My man died.
He was an old bastard, a crazy religious nut, and Jeff kicked his head off.
It was awesome.
I like character death, it seems cruel to say but it's true. I'm usually a player so one would think I'm usually on the business end of death, but I'm not. The problem is that since we tend to run epic stories like anime or video games that we build up the characters to the point that they are unkillable from a story perspective. I appreciate the type of storytelling we do because it resonates with me as a player and as a gamer (the vidya type), it makes you feel important and powerful.
I'm starting to feel like we've too long coddled each other, we are in our mid to late twenties now and I feel like it's time to sack up about getting whacked. If our characters make a bad decision like fighting a dragon that is far too powerful or challenging that necromancer to a duel when all he wanted to do was offer us a quest, we should die. As it stands it forces our GMs to rewrite the stats of something or worse, ad lib through it until the players realize that would ruin shit for the GM and back off for metagame reasons. We are pussies, and D&D has not traditionally helped us get some balls with it's easy access to raise dead and assumptions that your characters can be brought back from the grave. The World of Darkness doesn't have that handy ability but because of our preferred GMing style the PCs typically end up being invincible.
We are starting up this Pathfinder rotating GM campaign and we nixed raise dead right off the bat. I find myself gleeful about my new mortality in a way that makes me excited to both run this game and play in it. This world is lethal and dangerous, the characters are not "The Chosen Ones" from session one, and the setting we've devised is not particularly kind to reckless asshole types. If we make bad decisions we may very well pay for them with our lives. The fate of the world may end up at our fingertips, but our own fate is something that we'll be constantly considering.
Here I'd like to talk a little about why I feel PC kills can be fun and exciting. They make the table gasp and bring a sort of tension that is impossible to replicate. It also creates a memorable moment for the entire group, another awesome roleplaying story to add to the collection. A dead PC hits the players like a hammer blow to the chest, like this shit just got real. It can also be hilarious, because as serious as the situation was, I still had my head kicked off. We are talking a roundhouse kick to the side of the head, resulting in a messy separation. After a few hours a great many chuckles were had at my character's expense.
We are sacking up in a major way and we'll see if it affects any real change in our play style. I'd like to see a more realistic take on games and a bit more open-mindedness on the part of the players and GMs. With any luck a dead PC won't be a taboo and we'll get some dead guys on both sides of the field.
-Lee
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Monday, April 26, 2010
Rotating GM Game Onset - Initial Rules
We have been discussing the start of a rotating GM game set in the Pathfinder role playing system. The idea is that we have one continuous plot (more or less) that each person expands upon as they GM.
From a single night's discussion, we walked away with three big rules to live by that will hopefully make this work. I think these rules are somewhat obvious, but they make it clear to everyone what we are trying to accomplish.
I know we are not the only ones running rotating GM games. Most LARPs run that way in addition to a few PnP groups. If you find yourself in one of these rotating GM environments, these rules may be useful. Once again, they may be obvious, but sometimes that is what people need - the obvious to be stated on a piece of paper.
1. Don't be a dick.
2. Engage the shared plot.
3. Don't take matters into your own hands.
1. Don't be a dick.
Take the game seriously. Respect the work of every GM that came before you and will come after you. Respect your own work as a GM.
When you are GMing, you have total control over a communal plotline. Don't mess with that plotline just to be a dick or to fart around. Do mess with that plotline if you think what your are doing is a fun, effective, and interesting direction for the game to go.
Don't be a dick.
2. Engage the shared plot.
A GM should always be mindful of the importance of focusing on the main plot of the game. With the potential of a half-dozen GMs, the game will quickly become unmanageable if each GM tries to focus on their latest side-plot they have been cooking up. A reasonable amount of tangents make sense, but the game should have an overall directed plot that the players can follow and become attached to.
Nothing you do as a GM is owned by you. The world, plot, and NPCs are all shared among all GMs, regardless of who first introduced them.
Any other GM is allowed, and actually encouraged, to use NPCs, locations, events, and anything else brought into the game by a previous GM.
If the quantity of any element in the game is getting out of control (NPCs, locations, events, etc...), try to reuse existing elements instead of introducing new ones. There is probably a character that is close enough to what you intended to introduce, and using that character might put an interesting spin on things you wouldn't have thought of otherwise.
3. Don't take matters into your own hands.
If someone is being a dick, there is only one way we handle it: We approach each other as a group and resolve the situations as adults. Everyone can be mature about this, including the offending party, and we get back to having fun.
We are all grown men, so there is no reason for vendettas, in-fighting, or other behind the scenes drama. If you take matters into your own hands, then YOU are the one causing the drama, not the person being a dick. Examples of things NOT to do:
Someone is a dick, so you dick them when you GM.
Someone does something being a dick, so you undo what they did when you GM.
People don't agree with you that someone was being a dick, so you decide to be a dick when you GM.
Will these rules get us everything we ever wanted out of this game? We'll have to wait and see on that one. What I am sure of though, is that they will encourage healthy doses of trust, effort, and respect. Sounds like a good start to me.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Attractive Flaws
Our group has been discussing 4th edition at great lengths lately. I've never been a big time DnD guru, generally gravitating to the more modern games, but even I feel like DnD 4th edition is lacking something crucial.
Now, if you have any gamer friends or frequent the internet, you would know that I am in no way alone with this feeling. But numbers alone will not satisfy me today. I would like to take a stab in the dark at what mystical component is missing from the DnD 4 experience.
4th edition is a seriously solid system. Your level one character doesn't suck. One person's character isn't way better than another's. It is easy to make a character. It is easy to play. It is easy to DM. The flavor is as fantasy adventuring as it gets, and there are party-based teamwork mechanics built into the game. These are all things I like a lot..... but do they come at a price?
I ask the question "Is 4th edition too perfect?" This may sound silly, but hear me out.
In DnD 3, being low level sucked. You then eventually got to the "sweet spot" (levels 6-12) where you started to be powerful enough to contend with the world. Any higher than that, and your DM had a hard time challenging you. But in DnD 4, every level is balanced and fun, but here is the catch: While no level isn't in the sweet spot.... no level is in the sweet spot either.
Its all the same. You level up, but its just more of the same. You don't have to go through that right of passage, and then a turning point, and finally end up at the victorious end. Its all just kind of fun the whole way through.
So am I saying that getting killed at low levels is fun? Well, probably not, but the experience as a whole maybe comes together better, or at least is more endearing.
Character customization is the same way. DnD 4 is balanced, but the characters aren't nearly as diverse. No character is much better than another, but none of the characters are all that good! No powers or spells are too good, but then there are no really good powers and spells!
DnD 4 fixes so many of the problems that plagued the previous edition, but in fixing those issues, has it become too vanilla? Too bland? I'm sure some of those problems are much better off fixed. But maybe some of them were more interesting broken.
I bet by now what I am trying to say is clear, but feel free to think of more examples yourself. Hell, maybe post a comment and we can discuss. I eat your brains to steal your knowledge.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Experience Points in 4th Edition DND
This is going to be about role playing in 4th Edition while not using experience points.
To format this a bit, I'll first explain why I have decided to get rid of xp in DND 4th Edition, and then explain some of the pros and cons to doing so. Just so you are aware beforehand, I have never been opposed to implementing any "House Rule" if I felt it would benefit the players and improve my game.
That being said, I have decided to run my latest game in a somewhat free-form style.
The point to the game is that the world is open and changes drastically between sessions. The players are able to act how they want with few restrictions, as long as they keep attempting to achieve the one goal I had burdened them with before the game began.
I wanted to allow the players to see the story change based on their own actions, to know the choices they make are what ultimately determines their fate.
Plus, they chose to be heinously evil. Yay to horrendous acts of violence!
And we are back on track.
As with each new game, I was very worked up for the first session. My personal goal was to blend White Wolf with 4th Edition. Character-driven story with a fantasy setting I knew and was familiar with? Yes, please!
I had it all set up and was ready to go. Most of my music was picked out (I like to procrastinate.). There were a ton of NPCs, over 20 fight scenarios, tons of Adventure Tools monsters, and no restrictions to prevent the players from experiencing the world however they chose. And that is what they did.
The outcome was less than one hour of PC to NPC or PC to PC interaction and about four hours of combat.
This was not unwanted, mind you, but it was not completely expected. I was surprised by how much interaction wasn't going on, given the propensity our group has towards role playing their characters out. A loop was thrown and I was Bowser. See note.
(Alright, quick note: From what I understand, being thrown/knocked for a loop has origins in comic-strip characters reacting so hard to, say, a hit, that they literally roll over, creating a loop effect. If you have ever played Super Smash Bros. Brawl, you'll know that Bowser can literally be knocked for a loop. Giggle. Giggle giggle.)
There were a couple things that seemed to be the culprit.
First, one of the reasons behind this xp onslaught is my admittedly subpar GM skills when it comes to making the situations characters are in compelling. Self-deprecating behavior aside, it is true. The solution, of course, is to put more effort into my games, and, more importantly, to PRACTICE them.
The other reason is a bit more vague. It is me realizing that if no skill challenges are won, no battles are fought, and no quests are completed, no xp will be gained.
Even when the characters were given free reign in my game, their initial response was an outpouring of physical violence towards unsuspecting foe. I do not blame them, as I would have done the same thing. Wererats deserve what they get. However, if a game is meant for the players to role play and experience the world, xp still needs to be gained to advance in levels.
So, with my idea in mind, to free as many binds as I could break and to open up the world so the players can interact more with their characters and really feel as if they are part of the world, I have taken experience points out of my game.
Here are what I feel some of the pros and cons are to removing xp from 4th edition games.
PROS
**********No grinding for xp**********
A player should never feel the need to grind in a role playing game; they should never feel the need to hurry through a session for fear of not gaining a desirable amount of xp, or assume that they are so close to gaining a level that if they barrel through enough fights, by the end of the evening they will be one level higher. With xp taken out of the equation, grinding is also gone. I'm am not saying the players are not allowed to pick fights whenever they wish, nor I am saying a GM cannot force the characters to barrel through five fights in a row. The goal is not to take fighting out of the game, but to impress upon the characters they don't need to fight. This relates to my next point.
**********Fighting is not the answer**********
Ideally, a lack of xp should also peal away at the box we, as players, can wrap ourselves in; the belief the problem the GM put before us is easily remedied by fighting (or a skill challenge). The bandits before us are our enemies and should be killed simply by being bandits and resting on the road. And if they aren't evil bandits, you, as the GM, need to immediately express this to the character. Even then, the players may instigate combat without ever using role playing or a skill check to determine the bandits' motives.
As players, we often times rely too much on our GM, waiting for them to set plot points for us to follow. This can create a game more linear than it was ever meant to be. Players may come up with two solutions, and completely skip over the fact there are three other solutions not yet explored. Taking away experience points will, hopefully, allow a player to cultivate and propose, if not use, these other solutions.
**********Less filler content**********
As GMs, we put ourselves in a similar box because the players expect us to give them enough quests, battles, and skill challenges per session so they can level up in a reasonable amount of time. A battle thrown in to help the players reach level five does not have to be a half hour of wasted time against enemies that are simply filler.
**********A GM must expect the unexpected**********
A GM will need to account for more, possibly obscure, scenarios from their players. Once a player does not feel the need to fight an enemy, they begin thinking of other ways to approach situations. A GM has to be aware the player will think of other, possibly ridiculous, ways a character can mess up a situation.
The idea here is the GM has to know their players and their world more so than before, as they need to account for unexpected scenarios the players throw at them. A more prepared and involved a GM becomes with their NPCs and cities, the easier it is for a player to remember an NPC or to keep a mental picture of the city in their head. This helps make the world feel more.
**********More original scenarios**********
By using xp, a GM is more or less restricted to having players participate in a certain amount of battles and/or skill challenges in a given session. However, without xp, a session may not even contain battles or skill challenges, as a GM can use scenarios they may normally stray from.
Perhaps the players are talking to spirits which tell the characters what they need to know. The spirits have no reason to keep information from the PCs, but the catch is the PCs only learn the answers to the questions they pose. Each question brings further insight to the PCs, who can now bounce more stable ideas off each other in order to come up with more questions for the spirits.
**********Sessions**********
The game can be however long you make it. With no xp in site, you can have a 10-15 session game the spans to level 30, or you can have a game that lasts five years. See the Session part in the CONS SECTION for more on this.
Those are the main benefits to removing xp from games. It isn't the full list, but I think I am hitting most of the important points. Now, on to some (not all) problems you may run into if you remove xp from your game.
CONS SECTION
********I may not enjoy what you enjoy********
As a quick note beforehand, I am neither saying I alone am right, nor am I saying I have thought up every situation in the book. I also must warn you that your group may not approach a game the same way as our group, or more importantly, the same way as me.
Essentially, everyone enjoys something different.
********Varying game lengths********
Depending on the players, what gets accomplished per session may increase or decrease dramatically. Perhaps the players are less focused on the main plot and become wrapped up in the politics of the country. Or, perhaps the players find a way to bypass a significant portion of plot.
********Dungeon crawls********
Dungeon crawls don't necessarily benefit from nixing xp like other game types do. They're often times more focused on battles and skill challenges than role playing. In this case, players in games like these may prefer the added experience points. A few extra winding paths and the players may make it to level five instead of level six. Experience points may give the players an added sense of accomplishment if that is what they are looking for.
Also, the paths the players can take and their solutions to problems are generally more linear in dungeon crawls than in epic games. For instance, the PC to NPC interaction may only get players a certain amount of information before the NPC's knowledge is expended. This limits a player's ability to interact outside the purview of combat and skill checks.
With a more linear dungeon crawl decreasing the amount that can be done with a given situation and having a noticeably finite amount of area to explore, along with the sense of accomplishment one gets while gaining xp, it seems to me removing xp may benefit a game less than keeping them in.
********Arbitrarily choosing places to level up********
You must figure out how to level up your party. Leveling them up arbitrarily is ill-advised. Choosing to level players up because they are about to fight a big dragon, or leveling them up at the end of a session after they spend the whole session accomplishing nothing isn't really benefiting your game.
As an alternate, leveling characters up at certain plot points or after significant events in the game gives you, as a GM, the ability to acknowledge the players' efforts and/or accomplishments by showing them, story-wise, what pushed them over the edge to that next level. It essentially allows you to integrate the act of leveling up into your game, whether it be through cool cutscenes or something else.
********Session loss = xp loss********
You may believe that a player missing a session or multiple sessions deserves less xp than the players always showing up. In this case, all players will be on the same playing field unless you can somehow work out a system to level up players depending on how often they show up.
To be honest, I have never been a proponent of players having different xp amounts. To me, it is reasonable to have all players the same level. Are all sessions worth an equal amount of xp? If not, what makes one person more deserving than the other, when both missed one four-hour session?
I understand trying to promote players to come to your game, but you're risking rewarding players who don't even participate over players who may simply have had something else planned. If you don't run on a regular schedule and they planned their activity beforehand, I am baffled as how it could be fair to punish them for something you have control over. I have other problems with doing this, but I'll just move on...
********Nothing happens because the players don't go anywhere********
This might be a bit out there, but it is possible players may not be as motivated to follow the plot if they can find something else that tickles their fancy. While I feel GMs should encourage strong characters, it is important that you, as a GM, make sure the players know before the first session what to expect out of the game and what you expect out of the players, even if it is as simple as telling them they should make characters willing to adventure.
Even so, wires between players and GMs can get crossed, and for one reason or another, your whole session dissolved into two characters trying to sell one goat to buy fifty chickens in order to start a farm (a good deal, indeed!). Funny as this is, constant sessions where one or two players spend the whole session doing their own side plots can devolve the game into something you never wanted it to be.
********Sessions**********
By removing xp, the game can be however long you want it to be.
That means the players can go six sessions or more without leveling up if that is what you choose. However, I would suggest against this type of approach, as leveling is an important part of role playing.
It is important to note removing xp from a game should not be used like this, as it may make the players feel like they are being punished. Whether you have a good reason to do so or not, I would at least inform your players ahead of time that levels won't come quickly, so they don't become frustrated.
That seems to be all I have for now! I will try being more punctual next time, though I'm still not sure what I'll write about.
I'd like to hear your questions, concerns, or comments. You can do that here or on twitter: www.twitter.com/house_rule.
-Ebo
To format this a bit, I'll first explain why I have decided to get rid of xp in DND 4th Edition, and then explain some of the pros and cons to doing so. Just so you are aware beforehand, I have never been opposed to implementing any "House Rule" if I felt it would benefit the players and improve my game.
That being said, I have decided to run my latest game in a somewhat free-form style.
The point to the game is that the world is open and changes drastically between sessions. The players are able to act how they want with few restrictions, as long as they keep attempting to achieve the one goal I had burdened them with before the game began.
I wanted to allow the players to see the story change based on their own actions, to know the choices they make are what ultimately determines their fate.
Plus, they chose to be heinously evil. Yay to horrendous acts of violence!
And we are back on track.
As with each new game, I was very worked up for the first session. My personal goal was to blend White Wolf with 4th Edition. Character-driven story with a fantasy setting I knew and was familiar with? Yes, please!
I had it all set up and was ready to go. Most of my music was picked out (I like to procrastinate.). There were a ton of NPCs, over 20 fight scenarios, tons of Adventure Tools monsters, and no restrictions to prevent the players from experiencing the world however they chose. And that is what they did.
The outcome was less than one hour of PC to NPC or PC to PC interaction and about four hours of combat.
This was not unwanted, mind you, but it was not completely expected. I was surprised by how much interaction wasn't going on, given the propensity our group has towards role playing their characters out. A loop was thrown and I was Bowser. See note.
(Alright, quick note: From what I understand, being thrown/knocked for a loop has origins in comic-strip characters reacting so hard to, say, a hit, that they literally roll over, creating a loop effect. If you have ever played Super Smash Bros. Brawl, you'll know that Bowser can literally be knocked for a loop. Giggle. Giggle giggle.)
There were a couple things that seemed to be the culprit.
First, one of the reasons behind this xp onslaught is my admittedly subpar GM skills when it comes to making the situations characters are in compelling. Self-deprecating behavior aside, it is true. The solution, of course, is to put more effort into my games, and, more importantly, to PRACTICE them.
The other reason is a bit more vague. It is me realizing that if no skill challenges are won, no battles are fought, and no quests are completed, no xp will be gained.
Even when the characters were given free reign in my game, their initial response was an outpouring of physical violence towards unsuspecting foe. I do not blame them, as I would have done the same thing. Wererats deserve what they get. However, if a game is meant for the players to role play and experience the world, xp still needs to be gained to advance in levels.
So, with my idea in mind, to free as many binds as I could break and to open up the world so the players can interact more with their characters and really feel as if they are part of the world, I have taken experience points out of my game.
Here are what I feel some of the pros and cons are to removing xp from 4th edition games.
PROS
**********No grinding for xp**********
A player should never feel the need to grind in a role playing game; they should never feel the need to hurry through a session for fear of not gaining a desirable amount of xp, or assume that they are so close to gaining a level that if they barrel through enough fights, by the end of the evening they will be one level higher. With xp taken out of the equation, grinding is also gone. I'm am not saying the players are not allowed to pick fights whenever they wish, nor I am saying a GM cannot force the characters to barrel through five fights in a row. The goal is not to take fighting out of the game, but to impress upon the characters they don't need to fight. This relates to my next point.
**********Fighting is not the answer**********
Ideally, a lack of xp should also peal away at the box we, as players, can wrap ourselves in; the belief the problem the GM put before us is easily remedied by fighting (or a skill challenge). The bandits before us are our enemies and should be killed simply by being bandits and resting on the road. And if they aren't evil bandits, you, as the GM, need to immediately express this to the character. Even then, the players may instigate combat without ever using role playing or a skill check to determine the bandits' motives.
As players, we often times rely too much on our GM, waiting for them to set plot points for us to follow. This can create a game more linear than it was ever meant to be. Players may come up with two solutions, and completely skip over the fact there are three other solutions not yet explored. Taking away experience points will, hopefully, allow a player to cultivate and propose, if not use, these other solutions.
**********Less filler content**********
As GMs, we put ourselves in a similar box because the players expect us to give them enough quests, battles, and skill challenges per session so they can level up in a reasonable amount of time. A battle thrown in to help the players reach level five does not have to be a half hour of wasted time against enemies that are simply filler.
**********A GM must expect the unexpected**********
A GM will need to account for more, possibly obscure, scenarios from their players. Once a player does not feel the need to fight an enemy, they begin thinking of other ways to approach situations. A GM has to be aware the player will think of other, possibly ridiculous, ways a character can mess up a situation.
The idea here is the GM has to know their players and their world more so than before, as they need to account for unexpected scenarios the players throw at them. A more prepared and involved a GM becomes with their NPCs and cities, the easier it is for a player to remember an NPC or to keep a mental picture of the city in their head. This helps make the world feel more.
**********More original scenarios**********
By using xp, a GM is more or less restricted to having players participate in a certain amount of battles and/or skill challenges in a given session. However, without xp, a session may not even contain battles or skill challenges, as a GM can use scenarios they may normally stray from.
Perhaps the players are talking to spirits which tell the characters what they need to know. The spirits have no reason to keep information from the PCs, but the catch is the PCs only learn the answers to the questions they pose. Each question brings further insight to the PCs, who can now bounce more stable ideas off each other in order to come up with more questions for the spirits.
**********Sessions**********
The game can be however long you make it. With no xp in site, you can have a 10-15 session game the spans to level 30, or you can have a game that lasts five years. See the Session part in the CONS SECTION for more on this.
Those are the main benefits to removing xp from games. It isn't the full list, but I think I am hitting most of the important points. Now, on to some (not all) problems you may run into if you remove xp from your game.
CONS SECTION
********I may not enjoy what you enjoy********
As a quick note beforehand, I am neither saying I alone am right, nor am I saying I have thought up every situation in the book. I also must warn you that your group may not approach a game the same way as our group, or more importantly, the same way as me.
Essentially, everyone enjoys something different.
********Varying game lengths********
Depending on the players, what gets accomplished per session may increase or decrease dramatically. Perhaps the players are less focused on the main plot and become wrapped up in the politics of the country. Or, perhaps the players find a way to bypass a significant portion of plot.
********Dungeon crawls********
Dungeon crawls don't necessarily benefit from nixing xp like other game types do. They're often times more focused on battles and skill challenges than role playing. In this case, players in games like these may prefer the added experience points. A few extra winding paths and the players may make it to level five instead of level six. Experience points may give the players an added sense of accomplishment if that is what they are looking for.
Also, the paths the players can take and their solutions to problems are generally more linear in dungeon crawls than in epic games. For instance, the PC to NPC interaction may only get players a certain amount of information before the NPC's knowledge is expended. This limits a player's ability to interact outside the purview of combat and skill checks.
With a more linear dungeon crawl decreasing the amount that can be done with a given situation and having a noticeably finite amount of area to explore, along with the sense of accomplishment one gets while gaining xp, it seems to me removing xp may benefit a game less than keeping them in.
********Arbitrarily choosing places to level up********
You must figure out how to level up your party. Leveling them up arbitrarily is ill-advised. Choosing to level players up because they are about to fight a big dragon, or leveling them up at the end of a session after they spend the whole session accomplishing nothing isn't really benefiting your game.
As an alternate, leveling characters up at certain plot points or after significant events in the game gives you, as a GM, the ability to acknowledge the players' efforts and/or accomplishments by showing them, story-wise, what pushed them over the edge to that next level. It essentially allows you to integrate the act of leveling up into your game, whether it be through cool cutscenes or something else.
********Session loss = xp loss********
You may believe that a player missing a session or multiple sessions deserves less xp than the players always showing up. In this case, all players will be on the same playing field unless you can somehow work out a system to level up players depending on how often they show up.
To be honest, I have never been a proponent of players having different xp amounts. To me, it is reasonable to have all players the same level. Are all sessions worth an equal amount of xp? If not, what makes one person more deserving than the other, when both missed one four-hour session?
I understand trying to promote players to come to your game, but you're risking rewarding players who don't even participate over players who may simply have had something else planned. If you don't run on a regular schedule and they planned their activity beforehand, I am baffled as how it could be fair to punish them for something you have control over. I have other problems with doing this, but I'll just move on...
********Nothing happens because the players don't go anywhere********
This might be a bit out there, but it is possible players may not be as motivated to follow the plot if they can find something else that tickles their fancy. While I feel GMs should encourage strong characters, it is important that you, as a GM, make sure the players know before the first session what to expect out of the game and what you expect out of the players, even if it is as simple as telling them they should make characters willing to adventure.
Even so, wires between players and GMs can get crossed, and for one reason or another, your whole session dissolved into two characters trying to sell one goat to buy fifty chickens in order to start a farm (a good deal, indeed!). Funny as this is, constant sessions where one or two players spend the whole session doing their own side plots can devolve the game into something you never wanted it to be.
********Sessions**********
By removing xp, the game can be however long you want it to be.
That means the players can go six sessions or more without leveling up if that is what you choose. However, I would suggest against this type of approach, as leveling is an important part of role playing.
It is important to note removing xp from a game should not be used like this, as it may make the players feel like they are being punished. Whether you have a good reason to do so or not, I would at least inform your players ahead of time that levels won't come quickly, so they don't become frustrated.
That seems to be all I have for now! I will try being more punctual next time, though I'm still not sure what I'll write about.
I'd like to hear your questions, concerns, or comments. You can do that here or on twitter: www.twitter.com/house_rule.
-Ebo
Walking on a Thin Line
So we've recorded some podcasts now, podcasts about something we here at house rule truly enjoy, roleplaying games. Then we realized that the podcasts were borked, borked beyond fixing. With these grim and terrible flaws at the forefront of our minds we hit the drawing board again, to fix all the things we did wrong.
Flash forward to our third recording session for our first podcast, we are pretty sure we have a good podcast done. Ed is working on it right now and I have high hopes. We used a distinctly sub-par setup for recording, but it resulted in a mostly error free podcast.
You can look forward to hearing about some relatively obscure japanese game composers, me making some broad assumptions about what makes something psionic, and the news. It'll be a delight.
-Lee
Flash forward to our third recording session for our first podcast, we are pretty sure we have a good podcast done. Ed is working on it right now and I have high hopes. We used a distinctly sub-par setup for recording, but it resulted in a mostly error free podcast.
You can look forward to hearing about some relatively obscure japanese game composers, me making some broad assumptions about what makes something psionic, and the news. It'll be a delight.
-Lee
Monday, March 8, 2010
RPG Dev Round One - Principles
Recently, I have been working on a new role playing system. It has already undergone many revisions, and the total progress I have made has been minimal. It has, however, caused me to try and quantify exactly what I want out of a role playing system.
Now, I won't pretend to ever be able to match these points with my system. But without further adieu, here are the principles I am shooting for:
Fun
This is simple but often neglected. The system should be very fun for someone who is into role playing. In other words, this is not geared towards instant gratification. It is for the person who believes an investment can be worth the fun in the end. All systems that are designed will keep in mind this principle: In the end, will this make the game more fun?
Unity Of Systems and Scope
The core system of the game will be used throughout. Because of this, the system will not inherently place importance on some activities as opposed to others. For example, physical combat will not have a different scope of rule detail than social interactions.
Encourage Fleshed Out Characters and Role Playing
The system will encourage players to consider how they wish to play their character role playing wise. This applies to both character creation and normal game play.
The character creation system will be more than distributing stat points here and there. When character creation is over, the player will know who their character is.
During play, role playing will be rewarded highly. Actively playing your character will be important above having good stats and whatnot.
Encourage Realistic Gritty Decision Making
Physical well-being will not be the only risk factor the players will have to consider when making decisions. Emotional stability and mental well-being will present an interesting take on how to interact with NPCs and other characters.
For example, getting into fight with your brother may leave you stressed out. You might decide that you just don't want to deal with that right now since you have other important things you need to be focused for.
This will also encourage play as a group. Since it will be difficult for a single character to handle all of the pressures of play, everyone will have to get involved and do their share.
Ease Of Play
The system will avoid rules that don't add enough to the game to warrant added complexity. It will run fluidly with little need to constantly look things up in a book. The decisions you make will be more important than the rules that govern them.
It will not, however, be designed to be a good "first timer" system. Seasoned role players will be able to pickup the game quickly and play it easily. For those entirely new to role playing, it might be a bit much.
Power to the Players
I want the players to feel as though they deserve the things they accomplish. I think a certain degree of crunch is required for that. Otherwise, it is just the GM telling you if you succeed or not, which is not what I am going for.
Enough rules will be present to allow the player to have an accurate feel of how good their character is at various activities. This feel will not be violated by narrative overrides. If the players can do something, then they can do it.
Representation
The players should have an easy time becoming immersed in the game. The systems that may be in the game should help the player to feel like that are doing what their character is doing. When the character is doing well, I want the player to think: "Yeah, I'm a badass." I do not want them to think: "Yeah, I'm good at DnD."
Advancement Encourages Active Play
The advancement will not be an equal share split at the end of the session. Advancing your character will require you to actively engage the game. This must be presented in a way that awards active players, but everyone will get a chance to play. Perhaps rewards will be offered for the entire group engaging the game (to encourage the players to help each other out!).
Mathematical Basis
The system will be firmly based in probability mathematics. There are certain things that can only be found during actual play testing, but a solid mathematical foundation will greatly help.
I'm sure there are other principles that I haven't quantified into words yet, but these seem like a good starting point for what I am shooting for. I'll keep you updated as this project develops.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
I want a new drug
So we've recorded our first podcast. In fact, Ed is sitting right behind me as I type slaving away so that we don't sound like a bunch of hushed lunatics talking about nerdy things. With any luck he'll succeed. If he doesn't, well, I've comes to terms with my lunacy.
What has been a bit rougher is coming to terms with the way my voice sounds. We stayed out rather late the night before we recorded our podcast and I'd been telling myself that my voice only sounded that way because I destroyed it. That is not the case, it always sounds like that. I don't know what to think. I never ever hear a recorded version of myself and it's made me a little self conscious. Also, I apologize for the sniffling and coughing you might hear, that's me.
I have also been working on an idea I've had to reorganize the way I keep my information for my games. I have a tendency to ad-lib when I shouldn't, it's a curse and a gift. I think I'm very good at it, years ago I would run games in D&D 3.5 where the only prep I would do is three quick lines of plot on a scrap of paper and some vague encounter ideas in my head, it was grand. The problem is that I now want a more coherent plot, something with purpose and direction. So I need to limit the ad-libbing I do to the places I know I can get away with it. My plan has worked out well so far, when the players talk to an NPC I have a name and place for I have a list of the things he KNOWS instead of the way I was doing it before, listing the things he doesn't know. If I get off track I can think of my list and bam, it's fixed. However I decided to go back and change all my old notes to this system, in addition to a lot of organizational fixes and such, it's an extremely time consuming process.
What this means is that now that I'm done (or nearly done) I can ease up on the hiatus I've taken from GMing and maybe enact a few of my crazier plans. It'll be nice to get back in the saddle. Next time I'll share some of my musings on character death and how our group has been a bunch of wussies about it. It might be time to put the fear back into fighting.
-Lee
What has been a bit rougher is coming to terms with the way my voice sounds. We stayed out rather late the night before we recorded our podcast and I'd been telling myself that my voice only sounded that way because I destroyed it. That is not the case, it always sounds like that. I don't know what to think. I never ever hear a recorded version of myself and it's made me a little self conscious. Also, I apologize for the sniffling and coughing you might hear, that's me.
I have also been working on an idea I've had to reorganize the way I keep my information for my games. I have a tendency to ad-lib when I shouldn't, it's a curse and a gift. I think I'm very good at it, years ago I would run games in D&D 3.5 where the only prep I would do is three quick lines of plot on a scrap of paper and some vague encounter ideas in my head, it was grand. The problem is that I now want a more coherent plot, something with purpose and direction. So I need to limit the ad-libbing I do to the places I know I can get away with it. My plan has worked out well so far, when the players talk to an NPC I have a name and place for I have a list of the things he KNOWS instead of the way I was doing it before, listing the things he doesn't know. If I get off track I can think of my list and bam, it's fixed. However I decided to go back and change all my old notes to this system, in addition to a lot of organizational fixes and such, it's an extremely time consuming process.
What this means is that now that I'm done (or nearly done) I can ease up on the hiatus I've taken from GMing and maybe enact a few of my crazier plans. It'll be nice to get back in the saddle. Next time I'll share some of my musings on character death and how our group has been a bunch of wussies about it. It might be time to put the fear back into fighting.
-Lee
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Creepy Crawlies
It is nice to see more of my posse on board. If only to ever elusive, dashing, downright enigmatic Ebo would drop his truth bomb on us.
Alas, my last post was catty. I realize that now but I regret nothing. Jeff has shown himself to be nonplussed by the egregious attack I levelled against his character in my former post, or as it is being called "the great american novel."
To be more brief this time, I am glad Jeff is largely unstirred by my remarks, because frankly, he runs great games. For all the crap I give him, I know this game is going to be a lot of fun.
I shout and yammer that I feel marginalized, duped even. Really I think I'm just suffering from the creepy crawlies because we have stuffed 20 pounds of character creation into a 5 pound bag and I am jonesing to play. It's been nearly a week since my last fix and I need to hear the clatter of dice and smell the scent of... Scratch that. The smells I can take or leave. But if I haven't RPed a single G come Monday, I am not going to be alright.
This is officially a cry for help.
Alas, my last post was catty. I realize that now but I regret nothing. Jeff has shown himself to be nonplussed by the egregious attack I levelled against his character in my former post, or as it is being called "the great american novel."
To be more brief this time, I am glad Jeff is largely unstirred by my remarks, because frankly, he runs great games. For all the crap I give him, I know this game is going to be a lot of fun.
I shout and yammer that I feel marginalized, duped even. Really I think I'm just suffering from the creepy crawlies because we have stuffed 20 pounds of character creation into a 5 pound bag and I am jonesing to play. It's been nearly a week since my last fix and I need to hear the clatter of dice and smell the scent of... Scratch that. The smells I can take or leave. But if I haven't RPed a single G come Monday, I am not going to be alright.
This is officially a cry for help.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)