG also says? Toss out and change rules as you see fit because they're not infallible.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2009 02:17
|
|
|
Super Waffle posted:The NPC didn't take too much damage, never fought back, and teleported away once he was cornered (which was all planned). I just underestimated my PC's, he wasn't supposed to get cornered until the very last room. Thanks for the feedback. Really it's all about keeping a face up. I think its ok for a DM to just about anything as long as the illusion is maintained. If he takes a heavy hit and doesnt flinch, it tells the party he's super powerful. Whether or not you mark it is fine unless they get wise somethings wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2009 04:14
|
|
|
even worse username posted:I don't want to restart the big XP As for where the character went we just roll with it. it breaks immersion but its not worth laboring over an excuse to me if they'll just be back next week.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2009 22:54
|
|
but I have a question for the GMs who award full XPs to characters with absent players - how is this rationalized in game, or do you bother? Are the characters assumed to have been present, and just in the background, or were they off doing their own thing that happened to net them the same amount of XP? In lots of games different players get different amounts of XP depending on their accomplishments, so how do you handle that for absent players? Do they just get an average award?
|
Super Waffle posted:Whats a good wage for a party of 5 to guard a traveling merchant to the next town over? 100gp a piece? 200gp? A 30% discount on weapons? Check parcels for that level. hand it out as a reward.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2009 06:21
|
|
|
Super Waffle posted:Ok, so lemme get this right. Under the Parcels section, theres a list of 10 items or group of items under each level. So over the course of going from level 1 to level 2, they should get everything in the list? That's exactly how it works. It's assumed you'll take about 10 fights to get a level so one parcel per fight. But at the same time dont follow it so rigidly. If the group fights a bunch of firebats they are not likely to have money or items on them, being non sentient beings, so just move the parcel you WOULD have given to be a quest reward, or hand out 2 parcels for another fight. Its what I do because in my game all fights are worth double XP to speed up the process (We dont get to meet as much as we'd like so to compensate we just double the rate)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2009 01:11
|
|
|
Super Waffle posted:Well they're getting ambushed anyways, whether or not they find the spy just decides when and where. Am I being a railroady DM? Naw, its standard procedure. Just do a passive perception check before to see if they see it coming.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2009 19:29
|
|
|
Annakie posted:I wanted to do XP this way but the supernerds in my group (most all of them) objected and now I send out a post-game wrapup with exact XP count because they really wanted me to. Bullshit them then. Get as close as you can then roll it up/down to 800. I'm kind of OCD like that and plan a level out ahead of time, so I like to have the entire level planned precisely to level up at the exact XP they need.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2009 21:37
|
|
|
Joudas posted:You're finally starting to make sense. Will you shut the gently caress up with this little goon slap fight?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2009 02:41
|
|
|
lighttigersoul posted:Hmmm. . . That's a neat concept, actually. Instead of item drops, make points where their 'weapons' power up in a suitably visible and cool fashion. . . Very gamey, but still would be neat for that type of game. They might think something is off though if that happens. Might want to consider something they can carry on them that gives a very small buff, like a token or something that gives +1 to attack rolls once an encounter, or to defenses for a round once an encounter. This way it's not overpowered, but they feel the need to keep them on them, because they're not taking up any slots, so why not keep them? Say the tokens are channeling power through them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2009 23:59
|
|
|
Christo posted:I have a similar problem with the campaign I'm DMing; my players don't really interact with the NPCs beyond a "give me a quest or fight me" sort of mentality. We're playing through Keep on the Shadowfell right now and last session they met Sir Keegan's ghost/undead body. During the negotiation skill challenge I tried to coax them into giving me more then "I roll diplomacy" by giving a bonus to their rolls if they respond in character but they were still hesitant. After succeeding the challenge the book lists a bunch of information about the keep and Sir Keegan's past that the players can uncover by asking questions ("Who are you?" "What happened?") but they went straight for "Can have your sword?". I know that as DM you should provide what your player's interested in but, I don't know, I just feel like they're missing a lot of cool background stuff by "skipping the cut scenes" Keep on the Shadowfell sucks for roleplaying. My group is pretty good about it and didnt feel much need to roleplay until pretty much the final battle.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2009 19:18
|
|
|
SweeneyTodd posted:Yep, my understanding is Soldiers a few levels higher than the party are particularly likely to lead to a whiff-fest from the PCs. It might be worth looking at what the PCs would have to roll to hit, and maybe adjusting AC to suit. I figured doing this since I have a level 5 party with 4 people fighting a level 8 solo. I adjusted the power as per the rules so it went down a level, AC is still 23 which I'm not totally happy with. Our barbarian would need a 14 to hit it. Whats a good expectation to get on a die roll?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2009 06:25
|
|
|
I have someone who busts out his iphone, psp or laptop mid game and I just tell him to not do that here. I'm being a bit of a hypocrite because I used to have my laptop out always and didnt realize how inconsiderite it was till I was in the GM's chair. As the GM it's your game and it's in your bounds to tell them that if they dont want to play, they're allowed to go somewhere else.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2009 18:42
|
|
|
^We do that too. It becomes almost expected after years of playing these games because you inevitably run into some jerk who plays a max CHA + diplomacy + feats to boost diplomacy to handwave away any sort of conflict. So you make them justify it by explaining what they said that's so drat persuasive.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2009 01:22
|
|
|
even worse username posted:I have not yet run into that particular brand of jerk, although I used a kind of middle-of-the-road approach with this. I think you should be able to play a smooth-talkin' mofo even if you're not one yourself, so people could make fast talk/intimidation/persuasion rolls without having a line if they couldn't think of one. On the other hand, if they had a good argument or effective line, they'd get a bonus. It's different to play a smooth guy and someone who's words can stop wars. The latter better be justified.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2009 18:49
|
|
|
I can tell you now if people go into a system being adamant about it sucking you're going to have a tough time convincing them otherwise. Confirmation bias will make them roll their eyes, groan, or point out every time something they don't like happens. Ask anyone converting 3.5 diehards to 4e. You can possibly give an incentive. If they indulge you in your shadowrun you'll run something they want after that. If it's 4e again so be it. If its something else you get to try something new.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2009 16:00
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:Whatever you decide, make sure it happens fast. If you kill off the ranger at the end of a session, don't take longer than 30-40 minutes for the sword mage to join them at the next session. Yeah it may seem undramatic to have him come back so quickly but this isn't traditional narrative storytelling and keeping him out of the fun sucks. Maybe at the next encounter he appears after a round or two and slices through some enemies all bad rear end and you can have a cliche "we thought you were dead!" and the reveal. "I am."
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2009 22:45
|
|
|
Bobulus posted:What is TG's opinion on introducing multimedia into your games? All my games are via skype and maptools, so we've already got the visual stuff taken care of, but I'm very tempted to rip up Skype to forward my computer sounds so that I can add ambient music / background sounds / whatever to games. it adds a lot but I reccomend more subtle music. Something without words is a big leap. If you use something with lyrics it can be distracting and take people's mind off the action, you want to compliment it not ruin it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2009 01:51
|
|
|
Epicurus posted:Literally everything from Open Grave including horde of zombies which is a skill challenge. Can you use bluff to move through the hoarde like Shaun of the Dead?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2010 04:32
|
|
|
Just remember to handle out the 10 parcels in that time and the balance will be ok.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2010 09:36
|
|
|
So question. Is rigging a fight so the PCs lose always bad? I'd always been taught as a general rule you just don't do that but I have a long term villian I'd like to establish as a credible threat and in 4e you generally don't run into fights you can't overcome, given how powerful the PCs are. Is it wrong of me to have them fight the boss (or if they heed the warning and flee that's cool too I won't make them fight him) and after a few rounds and of demolishing them have it interrupted so they can confront him down the line? I feel somehow that embarrassing the PCs is a way to get them to hate the guy off the bat.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2010 06:34
|
|
|
Eh I got collateral planned. The ultimate plot can still progress without his input, though it'd be different, not to say their changing it has no impact. And really intend to cut the battle short once the party realizes what they're dealing with, and give some hype that this guy might be out of their league so they can bolt before getting involved. I've played in some campaigns and know once players get wise that this guy is too powerful it becomes tedious quickly.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2010 08:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 08:27 |
|
|
Stuntman Mike posted:How much is this going to affect challenge ratings and such? Hahahahahahaha.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2010 14:25
|
|