Post/Author/DateTime	Post
UltimateReality 07-26-05, 03:12 PM	Okay, so some of you may remember I'm gearing up for a campaign after TPK's is done. Two weeks ago I handed out a 3/4 page, 12-point type sheet of campaign basics and chargen instructions. Besides the usual incessant questioning of "can I have X-which-isn't-on-the-allowed-list?", I have had a couple other frustrating, though not major problems. Your advice is appreciated. #1: timeliness. I asked them to have at least a sketch of their backstory to me by last Sunday, as large parts of the campaign will be written around them and, with my schedule and relative novice-DMhood, I want as much time as possible to give them something good. To date, exactly one player out of five has handed me a sketch. One player didn't even roll up her character until Sunday (which I can kind of understand because she's been busy recently with her grandma dying, moving out of home, working, and finalizing university stuff). Another is a really good player but is an infrequent attendee, and he didn't even show up and get a copy of the handout til this Sunday. The other two players have given me nothing, and I know they have more time and inclincation than the others. Yet they are very excited about my campaign. So excited, in fact, that it leads to problem #2, below. #2: Pr :censored: Cs. Pretty much all I have heard these two talk about is their PrCs. This is good, okay, I like PrCs myself. I even start with concepts based on PrCs. However I try to work beyond it to get a character. I have heard nothing about their characters beyond the fact that one wants to play a Shadowcraft Mage and the other a Chameleon because they both think each is broken. :rolleye2: I do not want to ban prestige classes, but how do I take the emphasis off them and ensure these players develop a character? If I require too much in-game roleplaying as part of the prereq, they will claim I am effectively banning PrCs. #3: Lack of teamwork. This has manifested both as a player and as a future DM. The party doesn't work well together -- odd, because we have gamed for over a year and half and have worked well before. I'm pegging a lot of this on us being experienced enough to know what concepts we want to play and playing them regardless of party makeup. I remember one campaign where TPK simply refused to say ahead of time what the chargen specs were. Of course everyone still had concepts, but not knowing whether they were viable until they actually sat down to make the characters together opened up a lot of discussion that otherwise wouldn't have happened. It is to the point with this group that I am tempted to say "forget the handout, when it's time to make characters I'll let you know what the specs are". The game is still set for an indefinite date in the future -- "whenever on_the_wings_of_TPK finishes his campaign" -- and I really don't like the direction this is heading. OTOH, I feel kind of bad changing the rules on them, as it were, even though they probably put all of 2 minutes into deciding which "broken" PrC to play (or haven't had time to read the handout in some cases) and it's probably a couple months before these things will see play. What say the boards on this matter? *** I also have two other problems, which occur under a different setting: one where I am a player, along with the same players above. Those problems are: #4: roleplaying. I cannot roleplay a character with anything other than my "real life" personality, because the other characters do not either. Any time I try, party effectiveness grinds to a halt. It's almost as though they can't relate to or communicate me when I'm playing something that's not my usual self...and frankly I'm feeling bored, frustrated, and trapped at not being able to make characters that have a different personality than I do. Suggestions? #5: Rules lawyering. I'm turning into one! Argh! Help me! I seem irresistably drawn to arguing whenever my beloved DM makes a judgement that renders my character unable to help affect the outcome of a fight, or something else I believe unnecessarily harms the party. (To be fair, I try to catch when we're misusing things to our advantage too, but the DM usually catches those before I do...he vetts all the character sheets, for one thing.) I've been getting bad about rules lawyering, and I want to do better. I know it stems purely from wanting my character to DO something -- I feel kinda useless right now as I'm in some slow levels. I've decided that instead of arguing, I will note on a piece of paper when I disagree with something, and look it up in a break. Is this a good solution? (Part of the reason the whole rules laywering came about is because, in preparation for my own DMing, I want to ensure I know the rules as well as possible. I fully expect attempted rules abuse from at least one other player, and two of them have a habit of not reading the rules too closely. A third is still kind of new to gaming and easily confused.)
Illion the Red 07-26-05, 03:30 PM	#1: timeliness. I asked them to have at least a sketch of their backstory to me by last Sunday, as large parts of the campaign will be written around them and, with my schedule and relative novice-DMhood, I want as much time as possible to give them something good. To date, exactly one player out of five has handed me a sketch. One player didn't even roll up her character until Sunday (which I can kind of understand because she's been busy recently with her grandma dying, moving out of home, working, and finalizing university stuff). Another is a really good player but is an infrequent attendee, and he didn't even show up and get a copy of the handout til this Sunday. The other two players have given me nothing, and I know they have more time and inclincation than the others. Yet they are very excited about my campaign. So excited, in fact, that it leads to problem #2, below. This is common. i've grown to expect the lack of response from players. The only thing that seems to help is to tell them that there is an XP reward or somthing along those lines for timliness/quality of background info. #2: Pr :censored: Cs. Pretty much all I have heard these two talk about is their PrCs. This is good, okay, I like PrCs myself. I even start with concepts based on PrCs. However I try to work beyond it to get a character. I have heard nothing about their characters beyond the fact that one wants to play a Shadowcraft Mage and the other a Chameleon because they both think each is broken. :rolleye2: I do not want to ban prestige classes, but how do I take the emphasis off them and ensure these players develop a character? If I require too much in-game roleplaying as part of the prereq, they will claim I am effectively banning PrCs. Make them come up with an in-game reason why that PrC is available. If it's not something that is common in your campaign world, they will likely have to find someone or something that will teach the PC about the PrC. #3: Lack of teamwork. This has manifested both as a player and as a future DM. The party doesn't work well together -- odd, because we have gamed for over a year and half and have worked well before. I'm pegging a lot of this on us being experienced enough to know what concepts we want to play and playing them regardless of party makeup. I remember one campaign where TPK simply refused to say ahead of time what the chargen specs were. Of course everyone still had concepts, but not knowing whether they were viable until they actually sat down to make the characters together opened up a lot of discussion that otherwise wouldn't have happened. If the PCs refuse to work together, it is their problem. Present the challenges to them and if they can't work together, then they aren't a party and will likely die fighting solo against monsters designed to fight the whole party. Consequences for not working together to preserve the whole "D&D Party Construct." #4: roleplaying. I cannot roleplay a character with anything other than my "real life" personality, because the other characters do not either. Any time I try, party effectiveness grinds to a halt. It's almost as though they can't relate to or communicate me when I'm playing something that's not my usual self...and frankly I'm feeling bored, frustrated, and trapped at not being able to make characters that have a different personality than I do. Suggestions? Find another group. I'm sorry to say so, but it doesn't sound like the rest of the group's style will fit with your desires to truly roleplay. Make a damage or spell machine for this group and leave your "character" personality at home. #5: Rules lawyering. I'm turning into one! Argh! Help me! I seem irresistably drawn to arguing whenever my beloved DM makes a judgement that renders my character unable to help affect the outcome of a fight, or something else I believe unnecessarily harms the party. (To be fair, I try to catch when we're misusing things to our advantage too, but the DM usually catches those before I do...he vetts all the character sheets, for one thing.) I've been getting bad about rules lawyering, and I want to do better. I know it stems purely from wanting my character to DO something -- I feel kinda useless right now as I'm in some slow levels. I've decided that instead of arguing, I will note on a piece of paper when I disagree with something, and look it up in a break. Is this a good solution? (Part of the reason the whole rules laywering came about is because, in preparation for my own DMing, I want to ensure I know the rules as well as possible. I fully expect attempted rules abuse from at least one other player, and two of them have a habit of not reading the rules too closely. A third is still kind of new to gaming and easily confused.) You should feel free to question things as the game progresses, but keep it to a minimum...Ask your question: "Shouldn't that provoke an Attack of Opportunity?" and let the DM respond with his ruling. If you disagree, write it down and look it up to bring it up after the game. This will allow the DM to still run the game and will allow you to get things clarified.
xlawedjeanne 07-26-05, 03:45 PM	#1: timeliness. I asked them to have at least a sketch of their backstory to me by last Sunday, as large parts of the campaign will be written around them and, with my schedule and relative novice-DMhood, I want as much time as possible to give them something good. To date, exactly one player out of five has handed me a sketch. One player didn't even roll up her character until Sunday (which I can kind of understand because she's been busy recently with her grandma dying, moving out of home, working, and finalizing university stuff). Another is a really good player but is an infrequent attendee, and he didn't even show up and get a copy of the handout til this Sunday. The other two players have given me nothing, and I know they have more time and inclincation than the others. Yet they are very excited about my campaign. So excited, in fact, that it leads to problem #2, below. you know how players can be, mine didnt show and i ended up playing with people i didnt even know knew how to play -.-. so my advice (newb advice i know) is not to excpet a lot from players. most except most of the work done, and most dont even do their share of the work. if they dont want to give you something good, you dont have to give them something good. #2: Pr :censored: Cs. Pretty much all I have heard these two talk about is their PrCs. This is good, okay, I like PrCs myself. I even start with concepts based on PrCs. However I try to work beyond it to get a character. I have heard nothing about their characters beyond the fact that one wants to play a Shadowcraft Mage and the other a Chameleon because they both think each is broken. :rolleye2: I do not want to ban prestige classes, but how do I take the emphasis off them and ensure these players develop a character? If I require too much in-game roleplaying as part of the prereq, they will claim I am effectively banning PrCs. tell them that there wont be any prestige classes. this will simply help them focus on their character. if you want prestige classes later on, than introduce them when they are around lvl 6 (a good lvl for prestige). by than they can choose a prestige based on their character, instead of a character based on the prestige. #3: Lack of teamwork. This has manifested both as a player and as a future DM. The party doesn't work well together -- odd, because we have gamed for over a year and half and have worked well before. I'm pegging a lot of this on us being experienced enough to know what concepts we want to play and playing them regardless of party makeup. I remember one campaign where TPK simply refused to say ahead of time what the chargen specs were. Of course everyone still had concepts, but not knowing whether they were viable until they actually sat down to make the characters together opened up a lot of discussion that otherwise wouldn't have happened. teamwork is a hard issue. i would say put them in situations where they must use it, or die. put them all in danger, so they all thrive to save themselves as a team. It is to the point with this group that I am tempted to say "forget the handout, when it's time to make characters I'll let you know what the specs are". The game is still set for an indefinite date in the future -- "whenever on_the_wings_of_TPK finishes his campaign" -- and I really don't like the direction this is heading. OTOH, I feel kind of bad changing the rules on them, as it were, even though they probably put all of 2 minutes into deciding which "broken" PrC to play (or haven't had time to read the handout in some cases) and it's probably a couple months before these things will see play. What say the boards on this matter? change the rules to whatever makes it easier for you. if its easier for you to try to get them to fill that out, than do so. but if you feel it saves you time and effort to not, than dont. #4: roleplaying. I cannot roleplay a character with anything other than my "real life" personality, because the other characters do not either. Any time I try, party effectiveness grinds to a halt. It's almost as though they can't relate to or communicate me when I'm playing something that's not my usual self...and frankly I'm feeling bored, frustrated, and trapped at not being able to make characters that have a different personality than I do. Suggestions? thats hard... i's say be whatever you like being. if they cant relate in the beggining, they will learn how. they will adept to your character as if they were a new player in the group, and they will relate to them. #5: Rules lawyering. I'm turning into one! Argh! Help me! I seem irresistably drawn to arguing whenever my beloved DM makes a judgement that renders my character unable to help affect the outcome of a fight, or something else I believe unnecessarily harms the party. (To be fair, I try to catch when we're misusing things to our advantage too, but the DM usually catches those before I do...he vetts all the character sheets, for one thing.) I've been getting bad about rules lawyering, and I want to do better. I know it stems purely from wanting my character to DO something -- I feel kinda useless right now as I'm in some slow levels. I've decided that instead of arguing, I will note on a piece of paper when I disagree with something, and look it up in a break. Is this a good solution? (Part of the reason the whole rules laywering came about is because, in preparation for my own DMing, I want to ensure I know the rules as well as possible. I fully expect attempted rules abuse from at least one other player, and two of them have a habit of not reading the rules too closely. A third is still kind of new to gaming and easily confused.) if you are having fun with incorect rules, than you can let them pass. if you have question wether they are correct or not, it is good to write it down for your own reference (like if you play with a different group). but if your group plays with slighty incorrect rules, and have fun than just go with it :). i can believe i am giving you advice ^^. well you helped me, so i will help you.
AntiDjinn 07-26-05, 04:00 PM	Remind your players that you are offering to build the campaign storyline around their character's background as a courtesy to them. This means play can start promptly without a whole session being spent introducing and motivating the characters. But if they don't comply then they don't reap the benefits: Characters who have been worked into the storyline will start with a place to live and will have contacts in the town or city where the game kicks off. Such characters may have family members or professional associates or other resources they can draw upon. Characters who don't supply a background are assumed to have none; they are homeless drifters who just wandered into town, knowing and known to nobody of importance. This exact thing happend in the last campaign I played in: The DM handed out a few pages with all the table rules he would be using, some changes to weapon pricing, classes and PrCs available, and the names of prominent families, churches, and organizations. PCs were asked to submit a character with a backstory that explained how they came to be in the starting town or what their situation was if they already lived there. Those of us who complied started out with a roof over our heads and three contacts each (locals such as a favored bartender, a fence, a merchant or two, a friendly member of the town watch) while those who did not started out with their starting equipment and gold and nothing else.
On_the_wings_of_TPK 07-26-05, 04:01 PM	Okay, so some of you may remember I'm gearing up for a campaign after TPK's is done. Two weeks ago I handed out a 3/4 page, 12-point type sheet of campaign basics and chargen instructions. Besides the usual incessant questioning of "can I have X-which-isn't-on-the-allowed-list?", I have had a couple other frustrating, though not major problems. Your advice is appreciated.The simple solution to this is to simply say "NO" and then stick to your guns on the matter. Players will always ask if they can X goodie from Y source that is really cool and such and such. Just keep saying no and eventually they will get the point. Rember the war I had to fight just to get them to stop asking me if i would allow X from Dragon Magazine? If I recall correctly I threatened to burn any copy of that rag that entered the apartment. #1: timeliness. I asked them to have at least a sketch of their backstory to me by last Sunday, as large parts of the campaign will be written around them and, with my schedule and relative novice-DMhood, I want as much time as possible to give them something good. To date, exactly one player out of five has handed me a sketch. One player didn't even roll up her character until Sunday (which I can kind of understand because she's been busy recently with her grandma dying, moving out of home, working, and finalizing university stuff). Another is a really good player but is an infrequent attendee, and he didn't even show up and get a copy of the handout til this Sunday. The other two players have given me nothing, and I know they have more time and inclincation than the others. Yet they are very excited about my campaign. So excited, in fact, that it leads to problem #2, below. This is something that as of recently I have given up on. Yes I ask for a backstory and yes the campaign will revolve around anything useful I find in there. The problem is though that when I first asked for backstories, the quality was crap. Then I awarded XP for it, and they got better. Then I stopped awarding XP for it and they got steadily worse. Now the quality is back to when I first started to ask for them. At the start of the camapign I got 4.5 backstories from 6 players. I was able to use material from 3-4 of them, and things were good for awhile. Then everyone walked away from their backsories and motivations that they themselves stated would work. From the 3-4 useful backstories, the campaign now hangs on 1. Everyone else has changed characters except for two and one is on vacation. The conclusion I have come to is that unless you reward heavily for a quality backstory, there is no point in asking for one, because inevitably trying to use it will become futile. #2: Pr :censored: Cs. Pretty much all I have heard these two talk about is their PrCs. This is good, okay, I like PrCs myself. I even start with concepts based on PrCs. However I try to work beyond it to get a character. I have heard nothing about their characters beyond the fact that one wants to play a Shadowcraft Mage and the other a Chameleon because they both think each is broken. :rolleye2: I do not want to ban prestige classes, but how do I take the emphasis off them and ensure these players develop a character? If I require too much in-game roleplaying as part of the prereq, they will claim I am effectively banning PrCs. Yes they will do that, but that is hardly your problem. You may require as much or as little to get into a PrC as you feel the class demands. Me, I just use whatever is implied by the PrC itself. This can be either written directly into the requiremnets, or it may be found in the flavour text. Or the PrC may may require that you are memeber of a certain guild, such as blood hound, and that guild may have other requirements above and beyond the written requiremnts of a particular PrC. In any event it is your call to make. #3: Lack of teamwork. This has manifested both as a player and as a future DM. The party doesn't work well together -- odd, because we have gamed for over a year and half and have worked well before. I'm pegging a lot of this on us being experienced enough to know what concepts we want to play and playing them regardless of party makeup. I remember one campaign where TPK simply refused to say ahead of time what the chargen specs were. Of course everyone still had concepts, but not knowing whether they were viable until they actually sat down to make the characters together opened up a lot of discussion that otherwise wouldn't have happened. This is another one that I am at loss over. I have taught you all tactics myself. I have on countless times proven their effectiveness, and still this group continues to refuse to use them. Also it would seem that teamwork is a foriegn concept to the group. I honestly do not know what to do, and have decided that since I can not show you the benefits of teamwork and tactics I will allow Darwin to take over the instruction of that lesson. It is to the point with this group that I am tempted to say "forget the handout, when it's time to make characters I'll let you know what the specs are". The game is still set for an indefinite date in the future -- "whenever on_the_wings_of_TPK finishes his campaign" -- and I really don't like the direction this is heading. OTOH, I feel kind of bad changing the rules on them, as it were, even though they probably put all of 2 minutes into deciding which "broken" PrC to play (or haven't had time to read the handout in some cases) and it's probably a couple months before these things will see play. What say the boards on this matter? You can certainly do that if you wish, but when I did that I ultimately was a failure. While true that the group will discuss what they are building with each other, no-one will change their concept for any reason. They will instead insist that it can work regardless of what others in the group are playing. As for not letting them know the specs ahead of time, while that may cut down on the pregame metagaming, it will not solve the issue. What will happen is the players will make something up on the fly and then when they find something else they want to play they will change charatcers. If you try and prevent this they will just have their characters commit suicide. I piont to our current line of characters as an example. To date there has been one character death and I lost one character sheet. Yet out of the 6 we started with only 2 are still playing their orginal characters, and it has been only 4 levels. One of the players with an orginal character is on vacation. #5: Rules lawyering. I'm turning into one! Argh! Help me! I seem irresistably drawn to arguing whenever my beloved DM makes a judgement that renders my character unable to help affect the outcome of a fight, or something else I believe unnecessarily harms the party. (To be fair, I try to catch when we're misusing things to our advantage too, but the DM usually catches those before I do...he vetts all the character sheets, for one thing.) I've been getting bad about rules lawyering, and I want to do better. I know it stems purely from wanting my character to DO something -- I feel kinda useless right now as I'm in some slow levels. I've decided that instead of arguing, I will note on a piece of paper when I disagree with something, and look it up in a break. Is this a good solution? (Part of the reason the whole rules laywering came about is because, in preparation for my own DMing, I want to ensure I know the rules as well as possible. I fully expect attempted rules abuse from at least one other player, and two of them have a habit of not reading the rules too closely. A third is still kind of new to gaming and easily confused.) Funny you should mention that. Every time I make a call or enforce a rule that goes against the party, I am accused of being intentionally out to nerf them -- by many players. The amount of rules lawyering and blatant lack of respect has severely hampered my ablity to DM effectively. It is for this reason that once my campaign is done I am considering not DMing for this group again. I really do not know what else to do and it is becoming very frustrating.
psionichamster 07-26-05, 04:10 PM	hmmm...numbered lists! yay! 1: timeliness... they're not gonna put effort into their characters? fine, don't put effort into them either. let their last-minute, no-bkgd-having char's be back-burnered for the first, second, etc. sessions until you either have an IG reason to engage them, or they give you history. it sounds cruel, but they'll take every advantage of you you give them. 2: PrC's... i've got similar issues, however it's not been so bad, since the choices are typically believable. if you think they're going for a class/race simply because they're "broken"...show them just how balanced they are...lvl 3 ninja with all his money spent on potions, poisons, and a high wis targets them at lvl 4. they die, you make them choose from a doz. of random "adventurers" that are in the area that can replace their lost char's. problem solved, character dead. 3: teamwork... see above. do NOT change the challenge levels of the adventures you are creating, simply because your players are stupid. i have a very hard time NOT playing a Lawful something or other (usually a caster) that is very vocal to his teammates. why? because that's what I'd do, and I am the logistical voice of my real-life "party"...without me, that don't happen, and that means the game suffers (case in point...last game that i ran, the party spent all their time running from plot hooks and burning random buildings, and using their powers to hide/cheat/steal their way through America. sure, i made mistakes, and gave them too much power, but still, the prime motivating person was sorely missing...) which leads to #4: roleplaying...it is difficult for people to accept new "people" into their group. especially if your cohorts are not so much playing new characters as acting out their own fantastical desires within the DnD rules. they're the same, you're different, and i think that may be the largest cause of your distress. as far as #5: ruleslawerying... get to know the rules. when combat ensues, use the tactics you have at your disposal as much as possible (i specifically make grappling enemies or NPC's SOLELY to remind myself and the players just how that works). when this happens, the lawerying will slack off, and you will all be more comfortable with how certain things happen. if you happen to notice a dropped roll, or a missed bonus, or something trivial at the moment, i would recommend you hold your tongue. you only slow down the game when you can't decide if there was a +8 or +7 attack bonus on that last swing, or if the spell did 11d6 +4 or 11d6 +5 dmg...it just aint worth it. take it easy with the tricky rules portions, and don't be afraid to adjudicate things (nicely, please)...ie, "you want to leap from the stairs, grab the chandelier, swing across the floor and drop behind the dais and the chairs?...how much can you move in a turn...calculate quickly, ok, make a jump check, dc 1/ft travelled to the chand, a climb check dc 12 to hold on, and a tumble check dc 15 to negate the damage and roll to your feet..." 6 second in a round, about 30 second each player adjudicating and declaring and resolving actions. that's my golden standard... (note: if you're wrong about a particular ruling at a particular time, screw it...that's past and you'll do it the right way in the future.) fear not, young padawan DM, you will achieve greatness in your own time! namaste' the hamster
Ut-Napishtim 07-26-05, 04:19 PM	1. I wouldn't sweat it. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. Part of DMing is accepting the fact that different players have different interests. Those who are interested in the story will enjoy it, those who aren't won't be hurt by it. Some folks just want to kill stuff and take it's treasure, and that's okay by me - I save the rp for the folks that want it. As a caveat, any player without a background is pretty much putting it in the hands of the DM in my games. If a player decides halfway though the game: Don't worry, my dad is a powerful Red Wizard, I'm sure he'll help us out. I say: Um, I don't remember reading that in your background - so I rolled randomly for it. Your dad is a dungsweeper and your mom died of syphilis when you were 14. 2. If a player wants to sub a PrC goal for a backstory that's fine by me (as long as I approved the PrC.) As mentioned earlier, if they don't want to put a lot of thought into the character I don't force them to. It's their loss. 3. I've noticed a lack of teamwork in a lot of games I've played in over the years. Usually flat-out it's because most players are really only looking for what's best for their character, and take CN alignments to match that. A party of 8 CN's isn't exactly going to function like a well-oiled machine, so in actuality this lack of teamwork is representative of the character's alignments and good roleplay. I've solved acute cases of this problem by DMing without a screen. No fudging means when people don't work together or charge off on their own they die. Not my fault, I just roll the dice, man. 4. As long as you fairly adjudicate the PC's Diplomacy rolls and such I don't think they'll mind that every NPC doesn't have a distinct personality. There are tables in the DMG and DMG II with cliche traits I've found are easy to present so that each NPC, while maybe being cliche, is easy to relate to and remember as distinct by the players. 5. Good for you! IMHO you have to be something of a rules lawyer to be a DM, especially a good one. I'd rather have a game where the DM was a rules lawyer than one of the many I've experienced where he hadn't even read the DMG. When I DM I'm usually the biggest rules lawyer at the table, but every player knows they've been treated fairly and equally in comparison to the others. Of course, if I look something up and I'm wrong it's important to be honest, admit it and move on - making any changes as needed. A DM is a storyteller and a referee, I think too many these days forget the latter part and their games suffer as a result when one player or another doesn't get a fair shake or equal stake. :twocents:
Endarire 07-26-05, 04:37 PM	1: The three main actions are rewards for completion, punishments for incompletion, and letting the situation go. As a DM, those without a stated background get incorporated into the world in a somewhat logical manner, but one in which I see fit. 2: Only what fits in your campaign should be allowed in it. That may mean that monks are outlawed or that half-orcs have different stats. PrCs should be allowed on an individual basis, depending on what fits. 3: You can try persuading them that cooperation is a good idea™, but you can not force it. 4: Try encouraging roleplaying within your group, knowing that you can not force it. If you wish to roleplay, try it with other people. 5: Know your rules, but know how the DM knows his. While you are not expected to know every rule, you should know commonly-used things, like how much damage fireball or magic missile can do at a given level, what modifiers affect melee damage, and the DC for tumbling through an area at half speed. -EE
rbrt_Spade 07-26-05, 04:39 PM	welcome to the ranks of dming! my fellowgamers i think have given you lots of advice. have fun solve the problems and have at it! :)
UltimateReality 07-26-05, 04:54 PM	Wow, such an outpouring in so little time....I guess I'll expand on some things a little and reply to you all. :) (Aside to xlawedjeanne: You're giving me very good advice, too. I forsee an excellent DM in you. :) Sometimes we are blind to our heart's wisdom and need someone else to scream it in our ear repeatedly until we finally hear it and pay attention. :P) First of all, about the backstories. You're all right. If they don't put anything in, they don't get anything out. It is frustrating, but it also reminds me not to build everything around the backstories -- especially when I think back to this group's most recent set of characters. I had hoped that, based on backstories, I could pick something special to give the characters (item, feat, skill, etc.). It is obvious to me now that if I don't offer this ahead of time, I won't even get backstories. (I really like the idea of starting as a homeless drifter, btw.) This is a style difference. (I think Ut-Napishtim had it pegged? They want to play out their fantasies in a D&D world.) It bothers me, but I can live with it. TPK and I were always of the mind that a backstory should be a common courtesy and, while xp or other bonuses may be given out for exceptional effort, having your character worked closely into the campaign was the largest reward there is. The rest of the group apparently thinks differently. ** Secondly, the PrCs. Again I wouldn't mind if the PC was something other than a bunch of numbers on a sheet. It's called a player character for a reason. I myself often start with a goal of a PrC. This is shaping up to be another style difference. It's not really earth-shattering in importance, but it is a bit annoying. The whole powergamey (bad powergamey, not good powergamey)/munchkin-y approach they're taking reeks of "DM vs. players" attitude, which I do not enjoy one bit. (Unfortunately they managed to suck me in for a bit there; I know to watch myself more closely in the future.) I've considered banning PrCs outright, but I don't think I'd have any players left afterwards. (Okay, maybe the two newbs would stay. I might keep TPK if I allowed more than core for source, too.) Then again, going in the vein of some of your replies, losing half my group to such a "draconian" measure may not be such a bad thing. Actually, now that I think of it, a campaign with the Races and Complete cycle open, but no PrCs, would be very interesting, especially if I allow the non-core base classes too. *ponder* Gives people a chance to play some interesting combos that aren't "boring" or "typecast", and makes it easier to add some flavour based on race (and new base classes). I find that the higher the flavour content, the higher the roleplaying content. ** On to the teamwork. I feel this requires more explanation. The deficiency occurs on a number of levels: character design, deciding on a plan of approach to nearly every problem/encounter, and complete lack of use of combat tactics. These have all been experienced by me on the player end of things. TPK does not go lightly on us just because we don't work together, and I firmly believe he should "let Darwin take over the instruction of this lesson". :P To Ut-Napishtim: they're not CN alignments. But everyone is still basically just looking out for number one. ** Roleplaying: another style difference. I think I'll just blunder on with my sorry attempts at RP anyway. (It's hard to be much good at it when I have to fight the whole way, but past experience has proven that the group can and will change some parts of their behaviour if I lead the way, and if it's rewarded by the DM. It happens more effectively if I'm both. ;)) A lot of the roleplaying encounters TPK has tried to use have resulted in frustration for both him and me -- him because no one actually roleplays them, and me because I'm letting myself feel too constrained by peer pressure to try and do something different. ** Rules lawyering: I think some of you may have skimmed this section. I was talking about my own behaviour as a player. I know how to handle it as a DM. :P I do realize now that, with some of the players taking their unofficial leads from me, I unintentionally contributed to, or even created, the problem. Which means henceforth I shall stop enabling it. No more arguing with the DM, at least not in the middle of the game. It is a game, these are just graphite marks on dead trees, and it's not that big of a deal.
Thoronmir 07-26-05, 05:04 PM	#1: timeliness. I asked them to have at least a sketch of their backstory to me by last Sunday, as large parts of the campaign will be written around them and, with my schedule and relative novice-DMhood, I want as much time as possible to give them something good.Not every player wants to bother with backgrounds. I’ve learned that I can accept a character concept as long as the player can answer three questions: 1. What would motivate the PC to adventure? 2. What would motivate the PC to take a life? 3. What would motivate the PC to save a life? If my players give me more (and they almost always do … average background is about five typed pages), I’ll work details into the campaign plot. If not, I can use their answers to my three questions to prepare plot hooks that should appeal to the PCs (assuming the players are honest in their answers).#2: Pr :censored: Cs. Pretty much all I have heard these two talk about is their PrCs. This is good, okay, I like PrCs myself. I even start with concepts based on PrCs. However I try to work beyond it to get a character. I have heard nothing about their characters beyond the fact that one wants to play a Shadowcraft Mage and the other a Chameleon because they both think each is broken. :rolleye2: I do not want to ban prestige classes, but how do I take the emphasis off them and ensure these players develop a character? If I require too much in-game roleplaying as part of the prereq, they will claim I am effectively banning PrCs.Perhaps you can use Issue 2 to help with Issue 1. Tell the players that, in order to obtain a PrC, they must create a background that would justify entering into the PrC. If they remain stubborn, hand them an Everquest disk and wish them luck. #3: Lack of teamwork. This has manifested both as a player and as a future DM. The party doesn't work well together -- odd, because we have gamed for over a year and half and have worked well before. I'm pegging a lot of this on us being experienced enough to know what concepts we want to play and playing them regardless of party makeup. I remember one campaign where TPK simply refused to say ahead of time what the chargen specs were. Of course everyone still had concepts, but not knowing whether they were viable until they actually sat down to make the characters together opened up a lot of discussion that otherwise wouldn't have happened.Knowing that each PC’s survival will, at some point, depend on the party as a whole, why would any player not want to make character generation a team activity. I certainly don’t need input from the other players for selecting specific skills and feats, but why not at least discuss concepts to ensure that the PCs will (a) complement each other and (b) cover all the necessary archetypes? In my regular group, we are so embedded in specific concepts that I could probably predict what type of character we would each play (perhaps not Race or Class, but I can narrow it down to Tank, Melee, Skill Monkey, Arcane, Divine, etc.).It is to the point with this group that I am tempted to say "forget the handout, when it's time to make characters I'll let you know what the specs are". The game is still set for an indefinite date in the future -- "whenever on_the_wings_of_TPK finishes his campaign" -- and I really don't like the direction this is heading. OTOH, I feel kind of bad changing the rules on them, as it were, even though they probably put all of 2 minutes into deciding which "broken" PrC to play (or haven't had time to read the handout in some cases) and it's probably a couple months before these things will see play. What say the boards on this matter?I say that, before anyone lifts another finger to prepare for your campaign, you have a serious heart-to-heart with your players and decide if they’re really interested in playing in the game you want to run. Because it sounds as if the DM and players are working from different scripts. If possible, compromise. If you can’t or they won’t, I wouldn’t put myself through the pain of DMing for this party.#4: roleplaying. I cannot roleplay a character with anything other than my "real life" personality, because the other characters do not either. Any time I try, party effectiveness grinds to a halt. It's almost as though they can't relate to or communicate me when I'm playing something that's not my usual self...and frankly I'm feeling bored, frustrated, and trapped at not being able to make characters that have a different personality than I do. Suggestions?Well, if you’re willing to do all the heavy lifting here, I suggest you ease into a different personality. Maybe that would help the other players realize that it’s still you behind the curtain. But really … with so many points of conflict, is it worth it?#5: Rules lawyering. I'm turning into one! Argh! Help me! I seem irresistably drawn to arguing whenever my beloved DM makes a judgement that renders my character unable to help affect the outcome of a fight, or something else I believe unnecessarily harms the party. (To be fair, I try to catch when we're misusing things to our advantage too, but the DM usually catches those before I do...he vetts all the character sheets, for one thing.) I've been getting bad about rules lawyering, and I want to do better. I know it stems purely from wanting my character to DO something -- I feel kinda useless right now as I'm in some slow levels. I've decided that instead of arguing, I will note on a piece of paper when I disagree with something, and look it up in a break. Is this a good solution? (Part of the reason the whole rules laywering came about is because, in preparation for my own DMing, I want to ensure I know the rules as well as possible. I fully expect attempted rules abuse from at least one other player, and two of them have a habit of not reading the rules too closely. A third is still kind of new to gaming and easily confused.)There’s nothing wrong with raising a point if you think a mistake is being made. Like I used to tell my law students, “There are no stupid questions; only stupid people who ask questions.” Just don’t belabor the issue. Let the DM rule and, if you still think he’s wrong, make a note and look it up later. DMing a decent roleplaying campaign requires enough time and effort. I’m not sure I’d want to take on the additional frustration that apparently awaits you with this group of players. New DMs have plenty of problems even with the most cooperative players. If you decide to soldier on, good luck.
demonpunk 07-26-05, 05:10 PM	Sorry, only read the initial post (as I'm on my way to leave work and just scanning the boards), but it sounds like you are me. I mean, I DM and I'm having the same problems with my players. And when I play I'm a bad roleplayer and a rules lawyer. Not severely, but its there. You are not alone!
TheErsatzFacsimileOfMe 07-26-05, 05:17 PM	1. I agree with anyone who says,"If they turned them in....they play now....if they didn't...make them wait." 2. First off...if it doesn't fit in to your campaign world (now or not ever), let them know this, and stick to your guns. Secondly, stick to your guns. and finally, as the DM feel free to do anything you wish to limit the materials which can be used....you could say "core-only" which is what I usually do. 3. Force them to play together or die...they'll figure it out eventually. 4. You could make PCs that have "subtle" differences from your own personality, but nothing drastic....see if it works. 5. Check with the DM after the session. And in summary....remember, it's only a game...you're supposed to be having fun...
UltimateReality 07-26-05, 05:18 PM	Not every player wants to bother with backgrounds. I’ve learned that I can accept a character concept as long as the player can answer three questions: 1. What would motivate the PC to adventure? 2. What would motivate the PC to take a life? 3. What would motivate the PC to save a life?The problem with our group is exemplified by what happened just htis campaign: TPK got backstories, and people (myself included, alas) either changed their character or went in a completely different direction than the backstory indicated. I like your list though. I think you may have seen what I wanted for a backstory already. If not: 1) Basic life history, including your region of origin and any travels, including why you are in (the starting region). 2) Important relatives, friends, enemies, colleagues, neighbours, mentors, or other PCs or NPCs. 3) Any contact you have with guilds, temples, merchant houses, government, or other organizations. 4) Your character’s personal goals. 5) How you acquired any magic items you own. 6) A short personality sketch of your character, including any distinctive traits, features, or quirks. If my players give me more (and they almost always do … average background is about five typed pages),I envy you. (Though five pages/PC is a bit much for me to handle right now, at least yours write something!) I can use their answers to my three questions to prepare plot hooks that should appeal to the PCsSo what do you do when they run away from every plot hook you dangle? :P Tell the players that, in order to obtain a PrC, they must create a background that would justify entering into the PrC.Heeey, I like. I also want to have some real RP to get into PrCs -- not just "okay, when I'm in town I find someone from the guild to teach me". I don't believe it works like that. I should probably introduce their guild/PrC contacts a level or two early in order to allow appropriate time, no? why would any player not want to make character generation a team activity.Because they all wanna play their cool concept that kicks butt. ;) In my regular group, we are so embedded in specific concepts that I could probably predict what type of character we would each play (perhaps not Race or Class, but I can narrow it down to Tank, Melee, Skill Monkey, Arcane, Divine, etc.)Some of us tend to play more archetypal characters than others. The problem is that these characters don't mesh well in terms of covering bases. We had a group that was fully half rogues. This would be cool if the rogues each excelled in their own area, but they all pretty much tried to be generalists, and as a result, NO role got filled. I say that, before anyone lifts another finger to prepare for your campaign, you have a serious heart-to-heart with your players and decide if they’re really interested in playing in the game you want to run. Because it sounds as if the DM and players are working from different scripts. If possible, compromise. If you can’t or they won’t, I wouldn’t put myself through the pain of DMing for this party. <snip> DMing a decent roleplaying campaign requires enough time and effort. I’m not sure I’d want to take on the additional frustration that apparently awaits you with this group of players. New DMs have plenty of problems even with the most cooperative players. If you decide to soldier on, good luck.Thank you for your advice. You are, of course, right about the heart to heart. When I last tried DMing, I clearly specified a heavy-RP campaign and got pretty good results. I think I need to do the same with this one. Also, as TPK has pointed out: there's no rush. This could still be a long way off. Things don't need to be finalized right now. It's okay to wait a bit before making executive decisions. I can take the time to figure out just what kind of campaign I want to run (roleplaying, from the sounds of it), and let the players know what parameters I want to use.
Thoronmir 07-26-05, 05:35 PM	So what do you do when they run away from every plot hook you dangle? :PI was going to say something clever about fishing with M80's, but I'll answer your question since it raises what I consider to be an important point. If the players aren't biting on my plot hooks, I conclude that I'm no longer tempting the PCs' true motivations. At that point, it's time for the players to answer my three questions again. I encourage players to allow their characters to evolve. The cold-hearted mercenary who was once only motivated by money may have developed a conscious and is now likely to protect the weak rather than just sell his sword for gold. I know my campaign has failed if every PC has the same personality at level 8 as they did at level 1. Characters should change over time in response to their experiences in the campaign. Most of my regular players write campaign journals in which their characters discuss such changes, so I usually know what's going on in their heads and can adjust my hooks accordingly. But, if necessary, I will simply have the players answer my three questions. Regarding your list of background issues, I would certainly give a DM all that and more, but it would not be complete. I always leave a few gaps to be filled in during the campaign. I never know how the adventures will inspire me. So, my backgrounds tend to take the form of a series of anecdotes and vignettes that provide all the information the DM wants (and then some), but I allow myself some leeway to add to my character's pre-campaign experiences.
adrj 07-26-05, 05:45 PM	I read that list of questions and actually shuddered. It's not that I'm against RP in my games. In fact I quite enjoy it most times, but just the thought of being asked to fill out that much background made me feel ill. I give a very broad character history if requested, and let the DM tailor the details to fit whatever plot hook he may have. He's not constrained by something I wrote down before I really "knew" my character and I'm not worried at all about the DM corrupting or changing my characters history.
UltimateReality 07-26-05, 05:53 PM	I read that list of questions and actually shuddered. It's not that I'm against RP in my games. In fact I quite enjoy it most times, but just the thought of being asked to fill out that much background made me feel ill.eh? :confused: I didn't think it was too much, especially considering the party is starting at level 3. I'm fine with point form notes on the back of a bar napkin being the sum of your backstory. Also, if the PCs don't want to fill in contacts, that's okay -- they don't get any contacts. And life history? All I need is salient points (again, point form is fine, and if all you have is "family died in fire", that's okay). I just want them to put some thought into their characters. I'm not insisting they write a book about him, or know everything about him before they've played him. I do, however, want to see that their character is more than a collection of numbers to them, and that they have a concept beyond "I want PrC X". Wanting PrC X is certainly a valid part of a character concept, but having just PrC X is not a character concept -- it's a build.
Thoronmir 07-26-05, 06:06 PM	Wanting PrC X is certainly a valid part of a character concept, but having just PrC X is not a character concept -- it's a build.Exactly. While it's possible that a character may suffer from such narrowminded sense of purpose that he chants the mantra "I want to become PrC X!" in response to any personal questions, it's hardly a satisfying basis for the PC's self-awareness. It's fine that achieving PrC X is the player's only goal; I would hope that a character had more on his mind.
adrj 07-26-05, 06:23 PM	I may have read a bit too much into the questions then. Question 1 to me asks "Describe how your character got to level x?" Question 2 is a real sticking point for me. My group plays homebrew worlds exclusively. NPC's are the DM's domain, so I just can't see myself giving imporant NPC's any sort of backstory or limitations. (NPC x can't have fought off the orc hordes then! He was home teaching me how to swing a sword.) Question 5 is again asking me "how did you get to level x?" Even if you bought said item(s), how did you get the money? To properly answer some of these questions (as I read them), I would need to have a fair bit of knowledge about my DM's world. For someone like me, just answering questions 3, 4 and 6 would be almost perfect. I would honestly prefer to answer question 6 after a session or 2 have passed so I can get a feel for the game, the world and the party before I settle on a character personality.
UltimateReality 07-26-05, 06:36 PM	The first thing I should say is that I heavily encourage PCs to work on their backstories with me when I DM, so I can make suggestions and incorporate their ideas of its history, geography, and recent and local events. Question 1 to me asks "Describe how your character got to level x?"Basically, yes, although I don't want all the gory details. Just the things that are essential to your character. I also want to have a way to hook you up with the party beyond "you're all in the tavern and..." (Our players are particularly bad at intertwining backstories by themselves.) Question 2 is a real sticking point for me. My group plays homebrew worlds exclusively. NPC's are the DM's domain, so I just can't see myself giving imporant NPC's any sort of backstory or limitations. (NPC x can't have fought off the orc hordes then! He was home teaching me how to swing a sword.)Ahhhh. Well we play about half homebrew and half published. The reason for this is mainly to let you seed in hooks for your PrCs, and maybe give the DM something to work with for an off-the-cuff adventure. It's also fun just to be like "we decide to go to Old Bruno's Smithy, seeing as he's my brother's mentor." (And hey, I may even cut them a deal on the armor if they RP it nice.) Obviously Elminster isn't an NPC you have contact with unless we're starting at near-epic. :P It's generally assumed that any NPC contacts you have will not be historically important or very influential, although you can work with the DM to have an intermediately important one. The benefits gained from NPC connections are minor, but they are there. They also make good plot hooks. Question 5 is again asking me "how did you get to level x?" Even if you bought said item(s), how did you get the money?This requirement would've been removed had the PCs started at a higher level, due to the sheer insanity of detailing the history of all your lewt. It is there mainly to encourage them to think of their items as something beyond "a +X uber-leet insane-bursting weapon of doom". To properly answer some of these questions (as I read them), I would need to have a fair bit of knowledge about my DM's world....not that anyone READS the handouts. *grumble* Sorry. They really won't read anything longer than about 3 pages, and even then they just skim for crunchy bits and miss those little, unimportant headings like "History" or "Government". I would honestly prefer to answer question 6 after a session or 2 have passed so I can get a feel for the game, the world and the party before I settle on a character personality.Understandable. Hence why I used the words "short" and "sketch". :P I have totally been there with characters that change on you...I just want there to be something there that can change in the first place! :) Do remember that up until now, my party has had absolutely no character beyond the RL personality of the player, so this is intended partially to help them get their creative juices flowing too.
scott644 07-26-05, 06:50 PM	1: timeliness. To be honest, this isn't so much about timeliness as about asking for in-depth background stories. Simply let them create them if they like, or not if they don't. Use the ones that are created as part of the world. Heck, let these guys help build part of the world with their background stories - it's an awesome empowerment to the players! I have a character from a province in a kingdom in one game, where the DM hadn't written up the province yet; I wrote a backstory (and then some), and effectively created the society and culture of the province for him. Every time we go there, talk about it, or have npc's from there come around, I always feel a bit of proprietary pride. It's the same with the players who present backstories. Also, if a backstory is particularly juicy or well-written, give the character an experience award. For those who don't, they simply won't get the rewards. And then, you put the two-dimensional characters in among the three-dimensional characters, and see who comes out ahead. 2: PrCs. PrCs (and other optional game aspects) aren't as bad as you think they might be. Just follow three simple rules. First, allow only those you feel fit and contribute to your campaign. Second, only allow access after the characters have been roleplayed in an appropriate way to justify it. Becoming a drunken master is a perfect example; as a special qualifier you have to get rip-roaring drunk with some real drunken masters, without getting into trouble as a result. Sounds easy enough, except you have to find them first, befriend them, and finally go out and have a party with them. Shadowdancers? Again, have to find them first, then convince them to accept you. Some wouldn't take so much; the eldritch knight for instance, is a simple blending of combat and arcane magic. The mystic theurge however, would require convincing the leaders of one's religion that one isn't betraying the sacred tenets by mixing the Divine Gift with arcane corruptions. 3: Lack of teamwork. Simple enough. Give them a bunch of individual adventures, each of which demonstrates clearly how they'd be able to do soooo much better with other party members' assistance. Give the rogue a "job," only to find the local necromancer had protected the place with a few zombies. Give the cleric a crypt to clear, full of (minor) traps and locks to pick. Give the Wizard a hall of illusions to pass, with a test of physical prowess at the end. Give the fighter the very same hall, starting from the other end and having his door disappearing until he clears the illusions. Don't shy away from making it too hard for each one of them, either; make them fight a hard fight to get away/survive without the appropriate character's assistance. They'll learn real fast. 4: roleplaying. Give in-game awards for good roleplay. First, give on-the-spot exp for excellent roleplay moments. Second, give bonuses and penalties to social skills based on roleplay. For example, they need to find Argon the Wizard and their rogue/bard sets about with gather information. If the player just opts to role the dice, give a significant penalty (the PC came at everybody with an arrogant attitude, expecting them to just produce information on demand). On the other hand, if they actually go up to people and talk to them respectfully and with a certain degree of cunning, give a bonus (the PC was a likeable chap, ingratiating himself to his new acquaintances and earning their respect as well as a desire to help him). 5: Rules lawyering. Set a few house rules that explain how this isn't going to work against you. For instance, one game I'm in the DM doesn't really know the rules that well. What he does is focus on the roleplay and adjusts the rules to accommodate the situation; it's a swashbuckling campaign, so he bends the rules backward sometimes if we're being flashy, showing some flair, or just kicking backside all over the place - or if the same is happening to us. In the end, it all comes out more impressive for it.
psionichamster 07-26-05, 08:58 PM	you know...long story short, i don't think your group deserves you if they fight you about making believable backgrounds for their characters, are disinterested in the "meat" of the story you are providing, and choose to willfully endanger their lives with selfish notions... they deserve the horrible nasty fate that awaits them you probably have a number of very interesting, lethal-potential encounters/adventures planned out. (as i recall, desert based...) take it from the ancients...the best place to carry your water, is inside you. if you are too focused on the external "things" that surround the character (you being your players, not necessarily you in person), you miss out on the motivations/personal decisions that should guide a character's development. but that's coming from someone who went to school for readin' and writin', so that probably does not appeal to all people... if they can't give you more than a list of BAB, HP, feats and the like, you are under no obligation to give them any more than a series of AC's, Special Attacks, and the like, all of which you can use from any published WoTC source (or elsewhere, for that matter...i highly recommend using Shadowrun spells for your NPC casters, if you want to mess with them...) don't kill yourself for a group that is not willing to meet you at least halfway...it simply drains your desire to game, and that's not cool (on second thought...if you drive off the problem players, you can recruit new ones...better ones...bionic ones....) hmm... i forget who wrote it (and i am too lazy to scroll down to find out), but you and your group do not seem to be on the same wavelength about what kind of game you want to play. you: deep immersion RP, personal interactions, water merchants, intrigue, and all around wahoo-goodness them: crunchy bits of cheese (munchkin-variety), Prestige classes for the unprestigious, and straw men that can kill goblins/orcs/dragons and collect the K3W1 13W7!...(ok, i may be being a little unfair, but i don't know them, and don't really feel like being fair right now...) unless you can come to an accord about what kind of game the group wants to play (and yes, you count, as well), this is not going to end well. hope this has helped namaste' the hamster
celtredleg 07-26-05, 09:12 PM	Your list of questions does not seem that long. I dont see why it could not at least be outlined. I have given up on writen backstorys with the players I have now. Just not the sort of thing they go for. On the plus side, they gobble up every hook tossed infront of them. If you dont at least limit Prcs available you might be in a lot of trouble. As a new DM, you probably are not yet flexible enough to catch all the little quirks some of the Prcs have. Even experienced DMs can get caught out because of the sheer number of Prcs available. If it doesnt fit, or you think it will hurt your game, ban it befiore they start play. Doing so after they have invested gameplay in getting to the Prc is almost always going to upset your players. As for teamwork, I have always felt pain is an excellent teacher. Pound them. Flatten them. TPK if appropriate. As for the roleplay, if you are stuck in a group that does not suit your style, start looking for another. You dont have enough spare time to waste it on knucleheads that wont support you after you have supported them. Rules are mostly important in combat, so your survival depends on understanding them. They dont have to be RAW, but any variations need to be pointed out before hand. And a note on nerfing. If you feel something is to powerful for your game, by all means, nerf that sucker down. But, dont give somebody something, and then take it away. You read the player board, its full of my DM nerfed me, or my DM sucks. Most of the time, its better to leave a little extra power in your game than to have a massively unhappy player in your game. Us DMs never nerf things that players dont care about. If its unimprotant to them, then they never use it. Very few things are really broken, its just that we dont know a good counter to it. Or have miss read the rules. I recently allowed an archer to combine rapid shot, and mutishot. No problem at low level, major problem at higher levels. Good luck. You have demonstrated a great deal of effort to get it right. Such care deserves success.
Ut-Napishtim 07-26-05, 10:36 PM	Knowing that each PC’s survival will, at some point, depend on the party as a whole, why would any player not want to make character generation a team activity. I certainly don’t need input from the other players for selecting specific skills and feats, but why not at least discuss concepts to ensure that the PCs will (a) complement each other and (b) cover all the necessary archetypes? This is another great point I hadn't considered. I think every game I've played in and DMed since... oh at least since 3E came out had the players deciding who got which of the four archetypes (combat, sneaky trapspringer, magic, band-aid guy,) each wanted and who took what. If these guys aren't doing this then they're just stupid selfish. I just started playing a Cleric in an online game, and I don't know who's been running around saying they're overpowered but I'm pretty disappointed with my character from a mechanics perspective. From an rp perspective though the guy's pretty cool, so I just focus on that knowing someone has to be the band-aid guy. If your peeps haven't figured this out yet, it's about time someone laid down some harsh lessons. It's like that guy on the other thread asking about if it's fair to use traps since his party has no Rogue. I say as long as it's a fair CR for the party then go for it. The bad guys in real life don't even play by the rules of common decency, why should the ones in D&D not use traps simply because none of the players were selfless enough to take a Rogue. Heck, I'd take a Rogue if nobody wanted to, Rogues are pretty cool. :twocents:
UltimateReality 07-26-05, 11:05 PM	i don't think your group deserves youOh, they're not that terrible. They're just a bit trying at times, and the differing styles really don't help much. Like I said, with time and patience they can be molded -- and some of them come up with gold on their own occasionally. (One player in particular has a gift for both quotes, and humorous sayings at opportune times.) It's the newbs I feel bad for, because I want to show them a well-rounded D&D, one that's more than just endless hack 'n slash. Both of them are girls, so it's even more important to me to increase my gender representation in the hobby. as i recall, desert basedI'm not sure what I want to use for a campaign setting right now. I whipped up a quick generic no-PrC but just about everything else goes rules sheet, and I've started back to work on my original basic plot hooks seeded into Irada. I think when TPK gets home tonight, he and I will resume work on the campaign setting. (It's actually going to tie into the homebrew he started. I made this separate thing and he wanted to incorporate it. There are other places yet to come too. We work well together when designing homebrews.) Although, one player does have a couple of friends interested in playing. Unfortunately, one sounds like a jackass and the other has...um...undesirable influence. simply drains your desire to gameMy desire to game has already been drained a fair bit, and as you can tell from TPK's post it's been weighing heavily on him too. To be fair to this group, though, we've been worse than this before and pulled through. These guys deserve at least a few more sessions before we bail. They're friends. (on second thought...if you drive off the problem players, you can recruit new ones...better ones...bionic ones....)LOL. I may sig that. you: deep immersion RP, personal interactions, water merchants, intrigue, and all around wahoo-goodnessEngeh. I like the combat too. I just like it to have meaning. And I like to actually finish it. Loot is always good -- I'm always saving for some item or another. Although the "wahoo-goodness" is flattering. :P If you dont at least limit Prcs available you might be in a lot of trouble.See, here's the thing: I have no issue with the power level of most of them, and know enough to ban the insane ones. (Sometimes the other players don't read the rules completely and misinterpret what their PrC gives them, but the DM catches that kind of stuff.) I love PrCs myself. But suddenly I'm having trouble wondering how to keep the characters mechanically individual without them. I think that's a sign I'm addicted, right? :P I would limit them to one PrC and taking full progression, but they already do that. It's just...all I hear about is the PrC, and what cool powers their character has. (Yes, your character is allowed cool powers and you're allowed to brag, but not for more than one session in a row. Please?) You dont have enough spare time to waste it on knucleheads that wont support youFeeling vicious today? :P The problem is I don't really have enough spare time to go find another group. Plus, these people are my friends out of game -- not just "people I play D&D with". Amidst the insane work and school and family schedules, we rarely see each other outside of the game now. :( I think every game I've played in and DMed since... oh at least since 3E came out had the players deciding who got which of the four archetypes (combat, sneaky trapspringer, magic, band-aid guy,) each wanted and who took what. If these guys aren't doing this then they're just stupid selfish.I guess out group is stupid selfish then...no, our first mistake was letting the sometimes-player be the cleric. We quickly invested in wands of cure for my druid. To give you an idea of our complete inability to use tactics, we're averaging 20 uses of the wand per 4-5 hour session. Even when the cleric shows up. (Another player made a cleric and the cleric player replace his character with a tank, as I recall.) A lot of this is holdover from when we had 7-9 players and could play whatever we wanted, too. With that many players, the archetypes were always covered. When you've only got 4 regular gamers, it's a lot tighter. *** Anyway, above all I know all your advice is well-meant but please don't be slinging the hate at my friends. I may not game like them, and it may be frustrating, but they are good people -- and some of them are reading this thread. (Actually to be honest it kinda annoys me that I know at least one of them comes on here for the sole purpose of reading my and TPK's posts, and the CO board. Never posts anything, but frequently comments on threads we've written in. And never any other threads. Wouldn't mind so much if it didn't scream meta-gamer. Or if he'd actually reply to them. Then again, I should probably just be glad we don't get into that big online drama sh!t...gawd I had enough of that just watching others. :P It pains me to think I may have to resort to sock puppets, though.) Hm. So after that derailing, let me reiterate: my friends frustrate me sometimes, and I may need to look for a new group ultimately, but I would like to give these guys another shot. They've proven they're capable of better in the past; I don't see why they can't go back up to that standard now. And someone -- Yours Truly (tm) -- has got to lead the way. By example.
Timlagor 07-26-05, 11:27 PM	I don't know about Shadowcraft Mage but Chameleon isn't even Good let alone broken. The fact that I haven' heard of Shadowcraft Mage despite a fair amount of reading on the CO board would seem to indicate that it isn't either. HOWEVER If someone said they wanted to play a PrC in a campaign I was running because "it's broken" the conversation would go something like this. Player: I want to play X it's soooo broken man DM: X is broken? P: oh yeah DM: well I haven't really looked at it but I'll take your word for it. There will be no X in this campaign. P: Wha!? DM:Broken things are bad for the game: they *break it*. We don't want a broken game so we'll leave broken things out. Teamwork Face them with a bunch of low level things fighting as a team and then let them see how puny the stats were. If you *really* want to rub their noses in it then gather up their character sheets when they level up and when they have levelled up again whup them with their own party 2 levels ago. If they're really bad go for 3 levels. You don't have to be a good or lawful wizard to want the fighter to have good armour and similarly any sane fighter will want the wizard to have good spells adn the gear to keep them alive and effective
UltimateReality 07-26-05, 11:35 PM	I don't know about Shadowcraft MageIn RoS, lets your shadow evoc and conj spells do a higher %age of real damage... Player: I want to play X it's soooo broken man DM: X is broken? P: oh yeah DM: well I haven't really looked at it but I'll take your word for it. There will be no X in this campaign. P: Wha!? DM:Broken things are bad for the game: they *break it*. We don't want a broken game so we'll leave broken things out. :plotting: :D :evillaugh I like you already. Actually, they don't go around saying it's broken (mostly). They just on and on and on about how cool it is, how much damage they deal with their weapons/spells, how insane their Hide skill and/or sneak attack will be, how insanely many times they get to use invisibility, etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum ad nauseum. I mean I can barely tolerate it as a player. I'm glad they're telling me their character concepts ahead of time. And it's not like those builds of theirs can't be beat. (Again, that whole "carefully and completely reading the rules" issue.) I just wish they'd talk about something else every once in awhile, other than "at Xth level, I can deal a bajillion d googleplex hps damage, split evently amidst all energy types and no DR or resistance can affect it. Plus I get to make an attack and if they don't make their Fort DC infinity I get to put craters in Mars with the velocity their body chunks are flying apart from each other. And they won't even see me coming." Face them with a bunch of low level things fighting as a team and then let them see how puny the stats were.TPK does this a lot. :( My poor, brave DM. He kicks our butt often. Unfortunately, you need more than one person for it to be teamwork... You don't have to be a good or lawful wizard to want the fighter to have good armour and similarly any sane fighter will want the wizard to have good spells adn the gear to keep them alive and effectiveYou know, I've always been thankful that our group has been good about dividing treasure. Anything immediately useful to party members gets given to those with the most need/use for it, and the rest is liquidated and split evenly. The party even pitches for wands of cure when there's no cleric. :weep: Ny group is so awesome that way.
SilverSabre25 07-27-05, 12:22 AM	Yipe. This sounds so much like my group it isn't even funny. I'm currently DMing for the first timeand i'm facing a lot of the same issues, regarding timeliness and broken-ness and whatnot. This thread has actually been really useful and valuable for me, thanks!
Kintara 07-27-05, 01:01 AM	Okay, re: backstories: this may seem like a strange question, but why do you want the backstories? Is it mostly because you want to incorporate their backstories into the campaign? Backstories aren't the only way to tailor a campaign. I would suggest sitting down with the group, personally, and ask the players what they think would make a good campaign, and what they would like their characters to do in the campaign. Then, once you have some details down, have everyone exchange ideas on their characters, and the style of the upcoming campaign. Try to get everyone on the same page about what this proposed game is going to be like to actually play. I think it actually can help a player grow into his character if he isn't forced into defining a lot about his character's past. Let him fill in the details as he goes. The most important thing to define about a character, though, is to explain why he's worthy of being a protagonist in your collective story? It's like this: you say, "Okay there's this guy, right? And than [THIS] happens to him. And that's why he's a hero." Have them describe a pivotal event in the character's life. The most pivotal. Or, if you want, RUN this pivotal event, freeform or with rules, either way. I think this stuff might also help with the other problems, too.
UltimateReality 07-27-05, 01:18 AM	Okay, re: backstories: this may seem like a strange question, but why do you want the backstories? Is it mostly because you want to incorporate their backstories into the campaign?Mostly, yes. I had wanted to tailor the campaign largely around them, but I don't think it's going to work with this group. I also want them to show that the player has something besides a build in mind when s/he sits down at the table. I am not interested in running a hack 'n slash-only game. I would suggest sitting down with the group, personally, and ask the players what they think would make a good campaign, and what they would like their characters to do in the campaign.I did this before, partly in a short questionnairre format and partly f2f. Except for talking to on_the_wings_of_TPK, it was like pulling teeth. (I never have a problem with this guy and chargen or prepwork/feedback...maybe cuz he appreciates the privelege of being a player, and cuz he lives with me so I can nag him more! j/k) have everyone exchange ideas on their characters, and the style of the upcoming campaign. Try to get everyone on the same page about what this proposed game is going to be like to actually play.This is a really good idea. I have a grand vision of my party sitting down to discuss this openly like mature adults in my mind right now. :) How do you encourage them to make sure they have a full complement of archetypes and make sure everyone gets to play what they like, too? Previously, I had done a first-session-is-all-char-gen thing, and that worked pretty good. The problem I've noticed is that some dominant players pick their concept first and are are rather ungracious if they have to yield and play something else. Should I maybe just make them draw roles out of a hat and let willing players switch slips of paper? The most important thing to define about a character, though, is to explain why he's worthy of being a protagonist in your collective story? It's like this: you say, "Okay there's this guy, right? And than [THIS] happens to him. And that's why he's a hero." Have them describe a pivotal event in the character's life. The most pivotal.Exactly. "Why are you who you are?" "Why are you adventuring?" The really basic stuff. Or, if you want, RUN this pivotal event, freeform or with rules, either way.I hadn't thought of this idea. I'm thinking now I may start them at level 1 (harsh, I know, compared to our insanely high level normal start of lvl 3 :P), but I still like the idea. Maybe give each player a little mini-thing of like 10-20 mins when all characters are finished being made, if they go for the idea. I really love your ideas, Kintara; please keep them coming. Edit: I just found the questionnairre I gave my players-to-be last time I tried to start a campaign...I keep EVERYTHING in my D&D binder 'o doom. I modified a survey I got a link to from roleplayingtips.com for my then-planned Eberron campaign. Out of six players, these were the results: -3 wanted the PCs to be roving adventurers -2 wanted the PCs to be outcasts, struggling together to fulfill individual plotlines, survive, and find acceptance in the world -1 wanted the PCs to be individuals on their own, self-motivated and fulfilling their own goals -2 wanted the PCs to have a higher calling or purpose Players were asked to rate the importance of the following on a scale of 1 (not important) to 5 (very important). Below are the sums of all answers: Action 19 Adventure 20 Intrigue 17 Comedy 20 Romance 9 *Most players rated this a 1 or 2, but a couple gave it 4. Horror 12 *Most players rated this a 1 or 2, but a couple gave it 4. They all wanted more character-based plots! And they all thought someone should keep a campaign journal and get rewarded XP for it. 5/6 wanted me to give a newsletter style handout to recap each session. They didn't want to see undead. They couldn't decide how they wanted to handle natural 20s and 1s. they wanted to start at level 3 and use 4d6 reroll ones, drop lowest. There is more but it's not really pertinent. One thing I noticed is that all the answers varied WIDELY on this thing, which was done maybe 3 months ago, tops. I'm wondering if I alter it, shorten it, and freshen it up for my homebrew, if they might not be more excited by it. I'm sure some of them have changed their desires in the intervening time. If I could get it down to a one-side page, it might actually get done. (Though again, I've seen them take more than 4 hours to read the 3/4 page, 12-point type point form handout for char gen and guidelines.)
psionichamster 07-27-05, 08:46 AM	ok, fair enough, that was a bit uncalled for...i apologize lead by example...that's really all you can do. you're not going to change their behavior simply by explaining to them what is wrong...nor will they respond to seeing or hearing about the problem. they need to experience it in some way that makes them desire to change their gaming habits. keep at it, keep consistent in your DM choices (no, i said no Fochlulac Lyricist, and that is final...), and stick as closely to the rules as written as possible (for the newbs, at least), and you will do fine. namaste' the hamster
Lord Gwydion 07-27-05, 09:58 AM	Well, I was going to answer the original points, but that seems to have been covered pretty well already, so I'll just give a few thoughts I had while reading this post. One question: How RP intensive is TPK's campaign? Or better, how RP intensive does he try to make it? I know you mentioned that you don't want to run a hack-n-slash campaign, but maybe these players just need a little break to get the die-rolling and treasure looting out of their systems? Maybe you could start them out with a generic dungeon crawl and then start building the campaign from there? Obviously you'd have your campaign plans more or less set, and a few players might have backstories to work with, but the rest might get a few ideas about who their character is during the pointless dungeon crawl? Or their characters will die, and they can roll up new ones that fit the campaign now that the primitive urge to kill the orc in the 10' room has been fulfilled? Also, you can seed a few plot hooks in the dungeon... As has been mentioned, backstories are great, but hardly necessary. A few personality quirks and a goal for the future are really enough. Sure, it's hard to have "built-in" plotlines for a character who besides the numbers on the sheet is just "I am generous to the poor, but have no mercy for evil, and my goal is to become a Knight of the Chalice." But on the plus side, then you don't have to jump through DM hoops to keep that character alive or get the character raised/ressurected just to keep a plotline going. The players also. While it's best to have rounded, grounded characters, there can be a tendency to get a little too attached to these characters. And I realize it's probably a bit too late, since the players seem to have already come up with build ideas, but one good way to get the players to think beyond the numbers on their sheet is to challenge them to give a description of what their character does without ever mentioning a character class by name before they roll them up. So a Ranger might be a Scout or a Hunter or a Tracker. A Cleric might be a Priest or a Crusader or a Healer. A Fighter might be a Soldier or a Squire (thinking ahead to a PrC?) or an Archer. Then, as a DM, USE those descriptions by having NPCs refer to the characters that way. It's a simple trick to help the players realize that within the game world, the PC is more than a list of numbers and abilities. Finally, while I don't think a DM should pull punches, and should provide some challenges that would be easier to overcome if the party has all of the bases covered as far as character types are concerned, remember that the DM also has a responsibility to tailor the adventures to the abilities that the characters DO have to an extent. So if, as in the example you gave, half of the characters rolled up Rogues, and also no one is playing a Cleric, then they should expect Undead to be harder, and no less frequent, but they should also expect a lot of adventures that require lots of skill checks, sneakiness, and trap detection/removal to complete. You should try to play to their strengths as much as you take advantage of their weaknesses. Sending that party of mostly Rogues with no Cleric into a combat focused or magic focused (or whatever) campaign is just asking to ruin everyone's fun. P.S. I know it's been said, but rules-lawyers do make fine DMs. I say this because I found myself to be a bit of a rules-lawyer when I finally got to quit DMing and play for a change. Sound knowledge of the rules helps you focus on telling the story rather than having to waste time in game looking up rules or spending extra hours preparing the adventures.
celtredleg 07-27-05, 10:09 AM	Quick question, You have used chargen a few times now, so I am sure its not a typo, but I have never before encountered this word. What does it mena??? Also, I didnt mean to sound to harsh to your friends, but you are putting out a lot of work, with very little cooperation. I always hate to see that.
UltimateReality 07-27-05, 11:05 AM	Quick question, You have used chargen a few times now, so I am sure its not a typo, but I have never before encountered this word. What does it mena???Character generation. I'm a lazy typist. :) More answers when I return from class.
UltimateReality 07-27-05, 01:25 PM	Also, I didnt mean to sound to harsh to your friends, but you are putting out a lot of work, with very little cooperation. I always hate to see that.That's okay, I know what you mean. :) The truth is I kinda go in spurts...I try for more rp and characterization, then get tired of pushing the stone uphill (mostly by myself) and just sit back and rest for a bit...which lets the stone roll back downhill. Then I get motivated again and, well, you get the picture. :P How RP intensive is TPK's campaign?Alas, not very. He's trying to a bit, because he likes more RP too. Hey, all the players said they wanted more RP. But they're refusing to do it. It's really wearing him down, because when he tries to provide something to meet their expectations and enjoyment, they change their expectations and refuse to cooperate. (They have never, ever said "we want more combat", but that's always what they're looking for. Then they complain about how hard the fights are -- they're only hard because we don't use tactics. TPK likes the idea of using the party 2 levels ago to kick their current butts.) challenge them to give a description of what their character does without ever mentioning a character class by name before they roll them upSee, some members of the group always have a PrC/class/race combo in the wings. I can't get them to describe their character without mechanics because they start with the mechanics. I have downloaded and printed out a couple of rp articles on chargen for my own use, but I'm going to wave them under their noses much more vigorously I think... half of the characters rolled up Rogues, and also no one is playing a Cleric, then they should expect Undead to be harder, and no less frequentThis is funny because we DID run into lots of undead...a vampire recurring BBEG who's kidnapped one party memeber [on vacation IRL], some spawn, some zombies (including ones with the explode-on-impact feat)...and we had no one to turn them. We also had traps. ound knowledge of the rules helps you focus on telling the story rather than having to waste time in game looking up rules or spending extra hours preparing the adventures.This was my take on it. I'd rather not have to slow gameplay to a crawl, or take 1/2 hr breaks every 2 hrs to figure out all the rules I missed. ok, fair enough, that was a bit uncalled for...i apologizeHeh, it's okay...it's understandable. I guess I should clarify my relationship to these people more often. I am blessed to game with people I like outside the game and who I share other interests with. i said no Fochlulac Lyricist, and that is finalLOL. See my sig for my take on that PrC. :P stick as closely to the rules as written as possible (for the newbs, at least)You know, it really bothers me that after close to 9 months, one of them still has problems building her own character. She does good with one on one attention, but just doesn't retain much. It's not an issue, just something I wish she would hurry up and understand so she can get on to making cool new character concepts. :P (She actually came to us with one the other day! I was so happy!) Anyway, I think I'll let everyone get their current munchkinness worked out of their system and then announce I'm changing a few things a week before the campaign. In the meantime, my D&D binder 'o Doom, with its myriad articles, will be open to them, and I will be working closely with TPK to fit in more rp for my character, if not for theirs. I need to get in with a circle of arcane hierophants in a couple levels. :P Our mages keep dying on us, so my druid decided she'd help out a little there...but she is woefully impatient and doesn't like how her druid abilities have been delayed by the change in focus. TPK is playing with the contacts variant from UA, too. To date, at level 4 (I'm almost level 5), NO ONE out of 5-6 players has sat down with him to create them. And some of them actually get more than one by now, I'm pretty sure. Alas, I don't get even one until like level 10 due to my multiclassing; otherwise I'd make them up with him and use them prominently in game until the others get the hint. :P *** You know, I keep talking about my gaming group but never defining them. Here's a breakdown for all you confused people: 1. TPK. The DM. My fiance. 2. Me. Duh. 3. My sister. Currently playing a wizard that got kidnapped while the player is on vacation. The only original character with original backstory, and the only remaining usable backstory. A newb to D&D, but not rp. (Does lotsa online MU*s.) Very good writer. 4. The Ex. One of our ex-friend's ex-girlfriends. Another newb. Very busy. Doesn't understand the rules still. Has finally bought her own PHB though I don't think she's read it. 5. Quotes Guy. He's the guy...with the answer to where any quote you say came from. Okay; has been known to put concept first before, but concept usually revolves around the build. Wants to play the Chameleon. Plays a variety of characters. Has gotten steadily more powergamey since he moved in with... 6. Long-time Friend. Goes up and down in terms of compatibility to my playstyle. Is currently all about "broken" PrCs and feats. Is probably reading this thread right now. Plays rogue-y characters, sometimes clerics. Wanted to take the Shadow Weave feat in my Faerun adventure and justify not being evil and working with the church of Mystra but still retain Shadow Weave (because that +1 to my Illusion saves is more important than letting another character play their concept, too). Can be loud sometimes. Often takes his cues from me, so if I argue the rules, he does. If I rp, he does. (And he has the same effect on me.) Tends to bring good snacks though, and has shown he is capable of a wide variety of playstyles. 7. Part-Time Player. Really good guy, although we don't know him too too well. DMed for a bit before family issues came up and sucked up all his time. Used to play and DM 2nd ed. Excellent improv for campaigns. Good player.
psionichamster 07-27-05, 07:52 PM	if you want RP to happen, you have to make the first step. when i was playing with my friend Dan, it came as second nature to speak as if i was Kenshin (my sam. char), because he was just SO into the game and the NPC's and whatnot. the others, if they wanted to relate to us, had to follow suit. aside from some OOG comments and the requisite movie quotes/references, or the modern day swearing/slang (we WERE pirates, so it was expected...but we just weren't up the the task when it came to old-school epithets), most of the dialogue was IC, and IG-related. so, i had some good training and experience with that aspect of the game, even if i didn't realize it until much later. if you REALLY want to get them to speak/act in character, you will have to present them the world as if YOU are a character, and they have no outside info... tips to achieve this * if you use a battlemat/grid system, don't draw what they cannot see...this seems obvious, but to save time and effort, many times i have found myself drawing much more than they see...and it affects their attitude. * roll spots/listens for the chars, before you describe the situation. if they don't beat the DC to hear that conversation across the bar, don't describe it. if they couldn't see the broad side of a barn (cough...fighters....cough...) in clear weather, feel free to keep them in the dark... *...darkness is scary for people. enforce the lighting distances/sight distances to the best of your ability. if it's not all open fields/deserts with bright lights, they may pay more attention to their surroundings *consider using "voices"...this is scary to a new DM, since you are effectively now becoming an "actor" in front of an audience. be strong, keep them simple, and stay away from accents you know you can't pull off (like me and jamaican accents...it just makes people wince). i can't really stress this enough...you need to get them to distance their PC's from themselves, and if their only interaction with every NPC/monster they meet is with UR, in person, in voice, it becomes less believable *consider changing the lighting/ambient noises...i don't know your computer/AV setup, but you can acquire "background" noises fairly easily via mp3 download...set em up for some quick key access in winamp or the similar...or make a few CD's...forest, ocean, town, etc...keep the volume low (unless going for an effect like a raucous tavern, battle torn field, storm at sea, etc..) and in the bkgd, and you may be pleasantly surprised at the change in the atmosphere. simple changes in lighting can have dramatic effects...try using non-direct lighting on the table...perhaps a few candle-bulb lights immediately in the vicinity, with lighting from another area cast into your gaming area to enable you to read. you speak quieter when its darker, for one, which helps keep party in-talking from overriding the real game going on, and tend to pay closer attention to someone's body/facial language...probably since it's harder to see it. *roll with it.... you're gonna get frustrated behind the screen. its inevitable. when the party slams themselves into the same resetting trap again and again, when the don't use efficient tactics, when they refuse to flee when obviously outmatched, when they spend gobs of time on the most trivial detail you dropped, completely ignoring the "Giant Red Flashing Plot Point o' DOOM!" right next to it, remind yourself...they don't know about it. that's been the biggest obstacle for me. since i am a reader/writer, and tend to piece the things i am reading together long before i am done, i get used to the fact that i know what's going to happen. your PC's don't. they don't know what sneaky, diabolical plans you have cooked up, they don't know the real motivations behind Lady Eliset's betrayal of her betrothed, they don't know the curse of the family Loklinstable...but you do. and that becomes difficult to digest, sometimes... with the people you just described, i have one more point of advice: let the "good" roleplayers have their head...let em lead the rest of the group. (and if TPK runs that monk/ranger he posted, whee!) react to THEIR spoken dialogue/actions before, or instead of the others, and plan according to what they have given you. when they see the attention you give the good children, they will desire some themselves and change behavior accordingly. or leave. less caustic, more helpful, wow, i surprise even myself sometimes. namaste' the hamster
UltimateReality 07-27-05, 08:05 PM	if you want RP to happen, you have to make the first step.Yep. I've been going over my printed articles and stuff now :) when i was playing with my friend Dan, it came as second nature to speak as if i was KenshinIronic. We had a player and friend named Dan, but he was the largest problem player (and individual) we ever dealt with. Glad to know there's good ones out there. ;) *consider changing the lighting/ambient noises...i don't know your computer/AV setup, but you can acquire "background" noises fairly easily via mp3 download...set em up for some quick key access in winamp or the similar...or make a few CD's...forest, ocean, town, etc...keep the volume low (unless going for an effect like a raucous tavern, battle torn field, storm at sea, etc..) and in the bkgd, and you may be pleasantly surprised at the change in the atmosphere.I was wondering about this. Do I hand compile these suckers or is there some themepack type thing somewhere? (and if TPK runs that monk/ranger he posted, whee!) react to THEIR spoken dialogue/actions before, or instead of the others, and plan according to what they have given you. when they see the attention you give the good children, they will desire some themselves and change behavior accordingly. or leave. Heh. TPK's been a doll about the whole thing (if I can call him that! :P). He's offered to change his character concept so many times, and for someone who feels uncomfortable without splatbooks, his character is ending up surprisingly core. ;) less caustic, more helpful, wow, i surprise even myself sometimes.Heh, usually you're really helpful. We seem to see eye to eye on a lot of things. Anyway, in campaign news: I now can't decide if I want to set it in my homebrew or Eberron. I'm listening to the Eberron CD and while the music isn't stunning, it is fairly evocative. My main problem with Eberron is I have to struggle to get any sort of plothook out of it...I mean they all seem kinda half-done, like what I normally come up with on my own. ;) However, I like the idea of only having a few campaign splats to deal with, I like the setting, and the books have been sitting on our shelf since we got them. My homebrew, of course, offers me the complete customisability, but it's also not a fully detailed published world, and I don't think I'm ready to have my vultures players pick it through just yet. ;) So I think I'll go re-peruse the ECS and the stuff I had set up for my original Eberron campaign. Need to redo my binder too, with specific DM sections for plot hooks/adventure ideas, NPCs, etc.
psionichamster 07-27-05, 08:24 PM	to tell you the truth, i don't know too much about the whole sound-effect thing as far as compilation/creation, but a quick google search for "ambient sounds mp3" turned up some promising links like this: http://www.partnersinrhyme.com/pir/PIRsfx.html and this http://www.futurewaveshaper.com/ so, i am assuming, with a little perusal of the 'net, you can find all you could hope for. i do know, if you have a MIDI-enabled electronic piano (or even a cheap little casio keyboard, so long as it has programmable sounds), you can set up a file where each key is a particular sound...bar noise, geese, sword clang, etc. it takes a bit of pre-set, but it works... dans may come, dans may go, but bobs are forever. remember that. (i dunno, don't ask) as far as Eberron vs. homebrew goes: go published, until you want to change it. i am using Eberron in my bi-weekly game (as is the OTHER dan, also a good DM/player)...he's running the published modules, i make it up as i go, more or less, and i plan on introducing some SERIOUS changes in the world structure (not that i haven't already, what with Valenar war-ships and seige ships blockading Thronehold and all, but hey...) if you stick with the published setting, there is just so much you can pull into the game, WITHOUT having to create it in your head. i just bought the Slayer's Guide to Orcs, for the very reason that it has the psychology, physiology, tactics, and basic motivations of the Orcs laid out, for me to read and digest, rather than having to create all that myself. (im playing an orcish fighter in the game i am not running, and i wanted to make sure i wasn't introducing too many human-ish or me-ish elements to a completly unfamiliar race...) i would stay away from FR for your first time out, though...GP values and magic availability makes that setting a little sketchy for me...and it's tough to keep balance in a "i want lots of cool stuff, oh yeah, and im a thayan red wizard apprentice/incantatrix too..." kind of place namaste' the hamster
UltimateReality 07-27-05, 09:30 PM	to tell you the truth, i don't know too much about the whole sound-effect thing as far as compilation/creation, but a quick google search for "ambient sounds mp3" turned up some promising linksThanks. These are a good start. I'm mainly looking for something free, and loopable or at least longish in length. I think I found something in Atmosphere Deluxe 5.4, but it's only free for 21 days and won't let me save anything. :( I'm almost tempted to see if the library would have anything of use. (As I recall, our collection on that subject is pitiful.) y come, dans may go, but bobs are forever. remember that. (i dunno, don't ask)I've only known one Bob. He was nice. And now I have to ask. :P stick with the published setting, there is just so much you can pull into the game, WITHOUT having to create it in your head.Yeah, that was my thought. Followed immediately by, "I need to quit trying to work every published NPC in the campaign setting into my campaign". :P i would stay away from FR for your first time out, though...GP values and magic availability makes that setting a little sketchy for me...and it's tough to keep balance in a "i want lots of cool stuff, oh yeah, and im a thayan red wizard apprentice/incantatrix too..." kind of placeEh, I started with FR and have done it on again, off again through the years. When I did it last time, I had no problems with power level. The effect the power level has obviously had on my players' attitudes now has me concerned though, so I think I'll ditch it. One thing I'll say is going for Eberron: that part in chapter nine where it talks about making a party that works together, has personalities, and has backgrounds!
Man in the Funny Hat 07-28-05, 01:57 AM	#1: timeliness. I asked them to have at least a sketch of their backstory to me by last SundayWriting even a sketch of a characters backstory is encompassed within "roleplaying" that character. You can't FORCE someone to roleplay and expect good results. They really need to want to do it. And besides, some players aren't particularly keen on being put in the limelight because the game isn't always all about roleplaying. Sometimes it's just rolling dice, and for some players they don't really need or want much more than that. Communicate more with your players and find out what THEY are expecting. #2: Pr :censored: Cs. Pretty much all I have heard these two talk about is their PrCs.Well that's not a particularly good sign. Just because you allow PrC's doesn't mean you have to allow ALL PrC's and in fact it's VASTLY better if you're highly selective about which one's you're going to incorporate into your campaign. IMO, PrC's are far less about being player goodies for character design than they are about DM's goodies for CAMPAIGN design. #3: Lack of teamwork. This has manifested both as a player and as a future DM.Noone can take advantage of you without your permission. Again, communication with your players seems to be absent. If you have concerns about a lack of teamwork TELL them you're concerned about a lack of teamwork. Ask for their perspectives on it. For all you know they're actually enjoying a certain amount of team friction and malfunction. #4: roleplaying. I cannot roleplay a character with anything other than my "real life" personality, because the other characters do not either.Roleplaying is its own reward. Players who put more effort into roleplay do so because they enjoy it, not because they think it's required. Your enjoyment shouldn't hinge upon all the other players being just as into their characters as you are, nor should you consider it some kind of personal failure to not need or want to portray your characters as something distinctively NOT you. #5: Rules lawyering. I'm turning into one! Argh! Help me! I seem irresistably drawn to arguing whenever my beloved DM makes a judgement that renders my character unable to help affect the outcome of a fight, or something else I believe unnecessarily harms the party. (To be fair, I try to catch when we're misusing things to our advantage too, but the DM usually catches those before I do...he vetts all the character sheets, for one thing.) I've been getting bad about rules lawyering, and I want to do better. I know it stems purely from wanting my character to DO something -- I feel kinda useless right now as I'm in some slow levels. I've decided that instead of arguing, I will note on a piece of paper when I disagree with something, and look it up in a break. Is this a good solution?Actually, it's a very good solution. If you are feeling that your character is being rendered useless in some ways then rather than fret about a window being closed on you - look for a DOOR to open instead. (Part of the reason the whole rules laywering came about is because, in preparation for my own DMing, I want to ensure I know the rules as well as possible. I fully expect attempted rules abuse from at least one other player, and two of them have a habit of not reading the rules too closely. A third is still kind of new to gaming and easily confused.)Well it's a pretty sad state of affairs if players think they have to "cheat" in order to enjoy the game (which is the whole point). Maybe you could just mention that to them rather than approach it like you're in competition with them?
UltimateReality 07-28-05, 02:53 AM	Writing even a sketch of a characters backstory is encompassed within "roleplaying" that character. You can't FORCE someone to roleplay and expect good results. They really need to want to do it. And besides, some players aren't particularly keen on being put in the limelight because the game isn't always all about roleplaying. Sometimes it's just rolling dice, and for some players they don't really need or want much more than that. Communicate more with your players and find out what THEY are expecting.This is all very true. The point that got overlooked in my original post about this, though, was that I asked them to do something to help prepare themselves for the game and: a) no one told me they thought it was unreasonable, and b) no one even hinted that they were doing it. Well that's not a particularly good sign. Just because you allow PrC's doesn't mean you have to allow ALL PrC's and in fact it's VASTLY better if you're highly selective about which one's you're going to incorporate into your campaign. IMO, PrC's are far less about being player goodies for character design than they are about DM's goodies for CAMPAIGN design.More clarification on this too: one of those players is extremely hard to get a hold of, the other has told me that he doesn't like to set things other than mechanics in stone before he gets together with other players in case there's a conflict. It sounds like a case of miscommunication in the case of our group.
scott644 07-28-05, 09:35 AM	This is all very true. The point that got overlooked in my original post about this, though, was that I asked them to do something to help prepare themselves for the game and: a) no one told me they thought it was unreasonable, and b) no one even hinted that they were doing it. Yeah, I took those two for a given, without having to read them. It's a matter of group psychology/dynamics. People normally won't speak up and complain in front of everybody - especially if they're friends. And people generally don't go in the direction of extra work unless they feel personally inspired to do so. Yeah they could come up with a generic piece of tripe if you forced them, but that's all it would be. I'm reminded of a game where it was required of us and I had no clue about the answers to the PC's personality/background questionnaire. In the end I rolled it up using Central Casting, then told the DM that's exactly what I did and how I got there. I then informed the DM I felt absolutely nothing binding out of that as I wasn't in it - just some rolls of the dice - and I would feel nothing whatsoever about acting in complete contradiction to the provided background as a result. The DM managed to hide the look of distress this created, but not before I saw it clearly. Because he knew in seeking to force me to create a personality (which I told him in no uncertain terms would develop through play, but he didn't pay attention), he basically got a throwaway piece of paper that amounts to nothing and likely won't be used. This example is why I suggested just rewarding those who write them up, with a richer character history and direct impact on the campaign world, plus minor exp awards for exceptional pieces. It allows those who have trouble with it, to not bother writing up; they just won't have the added game-world influence and potential bonus exp those who write would enjoy.
UltimateReality 07-28-05, 12:06 PM	Firstly, another bit to Man in the Funny Hat: it sounds almost like you think I'm saying they suck cuz they don't play like me. I don't. It's frustrating, but I can work with it to a large extent. However, the differences are so pronounced I'm considering taking a break from playing/DMing, and maybe looking for another group. These people are wonderful friends, and decent gamers -- just not really my style. People normally won't speak up and complain in front of everybody - especially if they're friends. And people generally don't go in the direction of extra work unless they feel personally inspired to do so. Yeah they could come up with a generic piece of tripe if you forced them, but that's all it would be.Good point. So how do I personally inspire them? This example is why I suggested just rewarding those who write them up, with a richer character history and direct impact on the campaign world, plus minor exp awards for exceptional pieces. It allows those who have trouble with it, to not bother writing up; they just won't have the added game-world influence and potential bonus exp those who write would enjoy.If I did this, I would get one, maybe two backstories for sure. A sketch from a third or fourth. Although, if those who write them get more in-game plot and more xp from writing one, it may suddenly "inspire" the others. I just don't understand why they always need xp to motivate them to do anything related to the game. I wouldn't even mind them writing up backstories after the game started if they actually roleplayed. Needing to get a feel for your character, I understand. Even roleplaying a character whose main thing is "I love combat", I understand. But by session three or four, if you don't have a reason as to why he loves combat, and if you as a player are not doing anything other than enthusing about combat out of game, I'm going to assume you're not interested in developing a character and want to play a video or war game on paper. I'm also going to realize our styles don't match.
xlawedjeanne 07-28-05, 12:16 PM	Good point. So how do I personally inspire them? give em extra xp or gold ^^;; show an example of what cooperitive people get
Phrennzy 07-28-05, 12:17 PM	I'm only gonna tackle # 4 & #5. Roleplaying: This has been - as a DM - very hard for me. Not feeling like a fool, not paying attention to the stupid OOC jokes being made, that is difficult. But I know some times I nail it. I push myself forward to ignore everyone - I stare past them as I talk, avoiding eye contact, and just go. It's liberating then, when I am the troll-mother hag, or the market place vendor - it's fun. One trick I try to use is to base NPC personalities on people I know. My longest running PC was based on my friends younger brother - a leap before you look kind of guy. It was easy and fun. Just do it. Roleplay. Ignore that the other players can't grasp it. They will. Keep it up. They'll get it. They will. They'll learn to react to your PC's personality. My brother played a cleric named Damien once. Damien cast hold person on some bad guys (2nd ed). When the other PCs moved in to slaughter them, my brother said, "No. If you attack them, I will dispel the hold. We will not kill them." The other players all asked him if he was crazy, and why would he do that. And he said, "It's not what I would do, it's what Damian would do." I thought that was the greatest roleplaying moment in our games. It showed us what roleplaying was. #5: Rules lawyering. "I find myself arguing with the DM." Shut up. Shut. Up. Do you want a player arguing with you when you DM? No? Shut up. Writing down your rules questoins is a very good idea. Don't argue, write.
Dragonspirit 07-28-05, 12:23 PM	by than they can choose a prestige based on their character, instead of a character based on the prestige. A-fricking-men!!! I wish I could get some of my players to adopt that attitude.
UltimateReality 07-28-05, 01:24 PM	give em extra xp or gold ^^;; show an example of what cooperitive people getIronicly, I just finished flipping through my fiance's Psych 101 textbook...operant conditioning and observational learning are starting to look like pretty attractive options. ;) my brother said, "No. If you attack them, I will dispel the hold. We will not kill them."This reminds me of how I injected some rp-by-force into a campaign, though I had my fiance for back up support. We had killed some gobliny things that fell down the mountain. My character came from a culture that had a big thing about death and the undead -- vaguely Asian in feel. Anyway, the cleric wanted to just loot and leave the bodies ("they're goblins; they're barely sentient anyway; and it's not like they're gonna use their items now"). I insisted we bury them. With their items, which we would only have sold for gold anyway. Long story short, someone eventually burned them in the custom of their (the character's) culture. Later, this wierd rain started falling, and my character was convinced it was because the spirits of the dead goblins were displeased/displaced. It really got the ball rolling on that campaign, but man was the look on their faces priceless when I announced that we couldn't loot them and had to bury them. Really, encouraging RP is a bunch of little behaviours I can start modelling right away. I think I'll make a few notes for next session. I wish I could get some of my players to adopt that attitude.I don't care whether the chicken (concept) or the egg (mechanics) comes first -- as long as there IS a chicken. (Cuz chickens can always lay more eggs, or something.) ;)