|
|
Post by mao on Apr 8, 2021 6:33:03 GMT -5
I see dm ing as a performance that you don't put a number on. I view dms as artists. I always thought I was eicher or Salvador Dahle.
So how do you classify dms?
|
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Apr 8, 2021 21:13:31 GMT -5
I see dm ing as a performance that you don't put a number on. I view dms as artists. I always thought I was eicher or Salvador Dahle. So how do you classify dms? I'm gonna reply although I haven't played with enough refs to have a "rating" system and I hope I would appreciate anyone who reffed so we could play! Of course mao also says "how do you classify DMs?" That I can take a stab at. I also view the role as a kind of artist, all players are artists but the ref has a different kind of responsibility. But from the player's seat...there are bookkeepers, storytellers, and worldbuilders. There are varying degrees of "activity," creative activity, in response to player actions. Varying degrees of prep and improvisation. Varying degrees of intensity, insisting that players respond fast or make a wandering monster check, etc. Varying ability and desire to move in and out of "reffing," interacting with the players as people at the table, and so on. This is an interesting topic. Features of refs. Various sliders. Of course you can never nail a person with a set of "attributes" but why not try? |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Apr 9, 2021 2:33:47 GMT -5
I see reffing as a two tier thing. Tier one is an inborn talent and Tier two is a learned skill.
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on Apr 9, 2021 5:22:06 GMT -5
I see reffing as a two tier thing. Tier one is an inborn talent and Tier two is a learned skill. That's a really good take on this subject. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Apr 23, 2021 16:12:38 GMT -5
I see reffing as a two tier thing. Tier one is an inborn talent and Tier two is a learned skill. Ideally as a DM you belong to both tiers, but realistically that are few Tier One people, but being a good Tier Two will keep your group coming back for years. For me I think Tier One represents the intangibles that elevate running a game to an art form. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Apr 24, 2021 11:06:25 GMT -5
I see reffing as a two tier thing. Tier one is an inborn talent and Tier two is a learned skill. Ideally as a DM you belong to both tiers, but realistically that are few Tier One people, but being a good Tier Two will keep your group coming back for years. For me I think Tier One represents the intangibles that elevate running a game to an art form. To me Tier one is when the whole game flows and you cannot be stumped no matter what the players do. |
|
|
|
Post by Morton on Apr 25, 2021 0:52:22 GMT -5
IMO there are only two categories, refs and pretenders. If your players keep coming back you are a ref. If no one stays for more than two games at the most, then you are a pretender.
|
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on May 3, 2021 20:19:36 GMT -5
I wanted a different kind of game than anybody else seemed to be providing at the time. A game that incorporated harder elements of fiction that would play out more as a novel. One that had a living and logical world with men and monsters that don’t exist to give XP but are motivated to stay alive, execute plans, and offer the characters social interaction instead of just endless combat.
I wanted to create realms that one could explore and interact with, a game that incorporated more of the rules of AD&D than DMs were really using at the time. I will admit that my first attempts were heavy handed, and not very good examples of player agency. I wanted the role of storyteller, and I was able to fulfill this goal until I was less in love with my own ideas and more interested in encouraging the players to give themselves to this idea.
Looking at things as they are now, I was running more of a ‘modern game’ than was normal at the time, but I think that there were more and more people like me that wanted an epic storyline that might not involve saving the world or becoming gods but was modeled after cinema and utilized those kinds of tropes.
The more I played, the clearer my vision of what this game could do became. I am constantly evaluating my performance, the product itself, and ways to make it better. I never stop thinking about D&D, I am legitimately obsessed with it. Once I found my talent and passion, then I started researching the masters; seeking to understand why they did things and by doing this, I found my voice.
I am not a master of the game. I don’t think that there are any masters, only students. I am critical, and am always redefining what can and, more importantly, what can’t or shouldn’t be done. I error, but I’m able to spot those errors. I am restless and am pushing the medium, so errors are going to happen; but my players except this.
A DM, perhaps, is only as good as their players allow them to be. We need amazing players to get this game to operate like it is supposed to. A group is more of a band that we’d like to admit. If somebody doesn’t want to experiment or allow themselves to be uncomfortable sometimes, then the music doesn’t play. If the players are without talent, then the game itself will reflect this.
I am sure that my game would irritate some of you, it might not be what you yourself are expecting. I was one of those DMs who pushed away from old-school but have looked back and pick what I like from it. I enjoy hiding those classic ideas within the folds of a group story with dice.
I like a game where the players feel safe exploring a character. Our character sheets are complex, rolling up a character can take a few hours, but that is what we like to do. That is how we enjoy the game. We enjoy heavy roleplay, having backstory and a history that comes up in the theme of the game. Having dialog scenes that go on as long as they have to, splitting the party to get more done in less time, giving your buddy the chance to shine and enjoying it when it is your turn. We give NPCs our last healing potion, our bad guys win just to sweeten the game when we finally get him in the end, and we can go an entire session without killing a single monster. My game isn’t as lethal as many would like it to be, level progression might not be as slow as some would like it, and the general pace of the game might be slower than normal, but it is what WE find exciting, and that is all that matters.
|
|
|
|
Post by hengest on May 4, 2021 0:54:41 GMT -5
I would love to play in this game, ripx187. Wish it could happen! |
|
|
|
Post by simrion on May 4, 2021 6:54:43 GMT -5
I see reffing as a two tier thing. Tier one is an inborn talent and Tier two is a learned skill. Ideally as a DM you belong to both tiers, but realistically that are few Tier One people, but being a good Tier Two will keep your group coming back for years. For me I think Tier One represents the intangibles that elevate running a game to an art form. Passion for the subject can make for a lack of Tier One in my opinion. And much as I dislike the term, there IS a unspoken "social contract" between players and game master. I'm currently running the Frog God/Pathfinder Tsar mega adventure. Lots of character deaths as evidenced by the post-it note tombstones of my ref screen (and obituary pages in the back of the book!) Fortunately the players understand the lethality of the adventure (buy in?) and are high enough level that a slain character can come back if desired. I don't consider myself talented as a DM so it must be my passion for the subject that makes it fun and keeps people coming back week after week! |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on May 4, 2021 11:41:25 GMT -5
Ideally as a DM you belong to both tiers, but realistically that are few Tier One people, but being a good Tier Two will keep your group coming back for years. For me I think Tier One represents the intangibles that elevate running a game to an art form. Passion for the subject can make for a lack of Tier One in my opinion. And much as I dislike the term, there IS a unspoken "social contract" between players and game master. I'm currently running the Frog God/Pathfinder Tsar mega adventure. Lots of character deaths as evidenced by the post-it note tombstones of my ref screen (and obituary pages in the back of the book!) Fortunately the players understand the lethality of the adventure (buy in?) and are high enough level that a slain character can come back if desired. I don't consider myself talented as a DM so it must be my passion for the subject that makes it fun and keeps people coming back week after week! Passion for the game is IMO absolutely a component of being a Tier One. Reffing a game is like air, food and water to a Tier One. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on May 4, 2021 12:10:41 GMT -5
I wanted a different kind of game than anybody else seemed to be providing at the time. A game that incorporated harder elements of fiction that would play out more as a novel. One that had a living and logical world with men and monsters that don’t exist to give XP but are motivated to stay alive, execute plans, and offer the characters social interaction instead of just endless combat.IMO you can have the part in bold without having any of the pre-written novel like elements at all. I think you can have the part in bold, while creating the world on the fly as the players make decisions. (see some of the below comments) I wanted to create realms that one could explore and interact with, a game that incorporated more of the rules of AD&D than DMs were really using at the time. I will admit that my first attempts were heavy handed, and not very good examples of player agency. I wanted the role of storyteller, and I was able to fulfill this goal until I was less in love with my own ideas and more interested in encouraging the players to give themselves to this idea. Again IMO you can have the part in bold, without any of the rest of it. I am not a storyteller, my role is to be a neutral referee and to bring the world and NPCs to life. But I am not telling a story, I am allowing the players interacting with my world to create a story that is visible in hindsight. Looking at things as they are now, I was running more of a ‘modern game’ than was normal at the time, but I think that there were more and more people like me that wanted an epic storyline that might not involve saving the world or becoming gods but was modeled after cinema and utilized those kinds of tropes. IMO the first bold "epic storyline" has nothing to do with anything pre-written, no script or railroad elements and certainly nothing to do with the second bold part. While they can be connected, IMO they do not have to have any connection and I believe that the first can exist independently of the second. I think that an epic storyline can be created in a open-ended sandbox where the only restriction on player choice is the inherent design of the sandbox itself. Just as in the real world you cannot flap your arms and fly, those types of options are restrained, but virtually all other options are on the table. The world comes into existence during play and then continues on from there, even when the players leave the area. The more I played, the clearer my vision of what this game could do became. I am constantly evaluating my performance, the product itself, and ways to make it better. I never stop thinking about D&D, I am legitimately obsessed with it. Once I found my talent and passion, then I started researching the masters; seeking to understand why they did things and by doing this, I found my voice. All good! But none of that has anything to do with requiring anything pre-written or scripted. Everything in bold is independent of the type of game chosen. The choice of game can expand or restrict the options. I am not a master of the game. I don’t think that there are any masters, only students. I am critical, and am always redefining what can and, more importantly, what can’t or shouldn’t be done. I error, but I’m able to spot those errors. I am restless and am pushing the medium, so errors are going to happen; but my players except this. There are masters, but they are not self-proclaimed. They are defined by a number of intangibles and one of those is player commitment. A DM, perhaps, is only as good as their players allow them to be. We need amazing players to get this game to operate like it is supposed to. A group is more of a band that we’d like to admit. If somebody doesn’t want to experiment or allow themselves to be uncomfortable sometimes, then the music doesn’t play. If the players are without talent, then the game itself will reflect this. Your players have to want to interact with your world and do so with some fear, but without the fear of being treated unfairly. Good players will accept everything except being treated unfairly/badly. I am sure that my game would irritate some of you, it might not be what you yourself are expecting. I was one of those DMs who pushed away from old-school but have looked back and pick what I like from it. I enjoy hiding those classic ideas within the folds of a group story with dice. You and I have a completely different philosophy of the game and yet we have significant overlap in many areas that matter. I like a game where the players feel safe exploring a character. Our character sheets are complex, rolling up a character can take a few hours, but that is what we like to do. That is how we enjoy the game. We enjoy heavy roleplay, having backstory and a history that comes up in the theme of the game. Having dialog scenes that go on as long as they have to, splitting the party to get more done in less time, giving your buddy the chance to shine and enjoying it when it is your turn. We give NPCs our last healing potion, our bad guys win just to sweeten the game when we finally get him in the end, and we can go an entire session without killing a single monster. My game isn’t as lethal as many would like it to be, level progression might not be as slow as some would like it, and the general pace of the game might be slower than normal, but it is what WE find exciting, and that is all that matters. The parts in bold are things I really agree with. The last sentence I would need to know more about your game to see if I think any of it applies or does not apply. The part in italics, depends on what you mean by win. To me the bad guys winning would be a TPK, as long as the players are alive, there is no victory for the bad guys. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on May 5, 2021 14:20:00 GMT -5
Passion for the subject can make for a lack of Tier One in my opinion. And much as I dislike the term, there IS a unspoken "social contract" between players and game master. I'm currently running the Frog God/Pathfinder Tsar mega adventure. Lots of character deaths as evidenced by the post-it note tombstones of my ref screen (and obituary pages in the back of the book!) Fortunately the players understand the lethality of the adventure (buy in?) and are high enough level that a slain character can come back if desired. I don't consider myself talented as a DM so it must be my passion for the subject that makes it fun and keeps people coming back week after week! , I think you left out a word. It looks like The Perilous Dreamer thought you meant something other than you meant. I think you meant to say "Passion for the subject can make up for a lack of Tier One in my opinion." I think TPD thought you meant, " Lack of Passion for the subject can make for a lack of Tier One in my opinion." I think I got it right, what say Ye? |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on May 5, 2021 14:29:17 GMT -5
Passion for the subject can make for a lack of Tier One in my opinion. And much as I dislike the term, there IS a unspoken "social contract" between players and game master. I'm currently running the Frog God/Pathfinder Tsar mega adventure. Lots of character deaths as evidenced by the post-it note tombstones of my ref screen (and obituary pages in the back of the book!) Fortunately the players understand the lethality of the adventure (buy in?) and are high enough level that a slain character can come back if desired. I don't consider myself talented as a DM so it must be my passion for the subject that makes it fun and keeps people coming back week after week! , I think you left out a word. It looks like The Perilous Dreamer thought you meant something other than you meant. I think you meant to say "Passion for the subject can make up for a lack of Tier One in my opinion." I think TPD thought you meant, " Lack of Passion for the subject can make for a lack of Tier One in my opinion." I think I got it right, what say Ye? , the Admin Pete, got the right of it, that is what I thought you meant. It is highly likely that you are a lot better than you think you are. It is IMO impossible for a Ref to be Tier One without Passion for the game. In fact, I think that is one of the major components of being excellent and without passion, you only have mediocrity IMO. If your players are coming back week after week and having a blast, you are a Tier One Ref. I think the gaming community as a whole has a very false impression of what a good Referee is. |
|
|
|
Post by simrion on May 5, 2021 18:16:40 GMT -5
simrion , I think you left out a word. It looks like The Perilous Dreamer thought you meant something other than you meant. I think you meant to say "Passion for the subject can make up for a lack of Tier One in my opinion." I think TPD thought you meant, " Lack of Passion for the subject can make for a lack of Tier One in my opinion." I think I got it right, what say Ye? , the Admin Pete , got the right of it, that is what I thought you meant. It is highly likely that you are a lot better than you think you are. It is IMO impossible for a Ref to be Tier One without Passion for the game. In fact, I think that is one of the major components of being excellent and without passion, you only have mediocrity IMO. If your players are coming back week after week and having a blast, you are a Tier One Ref. I think the gaming community as a whole has a very false impression of what a good Referee is. Pays to proofread LOL, Thanks Admin! |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on May 6, 2021 0:10:40 GMT -5
Our players expect different things from us, mine prefer to have clear objectives. We don't have the time or desire to play a truly open sandbox game, I incorporate elements of that, but my style could be said to be modeled after a tv show like "The X-Files", some episodes are unrelated, but others are a part of the chase, trying to solve a mystery that is huge and much bigger than they are.
During my current game, I will use NPCs to teach them the basic strategies of the game, give them a chance to get a grasp on what is going on, but once they are strong enough they will be on their own. They'll be expected to plan their own missions and decide what objectives they want to get done, but at this stage they are playing a linier story that introduces all of the major NPC characters and clearly defines the rules.
I like low level play because I have the upper hand, but this shifts as the game is played; it will be reversed. We should be at around 15th level before the grand finale, and there is a grand finale, but there is a formula to the game. I have to get them to want to go down this rabbit hole with me, but thats okay, cause that rabbit hole is exactly why they come back month after month.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on May 15, 2021 12:30:17 GMT -5
Our players expect different things from us, mine prefer to have clear objectives. We don't have the time or desire to play a truly open sandbox game, I incorporate elements of that, but my style could be said to be modeled after a tv show like "The X-Files", some episodes are unrelated, but others are a part of the chase, trying to solve a mystery that is huge and much bigger than they are. During my current game, I will use NPCs to teach them the basic strategies of the game, give them a chance to get a grasp on what is going on, but once they are strong enough they will be on their own. They'll be expected to plan their own missions and decide what objectives they want to get done, but at this stage they are playing a linier story that introduces all of the major NPC characters and clearly defines the rules. I like low level play because I have the upper hand, but this shifts as the game is played; it will be reversed. We should be at around 15th level before the grand finale, and there is a grand finale, but there is a formula to the game. I have to get them to want to go down this rabbit hole with me, but thats okay, cause that rabbit hole is exactly why they come back month after month. As referees we have different expectations of the players as well. The most disappointing words in the English language (IMO) (in gaming that is) are when a players asks the referee, "What's my characters motivation?" IMO that is the most basic thing a player should bring to the table. IMO this is whole orders of magnitude different from what you are describing above about teaching someone. I am curious, in what way does the referee ever lose the upper hand? |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on May 16, 2021 11:41:04 GMT -5
In the beginning, maybe from 1st to 5th level, there is usually a railroad. The players tend to follow orders and assist NPCs. The DM preps what they want to to further establish the game. At 5th, the players and the DM work together to figure out where the next game is going. Often the PCs are working with vs. for high level NPCs. By 10th level, the players are telling the DM what to prepare for the next game. They are calling all of the shots. By 15th, they are forcing the DM to play with these characters, the DM sets up the monster hordes and the players gleefully knock them down. As the game runs through these phases, the balance of power shifts. It can be said that at some point, the Player's themselves can prep as they design their keeps, build empires . . . . it is challenging, at least for me, to not have the final say-so as to where this all goes. Most games stop before it ever gets to 10th.
I am really attached to the game that requires the players to assess the danger of a situation that I am presenting, and decide what to do. That danger goes away.
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on May 20, 2021 6:14:43 GMT -5
In the beginning, maybe from 1st to 5th level, there is usually a railroad. The players tend to follow orders and assist NPCs. The DM preps what they want to to further establish the game. At 5th, the players and the DM work together to figure out where the next game is going. Often the PCs are working with vs. for high level NPCs. By 10th level, the players are telling the DM what to prepare for the next game. They are calling all of the shots. By 15th, they are forcing the DM to play with these characters, the DM sets up the monster hordes and the players gleefully knock them down. As the game runs through these phases, the balance of power shifts. It can be said that at some point, the Player's themselves can prep as they design their keeps, build empires . . . . it is challenging, at least for me, to not have the final say-so as to where this all goes. Most games stop before it ever gets to 10th. I am really attached to the game that requires the players to assess the danger of a situation that I am presenting, and decide what to do. That danger goes away. This is very interesting and I think you are on to something. A lot of the problem is that quite frankly, most dms suck.I cal them DM=dungeon mediocres. The average dm NEEDS modules regardless of if they use them at all.. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on May 20, 2021 6:48:21 GMT -5
ripx187. as to your not being master of the game, that is very zen. I feel like you have become a master of kung fu and we are students at your feet. I am nicknaming you "Zen" live w it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on May 20, 2021 6:59:31 GMT -5
Our players expect different things from us, mine prefer to have clear objectives. We don't have the time or desire to play a truly open sandbox game, I incorporate elements of that, but my style could be said to be modeled after a tv show like "The X-Files", some episodes are unrelated, but others are a part of the chase, trying to solve a mystery that is huge and much bigger than they are. During my current game, I will use NPCs to teach them the basic strategies of the game, give them a chance to get a grasp on what is going on, but once they are strong enough they will be on their own. They'll be expected to plan their own missions and decide what objectives they want to get done, but at this stage they are playing a linier story that introduces all of the major NPC characters and clearly defines the rules. I like low level play because I have the upper hand, but this shifts as the game is played; it will be reversed. We should be at around 15th level before the grand finale, and there is a grand finale, but there is a formula to the game. I have to get them to want to go down this rabbit hole with me, but thats okay, cause that rabbit hole is exactly why they come back month after month. Something I am getting from this is how good are your players(I take it you have assembled a great group) I have never been happy about the players I atttract. AS I am less conventional my best players were always adults who had never played before. I am starting to realize that I can either have great players OR run the game the way I want to.Musst of my players only last a short while because I don't have orcs(etc) |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on May 21, 2021 19:16:43 GMT -5
In the beginning, maybe from 1st to 5th level, there is usually a railroad. The players tend to follow orders and assist NPCs. The DM preps what they want to to further establish the game. At 5th, the players and the DM work together to figure out where the next game is going. Often the PCs are working with vs. for high level NPCs. By 10th level, the players are telling the DM what to prepare for the next game. They are calling all of the shots. By 15th, they are forcing the DM to play with these characters, the DM sets up the monster hordes and the players gleefully knock them down. As the game runs through these phases, the balance of power shifts. It can be said that at some point, the Player's themselves can prep as they design their keeps, build empires . . . . it is challenging, at least for me, to not have the final say-so as to where this all goes. Most games stop before it ever gets to 10th. You and I are very different in our approach to the game. I wish I could come play in yours some to see it in action. I see it more like this: there are no railroads at any level. If there are complete newbies, I expect the other players to help them out with suggestions and with newbies I ask the question, "Are you sure you want to do that?" more than I do with experienced players. Also with complete newbies (the first game) I will sometimes spell out some of the possible options and the likely consequences of those actions. From 1st level on the players choices drive the game and the choices of one game flow right into the next game. I never see the players reaching such power levels that all monsters become pushovers. I would like to get to the domain game and I am making changes to make that happen much faster in the game. Even from level one, I never know where the game is going to go, because I have never predefined anything that has to happen. I am really attached to the game that requires the players to assess the danger of a situation that I am presenting, and decide what to do. Absolutely agree! |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on May 22, 2021 1:18:30 GMT -5
In the beginning, maybe from 1st to 5th level, there is usually a railroad. The players tend to follow orders and assist NPCs. The DM preps what they want to to further establish the game. At 5th, the players and the DM work together to figure out where the next game is going. Often the PCs are working with vs. for high level NPCs. By 10th level, the players are telling the DM what to prepare for the next game. They are calling all of the shots. By 15th, they are forcing the DM to play with these characters, the DM sets up the monster hordes and the players gleefully knock them down. As the game runs through these phases, the balance of power shifts. It can be said that at some point, the Player's themselves can prep as they design their keeps, build empires . . . . it is challenging, at least for me, to not have the final say-so as to where this all goes. Most games stop before it ever gets to 10th. You and I are very different in our approach to the game. I wish I could come play in yours some to see it in action. I see it more like this: there are no railroads at any level. If there are complete newbies, I expect the other players to help them out with suggestions and with newbies I ask the question, "Are you sure you want to do that?" more than I do with experienced players. Also with complete newbies (the first game) I will sometimes spell out some of the possible options and the likely consequences of those actions. From 1st level on the players choices drive the game and the choices of one game flow right into the next game. I never see the players reaching such power levels that all monsters become pushovers. I would like to get to the domain game and I am making changes to make that happen much faster in the game. Even from level one, I never know where the game is going to go, because I have never predefined anything that has to happen. I am really attached to the game that requires the players to assess the danger of a situation that I am presenting, and decide what to do. Absolutely agree! I don't think that our games are really all that different, I just have a different way of thinking about it. Everything that you said is also true to my game. I just try to teach you skills that I think will help you improve as a player. Well, that whole Monsters are less monstrous at level 10 thing is true. The game has a couple of doozies, but not enough. One gets to missing the good old days when orcs were fun to beat. At level 15, it just gets stupid. You really do need to be running some kind of domain game at that point and even then it can get kind of dumb. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on May 22, 2021 14:20:15 GMT -5
You and I are very different in our approach to the game. I wish I could come play in yours some to see it in action. I see it more like this: there are no railroads at any level. If there are complete newbies, I expect the other players to help them out with suggestions and with newbies I ask the question, "Are you sure you want to do that?" more than I do with experienced players. Also with complete newbies (the first game) I will sometimes spell out some of the possible options and the likely consequences of those actions. From 1st level on the players choices drive the game and the choices of one game flow right into the next game. I never see the players reaching such power levels that all monsters become pushovers. I would like to get to the domain game and I am making changes to make that happen much faster in the game. Even from level one, I never know where the game is going to go, because I have never predefined anything that has to happen. Absolutely agree! I don't think that our games are really all that different, I just have a different way of thinking about it. Everything that you said is also true to my game. I just try to teach you skills that I think will help you improve as a player. Well, that whole Monsters are less monstrous at level 10 thing is true. The game has a couple of doozies, but not enough. One gets to missing the good old days when orcs were fun to beat. At level 15, it just gets stupid. You really do need to be running some kind of domain game at that point and even then it can get kind of dumb. If you have looked at my dragon writeup, I have dragons that are on the order of AD&D dragons, then I have the fully adult dragons that are a couple of orders of magnitude more powerful and then I have my ancient dragons which are a force of nature. I have other monsters that are somewhat similar. You have heard of Tucker's kolbolds, think Tucker's balrogs. "We must face the long dark of Moria. Be on your guard. There are older and fouler things than Orcs, in the deep places of the world." |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on May 22, 2021 14:22:24 GMT -5
Our players expect different things from us, mine prefer to have clear objectives. We don't have the time or desire to play a truly open sandbox game, I incorporate elements of that, but my style could be said to be modeled after a tv show like "The X-Files", some episodes are unrelated, but others are a part of the chase, trying to solve a mystery that is huge and much bigger than they are. During my current game, I will use NPCs to teach them the basic strategies of the game, give them a chance to get a grasp on what is going on, but once they are strong enough they will be on their own. They'll be expected to plan their own missions and decide what objectives they want to get done, but at this stage they are playing a linier story that introduces all of the major NPC characters and clearly defines the rules. I like low level play because I have the upper hand, but this shifts as the game is played; it will be reversed. We should be at around 15th level before the grand finale, and there is a grand finale, but there is a formula to the game. I have to get them to want to go down this rabbit hole with me, but thats okay, cause that rabbit hole is exactly why they come back month after month. Something I am getting from this is how good are your players(I take it you have assembled a great group) I have never been happy about the players I atttract. AS I am less conventional my best players were always adults who had never played before. I am starting to realize that I can either have great players OR run the game the way I want to.Musst of my players only last a short while because I don't have orcs(etc) I think you can run your game and have great players. You don't have to have orcs, you can have all original monsters, but you do need to have a variety of power levels for your monsters IMO. |
|
