|
-
J B
United Kingdom
Norwich
Norfolk
-
I can't help myself. Writing interesting conversations with NPC's that have a brain, a history and an agenda, the world comes alive, and the places they reside in begin to pop into interesting and three dimensional spaces.
This is great for immersion.
It also raises problems of wandering off the path as you unwittingly describe areas that you never intended players to show interest in.
I had already decided that a ruined palace the players are currently visiting would be a non event. A place where some NPC's are living in past splendour, a source of information and plot tracking, and a chance to either make a friend or an enemy of an otherwise neutral but welcoming group. I don't really have the time to setup a nice sidetrek here above and beyond the NPC's already present.
However. The ruined palace exudes mystery. The greater part of its expanse is ruined and covered in jungle. Unnatural things roam just beyond its walls, and guests are warned not to wander into the disused spaces. Paths wind away from the compound, only to disappear under foot into tangled undergrowth.
And thus with my colourful descriptions, I fear the palace will be an irresistible mystery to explore and delve into. A path must go somewhere right ? And it disappears into undergrowth ? You are told its dangerous ? You might as well paint a sign saying Go This Way.
One of my players died recently, and his reroll is already a guest in the palace - the living players will meet the reroll as part of the whole meet and greet NPC malarkey. Given that, I have pre-briefed the reroll player on some facts about the palace which he may choose to divulge to the other players -
"You have seen at least half a dozen servants moving around the palace at any one time. 5 or so of the muscled guys. And an equal number or so of beautiful women. You are probably no expert on what attractive is for a human - but even to you, if you have travelled in human settlements, the number of flawless skinned women in the place is extraordinary.
Most of the place is disused, and some of it you have been warned is dangerous. Dangerous how remains a mystery. You have been told to stick to the obviously used areas for your own safety and so far you have mostly complied. You have wandered a little and discovered that to the North, the ruins of the palace sit overlooking a precipitous cliff drop into thick jungle. A path leads down from the palace, but it is disused and in disrepair and you have not had the inclination to test its dangerous way.
the jungles surrounding the palace are filled with all manner of disturbing noises during the night, and some of the unnatural cries have only reinforced your reticence about venturing into the darker corners of the palace. "
So it seems my writing has betrayed my decision to have a non event happen in the palace, and I think it will be inevitable I will need to rustle up some odd goings on in the undergrowth. Even to me it sounds too interesting to pass up.
Doh.
-
J B
United Kingdom
Norwich
Norfolk
-
Some GMs enjoy being antagonistic towards their players, the antagonism having a variety of sources, some good - out to cause as much brutal trouble for the players - and some bad - an immature need to humble the players or show off an NPC the GM is proud of.
Personally I don't subscribe to player antagonism at all, I see my role as a GM to be that of a world interpreter, the simulation of another world and its ultimate output. Whilst various factions can be antagonists to the players, and as GM I am running those antagonists in character, as a game overseer I am for the most part neutral with a nod of favour to the PC's - warnings, double checks, do-overs if there's a reasonable reason for a misunderstanding, and almost always the benefit of the doubt.
But there's an interesting thing that goes on. Despite me looking kindly upon my players - but certainly not babysitting them - over time the players identify me as the arch-antagonist.
I am out to kill them. Get them. Cheat them. Steal from them.
This is often doubly ironic when I have just given them the benefit of the doubt over some ruling, and yet out of character they curse me for doing my best to kill them.
It seems the players identify my shadowy hand controlling their foes, and over time identify me as the enemy as opposed to the enemy within the game. An out of character versus in character thing.
Thus a relationship of protagonist and antagonist is foisted upon affairs, and whether I like it or not, I am pushed into the position of being the Bad Guy. Or at least the perception of being the Bad Guy.
I am in their eyes, an Antagonist GM.
There's an injustice to this which, with the tools of GM at your fingertips, could be all too simple to do something about.
Me ? Antagonistic ? I'll show you antagonistic !
But I think a good GM should rise about such drives. Take the Zen path. Endure the slings and arrows and yet not react.
It quickly slips from the mind of a player that the game is entirely in the hands of the GM. Should they wish so, an impossibly powerful entity could appear, crush the players, and walk off. Of course, no fun for anyone. And thats the thing. Making the experience fun. Making the players compete to do their best. Where to pitch the difficulty so that its not so easy the players are complacent, and yet not so high the players become hopeless/resigned.
Maybe being classed as an Antagonist GM is not so bad - the players do not see a world that can instantly and unfairly crush them. They see a world in which they have to fight to survive, in which the fear of loss is present - I am after all 'out to get them' - but also one in which they can also succeed.
So maybe its just the mark of a correctly pitched difficulty level. And something that is keeping the players on their toes. And I will have to suffer being labelled as antagonistic.
-
J B
United Kingdom
Norwich
Norfolk
-
The slow drawn out drama of Dungeons and Dragons and Wizards of the Coast has taken a new turn of late. The editions wars roll on, and it seems that the Good and the Great at WotC now regret their decisions at the beginning of 4e which kicked the whole ruckus off.
WotC chose an interesting strategy with D & D 3. They threw open the doors, drafted the OGL, and allowed a diverse range of third parties and support products to give energy to what was a wildly successful release. 3e sparked a renaissance in D & D and pen and paper roleplaying, and the future seemed bright.
Along comes 4e. Out goes the OGL, WotC it seems wanted more of the gravy for themselves. Decades of evolutionary play were thrown out, 4e would be more geared towards the MMO player. Everything that had gone before was now useless - and much derided by WotC in their praise of 4e. A juggernaut of a leader in the RPG space, WotC knew best - better than their players, and they had nothing to fear.
Or so they thought.
To my mind 4e created nothing short of a schism. It at once alienated a vast swathe of dedicated fans, and it also gave some third party publishers an ultimatum. Adapt or die.
Unfortunately for WotC, some of the consistently best content output for 3.5 was not produced in house. Dragon and Dungeon magazine were produced by a third party company - luminaries of the D & D world, with plenty of influential friends - Paizo, and Paizo given a sudden ultimatum of no more 3.5, no more Dragon, no more Dungeon, took the bold step to write their own RPG.
Except it wasnt really their own RPG. It was a refinement of all that had gone before in D & D, in effect, it was D & D 3.75 - all the 3rd edition content was compatible, but here finally were some of the more problematic rules problems fixed. Issues resolved. A truly well polished product.
Much bluster followed with little data to understand what was going on. Rumours were rife that 4e wasn't a great success. That Paizo's effort was flying off the shelves.
Certainly Paizo scored highly with people familiar with the quality of their work from 3.5 days, their dedication to the customer base, and the extension of life of 3.5 content. This for many seemed to be in stark contract to WotC haughty tones of ignoring its fan based, of ditching old editions, and producing some questionable material.
Time marches on, and its soon clear that Paizo is doing incredibly well. So much so, that at last when hard and fast figures are revealed, D & D has slipped from its market leader position - replaced with the pretender to the crown Paizo's Pathfinder.
WotC stand at a unique juncture in time. They are faced with an ailing grand piece of IP - they have been out D & D'd by in effect their own ranks, and have made a number of missteps that have seen their sure thing market presence shot to hell. With these facts in hand, it hardly seems surprising then that the recent announcement in WotC land have been placatory and humble. Maybe they strayed too far from the path with 4e they say. 4e is not what D & D was they ponder. Our hobby is dying they note -
Dying ? No. Drivethrurpg has noted its best year ever. D & D sales are badly down ? Yes, D & D is dying ? Perhaps. RPG hobby is dying ? The sales figures indicate otherwise. It seems WotC cant help but paint a picture in their own egomaniacal image - if D & D is dying, then the hobby is dying. No. D & D is no longer the centre of the universe, but like an emperor who cannot quite grasp his empire has lapsed, still believe they are the most important entities in the RPG landscape.
So what now ? WotC seem desperate to reset the clock. They want lots of feedback from players ( woefully lacking with the haughty and arrogant 4e design ). They want everyone to have fun. To be happy. To all come together. And oh yeah, for you to spend your RPG dollars with WotC.
I can't help feel that all of this is just pure greed. A desperate attempt to re-ignite their ailing IP, to pull sales back in their favour and become the market leader again. Hobby be damned - WotC want to be the movers and shakers.
Its clear that if they were just interested in the hobby, then from a fans point of view, they would continue to support 4e, but, perhaps also start supporting *gasp* something like Pathfinder. Why not ? Plenty of talented writers, a range of juicy IP names such as Eberron and Greyhawk. Money to be made !
But you get the feeling WotC nestles a secret hatred of Paizo. That they have dared to knock them off their spot. That they were rude enough to challenge the thinking that 3e = bad, 4e = great - and ultimately be proved in market terms that the decisions made with 4e were a turkey - they handed over a locked in, sure fire, market leader RPG with rich IP, over to everyone else in the market.
WotC want D & D back. They jealously glare at Pathfinder whilst singularly failing to mention it. It can't have escaped their attention. Not when industry movers and shakers go so far as to deride 4e and praise Pathfinder as the 'real D & D in spirit'. WotC want their cash cow back. They want their fans back - they dont like the schism, with one half of their fan base either moving to different games, or stubbornly sticking with 3e, and pouring scorn on the dumbed down 4e.
Can they do it ? Can they turn back the clock, re-unite the fans back into one happy family ? Its going to be tough thats for sure. Already players of 4e have reacted in anger that once again WotC seem to be saying that the 'current edition' of D & D is broken, poor, not worth your time, instead why not play the new one. Echoes of 4e and 3.5e all over again. Players are angry that investment into 4e will now be wasted as 5e will once again be a paradigm shift over what has come before.
And as for those players that already left D & D, or stuck with 3 ? Another difficult battle. For players that moved to Pathfinder, I can't honestly see they will gain many fans back - D & D 5e would need to be breathtakingly sublime in design, and rewrite all the old rules for it to stand a chance of stripping Pathfinder of its support. Players of 3 movign to 5 ? Thats more likely, particularly if 5 goes back to some of the core simulation principles of 3.
In all likelihood 5e will not be a stunning game changer. I think perhaps that this is the beginning of the end for D & D. Numbers will continue to decline - one can only wonder what 6e could possibly bring, and whether anyone will care at that point. Its very possible that D & D could decline to the point that WotC don't want to waste any more money on it. After all, the once unassailable TSR was bought out by upstart WotC. Who is to say someone like Paizo might not one day buy the IP and rights of D & D from WotC ?
All things being equal, I think this is a probable scenario. I think Paizo will become the juggernaut. Hasbro will sell its D & D IP off. And in a strange migration from TSR to WotC to Hasbro to Paizo, D & D will have a new home once more.
Fri Jan 13, 2012 12:02 am
-
J B
United Kingdom
Norwich
Norfolk
-
My players are all hyped up roid pumping super heroes. Their stats are high - in hindsight I should perhaps have eased them down a fraction. Their levels of optimising are advanced. Their level of oo-rah is frequently assured.
All in all they pack a mean punch, and it can be hard for them to get seriously threatened.
But there seems to be a strange phenomenon going on. BBEG's they encounter are dealt with seriously and with all firepower to bear - and more often than not the poor BBEG's barely get off their Evil Monologue before they go down in a storm of damage. The BBEG's are rarely a serious TPK threat.
However. Line up a horde of low level mooks, armed with bows, or some minor affair, and the players struggle. They suffer the death of a thousand cuts. This is especially true when the BBEG brings along his horde of low level mooks to help out.
But all too quickly they mop the mooks up, or they bring to bear some awesome might of area whamminess to make them disappear in a bright burst of flame.
Today, after a long melee drought, the players got to dust off their melee skills and tactics as a wave of trivially low, but numerically significant undead zerg rushed them. The twist to this melee is that it happened in an anti-magic zone. No big spells. No fancy armour. No snazzy weapon effects.
And suddenly those trivially low, multi attack hordes are not looking so funny.
The cleric is down to half health in two rounds. The agile psionic rogue, bereft of powers is also struggling to stay healthy. The illusionist at the back is busy defending himself in a total defence pattern.
In fact the only one enjoying themselves is the melee monster of the group, the pure Fighter. Almost impenetrable to the rabble, and able to dispatch foes with a single blow, he carries on his work with a happy tune on his lips.
Now... if only the mooks didn't cause paralysis with every hit. All in all the scene could be set for a heroic ass kicking doled out by the fighter, whilst everyone else dies on the spot.
You can keep your BBEG. Never underestimate the zerglings !
-
J B
United Kingdom
Norwich
Norfolk
-
I have a friend whos unquestionably a gamer. A hardcore gamer, someone with a nice collection of games, who puts aside time every week for a gaming group, and who plunges into things like ASL with endless money, time and devotion, as well as the odd pilgrimage to gaming events.
He likes all sorts of games.
But theres one type of game he wont play. He has a strange phobia about them - RPGs.
In theory he loves the idea of many RPGs. He likes dungeon crawl games. He likes characters. He likes Computer RPGs. He even likes all the myriad rule books, supplements and the whole paraphenalia that goes with a mainstream pen and paper RPG.
But he wont play them.
Which is a shame, as I think he is missing out on the richest gameplay there is.
I have tried unsuccessfully over the years to engage him in an RPG. From zero roleplaying RPGs - just play the mechanical stats - to rules light RPGs - dont worry about the stats, just play the story, but all to no avail.
Its hard to pin down exactly what he fears about them. He is vague about it. Theres a definite distrust / dislike of hardcore roleplaying. The idea of someone acting out a part is shocking to him, stupid, ridiculous, worrying. Which is fine. Some people are not comfortable with theatrics - its like being self conscious. But I have run RPGs where no one is acting out a part. They have the stats of their character, but by and large, they play themselves.
But its still an issue. Even the naming of a character is a problem. Theres a certain stigma to picking a name that isnt his own, or something non fantastical. A long time ago this would usually rear its head by him choosing a joke name instead - something obviously stupid, like a famous character from a soap.
And yet. He can take something like descent and enjoy it. Which is RPG lite imo. In fact the way I run some lite RPGs has pretty much been descent.
I am convinced that if I can just get him over that initial hump, he will enjoy himself. Have him sit down and play descent, but by the end of it, be playing Pathfinder. Or something.
Maybe the Basic Pathfinder boxed set would be a good gateway product here ? I am not sure.
-
J B
United Kingdom
Norwich
Norfolk
-
I have - in my most recent RPG play - been running a 3.5/Pathfinder RPG game for the better part of three years now - Legacy of Fire Adventure Path via forum post to be precise. Players have come and gone, but there have always been a core group of players to hold onto some semblance of story continuity.
RPG play over a forum offers in my opinion, not just a handy way for people to play who are time short, organisation lacking and or geographically challenged, but a completely new take on the art form. It gives the players, and especially the GM the precious resource of time. Time to think. Time to give proper voice to your ideas. Time to explore alternatives.
At least half of what an adaptable GM does ( or perhaps should be ) is improv. I am not talking here about whether a GM creates their own content or instead reaches for an off the shelf adventure - I am talking about the point where the GM has to handle something that they haven't accounted for - handling unexpected questions events and consequences. In a more traditional real time setting of a face to face game table, or for the more technically inclined online table, the challenge of real time improv is probably the most difficult, and to new GMs, most intimidating aspect of play. Especially if you have players who thrive on being 'difficult'. Preparation work - doing your homework - pays off here, knowing the motivations behind the more obvious goings on, being a walking encyclopaedia on rules, lore, campaign etc. But even the most prepared of GMs cannot hope to cover everything. So theres a compromise - either the improv work can only go so far, or it can only be of a certain quality before a halt must be called, or the players gamely stick to a reasonable idea of what should be done, or state their intentions a week before play. Experienced GMs will more than likely outshine the new GM when it comes to the scope of improv work, but ultimately, new and vet GM alike are unlikely to be able to spin out a perpetually compelling, rational tale off the top of their head.
A forum based non real time based RPG faces these same difficulties, but now instead of minutes or seconds to think of improv, the GM has hours, maybe even days. With such time to think, all your NPCs develop from rough characters that spit out sound bites, into fully fledged thinking beings. The players can converse with just about anyone they please and expect a rational reply - whether its a commoner who doesnt know much about the goings on of the lords, or an eloquent noble locked in dispute with his land tenants.
Personally I find this completely changes the feel of what a traditional table top RPG is. Roleplaying elements come to the fore. Whilst melee - whilst decently achievable with the correct technology in place - is drawn out over forum, and so takes less of a dominant position. Story telling above all becomes King. And the world becomes a larger much more interactive and interesting place. Its not a series of steadily more difficult melee encounters - there's actually an engaging story going on, and sometimes its necessary to fight.
Don't get me wrong, I love a good melee, it gives a very good reason for everything else to exist for a lot of players. And I don't cut fight scenes. In fact I often pad them. But I make sure that a melee - which can range from anything from a few real time days, to a fortnight in length - is interesting and important. Random wandering monsters in uninspired settings never come up. Interesting wandering monsters in unusual situations do come up - and can sometimes turn into mini adventures of their own.
So, time to think - its good for the story, its good for the believability and interaction with the world, its good for roleplaying. It's not great for mindless melee.
Theres a rough principle somewhere that states, if you want to really hook people into a story, always leave gaps in explanation or knowledge. People love a mystery, a place where they can debate the ifs, buts and maybes, somewhere that they can poke curiously to find out more. Of course like anything its about knowing when to wrap something up or when to provide another teaser.
This can have inadvertent consequences however - when something simply is what it appears to be. No more, no less. Yet your readers/players are convinced otherwise, and nag at it to find its secret. The problem then comes that the more you protest there is nothing to see here, the more they are convinced there is indeed something hidden here, they just have to find the right key. Sure you could break the fourth wall and directly address your audience to say, hey, really, theres nothing to see here, move along. But that's defeatist.
And this is a problem I've been dealing with for the last few months.
The players have acquired a couple of strange gems. Both radiate a faint magical aura, and both defy their attempts to identify what they are. After several repeated investigations, I let them have the low down - they are pretty much uninteresting. One can be used in crafting. The other, well, the other has no known use. A done deal, or so I thought.
The given explanations have fallen short of player imaginations.
They continue to nag at the gems. What are they. What is their purpose. Where did they come from. Every other NPC they meet, they haul them out, and ask them if they know what they are.
I am sure as far as the players are concerned its an enduring mystery that must be answered.
From my point of view, I have gone past being tired of telling them theres nothing to see, and now find the whole thing amusing. It seems that inadvertently I have setup a major puzzle for them to solve.
Partly this is a problem of having too much time to think. The two gems represent something that in a normal course of a game probably wouldn't even come up. One served as a direct enticement / reward for one of the characters, whilst the other was a plot leftover that should be ignored. Having had some time to think on the matter, I picked up the plot leftover and re-integrated it in a minor way into the story, and the enticement was used as a direct reward.
But in the minds of the players these two gems are linked. Their exact use defies their efforts of divination, and with each failure their importance increases. This is probably helped by the fact that the person who gave them to the players was inherently mysterious, powerful, uttered a cryptic warning and promptly vanished.
They've just met another important and knowledgeable NPC. Predictably the gems have come out, and they have prodded the NPC for an answer.
Time to think. Conceivably the NPC - an expert in the field - could pin down more of their details. So I am left with a plot opening, I can turn these gems into anything - I can foreshadow events with them, setup an entire diversionary excursion, or pass them over once again, their exact nature a mystery to the NPC.
I am still mulling over just how to put these two recurring thorns in my side to sleep - but in a good way that gives the players a sense that all is right with the world. Personally I am leaning towards foreshadowing. I love foreshadowing, I get a warm glow everytime a circle completes and the hammer finally drops.
|
|
|
