Originally posted by Fixxxer
Furthermore, it occurs to me that I'm tired of defending my own work against people who've already made up their mind and have nothing better to do than dump on someone else's hard work, repeatedly beating the undisputed fact that all questions are answered in opinion into the ground. Quite frankly, we did the work and the Wiz-Os stickied it. If you don't like that fact, write your own FAQ to replace ours...lets see how much less opinionated it is.
Originally posted by Fixxxer
And now your opinion has been endorsed as well.
Think of it like this...the WizOs moderate these forums, so they see a LOT of threads that ask the same question. As a result, they also see the same answers being given over and over and over. Think of the stickying of this thread as our and their way of making those answers easily availible to everyone quickly.
I had such high hopes that we could create a FAQ that wouldn't get insulted and downplayed. I suppose it's in the nature of humanity to stomp on anything they don't agree with just because they don't agree with it, but I still don't feel good about it...
It might be human nature, but there are ways to go about doing FAQs. FAQs are often interpreted as official, even if they arent presented as such. Additionally, When a question is frequently asked, its important that there is a simple and consise answer or to say that there is no simple and consise answer.
Many of the answers provided in the FAQ do not come from answers given over and over again, but from 6 individuals personal preferences and opinions. This is not what the concept of a FAQ is for, unless these 6 individuals have compiled the answers from many previous posts, and these answers represent the majority of the answers. The problem with this "FAQ" is that they do not.
Especially Endorsing a ruleset aver another, especially over the ruleset which these boards are provided to discuss (and sorry, but these boards are here to discuss 3.0 and 3.5, there are other boards to discuss previous version) should be expected to be met with heated criticism, and certainly doesnt belong in a FAQ.
My comment, as others have, is the fact that this thread has been made sticky. I dont know why this was done, but the end result is that those opinions have been endorsed. Opinions can not be right nor wrong, and therefore should not be endorsed one way or the other.
Im not referring to rights, or law, but simple good moderation. This is not an example of such.
Q: What do I do to resolve mass combats and large-scale battles in my game?
A: There are several possibilities. Here are the most common responses.
1. Use Farland's handy mass combat program and system, located at www.farlandcampaign.homestead.com/program.html.
2. Use Cry Havoc by Malhavoc Press, located at www.montecook.com.
3. Use the system for mass combat presented in War by AEG press.
4. Use Chainmail, a miniatures game, by WOTC.
5. Just have the PCs roleplay out a few skirmishes and then have the DM decide who wins the battle.
First of all, it should be obvious that this particular forum is almost totally dedicated to personal opinions/advice. More factual questions usually belong on other forums. As such, ANY FAQ for this board is going to be filled with personal opinions. I am therefore especially happy that this particular FAQ was put together by 6 individuals, meaning that 6 personal opinions are heard, not just one single voice, regardless of whether I agree with some of these opinions or not.
Secondly, with any FAQ voicing opinions, obviously there are those that will disagree with those opinions. If factual inaccuracies or a heavy biases are pointed out, we do expect the FAQ maintainer(s) to address these complaints. If it is simply a matter of opinion, however, we deliberately leave FAQs open in order to allow opposing opinions to be voiced.
Thirdly, regardless of the legitimacy of any complaint on an FAQ, we expect those voicing the complaint to do so in a civil manner and with a level of respect for at least the effort and desire to be helpful indicative of such an FAQ. The fact that you disagree with someone's opinion does not give you the right to be condescending, derogatory or otherwise insulting.
I would ask all of you to bear these issues in mind when making further posts to this thread.
Thank you and happy posting.
Originally posted by mirtos
I apologize if you feel like I was attacking your work. I wasnt. I can understand how you feel that I was, as many others have. As I said, everyone has the right to their opinion. I fully believe that, whether I agree with your opinion or not. I haver, do not agree, that your opinion should have been made "sticky" which, despite what you want to believe, does endorse it more than someone elses.
This, once again, is not a comment about you or your opinion (I actually agree with some of the statements in the "FAQ", not all certainly), it is a comment about the moderation upon this board.
As for myself and a FAQ I could write, I could not write a less opinionated one, because I do not have the resources to know the most frequently asked questions and the answers give to them that concur with other people's responses. I know this, and I would not expect, nor would I want, the WizOs to make a posting of mine "sticky" either. That would also be poor moderation.
I chose to sticky this FAQ because I felt it would be useful to new members. And that is exactly what the purpose of an FAQ is. And it was made sticky to increase it's usefulness along these lines, nothing more. I understand that some may interpret it as an endorsement of viewpoint, especially in regards to an FAQ involving subjective material. It is for this reason that I was especially happy that this particular FAQ included no less than 6 opinions on it. And you have had an opportunity to voice your's as well, which is exactly why this is not a locked sticky.
And if you, or anyone esle wishes to go to the effort that these 6 people have gone through to be helpful on this forum and create your own FAQ for it, I will consider sticking it, as well, should I feel the FAQ has merrit.
But again, despite the fact that a few see this thread as some kind of official endorsement of opinion, it is not. Again, it is simply a helpful tool to newbs. Please do not derail this thread further with this particular discussion. If you have any further questions on it, please email me.
Furthermore, it occurs to me that I'm tired of defending my own work against people who've already made up their mind and have nothing better to do than dump on someone else's hard work, repeatedly beating the undisputed fact that all questions are answered in opinion into the ground. Quite frankly, we did the work and the Wiz-Os stickied it. If you don't like that fact, write your own FAQ to replace ours...lets see how much less opinionated it is.
My comment, as others have, is the fact that this thread has been made sticky. I dont know why this was done, but the end result is that those opinions have been endorsed. Opinions can not be right nor wrong, and therefore should not be endorsed one way or the other.
And now your opinion has been endorsed as well.
Think of it like this...the WizOs moderate these forums, so they see a LOT of threads that ask the same question. As a result, they also see the same answers being given over and over and over. Think of the stickying of this thread as our and their way of making those answers easily availible to everyone quickly.
I had such high hopes that we could create a FAQ that wouldn't get insulted and downplayed. I suppose it's in the nature of humanity to stomp on anything they don't agree with just because they don't agree with it, but I still don't feel good about it...
Originally posted by shortstak37
do u know any for 1st lvl chariters.
Go back to that link and check the bottom left corner of the page. There are a bunch of them availible.
the option to participate was open to all...if I could find the thread that was an invite, I'd link it.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57314&highlight=Question+WizOs
Also, I'd like to mention that we do not feel the same way about a lot.
Very true. Personally, I never liked 2nd edition, but the FAQ is full of stuff referencing or pertaining to 2nd edition. I also dislike the Forgotten Realms, but there is plenty of support for FR in the FAQ.
I am only guessing but did you guys get together because you were like minded?
I suppose we are a little bit like-minded, but that's mostly due to the fact that we all love D&D and we were all willing to work with each other on a semi-large project. Aside from that, we all have our own unique ideas and insights, which is why we chose to do the FAQ in a forum style instead of a standard Q&A format.
Wazir Kazam and particularly NinjaHedge make some very good points, maybe worth inserting?
To be completely honest, I haven't seen much in this thread from Ninjahedge that looks like anything short of an acusation. Wazir Kazam was much more polite in presenting his side of things, but I don't remember anything from him that pertained to subjects for the FAQ. I invite both of them (and anyone else who has something to say) to email either myself or Dash with any question you would like to have placed in the FAQ along with your answer, should you have one. I can't guarantee that everything sent to us will go into the FAQ (we will mass mail it between the six of us and discuss), but I promise that we'll try.
Originally posted by Wazir Kazam
Quick question that probably doesn't belong here but Fixxxer you mentioned a search function...I'm a wee bit slow on the computer power side, where is it and how do I use it?
As Dryder mentioned, it's at the top of every forum page. Under the big D&D picture, there are a series of seven blue buttons. The second to last one is the SEARCH button. You can actually search every forum at once or choose a specific forum to search. As well, you can search for keywords, phrases...even by the name of the poster you're looking for.
That being said,
This is all good work...
Thank you.
And like others have said, these forums are rife with opinion. This one included albeit with 6 consensual opinions. Still opinion.
This is true. However, we freely admit this. This particular forum, probably more than most others, is based a great deal on opinion rather than solid fact. This is not a forum to debate rules, it is a forum to offer opinions and advice. We thought that the fact that our work is simply our views and opinions would be obvious. We can see now that it is not. Please believe me when I say that we will be adding an addendum that states (among other things) that this FAQ is based on our opinions and our observations of the opinions of others on this forum.
I've started a few of these redundant threads only to receive elitest remarks by one of you guys about how you've seen it a millions times before. So what if you have? How is this kind of remark helping me? If it bothers you so much why not skip it and read something else?
Bare in mind that our "traffic cop" intention was not to prevent redundant threads. I was moreso a way to hopefully slow down the posting of a thread when there are two other threads exactly like it asking the exact same thing on the first page in full view. You speak of egotism. To me, that seems like egotism in the highest. "Yes, I see that two other people have asked the exact same question, but I want you to answer MY question."
predict that despite your efforts here people are going to post and repost and repost again the same threads over and over again.
We acknowledge this. We expect this. However, we've already gotten at least two people to read this FAQ and like it. That means that so far, at least two people have found a place where they can come to have commonly asked questions answered without having to start a thread and wait for hours or even days to get a decent answer.
Most of us don't live here. We don't have the time to carefully research each thread. Fact of life.
I would never expect anyone to "carefully research every thread." What I would like to see, however, is more people utilizing the forum SEARCH function. I don't expect that they will, but that's what I would like to see.
Personally, every time I have a new question that doesn't pertain to a particular thread, I pop in and use the SEARCH function before posting a new thread. If nothing obvious comes of it, I post a new thread. To me, this is just polite.
By and by I've been playing DnD since 79 and yet I would never assume my opinion would or should suspercede any other gamer of any level of experience.
That's good. Personally, I don't assume my opinion is better or worse than anyone else's. I don't think the other five people who worked on this FAQ do either. Notice that we have stated over and over again that this is mearly our way of collecting the most common answers to the most commonly asked questions of this forum. We did not, however, pop in and say "This is our work. We are better than you because we have been playing long and know more than you. You will use our ways or you are a bad DM. Bow before us and hope that we don't crush your pitiful mortal soul."
If you choose to restart this thread to clear out other's opinions, that is tantamont to denying them their first amendment right.
As has been stated before, the first amendment to the US constitution doesn't apply here...but that's beside the point. I agree with you. As far as I'm concerned, this thread will not be restarted to remove the opinions of others. If it is, it will be without my assistance.
NestroEmichae, thank you for your assistance and support, but I don;t think that Wazir Kazam was trying to be inflamitory. His opinions are indeed strong, but they're just that...his opinions. He was very polite in voicing them and I respect him for that.
The fact of the matter is, it is elitest to attempt to corral a public forum in to a shape that is pleasing to the few.
Again when you raise the voice of the few you diminish the voice of the many.
This is bordering on flaming, but I can understand the perspective, even if I don't agree. Once again, we are not trying to stiffle anyone's voice. We simply want to give people a quick reference to the most common answers to the most commonly asked questions of this forum. Regardless of whether they are right or wrong, they are the most common answers.
I was wondering when you or Fixxer were going to show up.
After I finished working in the shop for a while. (Hey, UnholyDragoon...chalk another mispelling up to my name!)
If anyone would like to debate our intentions or reasoning behind the creation of this FAQ, please feel free to email me. I did a callout for anyone who wanted to contribute, refreshing often and leaving the offer open for two weeks. Six people responded (and PenderGrass responded a week later). For those of you who "don't live here", that won't mean much. Those of you who do "live here" on the other hand...well, you had your chance to join the original work and you didn't take it. This is your chace to contribute to the work now. Understand that any opinions, questions, answers, etc that pop up in this thread will be considered for addition tot he main FAQ (the first two posts to this thread). This is your chance to offer up your input on the subjects that you disagree with. Please don't waste it arguing with us....
That's my logic, anyhow.
I don't either.
Obviously, you do. If you didn't care, you wouldn't have mentioned it. On top of that, you capitalized the word "published" as if to drive the point home that your ideas are somehow superior to others simply because you have something in writing.
We had a Min/Max board, if your definition of Min/Max includes "min/maxers are a problem" then your definition is WRONG, PERIOD. It's not an opinion, it's a fact.
Oh, now who's taking things out of context? My intention when I wrote that was to support the idea that many times, min/maxing can indeed become a problem if it's done in a game where it's not called for. You obviously like the min/max style, which is fine by me, but just because you like it and just because WotC had a forum for it, that doesn't mean that it can't be a problem.
that quote pretty much destroys your point, you do hold it as the word of god.
Hey, Pot? Yeah, this is the Kettle...
Except the fact that you expect it to eliminate a lot of new posts and plaster it at the top of the page as "read this: DM FAQ" pretty much presents it as somehow superior to everyone else's opinion, and the only opinion neccisary. Regardless of what else you said in the thread, at *best* it's a way for you to get your opinions read first.
Or mabey...juuuust mabey, it's exactly what we said it is...a way to hopefully remove forum clutter and reducae a little bit of confusion that occurs when the same topic is posted 3 or 4 times on the same page.
Sorry "I like icecream" is an opinion.
Actually, that's a fact. "Chocolate ice cream is the best flavor." is an opinion.
Bashing all users from the min/max boards is unexeptable, especially in something presenting itself like this.
This FAQ in no way bashes users from the Min/Max boards. Until you popped in, there were no personal attacks, no heavily opinionated statements of fact, and, come to think of it, no real problem. You have misconstrued a simple one-liner and decided that it was an attack on a whole community of people. How's that for irrationality?
once again, thanks for taking me out of context. I just LOVE it when people do that. I don't know if you're just trying to make me look bad unfairly or you just missed it, but generally a signifies some level of humor.
Looking back, you posted the ;) smiley after you stated so blatently that our opinions were wrong. Quite honestly, it looks like you did so simply because you didn't want to be flamed for saying something so....opinionated. Afterwards, you stated as fact that "FR is terrible. It's one thing to do highmagic, but they aren't even sensical about it."
I was just pointing out another place where you were quite unprofesional in your presentation.
Let me see if I've got this straight...the many times you have done this have been cute, but let us do it and it's not only unprofessional, it's a waste of forum space? Yeah...real good one there.
By addressing him, all ye are doing is encouraging him to further disrupt this topic.
Which might be his goal...disrupting the topic to turn it into a flame war and get it closed. Well, whatever...I'm done arguing with someone so narcissistic and hypocritical as to post his opinions as fact while accusing everyone else under the sun of doing the same thing.
Personally, I hate the Forgotten Realms. I also hated 2nd edition. However, I wasn't about to tell the other 5 guys on the FAQ project that they couldn't write about FR or 2nd edition simply because I don't like them. That would be a very wrong thing to do.
As a side note...that's pretty much what you're doing, NinjaHedge.
The six of us have milled over the questions and answers contained in this work and we think it's finally ready to be posted.
Edit: We have been asked to contain all of the FAQ to the first two posts in the thread (due to size). Future updates to the FAQ will be made in the form of edits to the original posts. I will try to remember to change the color of any new text. I will also be adding a small table of contents in the near future to help those who might be looking for a specific question. Feel free to discuss and debate.
One last thing...we like to think that this FAQ is fairly comprehensive. It certainly doesn't cover every subject that is asked about on this forum, but it covers a great deal of the questions that are asked all the time. It is also not the end-all answer to every question...even the ones that it covers. If you have a different inturpretation of something, you are welcome to post it. Please keep in mind while you're posting that there is a search function that can be utilized to great result. It is located within those blue buttons under the banner image at the top of each forum page.
On to the FAQ...
BLATANT COMMON SENSE DISCLAIMER: The answers given in this FAQ are not the end-all answers, they are just the most commonly-given answers to the most commonly-asked questions on this forum. This particular forum is based largely on opinionated answers, so you can expect to see many opinions included in this FAQ as well.
Furthermore, the stickying of this thread by the Wiz-Os was not an official endorsement of our questions and answers. This thread was made sticky to make these commonly-asked questions availible to everyone, especially new DMs. Our answers are no better than anyone else's. In the end, this FAQ is like everything else concerning D&D...you take what you want and leave the rest.
[u]Tips For Beginners[/u]
[b]Q: What do the terms “munchkin”, “powergamer”, “twinkie” and “min/maxer” mean? [/b]
Fixxxer: The term “munchkin” refers to a person who works within the rules, but builds a super powerful character/magic item/etc that is so beefed up that it’s out of balance with the rest of the group/items/etc.
“Powergamer” generally refers to a person who thinks of nothing but combat and getting “PHAT LEWT.” Generally, a powergamer doesn’t bother to roleplay at all (though in his mind, he might think he’s roleplaying) and all he wants is combat over and over like he was playing a game of Diablo.
“Twinkie” is a lesser-used term on the forums, mostly used on the Spells and Magic Items board, but occasionally used here as well. It refers to someone who builds his or her PC as a direct carbon copy of another character, a hero from a book or movie or some other model. The term itself stems from the number of people who model their PCs after Drizzt Do’Urden from the Forgotten Realms novels, since he carries a pair of swords, one of which is named “Twinkle.”
Finally, a “Min/Maxer” is someone who completely beefs up stats that he thinks are going to be important to him at the cost of his other stats. This is generally more of a problem when you use a point-based creation system, but it can easily be a problem with a roll-based creation system as well. An example of this would be a player who creates a fighter and puts all of his points into strength and leaves wisdom, intelligence and charisma very, very low. This in itself is not insincerely a bad thing, but in many cases, these players want to play the character as though he had average WIS, INT and CHA scores, which is bad juju.
Most D&D terms have been compiled and defined by Trollbill at the following link: http://archivedboards.wizards.com/rpg/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=135;t=006969
[b]Q: How do I start a campaign? [/b]
Soto: If this is your first time DMing, start slow. Find a few players and talk with them about what they want and what you want out of a session. A few good subjects that I like to cover are Combat/Roleplay ratio, High/Low magic, rate of advancement, and type of adventures (Long-term Epic stories vs. Short & Gritty Dungeon Crawls). Decide on a world and a location in the world to start.
Then move on to planning adventures. I recommend planning 2-3 possible adventures before starting a campaign, as well as ways to trick the players into going for these adventures (also known as “adventure hooks”). For Adventure Hooks, several things work well... Local rumors, specific NPCs with goals, well placed treasure maps, and events around towns. Generally, adventure hooks should point the players into the direction of planned encounters that allow the characters to interact with the world. For a first adventure, a dungeon crawl is fairly simple. Choose a location, remembering that a crawl can be done anywhere from an ancient tomb to the sewers under the city. There needs to be a reason to go there, such as "Drive the kobolds from under the palace" or "Recover the lost treasure of Anita Goldpeas". If you are artistically inclined, draw a map. If you are not, a simple search online can find map-making software or pre-generated maps. Choose a few areas to stuff with monsters, traps, and treasure. Your DMG should provide good information on choosing levels of monsters and treasure appropriate to the number and levels of players that you have.
Finally, plan ahead. Remember that the players aren’t the only living people in the game world. Things are going to change while they are out adventuring. Some of the changes might create opportunities for more adventures. For example, now that the Kobolds are gone from the sewers,
what happens when the giant rats infest again. When the Goldpeas family finds out that someone raided their ancestor's tomb, what do they do about it? Try and keep a few steps ahead of your players. Experience as a DM is the best way to learn to get better. Always try to gauge your players enjoyment and learn what works best for you and your party.
Flak: While some people will tell you to get random encounter tables ready, I have found that it is usually more fun to avoid having a table for them...but some DMs prefer to plan. You, as a DM, should try to fall into a style that will fit you. The way I DM, the important things are things like setting, history, etc. WHY did the PCs come together? WHY is the BBEG a threat? What is the world like? What are some of the important events of the world's past? Have some maps, some idea of history, and knowledge of character backgrounds. Remember to make the world realistic -- the characters are mere parts of the world, not the only things. You also need to be sure to allow for player freedom. They may not feel compelled to follow your main adventure hook, so you need to be ready with others. If they don't take ANY of them, you may not have given them enough reason, or you may need to talk to the players. The most important thing to remember is that intuitive improvisation is the key to genius. Be ready for ANYTHING (well, at least don't let your characters REALIZE they caught you off-guard). Do they decide to pants someone in
hopes of buying escape time? Throw a grappling roll if you want, and decide how the NPC will react. Some of my favorite moments DMing have been improvised, unexpected, and hilarious.
Dash Branaghan: I’m a fan of the plot hook, with the rest being dressing. Find your reason for why the PCs would do something (a motivation per se) and then work around it. Planning a campaign is like writing a short story, and every player of D&D has some natural creativity that can be tapped here. Remember, as a DM you are weaving a story, a story where you know what can happen, but not what does happen. You control the setting, but you don’t control the heroes.
Once you have an idea on where you want to take this, then look to determine your world. You can use any of the many created worlds such as Ravenloft for the gothic horror feel, Dragonlance, if you want a really good setting, or Forgotten Realms if you want high magic, high fantasy. The default world of D&D is Greyhawk and is as good as any of the others.
Dryder: Slowly! Read the text in the DMG about creating a campaign, this gives you a lot of hints about what a campaign is all about. It is good advice is to talk to your players about what kind of adventures they want to experience with their characters. Once you know this, you can create the characters together with your players. Ask your players for a background story and try to incorporate this into your adventures so you have a good chance of finding a hook for some of the characters to get them into the action!
Don't prepare the whole campaign at once. It is absolutely ok to wait and see how the first 2-3 sessions play out. You'll see that after the first session you have a lot of things that can give you ideas of how to proceed and where the adventure will lead you...
[b]Q: How Do I Start A Group? [/b]
Dash Branaghan: The first things you need are the Tools. (See Below) Then you need to know the books intimately. As Fixxxer so often states, "Read them cover to cover, twice."
Once you know this, you need to gather gamers. Sometimes this can be trickier than it sounds, especially if you live in a small town or a conservative/religious area. Many people still have strongly negative views about D&D, and you have to be prepared for that. Sometimes a group will start and fall apart when parents find out what their children are doing and forbid them from doing it.
Ways to gather like-minded people include ads in local gaming stores (or wherever you get your gaming supplies), the WotC Gamer Classifieds (http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=347), school newspapers or bulletin boards, and classified ads in local papers. Try to get people with similar experience; in some cases, more experienced players will overpower the session and leave the novices doing nothing.
Once you have your gaming group, you need to make sure you have a place to game with enough room to fit everyone, supplies such as dice, paper, pencils, a table to roll dice on, characters sheets, and a couple of spare PHBs (which should be purchased by players) so the players don't utilize yours all the time. As well, game sessions can run for several hours, so determining a way to handle snacks is a good idea (IE: everyone brings a bottle of pop and some snack food).
Voila, you have a group!
[b]Q: What game world is best? [/b]
Soto: Whatever (Forgotten) world (Realms) works best (Forgotten Realms) for you. Some people prefer to create their own worlds with complex histories, mythologies, and house rules. Others (Forgotten Realms) prefer to rely on well written and documented worlds where they can focus on creating adventures and not on creating a setting. Obviously, if you want to hand your players a description of the area they will be adventuring in and not have to write it yourself, choose a world that (Forgotten Realms) has a more complete documentation. Just as a personal preference, I am a big fan of the Forgotten Realms because it is a high magic, high fantasy world where just about anything I can throw into a game can reasonably exist.
Fixxxer: I’m a big fan of designing unique campaign worlds. This is good because you can make things up as you go and no one is the wiser. It’s also useful if your players happen to have a good knowledge of other campaign settings (such as a player who has read all of the Forgotten Realms novels).
I generally recommend to new DMs that they forgo attempting to create a world and stick with a pre-made world for a while until they learn the rules of the game. Forgotten Realms, Ravenloft, DragonLance and many others are good settings, but they cost extra money (around $40 each, just for the setting book). For a new DM, I would recommend simply going with the generic D&D setting of Greyhawk since it doesn’t require anything beyond the Player’s Handbook.
Dash Branaghan: Like Fixxxer, I’m a fan of making my own world, but the problem with doing that is that it is quite intensive and takes a lot of work on your part. If you aren’t strongly familiar with the rules of the game and how these may play a part in your world creation, then you may want to start with a pre-created game world. My vote would be for Dragonlance over Forgotten Realms, with Ravenloft my close second. Ravenloft, while a wonderful game world, is more gothic and horror driven and really requires solid DMing and roleplaying skills. Dragonlance is somewhat easier.
Dryder: Well, nobody can tell you this…you have to find out for yourself! A few thoughts from me here: I prefer (and LOVE) the Forgotten Realms! First of all, you'll get a lot of material about this world and, for my part, this is one of the biggest advantages, because due to my work time gets very precious and if I can use pre-prepared maps, NPCs, cities, etc, it is easier to change them to my needs then to make them all up anew by myself! Go to your local store and ask if you can have a look at the various settings. There is a good chance there will be a senior D&D player at the store who is also browsing the books. Don't be shy…ask him for help. We RPG guys are always ready to help! Believe me in this!!!
[b]Q: What should I put in this ? [/b]
Soto: It depends a lot on what the is used for. If it is/was a military outpost, it should have heavy fortifications, enough space for soldiers, and probably very few of the comforts of home. If it is/was a place of worship, it would most likely be very decorative, with little attention paid to functionality and convenience. The same concept works for less human-friendly places such as a goblin lair, a tomb, or a lost shrine deep in an evil wood. Try to think like the original builder for design purposes, and like the current occupants for decoration and defenses.
[b]Q: How do I Get My Players to Roleplay? [/b]
Dash Branaghan: There are usually two immediate causes to players not roleplaying. The first is that the game is predominately “hack n slash”, meaning that it is more combat-oriented than socialization-oriented. This fault is the DM’s for not implementing enough scenarios that rely on the players utilizing their acting/RPing skills.
The other reason is that the players are shy or embarrassed to act out. The major way to cure this (aside from positive encouragement) is roleplaying awards. In our groups (as mentioned above) we have an XP (experience point) award determined by the DM (0, 50, 100, 150, or 200, and only one person gets the 200xp award in a session and they can never get it two sessions in a row) plus a bonus 100XP as determined by the group. When the group votes for who they think deserves the 100XP prize, they list a reason for it, so it is positive feedback. This might help your quieter players perk up a bit.
Soto: Engage them! If it is one or two players, chances are they either haven't gotten involved in the session or someone else is out-talking them. As a DM, I control the flow of the game, and have been known to stop the action with the rest of the party just to have a DM/Player roleplay with one PC whom I feel is not getting into the session. Some players want freedom to run around town roleplaying with every shopkeeper, beggar, and lamplighter they encounter. They're easy to engage. Other players would rather have distinct roleplaying encounters of specific objectives.
Example: I had a player once who was a human thief. He just floated from place to place as the party traveled, occasionally picking pockets. From session to session, he never remembered what was going on with the overlying story. I decided to directly engage him during a wilderness encounter. The party stumbled across an orcish ambush. The thief promptly slipped into the shadows and began seeking a good angle for attack. As the rest of the party entered combat, the thief found the ambush's previous victim, a Harper scout. The scout had a very important message to deliver, but was dying from grievous injury. He relayed the message in very specific code words (a sort of fantasy James Bond speak) and told the thief how to make contact with the recipient. Now that he had a specific encounter to make, the thief came alive in the party, insisting on direction of travel from week to week.
Fixxxer: Many players have a problem roleplaying when they first start out because they feel silly and/or don’t want to be ridiculed or laughed at. All you have to do for these players is show them that they’re not being any sillier than anyone else there. Make sure that you, as a DM, do your share of roleplaying and ask them to do theirs. Give them little reminders every once in a while, if need be:
Player: “I tell the shopkeeper that I want a Longsword.”
You (DM): “So tell him.”
[b]Q: How do I build my own adventures…or should I run a published adventure? [/b]
Fixxxer: If you are a relatively new DM, I would suggest running a published adventure or two before trying to build your own. This will help give you a good idea of how an adventure should be built and run. Afterwards, you’ll have a much better chance of writing something that doesn’t flop.
Dash Branaghan: Like I said earlier, DMing is much like writing a story. Building an adventure is the same. To build an adventure, you have to know the characters in it (the PCs and NPCs) and understand what motivates them. If you know this, you can design a campaign that can play on that.
Develop the hook that will draw players into the game and have them following your lead, but always be ready for them to take their own path. Plan for this contingency at every opportunity.
Always make sure there is a suitable reward for them at the end as well; PCs will be less likely to follow the hooks you give them if you don’t reward them for their efforts in some way.
Dryder: Well, as you are probably new to the game, I would recommend you run a published adventure first! In this way you have all you need between the covers of your module and you'll learn how an adventure is made. Soon enough (by your third bought adventure module at the latest) you'll start changing things to fit your style and from there on it is only a short road to your first own adventure!
[b]Q: How do I award XP? [/b]
Fixxxer: XP is relatively easy once you’ve done it correctly once or twice. Each monster/trap/etc has a challenge rating (CR) that is worth a certain amount of XP. Turn to page 166 in the Dungeon Master’s Guide (or page 38 in the 3.5 DMG) and check out that large chart. You just have to cross reference the CR of the encounter with the average level of the party and award XP. For example, if a party with two 5th level PCs and two 3rd level PCs (average party level of 4th level) were to defeat a troll (CR 5), they would be awarded 1600 XP.
[b]Q: My PCs are advancing too quickly! Why is this?!? [/b]
Fixxxer: A mistake that many new DMs make is to give full XP to every character. This is not how it is supposed to be done. In the example above, I listed a party of 4 PCs that earned 1600 XP. This 1600 XP is to be divided by the number of players (4 in this case) to figure out how much XP everyone gets. In this case, all four PCs would get 400 XP each.
[b]Q: Q: Which Rolls Could/Should I Make For the Players? [/b]
Dryder: I do the following for my players:
- Bluff (so the player doesn't know if he succeeded)
- Diplomacy
- Hide
- Listen (if the pc rolls for himself and he hears nothing, he will always think "Something has to be
there!" and he might fall into metagaming...)
- Move Silently (If the guard hears the thief, but doesn't show it, the thief will never know if the
whole city is already up to get her)
- Use Rope (when a pc is trying to tie up an opponent)
- Search and Spot (Conditionally...see Listen)
- Disable device (pc will not know if he succeeded)
- Appraise (maybe pc appraised wrong)
- Forgery
- Disguise
- Intuit Direction
- Read Lips
- and, I’m not sure about Sense Motive
Dash Branaghan: Another roll that the DM may wish/choose to make include saving throws (so the player doesn't know they've been infected with lycanthropy) for the player and or items.
Fixxxer: Spot and Listen are rolled for my players if I don’t want them to know they’re making a check. Saving throws are occasionally rolled for them if I don’t want them to know the outcome (such as a save vs. disease). Disable Device is always rolled for them because there’s a chance that they think they disabled the device, but really didn’t. Everything else is either an opposed check or has a chart to cover failure, so I don’t worry with it…for instance, if a PC is tying up a captured opponent, I don’t roll Use Rope for my players because it’s an opposed check. It doesn’t matter if the player knows what he rolled, it only matters that he doesn’t know what his opponent rolls.
Flak: Roll anything you don't want the character to know...This helps the player stay in character. Examples include (note that I use 2E) anything they might notice, but aren't actively searching for, saving throws that will not be obvious (a player won't know if they've contracted a disease
unless symptoms appear), rope use (knots look right until they fail when tested), thief skills, etc.
[u]What Tools Do I Need? [/u]
Dryder: You need the three core rulebooks (Players Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide and Monster Manual). If you still don't have them pick up the 3.5 versions, because that's an updated set of rules and all new material will rely on those 3.5-books.
In addition, you well need a set of dice (two sets are better) for yourself as the DM. Your players should all have a set of their own, but it's no problem if you have just one set to start with... everything just takes a little bit longer.
You don't necessarily need character sheets because you can very easily write all the stuff on normal paper, but as a beginner, they will help you a lot in getting things sorted and with not forgetting something during character creation.
If you are a beginner, I recommend buying an official adventure like “The Sunless Citadel”, so you don't have to create your own adventure in the beginning (you will do this soon enough). A bought module is relatively easy to start playing with.
That's all you NEED! Everything else is optional, like:
- A campaign setting (Description of a whole world)
- A DM Screen (where you can hide info behind).
- Sourcebooks like 'The Silver Marches' or 'Ghostwalk' (which detail areas or concepts).
- The books of the various classes, like 'Tome and Blood', 'Sword and Fist' and so on (just start with the iconic classes as they are presented in the players handbook, and all else will come with time).
Dash Branaghan: All you need to play D&D is pencils, a good supply of paper (lined and graph) and erasers, dice sets (one per player and multiples for the DM; though the DM can suffice with one set, I have 12 myself. It saves time when doing mass combat) and the core books, consisting of The Players Handbook, The Dungeon Masters Guide, and the Monster Manual.
Everything else is fluff. If you don't have the money for a module, don't sweat it. You have the ability to create a campaign yourself with those three books, including a guideline in the DMG on how to do it. Don't let not having a module scare you away from starting.
Fixxxer: First off, you need the Player’s Handbook (PHB), Dungeon Master’s Guide (DMG), and the Monster Manual (MM) if you want to be a DM (players only need the PHB). You will need a set of dice, pencils with erasers and character sheets. Lastly, you will need a drive to be a good DM and a willingness to work for your game. Everything else is pretty much secondary.
[u]Dos & Don'ts[/u]
Fixxxer:
DO: Listen to your players. Whether it’s good or bad, their praise and criticisms are useful information.
DO: Be fair. If the fighter doesn’t get a reflex save to avoid falling then you shouldn’t give one to the rogue just because he’s “supposed to be more agile.”
DO: Know the rules. You don’t have to memorize everything, but if you know there are opponents with abilities that you’re not familiar with, go over the rules before beginning the game.
DON’T: Railroad the PCs. If they decide they don’t want to take the hook for the quest you’ve been working on, don’t try to force it on them. They will only resent you for it.
DON’T: Make up house rules during game without talking with the players about it first. This is a good way to get branded as a bad DM.
DON’T: Fail to tell your players about any house rules that you’ll be using. It’s just not fair to them to think they can do something, but they can’t because of a house rule they don’t even know exists.
Dryder:
DON’T: Be over-prepared! Of course it's good to know your stuff, but don't get nervous if you get the feeling you haven’t thought about every possibility - your players will come up with another one anyway! Just know the module, so you can improvise on the spot. Know what the adventure is all about, and know where to find things in the core books. If you can't find a rule fast enough, don't slow the game down by continuing to hunt for it. Just make up a rule and look the official rule up later on (you don't have to replay the combat/situation, just play along with the right rule thereafter).
DO: be fair all the time and remember - it's NOT YOU AGAINST YOUR PLAYERS!!! If one of your player’s characters dies, don't laugh - try to be emotionless, but tell him you're sorry (this is no big deal for you as the DM). In this way the player will know that you have nothing against him and that you judged by the rules. There are ALWAYS players who get angry when their character dies, but…well, there are always people who can lose and those who can't. By the way, if one of your characters dies, you don't lose – instead, you get a new opportunity to play a new, exiting character.
DON'T: favor any of your players. You have to treat everyone equal! Sometimes it happens (and you might be totally unaware of this) that you have a gaming session where you talk to almost only one of your players. That happens sometimes because the other players are not that fit and this special player has a lot of fun and his character has a whole range of useful skills. But as long as you KNOW that this can happen, you will notice it almost instantly. Then you have to try to get the other players into play. Talk to them directly, ask them what their characters want to do and give them opportunities to shine above their comrades from time to time.
DO: Read the adventure beforehand! My point of view here is that I owe my players a fluent game since they give up a whole day on their weekend to come and play with me. I don’t think it's fair if the DM has to tell them, "Just a minute guys, I have to read this paragraph to know what's in this room."
If at some point it happens that you, as the DM, don't know what a room looks like, make it up. If you know it's a gold mine, go ahead and describe what you think a gold mine looks like, and while the players discuss their course of action just skim over the according paragraph.
DON’T: Ever tell your players how their characters feel! I know…sometimes you make up a great BBEG and you know he's cool because you can picture him in your mind and know exactly what he is able to do. You know that this guy (in real life) would scare away the characters and make them run like hell. I (as a player) experienced a situation where my DM told me my character feels panicked and wants to run away. I looked at him and asked him why. His answer was: "Because this villain is scary like hell!" but he never role-played him like that. If you want your players to be impressed and fearful of an enemy, try your best in showing how evil, bad and vile your villain is. Let them experience how influential he is and what he's able to do (like ordering a dragon to burn down a whole village, or a wizard fighting off a dozen heavy armored knights on horseback with his blasting magic). In this way, your BBEG will have a lasting impression on your players (and therefore on the characters as well), and the victory over him will be all the more sweet!
DO: Be patient! Rome wasn't built in a day, and that's the same with a good DM! It takes time to become a good DM. Well, your players will decide this for you anyway, but you'll know how you want to DM and run your game very early on! Just take your time and don't get panicked if, after a couple of months, you're still not where you want to be. Some of us have played for over 17 years (some even longer) now, and there's ALWAYS room to improve. So take it lightly, and don't forget to have fun at the table!!!
DON'T: EVER SPLIT THE GROUP…at least when you first begin playing. You will have a hard job of getting everything done already, in addition to getting through the adventure. When you get more experienced, splitting the group can be great fun, but always keep in mind that as long as one part of group is at the table gaming, the other part is out of the game and they probably don't want to be out too long. If you have good players who can differentiate between gaming and metagaming it might be no problem to let them stay at the table. As said before - you have to know your players to decide this!
Fixxxer:: In reference to Dryder’s comment “Never tell your players how their characters feel like”, this is great advice, but don’t be afraid to enforce Fear and Charm effects. While you should not dictate how a PC feels to the player, certain psionic or spell effects cause PCs to feel, see or do things that they would not normally do and you’re within your rights to enforce these effects.
Flak:
DO: Know your PCs. If you don't know the characters, it is extremely difficult to actually get the players to enjoy the campaign.
DO: Improvise. If your characters throw you a curve, don't get flustered because you didn't expect it. Act as though that was the most obvious course of action, and just continue the game.
DO: Take advice. Don't do everything every player or DM you know suggests, but listen to his or her advice, and make your own decisions.
DO: Talk to your players. Find out how they feel about the way everything is going. Make sure everyone is enjoying the game. If they aren't, find out why so you can try to remedy the situation.
DON'T allow your players to run the game. If you have made a ruling, they may be given a chance to make a case for their viewpoint, but if you don't agree, you have the right to stick with the ruling.
DON’T get upset when players ignore an adventure hook. Just move on. If they continue to ignore them, though, you may need to talk to them.
DON’T tell your players how to play their character. If they are playing out of alignment, talk to them privately. Otherwise, it is their character, and they have control.
Soto:
DON’T force characters to stay with the party if they don't want to, as the players will feel railroaded. However, don't stop the adventures for the rest of the party for one player. When I have this situation, the character that splits off gets a few moments of my time, between actions/RP with the characters that are still together. I usually try to break interactions off at convenient cut points, such as finishing a conversation, leaving the town, or opening a locked door in the dungeon. At that point, I would switch the action to the other group temporarily.
This leaves the characters wondering what is about to happen, and creates some suspense for the PC in question. It also prevents the rest of the party from feeling left out, as they are entertained frequently.
DON’T split the party up for the entire adventure. It is difficult to juggle two separate adventures. Whenever I have split the party up, I usually try to do it in a very controlled manner. While it may be borderline railroading, whenever possible, I like to have a hand in determining the split. I find that this promotes better cooperation and character development when 2-3 party members who normally don't work well together in a party of 5-6 suddenly find themselves thrown together
without the benefit of the party priest. An example of this I have used in a dungeon crawl was to separate two Knights of Solamnia from each other, leaving one partnered with only the priest, and the other partnered with a dwarven fighter (whom he disliked), and a wizard (whom he hated),
using the old "cave-in that separates the party" routine. Since previously the knights had disregarded the significance of the other party members, now they were forced to rely on skills other than direct combat.
DO use the split as a way to forward the overarching storylines. Since the characters are separated, they will have different opportunities to interact with NPCs, to stumble across information that the other group may have missed. This also encourages role-playing as one group may find out information that is critical to the other group. Example: While one
character was trying to research rumors that his family had once set up a home in a city, another member of the party was carrying out a Harper mission. When that went bad, he rushed back to reconnect with his party, and they were forced into the older section of town, where the first
character was investigating. Since the old section of the city was riddled with catacombs that the first character was mapping, the Harper was able to make a quick escape from a bad situation.
DO talk to your players beforehand about splitting up from the party. They should know that by splitting up from the party, they run the risk of being caught in a big battle, deadly trap, or other unwelcome situations without having any support from the group. That threat alone is usually
enough to keep most of my players from bailing out on the party anywhere except in towns where they are welcome.
ya ya ya, more flies with honey and all that stuff, I understand the concept. I was a little shocked that this made it past the mods and I've presented what I don't like about it now. Sorry for all the spit, need a hanky?
Is this a fact, or JUST YOUR OPINION???
once again, thanks for taking me out of context. I just LOVE it when people do that. I don't know if you're just trying to make me look bad unfairly or you just missed it, but generally a ;) signifies some level of humor. I was just pointing out another place where you were quite unprofesional in your presentation.
GOOD: The FR is a high magic world, and probably one of the most well supported by WoC, and probably has one of the most detailed worlds, with all the most famous and popular characters. FR is where Balder's Gate and Icewind Dale took place, and your characters can visit the dales in their adventures. However, many find the world to be inconsistent at best, and if you wish a lower magic campain, or even one better suited for the tables presented in the core books, living greyhawk and other campain worlds exist, and you can always feel free to make your own.
BAD: *cough* forgetton realms *cough* *cough* FR roxors *cough*
This pretty much clarifies that we do not view this as the word of God. Besides, with questions like "What is Evil?", you can't answer for fact because it is an opinion based question.
Except the fact that you expect it to eliminate a lot of new posts and plaster it at the top of the page as "read this: DM FAQ" pretty much presents it as somehow superior to everyone else's opinion, and the only opinion neccisary. Regardless of what else you said in the thread, at *best* it's a way for you to get your opinions read first.
And things like those definitions are just clever ways of hiding a shot at other people's opinions and disguising it as fact. You accuse me of critizicing your subjective beliefs, but there you are saying "min/maxers are a problem" and sticking it in a definition.
And most of the opinion based questions I didn't have any beef with. I left most of the "what is evil" alone, because you are right, those are obviously just opinion. I'll still bet you that within the year we'll get some new player stating "ya, but the DM FAQ said that evil was.....".
in the hopes that it would reduce the amount of new topics all asking the same thing
that quote pretty much destroys your point, you do hold it as the word of god. You hope people will come in, take your opinion, and not ask anyone else. Further evidenced by the fact you didn't make hardly any attempt at presenting other viewpoints you know exist and are quite legitimate. I guess you guys are just tired of losing arguements and you figured this would be a good way to avoid having to do that.
As far as including the 2ed, we included that because some people prefer the 2ed, just like some people prefer 3ed, and some prefer 3.5ed, and some of us old farts love 1ed (the way some videogamers like Atari). Again, if you don't like it, don't refer to it.
well, most people come in expected 3 or 3.5, don't just say something and fail to mention it's only applicitable in 2nd. Put a nice little warning label at the beggining or something.
That you don't agree with penalizing your players XP is your choice, but for Flak and other DMs it works. It is a possible solution to a possible problem that may come up, and as far as your argument about the DMG and PHB...Rule 0. Nuff said.
I'm not going to reiterate more points you've failed to address, but it's not a matter of what works and what doesn't. You are abusing your players, and that's never a good solution, and you are plastering gigantic houserules and failing to mention that is what they are, and spreading some of the worse misconseptions about D&D.
Yes, they could get these perspectives by asking, but the tendency to see these questions posted two or three times a day led us to take on our shoulders this project.
and it's exactly that perspective that makes this project a bad thing, and why I'm not interested in getting in on your little party.
There will be etiquette in this; if you don't agree with someone else's post, you will respect their opinion nonetheless...none of this "Dash is a moron for thinking that. Here is the right way to think."
And once again, as you've ignored over and over, a lot of what I presented had nothing to do with opinion, and I have stated why, and no one has yet to refute my reasoning. You cannot state "The moon landing was fake, and that's my opinion" and just say "It's an opinion, so I don't need any facts, and any facts you present are just an unfair attack on my beliefs!" Sorry "I like icecream" is an opinion. Bashing all users from the min/max boards is unexeptable, especially in something presenting itself like this.
Also, by posting multiple times in a row like ye did is scrolling
who is being childish?
please, posting the word "moot" 17 times in a row is disruptive, if adding further commentary gets me banned, I don't want to be here.
According to ye. But, according to Flak (and any other DM's with his particular playing style), it is perfectly valid.
but according to the DMG, PHB, and all common sense, it's not. It's not a matter of style. Weather to use green or blue dice is a matter of style, abusing your players is NOT.
edit: I'll just edit this in sense otherwise I'm "flooding"
IMO, ye seem to be bent out of shape that they didn't ask for yer opinion on this.
no, I'm bent out of shape because they're spreading misinformation
What matters to me is that this at least gives DM's a starting point for making educated decisions aboot aspects of the game as they crop up.
they could get that starting point just as easily by asking, and then they'd actually get other people's views too.
I'm not sure anyone cares that you are a published writer, NinjaHedge.. I know I don't.
I don't either. However, I was not addressing you. I was being accused of jealousy and inability. Thank you for taking my statement out of that context.
Bad advice? Well, take it or leave it; but it's just that, ADVICE. There is already somewhere people can go if they want hard and fast rules on how to be a DM. It's called the three core rule books.
If we thought any one bit of our information should be handed down as the word of God, we wouldn't have the round table discussion-style that we used to form the FAQ. It is obvious that you can't tell someone any one way how to play D&D, but we at least gave it a shot by giving them several different perspectives (which is why I hesitated to include much input of my own. Others had already said what I would have, and did a better job of it). This was intentional: you have to show a fledgling DM each dilemma from all sides of the argument before they can learn to form their own ideas of right and wrong.
however, you barely made an attempt to show other sides of the arguement, and you presented your own perspectives often without anything to back it up, and, as I've pointed out, you've presented things contridictory to what's in the core books. That's all fine and dandy if you just want to make it a regular thread, but when you call it "the what's a DM to do faq" and plaster it at the top of the forum, you ARE presenting it as the word of god, somehow superior to everyone else's opinion, you expect everyone to read your opinion first and never ask for anyone else's, as evident by the fact that you think this will actually elimanate some "spam" posts. And some of that "spam" were good forums for discussion.
Now, beyond all of that, I would remind you to hold your tongue if all you have to say is negative
No
And, when Dash asked you to elaborate on what you thought was wrong with what we said, as well as what you might have said in our place, all you could provide were some contrived examples of what you think a powergamer or munchkin are
I presented exactly what you asked for, what I thought was wrong, and I gave what you didn't, reasons for my opinion, and a lot of what I threw out there wasn't opinion. We had a Min/Max board, if your definition of Min/Max includes "min/maxers are a problem" then your definition is WRONG, PERIOD. It's not an opinion, it's a fact.
oh wait, we already have Trollbill's Dictionary
Trollbill's dictionary is a great example of a good reference. What you just placed at the top of the forum is a prime example of what not to do.
And since there is no right or wrong way to play, each of their opinions is perfectly valid.
bullocks. There are wrong ways to play, like doing things as a DM simply to stroke your own lust for power. For example, Flak's insistence that player's be penalized XP for playing out of character, that's not only counter to everything in the core books, it's flat out immature.
Originally posted by DarkMonkey
pssh dont worry about him guys, hes just jealous cause he couldnt do half of what you guys did here..forget about him everyone else knows its great :D
what, I couldn't post a bunch of bad advice? Ya, that's probably true. I could never live with myself if I posted such misinformation. However, I have had things I've posted on this board PUBLISHED.
You switch over to the far superior rules of 2nd edition.
once again, if you guys want to post this, fine, but this really needs to be taken off the top, and relabeled "gratitously irrational opinions"Whatever (Forgotten) world (Realms) works best (Forgotten Realms) for you.
If you guys are going to plaster this at the top of the forum, can you at least try to keep it somewhat facts, especially when your opinions are so....wrong ;)
FR is terrible. It's one thing to do highmagic, but they aren't even sensical about it.
First, be sure the player understands what the alignment means. If this doesn't help, I would then assign penalties when a character deliberately does something out of alignment. A good thief trying to break into a peasant's house to steal something might have penalties to hiding and
:OMG! have you read the PHB and DMG? Go back and do it again. I don't know where to begin telling you how wrong that is. Alignment follows action. ALIGNMENT FOLLOWS ACTION. Say it with me. Jebus. Action does not have to follow alignment. Action SHOULDN'T follow alignment. You obviously have NO consept of what alignment is or how it is suppose to be used.
If this system doesn't seem strict enough for your fighters, mages, etc., you can assign an XP penalty for the change in alignment, as the 2E PHB suggests.
First of all, this is 3E, not 2E. Second, the 3E book specifically says NOT to give XP penalties. This is the most incacurate and destructive thing you could possibly tell to a new DM and you're presenting it as fact. That's disgusting.
your definitions of munchkin, powergamer, and min/maxer are off
A munchkin is a term derived off of the typical adolecent player. They do not understand that it is not a game you can win and misinterpret and igonore the rules to benefit themselves. Example: someone who wants to create a true shot use trigger magic item at the level 1 magic cost.
Min/maxer is not a *problem*, and that's borderline spreading lies to say so. We use to have a min/max board on this website. It's simply about maximizing your advantages while minimizing your disadvatages.
A powergamer is someone who plays a more hack and slash style, wants the biggest weapons, most combat powerful character.
it's bad enough to sticky your guy's opinions, but this thing is completely inaccurate in some places. I hope people don't actually use this as a source of info, and I'm disapointed it's wasting space on this board.Originally posted by Wazir Kazam
Hey folks,
Very good and fair enough.
Quick question that probably doesn't belong here but Fixxxer you mentioned a search function...I'm a wee bit slow on the computer power side, where is it and how do I use it?
Many thanks,
Wazir
The search function is on the top of the site, below the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS title, second blue button from the right!
Good to see that arguing must not always be done the flaming way (I still don't know why you people call it flaming anyway, but well, english is only ma second language
)Thanx for that!
First of all, there was NEVER, EVER any REASON to get unfriendly and spitting on this thread!
If you've found something which, in your eyes, is wrong, than just go ahead, post your opinion on the given topic and put a smiley behind! Would that have been so hard??? There was no reason to call it a waste of space on this board! By the way, if that would be so, why do the WizO's sticky it
AND - we never said our opinions and answers to the questions are the only correct versions, it's just what we think! This thread welcomes any additions to frequently asked questions of new DMs. But it is REALY SAD to have someone like you, spitting on everything, instead of posting his opinion without offending anyone else, which is (in fact) against the code of conduct.
AND - you say you only talk about facts...
FR is terrible. It's one thing to do highmagic, but they aren't even sensical about it.
Is this a fact, or JUST YOUR OPINION??? :sad:
To come once more to our FAQ:
DO: be constructive with your critique!
DON'T: be unfriendly! Handle people like you want to be handled!
Our intention was just to help, and I hope you stop writing here (until it is constructive) and we DON'T HAVE TO WASTE ANY MORE SPACE on this thread, and keep other opinions and questions coming! Let the new DMs ask questions here, and participate in answering with your opinion, but stop talking '**'$§*$'
AND - Dash's offer is a good way to do something constructive! Go ahead, and send us your answers!
Very good and fair enough.
Quick question that probably doesn't belong here but Fixxxer you mentioned a search function...I'm a wee bit slow on the computer power side, where is it and how do I use it?
Many thanks,
Wazir
What is the intent? Other than to codify answers to multiple posts through your own (6) opinion(s). Perhaps you are offering your services with a clean heart. I'm sure that's how the bible started too.
I understand you have no malicious plans by doing this. But like I said, I have received little remarks from you specifically and your brethren when I have tried to use this forum to ask questions before. Comments directing me to look it up or how the thread has been posted before. However in your defense, you also answered the question posted.
Codify away. I meant it when I said it was good work. It is your right to use this forum however you see fit, but if you do so, then don't comment when those of us who don't live here, want to use these forums the way they want to.
Many thanks,
And Goodnight.
So none of these other missives, including yours, uses qualifying clauses.
It's fine. Not my point.
The fact of the matter is, it is elitest to attempt to corral a public forum in to a shape that is pleasing to the few.
Again when you raise the voice of the few you diminish the voice of the many.
As far as who owns the thread...sure I see the WOTC logo on the top. And they probably could close down my voice. But I'm also a life long consumer and it would simply be bad business to do so.
And I don't think the WOTC are into idea supression.
You see this is exactly what I'm talking about.
The forums should be open - United States or no. And what country represented here on the threads promotes the suppression of opinions?
If having a counter opinion expressed without aggression is wrong then the whole thing is wrong.
And your heated, immediate response smacks of histeria.
If you choose to restart this thread to clear out other's opinions, that is tantamont to denying them their first amendment right.
Who are you to decide?
This is all good work...
But as someone who doesn't fly the forums as often as you do, I don't see the harm in posting a quick question for a quick response even if it has been asked a thousand times.
And like others have said, these forums are rife with opinion. This one included albeit with 6 consensual opinions. Still opinion.
Frankly it's not for you to regulate forum communication. It's public and should be run by mob rule. It seems like superiority. You say that any perception of superiority is in the eyes of the beholder, like you are not responsible or attached to it somehow, but you should read your arguments with different glasses. Perhaps you can see why people might "perceive" it as so.
It smacks of egotism. I've read those threads dedicated to singing your praises and great for you, no sarcasm at all, but that stuff can go to your head. And maybe it already has.
I've started a few of these redundant threads only to receive elitest remarks by one of you guys about how you've seen it a millions times before. So what if you have? How is this kind of remark helping me? If it bothers you so much why not skip it and read something else?
I predict that despite your efforts here people are going to post and repost and repost again the same threads over and over again. Most of us don't live here. We don't have the time to carefully research each thread. Fact of life.
And for the WIZARD who allowed you guys to do this...shame on you. By raising the voice of the few, you diminish the voice of the many. Bad public policy.
By and by I've been playing DnD since 79 and yet I would never assume my opinion would or should suspercede any other gamer of any level of experience.
In closing, Moose, Indians.
As an aside, it is good that we have a resource where people can speak their mind, potentially at great risk to themselves; but, it is not necessary to view it that way. There is no opposition here; another side to the argument, perhaps, but no one, not even those who are traditionally viewed as "Flamers", are ever the little guy, and we are not out to get them.
This is a community, and we did our part to help it (and yes, of course, our idea of help is obviously an opinion, in and of itself; but we are only human). Nothing more needs be said about it.
So, moving on, does anyone have any topics they'd like to bring to the FAQ? Currently we're dealing with the removal of apprentice-level classes from 3.5 (you know, the variant where people could start at 1st level as a Fighter/Sorcerer or whatever), possibly including a list of pros/cons for using or refusing to use this variant.
As has been said before, you are free to write an email to either Fixxxer or Dash with your requests. It will help if you organize it the way we have done the topics already listed: i.e., first write the question, then your username, and after that you can list what your take on the issue is. We will discuss it and each give our own opinion, then post it in the FAQ, maybe even in one of the first two posts.
However, PLEASE do not post your idea for a topic here. It will probably get lost in the shuffle and there are already many posts cluttering up the place (on the other hand, we're not about to ask any of you to stop telling us what a great job we did; I am not above stroking my own ego).
Thank you.
I'd like to take this time to second Dash's suggestion: anyone who wants to throw their two cents in, or perhaps wants to add another topic but isn't quite sure yet how to go about it, can send an email to myself, Dash, or any of the others who worked on the FAQ. I'm not going to post their addresses here, but mine is [email]MinusInnocence@AOL.com[/email] and you have to be sure to include something relevant (hopefully, a reference to these boards) in the Subject line or we will probably delete it before we read it.
Thanks again, everyone, who took the time to read this. I feel we've already accomplished what we set out to do, because of it.
Bad advice? Well, take it or leave it; but it's just that, ADVICE. There is already somewhere people can go if they want hard and fast rules on how to be a DM. It's called the three core rule books.
If we thought any one bit of our information should be handed down as the word of God, we wouldn't have the round table discussion-style that we used to form the FAQ. It is obvious that you can't tell someone any one way how to play D&D, but we at least gave it a shot by giving them several different perspectives (which is why I hesitated to include much input of my own. Others had already said what I would have, and did a better job of it). This was intentional: you have to show a fledgling DM each dilemma from all sides of the argument before they can learn to form their own ideas of right and wrong.
Now, beyond all of that, I would remind you to hold your tongue if all you have to say is negative. And, when Dash asked you to elaborate on what you thought was wrong with what we said, as well as what you might have said in our place, all you could provide were some contrived examples of what you think a powergamer or munchkin are; oh wait, we already have Trollbill's Dictionary. We don't need you, after all.
Originally posted by DarkMonkey
Don't allow a monkey like that to derail this thread, I think its a great idea.
Histeria? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Look, the dancing monkeys are on my brain!
...hey what are you guys trying to say anyways?
*points to name* should i be offended? :D
Oh, quit monkeying around. No need to go ape over a couple of sayings. It's just monkey business.
Nah, no need. Just take it as a coincidence.
Originally posted by Wazir Kazam
How is having an opinion flaming someone?
You see this is exactly what I'm talking about.
The forums should be open - United States or no. And what country represented here on the threads promotes the suppression of opinions?
If having a counter opinion expressed without aggression is wrong then the whole thing is wrong.
And your heated, immediate response smacks of histeria.
Histeria? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Look, the dancing monkeys are on my brain!
No, I merely type fast. Plus, I have no sanity. Too many CoC games.
"It smacks of egotism." "elitist remarks" "I would never assume my opinion would or should suspercede any other gamer of any level of experience."
Even that is considered flaming, with the way you said it. You can state an opinion on here without using remarks of that type. You can also *gasp* actually contribute to the FAQ they posted.
As for what country flies their flag? You see that Wizards of the Coast logo in the top left corner? That's what country flies their flag here. This place is owned, operated, and controlled by them and them alone. They can allow or disallow whatever they want, as long as they do not draw the outside world into it. The internet belongs to no country, and each website is an nation of its own when it comes to laws. Their only limitation is that their corporation exists in the United States, but they still can do what they want here.
Oh, this is the internet, not the United States. The Constitution of the United States does not apply here.
Since you no longer like me... ~Sets artman on fire and laughs gleefully as he runs around burning.~ Gotta love epic DR and Immunity Ignoring Fire...
When I have to invoke the Goddess at the beginning of a post, it's bad. If I start it off by warning you that I am about to be permanently banned, you might want to not even bother replying to it, as at that point I no longer careand am out just to cause as much havoc and destruction to whoever got me that way in the first place.
Admittedly, I posted something similar earlier on this forum. Seeing his posts makes me wish I could go back to that time and throttle myself until I either gained some sense or died. I can at least look back and kick myself for such a stupid action. I assume insulting yourself or your own actions is not against the CoC.
Now, I have taken a look at this and aplaud them for trying and answering it as best they could. Do I agree with everything up there? No. Do I think all of their advice was correct? No. Am I going to troll this post until I am banned because of that? No. Just because I disagree is no reason for doing that on a topic where they were trying to help the entire forum.
Now, unlike NinjaHedge (or whatever his name is), I will work on my own answers to the questions and e-mail them to Dash. Why? Because that is the right thing to do.
NinjaHedge- You could have saved everyone some trouble and simply wrote up your own answers to the questions. Instead, you chose that route.
I must say that the tactics you used, while common on here, are not appropriate for this style of topic. Something like most of the topics in that 3.5 forum it is appropriate for, as those topics do not generally rise above that anyway. However, you had to troll a topic where people were honestly trying to help. I cannot even think of a term in any human language that conveys how disappointed I am at that. When I start talking about appropriateness, me being one who openly and loudly snored in church as a child, then it is bad. You have one more chance, as the winds of fate conspire to keep my wrath from you, so please use it wisely and contribute to the first two posts in a helpful manner.There is one think I miss:
Q: What does a game room or a gaming table look like? Is there a certain way things have to be set up?
Make sure every can sit comfortable, you will be sitting for several hours. Everybody must be able to see the DM directly and hear him clearly.
Originally posted by Wazir Kazam
I was wondering when you or Fixxer were going to show up.
I've been watching.
What is the intent? Other than to codify answers to multiple posts through your own (6) opinion(s). Perhaps you are offering your services with a clean heart.
Perhaps? We are. Just like Trollbill created his dictionary of D&D terminology, we created this to answer FAQs. It doesn't stop anyone from asking the questions on the open forum.
I understand you have no malicious plans by doing this. But like I said, I have received little remarks from you specifically and your brethren when I have tried to use this forum to ask questions before.
I cannot speak for the others, but I know that when I come online and see a thread with 30 responses, I skim it over and, if I see my opinions already presented, I generally don't bother to respond. And since I don't move much beyond WADMTD, I can't recall seeing a lot of your threads.
...but if you do so, then don't comment when those of us who don't live here, want to use these forums the way they want to.
Use the forum, by all means, as you see fit. I don't believe I've suggested otherwise, and if I have, I apologize for it. And once again, do not take this as our way of saying "Do Not Use The Forum For These Questions." Such was not the intent.
Many thanks,
And Goodnight.
You are welcome. I hope I cleared things up. And enjoy the evening as well.
Originally posted by Wazir Kazam
The fact of the matter is, it is elitest to attempt to corral a public forum in to a shape that is pleasing to the few.
Hmmm, well, that is your opinion of the intent of this, and you are welcome to it. However, this is your perception, not fact.
Again when you raise the voice of the few you diminish the voice of the many.
Only if we stifle other voices, which we haven't. Nowhere does the FAQ state "Never post these questions as we have answered them and as God we are right, no one else's opinion is important." Again, you are interpreting things as you choose to, and trying to label it into our intentions.
I appreciate your opinion on this, but it doesn't serve much in the way of a purpose as I see it. You stated that the work is good, so what is the problem? We have not stated that no one can ask any questions, nor have we forbidden people from asking other's opinions. In fact, I have seen a post that asks the questions that we have covered here after we posted this thread and I answered it. But sometimes people will read this and it will clear up some of the questions they have; in other cases, it won't so they will post the question.
Now, since a discussion applying interpretation to our effort here is rather pointless, can we move on and let it drop? I appreciate your opinion Wazir, and I accept the criticism. Nothing more needs to be said IMO.
No offense guys, and I'm not one to usually turn down a chance to be utterly silly on these boards, but considering the somewhat serious intentions of this thread, I would hate to see it locked and banished to the 7th layer of Hell due to our inappropriate posts on it.
So, can we maintain a little decorum on this thread in particular?
Thanks. :D
Originally posted by NinjaHedge
Except the fact that you expect it to eliminate a lot of new posts and plaster it at the top of the page as "read this: DM FAQ" pretty much presents it as somehow superior to everyone else's opinion, and the only opinion neccisary. Regardless of what else you said in the thread, at *best* it's a way for you to get your opinions read first.
*sigh* Ninjahedge, WE did not plaster it to the top. WizO_Snark "plastered" it there, and while it was at our request, Snark's suggestions were addressed, and, despite your complaining, Snark felt the FAQ warranted merit and subsequent stickying.
Our intention was not so much to have our opinions read first, but to keep from having to repeat these same opinions ad infinitum for the constant new threads that come forth. No, there is no rule that states we have to respond to every thread, but that we want to help people by presenting a view of the game based on years of experience is key here.
If you choose to interpret the FAQ as a sign of superiority in thought or deed, that is YOUR interpretation, not OUR intention. I highly suggest you take another look at what you are accusing us of doing and see if we are actually doing it, or if you just want to see it that way.
And things like those definitions are just clever ways of hiding a shot at other people's opinions and disguising it as fact. You accuse me of critizicing your subjective beliefs, but there you are saying "min/maxers are a problem" and sticking it in a definition.
I don't recall ever saying that "Min/Maxers are a problem." In fact, Fixxxer specifically stated "generally" within his statement. And as a generalization, it does not speak for everyone. If you are going to complain about absolutes, please provide a specific case of absolutes within our writing.
And most of the opinion based questions I didn't have any beef with. I left most of the "what is evil" alone, because you are right, those are obviously just opinion. I'll still bet you that within the year we'll get some new player stating "ya, but the DM FAQ said that evil was.....".
And if that happens, I will more than gladly explain that it was the opinion of the posters. But out of curiousity, did you write a letter to Monte Cook about his definition of evil in the BoVD? The definition of evil is written within there as fact. It would be awfully hypocritical of you not to write a complaint letter.
that quote pretty much destroys your point, you do hold it as the word of god. You hope people will come in, take your opinion, and not ask anyone else. Further evidenced by the fact you didn't make hardly any attempt at presenting other viewpoints you know exist and are quite legitimate. I guess you guys are just tired of losing arguements and you figured this would be a good way to avoid having to do that.
No, I do not hold this as the word of God. I hold this as the voice of experience. Stop trying to tell me what I think when you don't know what that is.
As far as presenting viewpoints, all this time you've been complaining, you could have presented them. Yet you have done nothing of the sort but whine because of YOUR incorrect interpretations of our actions here. You've labeled us (incorrectly), labeled our intentions (incorrectly) and now you accuse of "being tired of losing arguments"? I have no idea what arguments you are talking about.
well, most people come in expected 3 or 3.5, don't just say something and fail to mention it's only applicitable in 2nd. Put a nice little warning label at the beggining or something.
And a lot of people don't play Forgotten Realms either. What is your point? I'm not going to waste space putting a disclaimer on things specifying this is good for FR and this is not. The general issues we covered are inclusive of 2nd edition and 3rd edition, with the exception of "Which rolls should I make for my players" (since 2ed is less skill oriented than 3e) and the Called Shots section, which specifically addresses the 3e lack of.
I'm not going to reiterate more points you've failed to address, but it's not a matter of what works and what doesn't. You are abusing your players, and that's never a good solution, and you are plastering gigantic houserules and failing to mention that is what they are, and spreading some of the worse misconseptions about D&D.
Won't or can't? You talk a lot Ninjahedge and fail to provide anything other than yammering. Back up your claim and show me how we "spread the worse misconceptions about D&D"?
and it's exactly that perspective that makes this project a bad thing, and why I'm not interested in getting in on your little party.
Ninjahedge, if you aren't going to be productive, then drop it. I have given you the option to share your fantastic insight and your perfect DMing skills with this board. Your refusal to do so suggests that either you have no intention of helping your fellow gamers or that you have no valid suggestions to offer to this specific thread other than negative criticism because certain points don't conform to your rigid and perfect opinions. I'm at a loss here.
And once again, as you've ignored over and over, a lot of what I presented had nothing to do with opinion, and I have stated why, and no one has yet to refute my reasoning. You cannot state "The moon landing was fake, and that's my opinion" and just say "It's an opinion, so I don't need any facts, and any facts you present are just an unfair attack on my beliefs!" Sorry "I like icecream" is an opinion. Bashing all users from the min/max boards is unexeptable, especially in something presenting itself like this.
Bashing all Min/Maxers? Hmmmm, last time I checked, bashing anyone was against CoC, and since WizO_Snark did check this over before stickying it and didn't find anything against CoC, I would suggest that you are reading more into this than is presented. Fixxxer is of the opinion that Min/Maxing is [i]generally[/i] bad...which means that it isn't always bad. I'm pretty sure that is the only opinion of Min/Maxers presented.
It's funny, but when I read the first part of the initial thread, I found this really neat line in it:
It is also not the end-all answer to every question...even the ones that it covers.
This pretty much clarifies that we do not view this as the word of God. Besides, with questions like "What is Evil?", you can't answer for fact because it is an opinion based question.
As far as including the 2ed, we included that because some people prefer the 2ed, just like some people prefer 3ed, and some prefer 3.5ed, and some of us old farts love 1ed (the way some videogamers like Atari). Again, if you don't like it, don't refer to it.
That you don't agree with penalizing your players XP is your choice, but for Flak and other DMs it works. It is a possible solution to a possible problem that may come up, and as far as your argument about the DMG and PHB...[i]Rule 0[/i]. Nuff said.
Yes, they could get these perspectives by asking, but the tendency to see these questions posted two or three times a day led us to take on our shoulders this project. I'll tell you what Ninjahedge. You take out each question and answer them in a Word document, then email it to me. We'll edit it together to make sure it fits and that there is nothing offensive or rude in it, and then I will send a copy to Fixxxer and we'll add your answers to the questions that we have.
There will be etiquette in this; if you don't agree with someone else's post, you will respect their opinion nonetheless...none of this "Dash is a moron for thinking that. Here is the right way to think."
If that is an acceptable solution, you can get my email through my profile and send away. If you have no intentions of doing this, then as far as I'm concerned, you forfeit your right to complain.
Originally posted by Rowg_420
I dont now how to dm but i want to learn how to plese tell me what i am to do...:sad:
Well, start off by reading the first two posts...
Originally posted by NinjaHedge
Ninjahedge, while I appreciate your opinion on this matter I have one suggestion.
Instead of telling us we are wrong in places, highlight were we are wrong and explain how we are wrong. If you have better suggestions, by all means, feel free to present them.
But complaining about what is wrong without even taking the time to improve the issue or offer us your insight into the problem...that is what I define as a waste of space on this board. It is like not voting and then complaining about the administration in power.
[b]Q: What is Evil?[/b]
Minus Innocence: Evil is placing yourself before others, even when there is little or no cost to you for helping them. Evil is going out of your way to harm others, even when you will gain nothing for doing so. Evil is being covetous, secretive, treacherous, murderous, and seductive or any number of other heinous moral traits, and for no other reason than for the sake of behaving in that fashion (or, "Evil for Evil's sake").
Flak: Most people see evil as intentionally hurting others. While this is truly evil, it is not the only type of evil character a player can use. The root of evil is often greed and egotism. An evil character puts him/herself above others. They may do good if it will benefit them, but they are doing it for the benefit, not for the good it will accomplish. It's hard to talk about evil, however, without looking at the character's alignment with regard to the law. A chaotic evil character will work against the law in accomplishing what is in her/his a best interest, while lawful evil characters, perhaps best exemplified by the drow, will work within the laws to gain power. A neutral evil character might see the benefit in some laws, but break others. These are, of course, mere examples of how evil alignments can work, since the matrix created by the alignment system is far too limited to completely describe a character. This is not to say it is not useful--it only means that a character cannot be completely defined by his/her alignment.
Dash Branaghan: Evil is any act, deliberate or spontaneous, that causes overt harm, suffering, or loss to someone else and the perpetrator is aware of this effect. There need not be gain for the individual performing the deed beyond the desire to do it. This I find distinguishes selfishness from evil; if I hear someone screaming for help in an alley, and I choose to ignore it because I feel it is a trap meant to part me with my possession or life or both (and not necessarily in that order), I may not go down the alley. This is selfish, but not evil, even if it is someone in trouble. At the same time, not giving coins or goods to local charities such as churches or orphanages is selfish, but not evil.
Q: Is Evil?
Soto: Three things I like to look at when determining if an act is evil are Motivation, Outcome, and Foreknowledge. If the motivation of the character is to do harm to others, or benefit himself through the detriment of others, it is evil. If the end result of an action is evil, then a person has to look at the motivation and the foreknowledge of the character. If the motivation is good, but the player had knowledge that the outcome would be evil, then the act is evil. If the motivation is good but the player had no knowledge of how it would end up, the action is not evil.
Example: A paladin is trying to rescue all of the children a village from a crazed necromancer. The necromancer, knowing someone will try, has rigged a trap to instantly kill all of the children in the event someone storms his tower. At this point, the paladin's motivation is good, but the outcome is pretty certain to be bad. So we look to foreknowledge to determine if the act was evil. Did the paladin know beforehand that a frontal assault on the wizard's home would result in the death of innocents? If he did not, his actions, though of regrettable outcome, were not motivated by the desire to harm others, and in the end, were not evil. If he knew of the trap, and proceeded to take action that he knew would result in the children's death, the action was evil.
Dash Branaghan: This ties into the definition of evil I have chosen. Any act, either deliberate or spontaneous, that causes overt harm, suffering, or loss to someone else where the perpetrator is aware of the effect is evil.
That said; take my example of the alleyway above. If I do not know what is going on and fear that it might be a trap, I leave it and go my way. Selfish? Yes. Evil? No.
However, if I know that someone is being raped in the alley because I can see it happening, and I neglect to do anything about it (defending them, calling the guards, forming a militia or a mob to rescue said victim), then I am perpetrating an evil act.
I find this is a simplistic guideline, but it seems to cover the bases for my players and myself.
Flak: Like I said in my definition of evil, I disagree with the idea that evil and selfishness are so far apart. Certainly, it isn't evil to seek self-preservation, but it is evil to put your own desires too far above the needs of others. For example, it is evil for a mother to buy expensive clothes for herself while she lets her children starve. It isn't the selfishness itself that is evil, perhaps, but it is the root of the evil. In order to decide if an act is evil, you need to look at what motivated the character. If the character simply thought he/she would die, it is simple self-preservation. If the character decided not to try to save the kidnapped peasants because peasants are too poor to provide an adequate reward, it is an evil act.
Q: Should I allow Evil characters in my game?
Soto: While traditionally DM's have been encouraged to remove evil players from the game and use them as NPCs, I have always felt that a skilled role-player could be quite effective as an evil character. It is entirely dependant on the type of game you play. While I would never allow a whole party of evil PCs in my campaigns, a well played evil PC makes for interesting party dynamics. I do not allow players to have the chaotic evil character that runs around killing townspeople because "I'm Evil." I explain to my PCs that if their evil character becomes disruptive to the campaign or hinders the ability of the other players to have fun, then the character will be removed. Most of my players know that if they are going to play evil, they will be watched, and that evil should be played like they role-play their hair color. It's not something
that you think about constantly, but when it does come up, it's notable.
Fixxxer: I have no problem with evil PCs as long as the players are mature enough to at least attempt to role-play the PCs well. Generally, I shy away from allowing evil PCs in my games because I don’t generally have the kind of players that would work well with evil PCs. Quite a few players will walk around town fireballing children and stabbing their friends in the back because they feel they’re justified in doing so just because they’re evil. If you think that your players might do something like this, then do not allow them to play evil PCs. If you believe that they’re mature enough to handle it and you’re willing to work around evil PCs, then by all means go for it.
Dash Branaghan: Like races with an ECL modifier or net-classes, be aware of what you are doing before you decide. If you wish to allow for evil characters, make certain that you can handle the situation. Evil does not always mean running around and butchering people; lawful and neutral evil alignments are often very subtle about it.
The concern to have over evil is the chaotic evil alignment. This alignment (along with Chaotic Neutral) has the greatest amount of difficulty for players to roleplay, as many take both CE and CN to equate to psychotic or sociopathic. Chaotic evil can be just as subtle as lawful or neutral evil, but most players tend to play them as raving mass murderers, and if you choose to allow this, you must be prepared for that inevitability.
Evil is something that I usually restrict to a proven roleplayer, as many novice gamers either get swept up in the evil aspect (forgetting the modifier of lawful or neutral) or wind up alienating themselves from their party. Take caution and party dynamic into account before you allow it (for example, if you have a paladin in the party, you may want to restrict alignments for ease of game play).
Remember, as in all things, the final decision is up to you. And the most important rule of DMing is be prepared
Minus Innocence: This is a judgment call on your part. In the alignment section, the PHB subtly states that evil characters can pose a serious problem. Though the Evil alignments certainly seem intriguing, they are listed as "The worst alignment, because..." This is a flashing neon sign to steer clear of them until you're absolutely certain your players can handle something like that. I, personally, have never taken an alignment test that labeled me (not my character, ME) as anything BUT neutral evil, but I am (hopefully) in the minority. Evil has the potential for disruption. Evil has the potential to destroy. Evil has the potential to bring your game to a screeching halt above and beyond the problems a good/neutral party typically faces every game night.
Dryder: Well, if you came up on this thread you're probably a newbie to D&D. Therefore, I would give you the following advice/tip: Before allowing your players to ROLE-play an evil character, you should take your time to get familiar with the game itself, its rules and the interaction at the gaming table. You should also KNOW your players, because only than will you recognize who of them is ABLE to ROLE-play an evil character in your group!
If the time comes and you happen to have this player wanting to play an evil character, go ahead…but try to figure out a story for his evil guy that allows the character to NOT annihilate the whole group (it happened to me once - one of my players played an assassin and got the whole party killed in one evening - terrible!!!), but to work with them. It's no problem if the characters (NOT THE PLAYERS AT THE TABLE) don't like each other…in fact this will bring up some great role-playing opportunities.
Q: How can I get my character to stay in alignment?
Flak: First, be sure the player understands what the alignment means. If this doesn't help, I would then assign penalties when a character deliberately does something out of alignment. A good thief trying to break into a peasant's house to steal something might have penalties to hiding and
lockpicking. A lawful good fighter might have a penalty to hit if he is attacking someone unprovoked. If they continue to act against their alignment, the alignment will change, as will the reactions of people they know. Of course, some classes lose abilities if this happens, and those
characters will not be happy. If this system doesn't seem strict enough for your fighters, mages, etc., you can assign an XP penalty for the change in alignment, as the 2E PHB suggests.
[u]Problem Players[/u]
[b]Q: What can I do about problem players?[b]
Flak: Many penalties can be imposed, provided that the player is willing, but just having problems. The first step is ALWAYS to talk to the player. Find out WHY the player is doing this and what would convince them to stop. If this doesn't completely solve the problem, and you don't want to eliminate the player, use whatever penalties seem most fitting. Many DMs use XP penalties, but these can cause characters to become less useful to the team, penalizing everyone. I, personally, use "stupid points." If a player does something they know they shouldn't, like metagame, they earn 1 or more stupid points. These are points that the DM cashes in as bad luck for the character: "You just got a critical hit? No, you must be mistaken...this stupid point says it wasn't a critical." "As you climb, this stupid point says that you tear your money pouch on a rock. You just lost most of your money."
Dryder: Before everything else you should try to talk to the player! Tell him/her that you are not happy with and that you just want to talk to him/her about that. I never met a player who didn't listen and try to change (especially if the other players think the same as the DM). If everything fails, you should consider putting the player out of the group!
Minus Innocence: First of all, you have to discern where the problem lies. Are they dissatisfied with the game? Do they not like the atmosphere; perhaps they feel they have to drive too far, and they are in a sour and frustrated mood when they finally arrive? Does the problem player not believe his character is getting enough of the "spotlight?” All of these are very viable reasons to act out in the game, or outside of it, around the table. Viable, mind you, but not appropriate.
Then again, maybe something else is going on... something beyond the scope of your once-a-week D&D party. If they are having financial trouble, or an impending separation with a loved one, or have fallen into a crisis of faith in their congregation, or any number of other things, you really can't do anything as the DM... BUT, you are within your rights as a friend to lend whatever advice or help you can, if they desire it. Anyway, my point is, talk to the player. Find out what's bugging them, and if it can be helped.
Finally, always remember: a good friend will not be too terribly put out by being excluded from the group, if they really can't mesh with the others. If, for whatever reason, an individual is just floundering and can't find his/her place as one of the PCs, they need to be cut loose; that is part of your obligation and responsibility as the DM, to ensure the greatest amount of enjoyment for the greatest number of players.
Fixxxer: Always remember that real friendship sees beyond the little things. Booting someone from the game shouldn’t be the first solution to every problem, but if you do have to cut someone loose, remember that such a small thing would not end a real friendship. A good friend may be upset, but he will eventually see past such a small thing.
Remember also that a real friend will not purposefully put you into a position where you have to boot him. If you have someone in your game who purposefully disrupts the game, badmouths the other players, threatens you or any number of other similar infractions, you should stop and think really hard about whether this person is really your friend or not.
Q: How do I Handle a Cheating Player?
Dash Branaghan: When someone has to resort to cheating, it takes the fun out of the game and takes the edge off the risk of doing something with the character. Cheating is, unfortunately, a common problem in D&D. This can be as blatant as fudging die rolls to mismarking lost hit points on their sheet or sneaking feats/skills/skill points into their character.
The first part is to know each character like they were your own. I like to get a copy of the character sheet and before I begin gaming, I go over it. For this, you need to know every class, their abilities, skill points, feats, etc. Of course, you have the PHB to refer to as well.
Now, sometimes these are honest mistakes where someone miscalculated their AC or their skill point total, and catching these early is fine. Other times, players intentionally jack stats, skills or whatnot to make themselves virtual juggernauts (see Munchkinism). These players become a problem, and often finding these "mistakes" right away lets them know that you aren't an idiot. NEVER accuse someone of cheating in this situation; aside from creating hurt feelings there really is no evidence that the person was "cheating."
Once you have the character corrected, get a copy and keep it handy. Keep track of every change, every item. This is extra paperwork, but this way the player can't cheat.
The other most common form of cheating is fudging die rolls. My former roommate was famous for this. In a single night of 4 hours of combat intensive gaming, he never rolled less than a 12. Aside from the statistical impossibility of this (and no, his die wasn't loaded) the fact he rolled on a clipboard with a sheet of paper blocking everyone's view of the die (despite all the information he needed being on the sheet that blocked our view) suggested he was hiding his die rolls.
To combat this, we implemented a rule where everyone rolled on the table in plain sight so at least one other person could witness it. I was also a fan of randomly standing and walking around the room to watch the die rolls. This was our solution to the fudging die roll cheating method.
Other forms of cheating are out there, and you have to be aware that not every gamer is pure in spirit. Find the easiest way to resolve it and just keep an eye on the player.
Soto: Warn once, then, if cheating persists, begin taking away privileges. First to go is the player’s right to keep his own character sheet and roll dice for that session and the next. By then, the player usually has decided to fly straight or leave. I agree w/ the other DMs about keeping a copy of your player's sheets so that you know how many HP they have, what their saves are, etc.
Dryder: As said before - a player might have cheated out of lack of knowledge concerning the rules (wrong calculations, and so on). If this is the case just tell him where he made the mistake and everything will be fine! If you observe that one of your players is cheating on purpose, tell him that you KNOW he's cheating, which takes the fun out of the game! Tell him he will feel better if he accomplishes a goal without cheating and that you will not tolerate cheating anymore. Keeping a sheet with the stats of your players is a good way to keep track of everything.
[u]Metagaming[/u]
Q: What is metagaming?
Fixxxer: Metagaming is when a player knows something that his PC doesn’t and he uses that knowledge in the game. For instance, the character has never heard of a troll before, but the player knows that trolls are best hurt by fire, so he (as the PC) uses fire spells against the troll, even though the character doesn’t know the first thing about trolls.
Q: How do I handle metagaming from my players?
Fixxxer: I dislike metagaming a lot. I have very little respect for someone who metagames on purpose. I realize that sometimes a player may accidentally use metagame knowledge without knowing he’s doing it. When this happens, I simply ask them how their PC would have that knowledge. Other times, a player is blatantly metagaming, such as when he blurts out the common stats, weaknesses and hit points of a monster to the rest of the party. When this happens, I generally impose an XP penalty on the player and make sure he knows why I did it. If he does it again, I’m going to take him aside and have a talk with him, asking him to please not metagame anymore. If the problem continues, I will probably look into dropping him from my game.
Flak: I tend to first warn the player (I am aware that it can be difficult to avoid). Then, if they still metagame, I start imposing XP penalties or "stupid points." Stupid points can be used to deal with many problems. These are points that the DM cashes in as bad luck for the character: "You just got a critical hit? No, you must be mistaken...this stupid point says it wasn't a critical." "As you climb, this stupid point says that you tear your money pouch on a rock. You just lost most of your
money."
If metagaming continues, I ask the player to leave the group.
Dash Branaghan: Shoot them. Muzzles are also an option.
Unlike Fixxxer, I don't impose an XP penalty per se. In our games we have a special RPing XP award that everyone is entitled to. Metagamers automatically lose this bonus. So far this has worked and we haven't run into that problem for extended periods of time.
Soto: Also in my campaigns, metagamers are not eligible for the RP experience awards. However, I usually make sure to explain the difference between player knowledge and character knowledge before beginning a new group. It is not uncommon for players in my sessions to look at one another and say, "Dude, you don't know that!" and the offender to quickly retract that action. This is probably the only instance I would allow a player to negate an action taken, and he would not be punished for metagaming.
Dryder: Whether the players realize it or not, they will from time to time use knowledge which their characters do not have. A very easy example of this is the following: You started a new campaign with level one characters. The players in your group have all been with you from the beginning and have played several adventures. In the first session, your characters happen to encounter ghouls. The characters (which have never encountered a ghoul before) don't know anything about their paralyzing ability - but your players might know, because they have probably encountered a ghoul in lots of gaming sessions before. If they start to say, "Beware of their claws and bite, it will paralyze you!" they are metagaming. In this case you may just tell them that their characters don't know this fact! I’ve never had big problems with metagaming and my players always try to stay IN-CHARACTER, because they know, that I give GOOD XP for that
Q: Can the DM metagame?
Fixxxer: Technically, the DM is incapable of cheating because he is allowed full license as far as the game is concerned. Realistically, yes, the DM can metagame and that’s usually a bad thing. If the DM throws a hoard of retarded kobolds that have never been outside of their cave at the players and the kobolds are specifically ganging up on the one PC that happens to have a target item in his backpack, then the DM is probably metagaming.
Sometimes, DM metagaming is warranted. For instance, a Great Red Wyrm dragon is infinitely more intelligent than a human could be. This means that technically, he’s more intelligent than the DM (who is a human). What this means is that the DM has to find some way of playing the dragon smarter than he, as the DM, is. This is generally done through limited metagaming. The DM may take a look at the party and figure out what traps could hurt the worst, then place them in the dragon’s lair. This helps to simulate the foresight that a dragon would have and a human would not.
[u]Called Shots[/u]
[i]Q: Where can I find rules about called shots for 3rd edition?[/i]
Fixxxer: Called shots are not supported in 3rd edition D&D. The reason for this is that 3rd edition was designed to be simple and as a result, the effects of attacks on different body parts were left out. Because of this, there are no mechanics for called shots and there are no penalties for hitting a specific body part. The method of attacking assumes that you are always trying to hit the target in the best location.
There are a few 3rd party supplements that have rules for called shots, though quite a few of them don’t mesh well with most games.
Flak: You switch over to the far superior rules of 2nd edition.
Dash Branaghan: As Fixxxer stated, the simplicity of the revamped game mechanics took called shots out of the game. However, one thing I would like to add is that allowing called shots (should you find rulings on it from 3rd party sources) is a two-edged sword: if your players push you to implement called shots, remind them that they will be subject to called shots as well. So that instant kill shot might make them think twice, especially when going up against mid-high CR creatures, when they are mid-high level.
Players are a little less pushy when the mechanic they want to abuse gets used on them. :-)
Q: Why shouldn’t we use Called Shots anymore?
Minus Innocence: 3rd edition provides far too many opportunities to supercede nearly any penalty the DM can assign to practically any roll. A 1st level Arcane spell, True Strike, allows a +20 insight bonus to one attack roll. This means a 1st level wizard could probably spin his sling, let loose a stone and roxx0r the orc chieftain in the throat for nearly no penalty at all. Of course, this is only an extreme example of the ludicrous, but I feel it warrants the removal of the called shot variant from 3rd edition games. As others have already expressed, it is assumed that when you attack, you are going for the most viable target; which is why on a natural 20 you can check to confirm a critical. If you were deliberately NOT trying to go for the weakest or most vulnerable target on someone's body, then you would probably be denied the opportunity for a critical, too.
[u]Other Considerations[/u]
Q: What does a game room or a gaming table look like? Is there a certain way things have to be set up?
Dryder: This depends. You might try to make atmosphere by using candles (with other light as well - you have to be able read your notes). Try to have enough room beside the table for your DM folder, notebooks, rulebooks, etc.
I always have a chandelier on the table and a little lamp (spotlight) beside me, which gives light only to my notes behind the DM screen.
Having a CD-player within reach is a great way to be able to use some music on the spot without searching the remote control, etc.
It's also good to have a room without too much traffic. People running around you who have nothing to do with your game will only distract you, and nothing is more annoying for a DM if his players are talking to his parents, brother or whatever...believe me!
Fixxxer: Just make sure to have enough space for yourself and the players. It’s also helpful to have enough walking space in the room in case someone needs to get a drink or go to the bathroom.
[u]Link to Doug C’s Thread of Useful DM Links: [/u]
This thread has been of immense help to many DMs out there, new and old. It has literally hundreds of links to sites concerning playing, Dming, D&D computer programs, general tips, adventure modules, etc. It’s updated constantly.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45633
Thanks for the contribution.
On Topic
The question of Gaming tables is a good one. Personally, I go for the simplistic approach. Taking a folding bench table (like those found in a school ;) ) and use that. I also recommend getting a card table and setting that up on one end to make an "L". Have the DM sit in the curve of the "L" - He'll have room for all of his gaming stuff under the table, and he will be nearly equidistant to everyone at the table. :D
Originally posted by Wazir Kazam
One last thought,
If you choose to restart this thread to clear out other's opinions, that is tantamont to denying them their first amendment right.
Who are you to decide?
The First Amendment has no application to this. We are not bound by the laws of the united states on these forums. We only have the rights granted by WotC.
We have no First Amendment rights on these boards.
A truly wierd question. :D
at the irony of artman being on fire while his avatar is coverd in snow.*Originally posted by NinjaHedge
bullocks. There are wrong ways to play, like doing things as a DM simply to stroke your own lust for power. For example, Flak's insistence that player's be penalized XP for playing out of character, that's not only counter to everything in the core books, it's flat out immature.
According to ye. But, according to Flak (and any other DM's with his particular playing style), it is perfectly valid. IMO, ye seem to be bent out of shape that they didn't ask for yer opinion on this. Guess what? They didn't ask for mine either. I personally don't care. What matters to me is that this at least gives DM's a starting point for making educated decisions aboot aspects of the game as they crop up.
Also, by posting multiple times in a row like ye did is scrolling (a violation of the Code of Conduct). Consider yerself reported fordeliberately attempting to disrupt this thread.
Ye should be ashamed of such childish behavior NinjaHedge.
(PS - quite complaining and actually answer the questions asked in the FAQ. Yer replies might actually make it into the first couple of posts if ye are constructive)
trollbill's Dictionary of Terminology
There's the updated link for ye.
Sometime's it is good to have been one of the first to come back when the board switched over... :P
So mebbe it is a good subject to add to the fact.What is World-Building - the simple answer is it is the process require to create the settings for the adventures the players will be in. The long answer is decidedly more complicated, but is based off of that. There are a couple of aspects to world-building that need to be considered before ye start. I'll pose them as questions.
What sort of campaign setting are you looking for? This is by no means an easy question. It falls into a few categories: Theme, real-world realism, Level of technology/magic, style of play.
Theme is the kinds of adventures ye want. Sword and Sorcery, Cyberpunk, Renaissance, etc. are all themes. Iffin ye want "classic fantasy" as yer theme, then little work needs to be done to the system to incorporate it. Good "canned" (already generated) examples of this would be Forgotten Realms (though I dislike it fora different reason....), Greyhawk. Of course, there are other themes.
Real World Realism - this governs how much of actual historial examples and cultures ye wish to use as a basis. I'll show ye why this is important for my campaign when I use it as an example.
Level of Technology/Magic - very important, as it will determine just how "fantastic" yer fantasy will be. Low levels of magic (or tech) makes for a gritty, realistic tale (such as Tolkien's reliance on the "mettle" of heroes and has very little flashy magics, at least for the heroes). High levels of magic and tech lend itself to much less gritty tales (Harry Potter, Star Treck, Star Wars, Xanth).
Style of Play - this is the most important of all, next to theme. If ye have a kick in the doors, dungeon crawl, ignore everything but adventuring type of players, then ye have significantly less work to do than if the party is concerned with teh "social" aspects of adventuring. The level of detail ye put into it need not be more than what ye should reasonably expect yer party to need to keep the versimilitude of the setting. The style of play will also determine what kind of setting ye need - one rich in socio-politcal aspects and intrueges, or one that only concerns itself with the nearest hoard to plunder.
....more to come on this.
Yeah, you've seen me before. ;)
My only question is: What about world building?
Back when I used to frequent this forum, there were a number of DMs asking for tips and advice on building their own homebrew worlds. Have these questions reduced sufficiently enough that there's no place for it in the FAQ? (I guess the first wasn't the only question, eh?)
Keep up the good work!:D
I haven't been around for a little over a month or so, but I remember seeing a new "How do I run large scale/huge/mass combat?" thread every day or every other day. Sometimes, two such threads would be on the first page at the same time.
In fact, my first day back here I saw a thread asking about running large scale combat. I can't remember if it was here or in the Dungeon Master's Guide forum, but the qustion was posed yet again.
My standard answer to such questions? 1. Use Farland'sMass Combat Program.
Farland's suggestion is definitely worth some serious consideration.
Oh, seeing as how I just realised that I, too, am a published writer I feel that I should get a second vote... yea!
**burning, burning**
All in favor please vote "Yea."
All opposed... I don't like you anymore.
Yea!
Originally posted by Unholydragoon
Give some example categories, would ye?
Of myself being published? Well, it was only a poem, so I guess it isn't all that much - oh, you meant the other thing.
Well, there are some things that come up and some particularly good threads that I think that it could be helpful to direct people to. For example:
Alignment as a System:
Alignment Removal Project: Talks about how to remove alignment from the game.
Running Subtle Alignment: Gives tips on how to make alignment more subtle, yet still use it as a tool.
Alignment Preservation Society: A thread on keeping alignment as it stands and related issues.
DMs running PCs (you'd be surprised on how often this crops up):
Here,Here,Here,Here
Being too tough as a DM:
How tough should a DM be?
How to balance encounters/dungeons?
Players breaking the law:
Cleric disagrees with Lawful Good
Sweet, delicious murder
Others:
Dealing with DM burnout
Plot/character driven styles.
Speeding up combat
These are examples of threads that deal with often-asked issues and some of them are probably good places to point people with questions, as at the very least some of them have some very good ideas. I just pulled a bunch at random, but going through and selecting the more informative of the pile and providing links I think could be very helpful.
One thing that I think would be useful to include in the FAQ might be common issues/decisions/schools of thought on choices or styles of play that DMs run with, and links to various threads that are on this board. I recall seeing a few meaty threads with some good information about various topics, and I think having such a links section would be good for a quick reference for those who have particular questions, especially when the material gets a little too in depth to be fully covered.
Also, you should listen to me since I've been published.
I saw the title and began to read and my immediate thought was "What complete and utter arrogance" but then I read it and you really have not written it like that.
It's impressive that you guys took the time to help out with your insights and experience, and honestly I am not being being sarcastic. I think it is really great but.......
I am only guessing but did you guys get together because you were like minded? I suspect so, conflict is not a bad thing
Wazir Kazam and particularly NinjaHedge make some very good points, maybe worth inserting? especially about using the term FAQ as a suggestion of accuracy, but then I suppose if ya didn't use FAQ then who would read it
AND IMHO PEOPLE SHOULD READ IT.
Also regardless of what people say anyone who stands up for what they think in the face of such opposition (albeit a nameless, faceless message board) is pretty damn impressive.
Wazir Kazam and NinjaHedge
Originally posted by Greldinard
Q: What does a game room or a gaming table look like? Is there a certain way things have to be set up?
Most folks end up using a dining room table or similar - a rectangular table.
There is always the temptation for the DM to sit at the head of the table. My advice is to sit in the middle of one on the long sides instead.
Sitting at the head of the table means that those players closest to you will monopolise your attention, and those players at the other end will be unintentionally excluded.
Sit in the middle of one of the long sides and you will be pretty much equidistant from all of the players, and you will be more a part of the group.
Q: How do I start a campaign?
One difficulty many DMs face at the begining of a campaign is that his players create characters in isolation. This has 2 potential drawbacks. (1) The party is not well rounded - no healing, for example, or not enough front line fighters for most encounters. (2) The characters are a group of individuals with no common goal.
Both of these increase the workload of the DM. The first by requiring him to tailor the campaign into something that the disparate group can survive, and the second by the DM having to spend time coming up with a way to get this group of individuals heading towards a common goal.
These are not impossible challenges, but my advice to a novice Dm is to avoid this work by having the players work together to create a party, not work seperately on each character. Request that the players create a ready formed party of co-operative adventurers, with reasons why their characters are working together and going adventuring.
This saves you a lot of trouble, and you can also ask the players what sort of adventure their characters are interested in - what will motivate them. Are they merely seeking their fortune, are they out to right wrongs, are they seeking vengeance on the band of orcs that burned their village to the ground?
This gives you a ready made party, and a ready made adventure hook, which lets you concentrate on the story rather than spending the first few sessions cajoling the players into forming a team and heading off on your adventure.
I thinks its clear that all of the advice given to new DMs by the team is their opinion only - especially since each of them offers a different opinion on some issues. And since there is no right or wrong way to play, each of their opinions is perfectly valid.
Good work, guys.
Don't allow a monkey like that to derail this thread, I think its a great idea. Just ignore him, he's prolly spitting his medication at the keyboard in a feeble attempt to 'type.' Give him too much attention and he might start frothing at the mouth.
PS chances are his 'publishing' is him having written to a Agony Aunt column and his sorry story won the 'letter of the month' award and had a little border around it and everything on page 65 of that magazine.
Oh yes and i vote 'yeah' for restarting the thread.
I disagree with the thread starters on certain points, but I believe they did a good job overall, so I personally prefer option B (which should nuke this post as well). I didn't expect to see a flame war in a "Read This" thread, so my eyes rolled into my brain once I started scrolling. (Plus, that post count is a tad intimidating.)
Just a thought. . .
I dont think I have ever actually debated with/or asked any of you any questions, but i need to say that I have had so much help over the last year from things you guys have written, that I would feel iungrateful if did not thank you.
This FAQ is simply brilliant. I have managed to get my fellow GM's in my group to read it by hitting them on the head with a dried salmon and screaming "I will never invite you over for tea again you cretins" and they want me to convey their enormous respect for the work you guys have done here.
So there you have it.
At least 3 Gm's (4 with myself, but I am not really a newbie as they all are.) have enjoyed and learned from your work.
Thank you.
I know very little about the boards, but I do know that something like this had to have been alot of work. I also know that it must be frustrating for you to have it corrupted by the arguments that have plagued it. I, at least, understand your intentions, and I also understand that this post now is open for any DM to submit their opinions and ideas. Thus, any DM out there with opinions varying from those presented here now has a forum to express them, as long as they aren't submitted in a way that will criticize another's opinion.
One thing I did learn, in one of my first attempts at running a full-fledged campaign, was how horrible railroading can be. I had, in my naivety, spent a lot of time writting out my game, as if it were a book, chapter by chapter, before we even had started the first session. It became evident, within the first session, that the game would in no way resemble how I had written it out. Thus, I began to attempt to force it to happen (I had just spent the past few weeks writing, well, a novel, I didn't want it to fall apart). My game died rather quickly as the strain drove it far past the breaking point.
I learned that a story (a campaign, rather), is much like a river. It's fluid, ever-moving and changing, and is driven by your PCs. If you put a dam in the middle in order to try and direct the course of the river, the PCs are goign to slam full force against said dam. If they are new players, with little experience, they might not know what to do, or even that they can do anythign and what they just experienced is bad DMing, and they might go along with it for no other reason than "we're supposed to." I had the luck (and I do believe it to be good luck) to have done this to an experienced party of players. The roleplaying strength of these guys was far beyond my DMing skills, and they broke down my petty attempts at railroading with little effort....the river ran off in the "wrong" direction, and I had no idea what to do. I lost control of my game because I was too rigid and refused to adapt to my players.
My advice here is this: Do not plan too far ahead, for every PC has the inherant ability to go in completely the opposite direction you had planned, avoiding all story hooks and NPCs you developed, and going into a city you might have not even fully developed yet. As a DM, you have to stay flexible, you have to be on your toes, and be ready for anything the PCs throw at you. DMing is a very powerful way of flexing your creativity.
I'm not saying don't plan anything, by any means. You need to develop cities and NPCs and everything (if you're using a module, it's done for you, you just need to expand the ideas already handed to you), just be ready for the PCs to completely ignore or avoid said towns and NPCs in favor of a new location, maybe a NPC they met that you played in a way that intrigued them more than the NPC you planned on them liking, whatever. A game will not progress in a straight forward, this-is-the-way-it-will-go manner. It will ebb and flow, make turns you did not forsee, and go places you did not plan on it going. As a DM, you have to be ready, or at least be able to manage it and keep things going for the PCs. My group would become frustrated when they'd go somewhere and I'd have to say "hold on, I don't know what's here yet, give me a second." THAT is bad DMing. Even if you really don't know what's there, you can't act like it. You have to be quick, and come up with something. You need to keep the game flowing. It can be hard, I know it is for me, but with practice, I'm sure new DMs (like me) can get better at it.
Originally posted by Ankalagon
IMHO
I saw the title and began to read and my immediate thought was "What complete and utter arrogance" but then I read it and you really have not written it like that.
It's impressive that you guys took the time to help out with your insights and experience, and honestly I am not being being sarcastic. I think it is really great but.......
Thank you.
I am only guessing but did you guys get together because you were like minded? I suspect so, conflict is not a bad thing
the option to participate was open to all...if I could find the thread that was an invite, I'd link it. Also, I'd like to mention that we do not feel the same way about a lot.
Wazir Kazam and particularly NinjaHedge make some very good points, maybe worth inserting? especially about using the term FAQ as a suggestion of accuracy, but then I suppose if ya didn't use FAQ then who would read it
what good points do they make that fit into the FAQ? It seems to me that they came on here and started accusing us of having the wrong intentions. If they would like to include something, they may contact any of us involved by email (I'm [email]nerdb0mb@hotmail.com[/email]).
AND IMHO PEOPLE SHOULD READ IT.
thank you.
As for the intentions of this particular FAQ, these questions are asked often enough that some of us wanted to post answers people would probably be offered anyway. The invitation to be involved was open to everyone, and still is, as far as I am aware.
What is the intent? Other than to codify answers to multiple posts through your own (6) opinion(s). Perhaps you are offering your services with a clean heart. I'm sure that's how the bible started too.
This quote puzzles me. First of all, yes, we see this FAQ as a good thing, not some claim to fame or such...I don't see how it could really be percieved otherwise. As for the Bible reference, I am confused by it. What it has to do with this is beyond me, and your view on "how it started" is misguided, at best. This is the sort of comment that I would have to wonder about. Is it tolling, or truly misguided? I'm not going to get into a discussion of Christianity right now, as that would be counterproductive, but I do ask that you not make such comments in the future.
:D 
Additionally, I specifically mentioned 2E, which gives penalties for alignment changes and being forced to act out of alignment. As a DM, I have adjusted this a little, but not much. The penalties to rolls while acting out of alignment are repreentative of a conscience. If you feel bad about doing something, it is harder to concentrate. The XP penalty for changing alignment is in the 2nd edition rules, as I noted, and I even mentioned that it is merely an option.
Don't allow a monkey like that to derail this thread, I think its a great idea.
Histeria? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Look, the dancing monkeys are on my brain!
...hey what are you guys trying to say anyways?
*points to name* should i be offended? :D
to do something like this was probally one of the smartest things i have seen during my short time on these boards
keep up the good work, this is why you guys (and a few others) are considered the most helpful users on the boards
I'm totally new to posting and message boards ,and not completely sure what I'm doing. But I want to get involved.
I've been gaming (mostly D&D) for over 20 years. I LOVE IT!!
My current game crew and I (6 of us) are not completely satisfied with 3.5. The desciption of the Doom spell! Come on!
But, like with all previous versions, even AD&D, a group needs to use the rules they like and work around the ones that don't work for them. I think all groups must work like that.
For instance; we don't care for the new DR set up, so we're going to use the old rules.
We don't like the new numbers for Cover either, so we'll come up with something, or switch back to the numbers for 3.0.
House rules are the way to go.
I'd like some imput from you folks.
A few months ago my crew cast an invisibility spell on a dungeon door in an attempt to see what was behind the door.
When cast on an individual or object, one can see through it as if it weren't there. They had a sound theory.
However, Invisibility is of the school of Illusion, not Divination, so I decided not to allow them to use Invisibility like x-ray vision, rather I showed them what they wanted to see( or what they thought would be behind that door).
What would you have done?
Thanks
E
I can't wait to see your example using your campaign world.
DougC