| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Puggle Halfwine07-30-07, 07:31 AM | 80% of the exp for a module must come from combat exp. If there is any one single thing I want from 598cy, it's to REMOVE THIS RULE. At least for regional/metaregionals. ... please? :( |
| gomeztoo07-30-07, 07:37 AM | While a nice idea in principle, the problem becomes what to give xp for if not for a (combat) challenge? |
| Madfox1107-30-07, 07:42 AM | You misunderstand the rule you quoted. 80% of the xp has to come from clearly defined challenges which could be combat, but can be traps and fights that can be avoided with diplomacy, stealth or other goal orientated events. The fact is that xp in a living campaign must be rewarded based on objective stuff or else players will suffer the effects of arbitrary DMs or people favoring particular styles of gaming. |
| Puggle Halfwine07-30-07, 07:47 AM | The problem is the meaningful challenge bit. In the eyes of the LG folk, it seems, that's the only real challenge... and to be honest, the last time I played a module where I DIDN'T get full exp for it (and was in APL) was almost a year and a half ago. 90% of modules are basically: "You get full exp OR you TPK". So how about giving exp through story awards which don't require combat to complete but are still possible to fail (or at least rely on good roleplaying)? I just think the wording of the rule strongly suggests combat... |
| clik_ml07-30-07, 07:50 AM | Worse for me would be mods that don't give full GP if you succeed without fighting. This was highlighted recently when my table completed a mod near-perfectly, avoiding all but 1 combat through good planning- our just reward was a whopping 8 gp on the AR... so negative gold after upkeep. Losing XP is actually good for your long term character oomph. I might raise an eyebrow if I was shorted XP on an AR, but wouldn't worry about it too much. Losing GP is entirely bad however. |
| Pint_Glass_Crusader07-30-07, 09:01 AM | Indeed, I recently played a module, where we had a great Bard with diplomacy and RP skills to match, I was quite happy to let them use their "face skills" to get through "challenges"... Hell! I even had my monk roll diplomacy assists! However, when I received my 25gp at the end of the module, I vowed never to use diplomacy again! Now as a writer I know this is totally wrong, and I will endevour to reward players in other ways in the future for bypassing combat with diplomacy/stealth etc. I believe these types of action are the perfect opportunity to reward players with better favors or access (through a sympathetic patron). Now of course that doesn't answer the problem (good access ain't squat without GP reward) so how about a better sytem of favours/RIPs etc.? like those that can be cashed in, for say... cash? or free (yes! probably the most hated term in LG! FREE!) equipment (within reason of course). |
| TetsujinOni07-30-07, 09:03 AM | The problem is the meaningful challenge bit. In the eyes of the LG folk, it seems, that's the only real challenge... and to be honest, the last time I played a module where I DIDN'T get full exp for it (and was in APL) was almost a year and a half ago. 90% of modules are basically: "You get full exp OR you TPK". So how about giving exp through story awards which don't require combat to complete but are still possible to fail (or at least rely on good roleplaying)? I just think the wording of the rule strongly suggests combat... I've been told about regionals which involved no weapons drawn, lots of roleplay, and interesting challenges. No idea WHICH regionals, but they apparently exist. |
| Mattastrophic07-30-07, 09:20 AM | One of my favorite modules EVER was a Year 5 Geoff module called The Weight of Words. The challenges were entirely objective-based, which led to full XP without a single combat. But the really ingenious part was the GP and access. The latter phase of the module involved rescuing a dragon's egg. So, if the PCs succeeded, the favor of the dragon granted access to everything that appeared in the Items Found box. And if the PCs succeeded at the main focus of the module, the giant hosts granted each PC a gift of a golden egg, which is what made the GP cap. And on top of that, the conclusion was penalized for doing any combat. Combined with having methods for full XP, full GP, and full access without combat, that mod was made of awesome. -Matt |
| vvincent07-30-07, 10:38 AM | The problem is the meaningful challenge bit. In the eyes of the LG folk, it seems, that's the only real challenge... and to be honest, the last time I played a module where I DIDN'T get full exp for it (and was in APL) was almost a year and a half ago. 90% of modules are basically: "You get full exp OR you TPK". So how about giving exp through story awards which don't require combat to complete but are still possible to fail (or at least rely on good roleplaying)? I just think the wording of the rule strongly suggests combat... I think that's a common misconception. The DMG defines a challenge as any encounter that requires the expenditure of resources on the part of the PCs. Combat is the most common form of challenge, because it's the most readily understood - and because, as many have pointed out, many of the rules are designed for combat. However, if you step back and look at the definition of challenge, a lot of other types of encounters fall into that area. Negotiation encounters can fall into this (especially if spells or gold - i.e. resources - are used). Puzzles and traps obviously fall into this category. Even pure roleplaying encounter can be challenges when coupled with skill checks. Without spoiling anything - Verbobonc released two adventures in Year 6 that could be completed without any combat. Perhaps some of you will play them at the PreGenCon Madness this year! Vernon L. Vincent Verbobonc Triad |
| rutrow42407-30-07, 12:48 PM | Without spoiling anything - Verbobonc released two adventures in Year 6 that could be completed without any combat. Perhaps some of you will play them at the PreGenCon Madness this year! Vernon L. Vincent Verbobonc Triad I'll vouch that one of these was one of the most enjoyable mods I have played in 7 years of LG; I must have "failed" in the other one and had combat. |
| Simpi07-30-07, 12:58 PM | I've been told about regionals which involved no weapons drawn, lots of roleplay, and interesting challenges. No idea WHICH regionals, but they apparently exist. NAE5-02 Return to Gefjon TSS5-04 The Sun & The Nightingale Both retired now. It was not easy but you could complete both without fights and still end up with good favours and majority of cash. TSTN even punished you roleplaying exp if you fought more than once. TSTN also offered wide selection of people to side with (Church of Zilchus, independent merchant or Pomarj Slavers) which led to interesting debates and conflicts between players. However, I don't think anyone got access to best favor (imo) which would have been earned for siding with Pomarj slavers, though others were not too far behind. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad |
| ShinAkuma207-30-07, 01:20 PM | Worse for me would be mods that don't give full GP if you succeed without fighting. This was highlighted recently when my table completed a mod near-perfectly, avoiding all but 1 combat through good planning- our just reward was a whopping 8 gp on the AR... so negative gold after upkeep. Why is that unexpected? Most of your gold comes from looting the bad guys you defeat. If you don't take anything, you don't get anything. Should your successful Diplomacy check also convince the villains to empty their pockets for you? |
| control freak07-30-07, 01:22 PM | theres alot of regionals/metaregionals for VTF/veluna that are the opposite of tipical COR mods they have -1 (some times 2) combats in tipical module and you still get full exp/gp -2 that i have done can be done with 0 combats and get full GP/XP from simple rewards from compleating the adventure (return item X and we will pay you GP amount= nearly the APLs cap) - we have some players who hate the metaregionals (because they like combat oriented DnD) i love them because they are more RP but still allow you to resort to combat if you hate them (well maby we should just take what we want from you) i would say they are 30/70 for combat/RP and if RPed correctly can be even less combat |
| vvincent07-30-07, 01:27 PM | I'll vouch that one of these was one of the most enjoyable mods I have played in 7 years of LG; I must have "failed" in the other one and had combat. Thank you very much! That's high praise considering the scope of adventures covered by 7 years of the campaign. The one adventure was something of an experiment at the time - just to see if it could work. I don't the style would work for every adventure. Which is good because it keeps us from falling into a "formulaic" pattern of mod design. Thanks again! Vernon L. Vincent Verbobonc Triad |
| bitznarf07-30-07, 02:39 PM | Why is that unexpected? Most of your gold comes from looting the bad guys you defeat. If you don't take anything, you don't get anything. Should your successful Diplomacy check also convince the villains to empty their pockets for you? Because it weakens PCs over all. Effectively it punishes PCs for not fighting. And punishing PCs for not fighting should be discouraged in my opinion. In a home game, this isn't a problem as all gold is controlled by one DM who can maintain an appropriate balance. In LG, no such means exists to regain the balance, unless you fall so far behind that you can use Charity of Friends. In which case you are still way behind. |
| bitznarf07-30-07, 02:41 PM | TSTN even punished you roleplaying exp if you fought more than once. How can you possibly tie roleplaying exp to how many fights you got into? So that party got into more fights. Fine. How is that any indication of poor roleplaying? |
| Simpi07-30-07, 03:22 PM | How can you possibly tie roleplaying exp to how many fights you got into? So that party got into more fights. Fine. How is that any indication of poor roleplaying? Because nothing in the writers guidelines prevents me from doing it when I deem it appropriate for the module structure and plot? Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad |
| bitznarf07-30-07, 03:41 PM | So call it something other than roleplaying exp. Because it obviously has nothing to do with roleplaying or lack thereof. |
| Samwise07-30-07, 07:35 PM | The problem with allotting gold to non-combat encounters is that you either wind up with these huge hoards waiting around for some random person to find them, or you wind up with a majority of the gold being tied to mission completion, which winds up punishing players who choose not to complete the mission for background reasons, or who fall just short of completing the mission. So load it up on monsters, or load it up on patrons, or load it up in hoards that can be missed, no matter what, someone will miss part of it. |
| Mattastrophic07-30-07, 07:56 PM | Or you could load it up on multiple places, so no matter how you go about getting the gold, you end up hitting cap. -Matt |
| LGMoses07-30-07, 10:17 PM | "You get full exp OR you TPK". To put a positive spin on that I say "Death or Glory" :D |
| _metz_07-30-07, 10:30 PM | 80% of the exp for a module must come from combat exp. If there is any one single thing I want from 598cy, it's to REMOVE THIS RULE. At least for regional/metaregionals. ... please? :( If it is all tied to roleplaying, than there can be too much bias. There is a reason it is tied up in combats. So the DM can't punish players for not playing in their style, or favour some players over others. By all means I agree, tie the xp with acheiving set goals, like 'saving the Damsel in Distress', rather than 'kill the NPC Tim who has kidnapped the damsel' However teh current rules do exist for a reason. |
| ShinAkuma207-30-07, 11:25 PM | Because it weakens PCs over all. Effectively it punishes PCs for not fighting. And punishing PCs for not fighting should be discouraged in my opinion. Well, sorry to break it to you, but D&D is a combat-based game. It's a game of Hero vs Villain, not Talker vs Listener. If you want to skirt the main mechanics of the game, that's fine, but I wouldn't expect to be rewarded with a font of gold every time I sweet talk a bad guy instead of taking his stuff. And that's what gets me...You don't want to be "punished" for not fighting. Well guess what? Reward comes with risk. If you roll a d20 and make the bad guy friendly, you used zero resources and took no risk. There should be no reward other than that fact that you completed an encounter without consuming a single resource. |
| Simpi07-30-07, 11:48 PM | So call it something other than roleplaying exp. Because it obviously has nothing to do with roleplaying or lack thereof. Obviously you have played (and hopefully read) the module then. Otherwise you would not make such comments without knowing where in the module the exp could be lost and for what reasons... Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad |
| bitznarf07-30-07, 11:50 PM | Your right, I've never played the module. This is what I have to go off of: "TSTN even punished you roleplaying exp if you fought more than once." and "Because nothing in the writers guidelines prevents me from doing it when I deem it appropriate for the module structure and plot?" Losing XP due to module structure and/or plot reasons doesn't have anything to do with roleplaying XP. At least, not how I understand roleplaying XP. You know, XP awarded for good roleplaying. If I am missing some crucial bit that would have this make sense then by all means, please enlighten me. |
| Timlagor07-30-07, 11:53 PM | My understanding is that "Story Awards" are grouped on the Roleplaying side for LG xp. I think this is an easily remedied problem. |
| Puggle Halfwine07-31-07, 02:20 AM | My understanding is that "Story Awards" are grouped on the Roleplaying side for LG xp. I think this is an easily remedied problem. That is my understanding too and I too would like it fixed. |
| _metz_07-31-07, 02:36 AM | That is something to talk to triad about. For Regionals and meta regionals they determine this stuff. |
| Pint_Glass_Crusader07-31-07, 03:10 AM | And that's what gets me...You don't want to be "punished" for not fighting. Well guess what? Reward comes with risk. If you roll a d20 and make the bad guy friendly, you used zero resources and took no risk. There should be no reward other than that fact that you completed an encounter without consuming a single resource. This is very much a sweeping generalisation. Social encounters are frought with difficulties and potential perils, especially in the turbulent political climate of LG. Favours can be be won [or emnity gained] through social interaction... you speak of no risk... is not the risk that combat may ensue should negotiations fail... you speak of consuming resources... spells [charm person, friends etc.], potions [of helpful spells, often more expensive than mere CLW] and Luxury lifestyle, are these not resources? The path you suggest makes "face" skills obsolete [or at best secondary build skills]... that only promotes a climate of "The dead don't need to negotiate!", which doesn't really bring forward the LG ethos, and will eventualy end up with you on the wanted list. There are only so many ambassadors you can kill, before the Iron League decides... Hmmm, maybe negotation is the wrong way to do this... let's invade! ;) |
| gomeztoo07-31-07, 07:05 AM | If you roll a d20 and make the bad guy friendly, you used zero resources and took no risk. There should be no reward other than that fact that you completed an encounter without consuming a single resource. The fact that you invest in Diplomacy is a resource as much as is investing in being able to hit for 150 hp damage/round. If PCs think smart, they should be rewarded. If they manage to bring peace instead of killing everyone in sight, they should reap the benefits whenever this makes sense. You need not always provide alternate gold. If my bard bluffs the troll, she won't get the troll's gold. Since the troll was probably ment to be fought, that is no biggie - and my bard would not care for its gold anyway (the feat of succeeding to have bluffed it shoudl be satisfying enough). But if she can stop a potentially tense situation from turning into global war, and have the NPCs instead kiss and make up, she definitely needs a reward and goodies... |
| Lupo07-31-07, 08:30 AM | The fact that you invest in Diplomacy is a resource as much as is investing in being able to hit for 150 hp damage/round. If PCs think smart, they should be rewarded. If they manage to bring peace instead of killing everyone in sight, they should reap the benefits whenever this makes sense. You need not always provide alternate gold. If my bard bluffs the troll, she won't get the troll's gold. Since the troll was probably ment to be fought, that is no biggie - and my bard would not care for its gold anyway (the feat of succeeding to have bluffed it shoudl be satisfying enough). But if she can stop a potentially tense situation from turning into global war, and have the NPCs instead kiss and make up, she definitely needs a reward and goodies... it all concentrates on some terrible modules i had the bad luck to play: KILL EVERYTHING AND DON'T ASK WHY or you will not get anywhere near to positive gp!:( :confused: :rolleyes: these is in general the POOREST way of writing a module, one basically pulls random encounters out of the hat till the EL sums up right. every little bit of ADVENTURE in between the fights is just pathetic decoration, like a plastic tomato in a pizza hut :P the only way to get this better is to give CONSTRUCTIVE feedback to authors, triads and editors as often and detailed as possible. and yes, i was soooo fuming angry with certain modules that i might have been a little un-constructive towards some authors :rolleyes: anyway, most of them still talk with me ;) ciao martin m. |
| Simpi07-31-07, 09:54 AM | If I am missing some crucial bit that would have this make sense then by all means, please enlighten me. Actually I don't. In the end this whole thing would be about my idea of roleplaying vs. your idea of roleplaying and we can argue about that until the sun blows up without eithers position budging an inch. Sure I could go on details about the module and most likely me withholding exp from excess fighting would invoke the classic "You punish people for playing CN sociopaths" argument from someone and I don't see any value in that. I would like to give you a copy of the module though but giving it out without me removing GH references from it would probably be illegal. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad |
| wooti07-31-07, 09:56 AM | Well, sorry to break it to you, but D&D is a combat-based game. It's a game of Hero vs Villain, not Talker vs Listener. DnD is ROLEPLAYING game. Yes there are alot of mechanics surrounding combat in it and we shouldn't ignor it but please don't forget the roleplaying or we might as well play warhammer or minitures. Yes the tradiation mode of DnD is heroic, and that is the one I think we should strive for in LG. However how often do you see Superman or Batman kill their enemies? or for that matter loot their corpes? If you want to skirt the main mechanics of the game, that's fine, but I wouldn't expect to be rewarded with a font of gold every time I sweet talk a bad guy instead of taking his stuff. And that's what gets me...You don't want to be "punished" for not fighting. Well guess what? Reward comes with risk. If you roll a d20 and make the bad guy friendly, you used zero resources and took no risk. There should be no reward other than that fact that you completed an encounter without consuming a single resource. There we have a request, writers please put more risk in roleplaying sections. I would suggest one that immediate and targeted at offending characters, I would like to see my low charsma dwarf start losing access or being targeted for being a jerk and an idiot. |
| ShinAkuma207-31-07, 06:19 PM | This is very much a sweeping generalisation. Social encounters are frought with difficulties and potential perils, especially in the turbulent political climate of LG. Favours can be be won [or emnity gained] through social interaction... you speak of no risk... is not the risk that combat may ensue should negotiations fail... you speak of consuming resources... spells [charm person, friends etc.], potions [of helpful spells, often more expensive than mere CLW] and Luxury lifestyle, are these not resources? *sigh* Obviously I'm not talking about social situations. The situation at hand is one where people want to get out of fights by rolling Diplomacy, but don't want to lose gold for it. Clearly, if the situation is not a combat encounter, then talking should be the primary element. |
| garyjohnson07-31-07, 07:23 PM | Actually I don't. In the end this whole thing would be about my idea of roleplaying vs. your idea of roleplaying and we can argue about that until the sun blows up without eithers position budging an inch. Let me try asking bitznarf's question in another way, then. Which of the following describes how you wrote up the XP section of the scenario? Option One: There's a story award for "not initiating more than one combat". Option Two: The roleplaying award came with the condition, "only award this if the PCs do not initiate more than one combat". Option Three: something else. My reading of bitznarf's concern is that you used Option Two instead of Option One. If you actually used Option One, the point of contention may go away ... Cheers, Gary Johnson |
| bitznarf07-31-07, 07:30 PM | Sounds about right Gary. |
| Simpi08-01-07, 12:15 AM | Let me try asking bitznarf's question in another way, then. Which of the following describes how you wrote up the XP section of the scenario? Option three. Also note that not all of roleplaying/story exp was tied to that one particular fact. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad |
| clannagh08-01-07, 12:42 AM | I probably come from an unusual area but our last games day had an attendance of about 12 or 14 players .. two players (one being myself) were over 21-22 years of age. Nearly half our players were 12 or under, one as young as 8. Most of these pre-teen children are not related to older players and simply heard about the game from friends. I gain the impression this is not the norm in most areas but is the key reason I personally am opposed to the "combat or lose XP/gold" approach common in LG. It is a bad example for children (who at least "officially" are supposed to be able to play the campaign) and teaching them a bad moral lesson which will come back to bite them as adults. (It also explains why I have taken a very strong stance in other threads about allowing "fun" components in the game, it keeps the kids playing). Now I am aware of the "just get rid of the kids they do not belong" response as quite a few of our university age players have exactly that attitude (although they will accept the odd 12 year old that meets their "standards" of tactical combat competence to fill out a table) .. but I personally do not see that as a constructive response. The future of LG is not beer-gutted 50 year olds like myself its the young kids and the game quite frankly currently does not suit them that well. |
| _metz_08-01-07, 01:06 AM | Yes, but that is NOT typical of LG is it Glenn. Whilst perhaps that is the case in Armidale, largely due to a lot of the excellent work you and Kat have put into promoting the game for kids, LG remains a game based around a complex rules set and an established canon. Whilst I agree, such mods as the now infamous scrambled eggs, Ms Khundgeniality, and the Raticus Maximus Intros are all fantastic (and I am sure your intro is the same, I haven't had the opportunity to try it yet) It will alienate most of the older players to make the games solely more kid oriented. Nonetheless, I do feel that intros etc are a great source of fun 'Terry Pratchett style games, and one or two rounds a year with a less serious element would be fantastic. That you are writing such modules helps with that dilemma. In the mod I have been writing (which I really need to get submitted by the end of the week) I have actually tied several story based awards rather than encounter based ones. And I have ensured that a great deal of the gold and access comes from favours and from the completion of the mission rather than beating up random NPCs and taking their stuff. Xp benefits from things like 'got past the guards' rather than 'killed the guards' and so on are examples of good ways to do this. With a simple matter of linguistics one can remove the restrictions placed in many modules one needing to 'kill' the bad guys in order to get experience. If a player shows tactical nuance, rather than just simply clubbing the NPC I like to think that forms a point of experience as much as the physical challenge offered by fighting. I do however feel that Authors need to cater for diplomacy in almost every encounter, either by explaining why it won't work, or by providing solutions, and what may work on the NPCs as an example. The downside of this is that DMs have to prep the mods thoroughly, and also be able to respond quickly to changes from their PCs. Some DMs like railroad mods, that require nothing more than 'reading' the module. I personally do not, but feel that any Author should provide a sort of 'tree' Diagram to help the DM. (Which is what I plan on including in my mod.) |
| Puggle Halfwine08-01-07, 01:45 AM | such mods as the now infamous scrambled eggs, Ms Khundgeniality, and the Raticus Maximus Intros are all fantastic (and I am sure your intro is the same, I haven't had the opportunity to try it yet) It will alienate most of the older players to make the games solely more kid oriented. Hey Metz, As the author of Scrambled Eggs, I'll start by thanking you for your compliment. :) It's not often I get feedback on my modules (unfortunately), and it's less common that I get POSITIVE feedback (people often only talk to me when they have a complaint ;)). That said, I'm not quite sure I understand your statement. I wrote Scrambled Eggs when I was 20 years old, playtested it twice with players in the 20-30 age bracket, and I don't think I made a point of writing it for any particular age group. Why would you think that I did? Mail me offlist if you want (u 2 5 5 2 3 3 1 @ anu dot edu dot au) or just post here (I'm not afraid of scathing criticism!), because I'm always desperate to improve my writing style (bear in mind that Scrambled Eggs was also my very first module ever...) and I can only do that if people tell me what I screwed up. :) ... wow. Too many brackets. -_- Cheers, Dave. |
| Pint_Glass_Crusader08-01-07, 02:03 AM | I probably come from an unusual area but our last games day had an attendance of about 12 or 14 players .. two players (one being myself) were over 21-22 years of age. Nearly half our players were 12 or under, one as young as 8. Most of these pre-teen children are not related to older players and simply heard about the game from friends. I gain the impression this is not the norm in most areas but is the key reason I personally am opposed to the "combat or lose XP/gold" approach common in LG. It is a bad example for children (who at least "officially" are supposed to be able to play the campaign) and teaching them a bad moral lesson which will come back to bite them as adults. (It also explains why I have taken a very strong stance in other threads about allowing "fun" components in the game, it keeps the kids playing). I think you are from a lucky & unusual area... most of the Pre-Teens (and many under 30's) in my area are viscious little "initiative junkies" with no interest in roleplaying, short of causing conflicts with their min/maxed (soon to be dead :P ) Barbarian-Clerics... I think a certain World of... fantasy-based MMORPG is to blame [But that is for another thread!]. As a "more traditional" (by which I probably mean over 30) roleplayer, I don't want modules that are little more than a slim pretext for 3 D&D Minis matches. But I notice some modules say things like "unsuitable for large sized characters"... how about "unsuitable for players that just want to kill stuff!"... or "Roleplaying Lite!" Would that satisfy the "combat monkeys" among us? |
| clannagh08-01-07, 02:42 AM | Hey Metz, ... wow. Too many brackets. -_- Cheers, Dave. Watch out or the compiler will give you a parse error :P |
| clannagh08-01-07, 02:47 AM | I think you are from a lucky & unusual area... most of the Pre-Teens (and many under 30's) in my area are viscious little "initiative junkies" with no interest in roleplaying, short of causing conflicts with their min/maxed (soon to be dead :P ) Barbarian-Clerics... They do have that tendency. They start out wanting to kill everything in sight and if the Barmaid in the Inn doesn't answer the right questions or tells them to put there weapons away they hit them with their Greataxe. In fact most of them seem to start with the idea that being an "adventurer" is a licence to be a schoolyard bully. I suppose my point is that too much emphasis on combat as the only solution makes it even harder to get the younger players away from that "bash everything first and ask questions later" mentality, and unlike older players they may take that concept on board as a role model for sucess in real life. Unfortunately long term success in real life comes mainly from the ability to get on with others and co-operate and ruthless aggression tends to generally get you arrested, its not even encouraged in the military. But I actually have no idea how many kids play LG overall, it may not be an issue at all in most other areas. |
| clik_ml08-01-07, 03:33 AM | *sigh* Obviously I'm not talking about social situations. The situation at hand is one where people want to get out of fights by rolling Diplomacy, but don't want to lose gold for it. Clearly, if the situation is not a combat encounter, then talking should be the primary element. In my most recent instance we weren't worried about the combat, we simply didn't want to be jerks and attack guards that could very well have been good and in the right. So rather than attack some guards we used a forged document to get past them and investigate further. Since we didn't have to beat up these guards (who even after the mod, I am uncertain that harming them would have been proper or right), we only wound up kicking ass against another couple that were clearly guarding unlawfully held prisoners and they had nothing of value apparently. Even if we had fought everyone it made no sense to rob these guards who may well have been doing their job properly anyway, and in fact for the first group I could imagine that leaving them unconscious and without weapons in a dangerous area might be considered an evil act. And throw on top of it that in the next mod we played, same region, our 2 wizards got their spellbooks confiscated for casting glitterdust and color spray in a battle, along with 4 TU + 500gp fines (negligent use of magic, whateverrrr). So I'm definitely getting mixed signals about whether to engage combat and rob presumably decent guards to make our gold cap, or whether to avoid such things like the plague for fear of being bankrupted by fines. The judge checked diligently to make sure he was awarding us properly since 8 gp seemed way off considering we did things about as optimally as possible. If I run this mod (as I may be likely to do so in a couple weeks), I'm liable to go against whatever bs guidelines are listed for the gp by at least having the commander who orders the party to do this task to pay APL gold per party member for completing the mission, since there is almost no gold to be had unless you are a thieving thiefy thief who fights anyone in your way whether they have lawful authority or not. |
| _metz_08-01-07, 04:26 AM | Hey Metz, As the author of Scrambled Eggs, I'll start by thanking you for your compliment. :) It's not often I get feedback on my modules (unfortunately), and it's less common that I get POSITIVE feedback (people often only talk to me when they have a complaint ;)). That said, I'm not quite sure I understand your statement. I wrote Scrambled Eggs when I was 20 years old, playtested it twice with players in the 20-30 age bracket, and I don't think I made a point of writing it for any particular age group. Why would you think that I did? Mail me offlist if you want (u 2 5 5 2 3 3 1 @ anu dot edu dot au) or just post here (I'm not afraid of scathing criticism!), because I'm always desperate to improve my writing style (bear in mind that Scrambled Eggs was also my very first module ever...) and I can only do that if people tell me what I screwed up. :) ... wow. Too many brackets. -_- Cheers, Dave. Dave, I was highlighting that it was one of several 'lighter side' or non serious plot oriented modules, that they wouldn't stick with greyhawk canon. These suit many age groups, but are more accessible to the younger aged folks then to those who play the modules with people eating other people :) As such I was saying such mods are good, but you have to cater for the other kind of more traditional fantasy 'everything is serious' players as well ;) If you feel that you are still missing somethin, we can discuss it at winterfest! - also named Dave |
| Necrochaos08-01-07, 08:43 AM | Isn't what we are arguing is what it takes to "defeat" the encounter? EX. There are guards in front of the castle that the PC's need to enter. The point is for the PC's to enter the castle. It doesn't matter if they defeat the guards by combat, sneaking past them or negotiating with them, they have defeated the encounter and should be awarded the appropriate experience points for the monsters. EX. Thug attack on the side of the road. The PC's flew instead of traveling by ground. The PC's did not approach the encounter, instead they ignored the encounter by flying past the checkpoint. The PC's would not be awarded the XP for this encounter. However, I have seen many modules have a different encounter prepared for PC's who take an alternate route for travel. The thugs may be stationed somewhere else or the PC's may have the jump on the next encounter, etc. I believe the other problem we are addressing the how the gold is distributed through out an adventure. In most cases, the PC's are hired by a party to do X. They pay Y (which is usually a minimal amount). The PC's find most of the loot from taking out the bad guys. They sell the items and end up with Z cash. If the party that hired the PC's is a noble or some party that needs to save face with the people, they may pay the PC's A at the end of the encounter for not harming anyone for completing the mission. This would make sense as by not killing anyone the hirer doesn't have to clean up the mess or explain the deaths to someone else. You could also offer the PC's gold instead of some access or favors that would be listed on the AR. EX. AR favor, PC gains 1 influence point with X that can be used to 1. Gain access to Y PrC, 2. Reduce time in stocks by 2 TU's or 3. Be used to gain Z gold (condition that gold does not exceed max for APL). Lastly, I believe that many authors may be fed up with the face of the party. There are some characters that have diplomacies in the 40's or 50's. The DM shows that the enemy would immediately go to friendly, which doesn't make sense in some cases. There are some combats you just can't talk your way out of. Diplomacy can be abused at times and should have some sort of limit on it's uses. |
| Pint_Glass_Crusader08-01-07, 09:01 AM | I understand the dilema that writers are in. It is the plain and ugly truth that the following statement is true of a characters career in LG... "XP loss isn't so bad, and is actually an advantage as you can play more modules before you retire... Conversly GP loss is crap, as you have to play more modules to get enough GP to pay for your +10 Sword of GM Annoying." If you use Diplomacy, or some alternate method of overcoming an encounter that does not allow for the "rifling of pockets", how do you justify the characters gaining GP for that encounter. To just give XP makes some players feel they have been cheated. The answer is simple, and actually appeared in a recent module I played (which is still active, so will remain nameless!). We need to introduce more AR rewards that generate GP, either through character investment of TU or by allowing you to "cash in" the reward for a fixed sum. In the module I am currently writing, I intend to have a reward where characters receive an interest in a business, allowing them to make [modified +4] rolls on the "Benefit from Non-Adventuring" table [in the LGCS] with a certain professional skill in exchange for spare TU. It doesn't do away with loss of GP, but it certainly lessens the blow, and rewards non-combative play. More rewards like this make players [at least] consider alternatives to "Ultra-Violence". |
| Puggle Halfwine08-02-07, 12:31 AM | Watch out or the compiler will give you a parse error :P As I am reading this in my "nondeterministic finite state machines" lecture which I am dutifully ignoring, I nearly started laughing out loud for no reason whatsoever. I'm glad I didn't, because my peers would probably think I was insane. |
| bitznarf08-02-07, 12:37 AM | As I am reading this in my "nondeterministic finite state machines" lecture which I am dutifully ignoring, I nearly started laughing out loud for no reason whatsoever. I'm glad I didn't, because my peers would probably think I was insane. How much longer do you think you can keep them from the truth. I mean, they are going to catch on eventually. Probably about the same time someone walks in on you dialing Britt-Prayer-Hotline. Although you do have dental... |
| _metz_08-02-07, 12:54 AM | As I am reading this in my "nondeterministic finite state machines" lecture which I am dutifully ignoring, I nearly started laughing out loud for no reason whatsoever. I'm glad I didn't, because my peers would probably think I was insane. Thats the uni work ethic that we students are so well known for! (I come up with some of my best daydreams during finance or accounting lectures!) |
| Puggle Halfwine08-02-07, 02:18 AM | How much longer do you think you can keep them from the truth. I mean, they are going to catch on eventually. Probably about the same time someone walks in on you dialing Britt-Prayer-Hotline. Although you do have dental... True. Abandon all pretenses! Britt... is an aspect of Zagyg! Bwahahahaha...! |
| Timlagor08-02-07, 04:36 AM | True. Abandon all pretenses! Britt... is an aspect of Zagyg! Bwahahahaha...! Don't you mean that Zagyg is an aspect of Britt? |
| vvincent08-02-07, 10:22 AM | Britt is an aspect of Asmodeus - after all, he's studying to be a lawyer. :D First round of drinks at GenCon for the Archdevil is on me! |
| Puggle Halfwine08-02-07, 11:12 AM | Don't you mean that Zagyg is an aspect of Britt? That is what I meant, yes. |
| bitznarf08-02-07, 11:15 AM | So let me get this straight Puggle... Zagyg is an aspect of Britt, and Britt has the Law domain? |
| gomeztoo08-02-07, 11:29 AM | So let me get this straight Puggle... Zagyg is an aspect of Britt, and Britt has the Law domain? I don't see any conflict there... *cackles madly* |
| codyknotts08-02-07, 05:18 PM | One of the things that seems to be forgotten is that that the +50 diplomacy guy is not "roleplaying" in the traditional sense, but building a character to do one thing, avoid combat by talking. I played with one of these players at Origins. It was interesting, every short encounter (remember diplomacy takes time, which is almost as forgotten as the -2 to spot for every ten feet, or the +10 for prepared positions). They could avoid almost anything and force anyone to talk to them. But the question is was their roleplaying superior? No, their build was superior for roleplaying. DnD is a combat game in which people play roles. The great fantasy characters were men and women like Conan,Red Sonja, Aragorn, Legolas, Elminster and so on. They are remember for their PERSONALITY and their COMBAT POWER. Not their ability to talk everyone down. Another problem is that the ROLLplaying character with the 50+ diplomacy dominates the interaction, everyone else gets to do nothing while they defeat the encounter singlehandedly. Same problem with snipers and such. The goal of any good DM is to include everyone in the fun at the table. The diplomacy character is the single player needed. |
| bitznarf08-02-07, 05:23 PM | But the question is was their roleplaying superior? No, their build was superior for roleplaying. No. No. No. That is just a different type of rollplaying, one that focuses on social skills rather than melee skills. Their build is no better for roleplaying than the combat monster. One hits things all the time, the other talk to them all the time. Netiher is inherently 'better' or 'superior' when it comes to roleplaying. |
| Puggle Halfwine08-02-07, 06:59 PM | So let me get this straight Puggle... Zagyg is an aspect of Britt, and Britt has the Law domain? That is correct. The nuances of Britt are complex. |
| garyjohnson08-02-07, 07:35 PM | Dave, I was highlighting that it was one of several 'lighter side' or non serious plot oriented modules, that they wouldn't stick with greyhawk canon. These suit many age groups, but are more accessible to the younger aged folks then to those who play the modules with people eating other people :) As such I was saying such mods are good, but you have to cater for the other kind of more traditional fantasy 'everything is serious' players as well ;) When I played Scrambled Eggs, we played it straight - well, as straight as you can when your character is a masked half-orc luchador known only as The Silver Mask. :) I don't think Scrambled Eggs belongs in the same category of scenario as, say, Evening in Laufgen , Dark Days In Deed, or One Jen Too Many - they all contain deliberately over-the-top elements that are included for comic effect. Scrambled Eggs seemed to me to be a "straight", serious scenario. IMO, the "best" scenarios are the ones that can be played in different ways depending on the mood and composition of the table. My personal preference is to avoid "silly" scenarios - I'd rather be able to add humour to a "straight" scenario if the table is in the mood and interested than have to struggle to take out inappropriate humour, either because it's SoD-breaking or because people aren't in the mood for irrational, wacky stuff. Likewise, I prefer upbeat scenarios to downbeat scenarios. If the table wants to do broody, angst-ridden roleplaying they can add it to the scenario, but if they don't want to watch innocents suffer and die because they didn't arrive in time to save the day, there's not much you can do if the scenario has "hard-wired" that into the plot. Puggle, I'll try to reread Scrambled Eggs in the next week or so and give you some written feedback on the scenario. Cheers, Gary Johnson |
| garyjohnson08-02-07, 07:37 PM | Option three. Also note that not all of roleplaying/story exp was tied to that one particular fact. Sampo Haarlaa Naerie Triad Thanks, Sampo - is it a currently available scenario, or can you provide more detail on how exactly the XP rewards were written up? Cheers, Gary |
| clannagh08-02-07, 08:18 PM | When I played Scrambled Eggs, we played it straight - well, as straight as you can when your character is a masked half-orc luchador known only as The Silver Mask. :) I don't think Scrambled Eggs belongs in the same category of scenario as, say, Evening in Laufgen , Dark Days In Deed, or One Jen Too Many - they all contain deliberately over-the-top elements that are included for comic effect. Scrambled Eggs seemed to me to be a "straight", serious scenario. IMO, the "best" scenarios are the ones that can be played in different ways depending on the mood and composition of the table. My personal preference is to avoid "silly" scenarios - I'd rather be able to add humour to a "straight" scenario if the table is in the mood and interested than have to struggle to take out inappropriate humour, either because it's SoD-breaking or because people aren't in the mood for irrational, wacky stuff. Likewise, I prefer upbeat scenarios to downbeat scenarios. If the table wants to do broody, angst-ridden roleplaying they can add it to the scenario, but if they don't want to watch innocents suffer and die because they didn't arrive in time to save the day, there's not much you can do if the scenario has "hard-wired" that into the plot. Puggle, I'll try to reread Scrambled Eggs in the next week or so and give you some written feedback on the scenario. Cheers, Gary Johnson I generally ran it pretty straight back when we were still in Perrenland as well .. though we do have a lot of very young players so some GMs may have hammed it up a bit in the odd game .. but if so that wasnt coming from the mod. I actually lost a character that was just about to level in Scamble eggs (* grumbles about x3 crit weapons in intro mods *). The only issues we had locally was its a mod that suffers badly if people metagame or talk even slightly about the major plotline. |
| codyknotts08-02-07, 09:58 PM | No. No. No. That is just a different type of rollplaying, one that focuses on social skills rather than melee skills. Their build is no better for roleplaying than the combat monster. One hits things all the time, the other talk to them all the time. Netiher is inherently 'better' or 'superior' when it comes to roleplaying. I agree with you that was my point (sarcasm does not come through well on the net) But It seems to me that some people don't understand this. |
| _metz_08-02-07, 11:50 PM | I generally ran it pretty straight back when we were still in Perrenland as well .. though we do have a lot of very young players so some GMs may have hammed it up a bit in the odd game .. but if so that wasnt coming from the mod. I actually lost a character that was just about to level in Scamble eggs (* grumbles about x3 crit weapons in intro mods *). The only issues we had locally was its a mod that suffers badly if people metagame or talk even slightly about the major plotline. Maybe it was done for me by a particularly silly DM then! I do know I had a lot of fun though, and liked the module. As for the excessively serious gaming, I acutally like a balance between the two. And I like to play different characters in different mods as a result. There is a reason, that for the grim downbeat 'we don't win, we just only lose a few resources/4 innocent villages and hold the undead back for another week when we will come back and do it all over again' Perrenland Regionals I play a dour taciturn Dwarven Earthdreamer/Battle Cleric of Moradin who goes around smiting foes of the Khund. Whilst in Ratik games, I play a cheerful slightly insane 9th level Rogue Dread Pirate with a Wizard cohort (with ship's mage and a monkey familiar) who wanders around with glamered armour, 2 cutlasses, a hat of disguise, some fancy outfits, and a crewed 'merchant' ship, generally having a merry old sailors time with copious amounts of rum. I do agree, that you need to have both, (as is currently the opinion here in Perrenland where despite the mods being very well written, they have gotten a bit repetitive and grim) But I reiterate, if all the games were Madhousey' (one of my favourite mods) then some players would also be alienated, and it only works every now and then. You can't do it with all of them. - Dave |