Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sowelu]

On the subject of killing PCs, make sure the players are absolutely on the same page as you about that subject.  I've been in (non-D&D) games that a couple players thought were less serious than the GM did, and didn't realize that he would ever actually kill them off from what was essentially a random encounter because we did something stupid.  Be CAREFUL if they start getting too attached to their characters on a personal level, and take them aside to talk about it outside of the game.  You don't want to get into a position where killing off a character would ruin the game for that player so much that they stop playing entirely...the solution to that is just making sure they're aware that yes, they can die.

If a player takes their death too hard, then make sure you give the group time to grieve properly, make sure that the player of the dead character knows how much their character meant to the party and the world.  If a player takes their death WAY TOO HARD in a perma-death campaign, but you can't let them escape death because it would cheapen the experience, then you might think about forcing them to retire instead; "Your character wakes up barely alive, the bullet nicked her heart and lungs.  She can never safely go adventuring again, she must leave the profession, but maybe she can go back east to live that quiet life on a farm that she was always talking about."  They're removed from the game, mechanical danger is upheld, and it sends a clear message of "Next time you might not be so lucky".

Yeah, make sure you know what your players expect from the game.  Can't be overstated.  Obvious stuff like "You might actually die" might still catch them by surprise once it sinks in, so it's worth actually talking to each of your players in a one-on-one basis about stuff.

[Neonivek]

Also make sure you realise that in essence things that kill players are much cheaper against players then they are against enemies.

For example the rule for Criticles is that rolling criticles 2.5 times kills the player outright (In one game). However the PC will get hit thousands of times while an individual will only get hit once. My DM eliminated that rule for the PCs and good thing too because it did happen to a PC.

Always take that into account when dealing with death scenarios. You don't want to put players on a death timer.

[lordnincompoop]

Now, since I haven't played any tabletop games for a long time, take this with a pinch of salt.

Don't trap yourself in rules too much, especially if you don't know them well or it's tedious. Don't have your players do something repeatedly, as it'll lose its novelty quickly. I fell for those pitfalls several times myself, when I forced my players to eat and drink amongst other things the first time around.

[Neonivek]

At the same time you can't always ignore the rules for freeforming or custom things.

The rules often ground the players and gives them some basis of what to expect. You can seriously confuse players.

Which is the tip I don't personally like as if it were up to me a lot of things would be my original creation... but it does not a good DM make unfortunately... predictibility is required.

[GlyphGryph]

Actually, thats not really true. Like lethality and tone, its as much about what players expect as what the host is offering. I've done successfull game completely freeform before, and games with supposedly strict rules like D&D that were always ignored in favour of the rule of cool. For some tones and campaigns, you might WANT your players to think outside the box (and they might want to just let loose and have some fun), and the rules are really only there as a jumping off point.

So I guess what a lot of this boils down to is... know your players, know what they're going to expect, make sure they understand what the game is going to offer. If they expect loose rules, don't suddenly become a rule lawyer. If they expect strict adherence, don't suddenly toss rules out the window (or at least don't let them know).

[nenjin]

So I guess what a lot of this boils down to is... know your players, know what they're going to expect, make sure they understand what the game is going to offer. If they expect loose rules, don't suddenly become a rule lawyer. If they expect strict adherence, don't suddenly toss rules out the window (or at least don't let them know).

QFT. This goes for everything; tone, setting, style, house rules, real rules and intangibles. This frequently crops up as an issue with people when I want to run a VtM game. I want the politicking, the subterfuge, the deceptions. The Masquerade. They don't want that. The most they're comfortable with is a good Sabbat rampage, because they find the Masquerade too restrictive and focused on emo roleplaying drama.

And this goes double for house rules. Make your house rules clear, make it clear from the outset which is more important in the long run: your house rules or the game rules. Some players will flip shit when you tell them to expect a lot of re-writes to the core rule book, they're not in to experimental game play. Others, particularly those that have played vanilla [insert game system here] for years, will jump at the chance for some creative tinkering.

As with any form of entertainment, knowing your audience is paramount.

[Criptfeind]

Biggest advice?

Giant crabs make everything better.

Seriously. Every. Thing.

I don't know how they got into your city, maybe the sewer, the point is giant crabs are awesome. And they can snip a PC you need to kill in half quite easily if you play them right.

Another thing, make sure the npc names are distinct. Super embarrassing to referring to a npc though a big fight by the wrong name, only to find out later when the players start saying 'wtf? He was a wizard?'

[Vorthon]

Giant Crabs... As beasts of burden would be awesome...

Great... Now I have to work that into the setting...

[Retro]

Another thing, make sure the npc names are distinct. Super embarrassing to referring to a npc though a big fight by the wrong name, only to find out later when the players start saying 'wtf? He was a wizard?'

I don't know, from my experience players will maaaybe remember one important NPC's name in the entire campaign, but remember all the others via nicknames or "that one guy at the manor, like the guard knight or whatever, the evil one." Players (and I'm hardly an exception here, DM-experience or not) nickname everything. The best you can do is make sure they at least associate their nicknames with the right character, since they will remember a nicknamed NPC, important or not.

I would totally link to DM of the Rings if I didn't recall it already being mentioned in the thread. Great and hilarious example of players fucking around with a highly railroaded campaign, but especially relevant as they thought they had won when they shot Saruman because they'd confused him with Sauron.

[Vorthon]

I'm considering changing the campaign to something a bit more conventional, but keeping the city as a background element or starting point. I think it would be a bit easier on me.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

For the sake of your game:  read, re-read, test, and re-re-read times ten the rules and rationalizations behind Challenge Ratings and encounter rewards.  If you dont, one of these things will happen:
1.  PC's wax every creature without breaking a sweat and get bored.
2.  The first encounter kills 3/4 or more of the party.
3.  The encounter goes great and you give away a magic item you think is cool, which then causes #1 infinitely, till you take it away and the players bitch.
4.  The encounter goes great but you give meager treasure, eventually leading to a brutal #2 during some climatic showdown, cuz the party never got stronger.

Secondly, No matter what the monster manuals say or even your own notes, the attacks, damage and hit points of enemy mobs can be whatever you need them to be.

Third, a great final encouter is when everyone in the party is on there last leg and somehow manage to eek out the final victory, desperately praying for a great roll as they do.  See my second point.  Bad guy bosses should have no more and no less HP/Magic/Attacks/Dam/etc then necessary to run the party through the ringer.

DO NOT LET players go beyond the core rulebooks for D&D (players handbook, MM, DM's guide) for their characters feats and such until YOU have a handle on the basic system and rules.

Fifthly, dont be afraid to just wing it and say to the guy who wants to jump off the balcony, grab the chandelier, swing across the room, sumersault through the air and hit/kick/stomp some baddie from behind.  Just say "roll a d20" and make a quick judgement.  I can guarantee you there are no rules ever written for any game to honestly adjudicate such actions, and all games are chock full of those kind of actions.  Also, its fun to see the players face when he rolls great and pulls off the manuever only to back that up with a "2" for the attack roll, and still ends up on his/her ass.  They will sit there and think, "damn, I just blew a perfectly good roll for nothing!"  Its sweet, truly sweet. MMMMMMMMmmmmmmm.  Good players will realize the tactical problem and conserve the number of rolls for success, allowing you to avoid the hasty issues like that.  GREAT players will keep on doing it anyway cuz its fun and makes the game move and when they pull it off everyone remembers.  No one remembers the guy who just always went conservative.

Sixthly, if the players havent ever seen an GazeeboOrc, and they meet one, dont say "You see an orc gazeebo".  Say something like "You see a monstrously large muscular humanoid standing across from you.  He smiles at you, picks up a rock and camly pulverizes it do dust in his fist in a display of arrogant power.  For some reason, he looks happy to see you."  Trust me, it will change the whole freaking encounter.

Lastly, ignore everything I said, and just play and learn and take your lumps.  DMing is a craft one has to develop.  It gets easier with time and you will find your own feel, voice and flair.  DONT try to be another DM.

[Cthulhu]

The first thing is really sound advice.  The third one is too, there's a lot of bullshit the players can pull if you're using splatbooks and the only way to prevent it is to develop an eye for it and know when it's being brought out.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

The first thing is really sound advice.  The FOURTH one is too, there's a lot of bullshit the players can pull if you're using splatbooks and the only way to prevent it is to develop an eye for it and know when it's being brought out.

fix'd for ya, I think.  I didnt label the fourth one.

[Sowelu]

It is much, MUCH better to go treasure-light than treasure-heavy.

Keep a close damn eye on what the party has.  A Wand of Fireballs with fifty charges basically makes them into gods until, like, level ten or something.  PSHOOF PSHOOF PSHOOF  Wands are dangerous (unless it's a Wand of Detect Magic, which makes the game go so much smoother).  Potions aren't SO bad, just...be careful about things that give them more latitude on how to solve problems.  "A magic rope that responds to their commands" is just asking for trouble.  I'm not saying don't give them stuff, but be careful and thoughtful.

And if you do end up giving them the aforementioned magic rope, make sure you you don't create places in dungeons that are like "Oh THIS is where the DM wanted us to use the rope".  Kind of works in text adventure games, but is totally lame in tabletop.  Let them have their creativity, just give it a moment and think about what they'll use it for!  If the answer is "to kill things", you probably don't want to give it to them.  At all.  It's bad.  Your players will sneak that magic rope along dark corners and strangle people with it, unless you specifically make it so it CAN'T strangle people for some contrived reason (which is more okay).

The worst thing that can happen in terms of loot is that you turn them into glass cannons with awesome attack powers and terrible defense powers.  Your only DM options at that point are "everything in front of them dies" or "the PCs die".  So again, ixnay on the attack-spell-wands-ay.  If you make the enemies hard enough to take a few hits from their shiny new wands of lightning, those enemies might squish them in just a couple attacks.  Also, the players might get confused as to which fights are "serious" enough to blow their consumables on, and then have nothing left for the Big Bad.  If the players are kind of weak but have cool defensive stuff, that's not as bad, because if they aren't taking enough damage to be challenged you just throw twice as many mobs at them.  So, once the traditional round of +1 weapons have been passed out, I recommend not giving them crazy attack powers but focusing on defenses instead.

[Lord Shonus]

A Wand of Fireballs with fifty charges basically makes them into gods until, like, level ten or something.  PSHOOF PSHOOF PSHOOF  Wands are dangerous (unless it's a Wand of Detect Magic, which makes the game go so much smoother). 

Not really. Not only are wands quite expensive for the level the spell becomes available (so they would make up nearly all of an appropriate treasure), at the levels where wands are most useful, you're often hard-pressed to find a target worthy of expending a fireball on, and often in a situation where it would be important, it would be an easy fight anyway. The only place an overleveled wand would be very disruptive is in a boss fight.

Going wealth-high is not too bad, really. Even 50% above WBL makes nowhere near as much difference as a modest level of optimization. Going wealth-low is very, very bad, as it makes it much harder for your PCs to improve.