General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
The pacing shouldn't be a big deal if you are using wandering monster tables. I assume your players are trekking through wilderness to reach some sort of dungeon. Generate a table for each wilderness (you really only need six or so entries), and set the level of these entries based on how dangerous your believe the terrain should be.
Here's why I have never managed to get around to generating random monster tables. The way I do things, #1: each encounter takes a lot of thought to design. #2: each new monster in 3.5 takes a lot of preparation to play.
#1 My idea of "encounter design" includes reasons why the fight is happening, terrain, etc. To put "water elemental" on a table I have to ask, "Do water elementals live there? Why is a water elemental hanging around by itself in the bay? What makes it attack the party, too?" By the time I've figured out the water elementals are guards for the river pirates, I've gotten out of random encounters and into design.
#2, you can't just pick a monster out of the 3.5E monster manual and run it. To run "allip" you've got to know incorporeal, you've got to look up ability drain, you've got to figure out a good suggestion to use with the hypnotizing babble. To run "water mephit" you've got to know stinking cloud, you've got to figure out what "summon mephit" is doing in the abilities line, you've got to remember the damage reduction. You also have to print out tokens if you want the encounter to seem real and not random.
I typically spend 15 to 20 minutes on every new monster I pick out of the MM, and I'm not even touching pit fiends. I was cured of the idea of running truly random monsters the first time I opened up to the Roper. So putting six monsters in a random encounter table seems like a major undertaking.
Here's why I have never managed to get around to generating random monster tables. The way I do things, #1: each encounter takes a lot of thought to design. #2: each new monster in 3.5 takes a lot of preparation to play.
#1 My idea of "encounter design" includes reasons why the fight is happening, terrain, etc. To put "water elemental" on a table I have to ask, "Do water elementals live there? Why is a water elemental hanging around by itself in the bay? What makes it attack the party, too?" By the time I've figured out the water elementals are guards for the river pirates, I've gotten out of random encounters and into design.
#2, you can't just pick a monster out of the 3.5E monster manual and run it. To run "allip" you've got to know incorporeal, you've got to look up ability drain, you've got to figure out a good suggestion to use with the hypnotizing babble. To run "water mephit" you've got to know stinking cloud, you've got to figure out what "summon mephit" is doing in the abilities line, you've got to remember the damage reduction. You also have to print out tokens if you want the encounter to seem real and not random.
I typically spend 15 to 20 minutes on every new monster I pick out of the MM, and I'm not even touching pit fiends. I was cured of the idea of running truly random monsters the first time I opened up to the Roper. So putting six monsters in a random encounter table seems like a major undertaking.
Which will lead to people telling you that 3.5 is poor for sandboxing and instead you should be playing [insert favorite past edition or retro-clone here].
Well, if the other players aren't having fun, there's no issue in changing up the game. If the other players are having fun, then the issue become whether he can change up his prep and gm-ing techniques such that he is having fun without spoiling it for the ones who are already having fun.
I have been playing for one year or so. My players have been playing for over ten years. They seem firmly convinced that in D&D, it is perfectly OK to just get up one session and decide you're going to travel across the entire continent. I don't think a DM can handle that. One of them ran his entire campaign as random encounters, I think. I can't see it at all. I wish I could see how their campaigns used to run without me.
I am taking more and more note of how computer games "play the DM" -- the way GTA: San Andreas makes sure you get the scene, jumping onto a moving semi, even if it has to prevent you from any creative moves like making a roadblock, for example. It's a total railroad, but it's still fun! Or Prince of Persia, the merciful DM that just wants to make sure you see all the cool environments it's laid out in a straight line. That's a fun railroad too, despite having no branches whatsoever.
I just thought of a game that is a sandbox, though, where the DM just lets you wander around everywhere. Legend of Zelda for the NES. Go almost anywhere in the Overworld, do at least half the dungeons in random order. That was a fun one.
I definitely failed to warn the PCs they were going to the dangerous dungeon. I could have made sure they had a cohort to take along. The reason I didn't warn them is that the start of the dungeon was low-key, and the encounter that nearly killed them was potentially only half of a larger encounter, so I thought it was safe to let them go in without warning. But improved grab is, as always, a character killer.
Later on in the campaign, when the PCs can succeeed against that location, this will very likely be a legendary story. When the PCs know that the world can kill them -- and will kill them, if they don't play well -- in-game accomplishments become far more meaningful, IME and IMHO.
As has been mentioned upthread, a part of your DM prep time should be devoted to deciding how the world reacts to the PCs. If you do not, your players won't get the immediate benefit of seeing that their actions change the world.
Some suggestions:
1. Plant hooks about what treasures are where. "Legend says that the Staff of Horus is lost in the Dungeon of Boiling Warts." Giving the players definite goals to achieve within a setting is a good thing.
2. Let the mayor, tired of nagging the PCs, hire some other would-be adventurers. Over time, she hires a sherrif. Based on what she has told the new adventurers, their opinions of the old adventurers may (initially) be rather poor.....
3. As above, but give one of the NPC adventurers a cool magic item. When said adventurer is lost in the Dungeon of Boiling Warts, the PCs may well want to try to recover the item. The question then becomes.....does the item belong to the PCs or to the adventurer's heirs? The answer will affect what happens when PCs die and their gear is recovered by NPCs.......
4. In addition to random encounters, write up a few small lairs that you can drop into the campaign world as needed. Do not let the players know that you are placing these lairs during the game -- they were always there! One placed, mark 'em on the map so you remember they are there.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
Here's why I have never managed to get around to generating random monster tables. The way I do things, #1: each encounter takes a lot of thought to design. #2: each new monster in 3.5 takes a lot of preparation to play.
In 3.5, every time you use a monster, include its stat block in a Word file. Print that Word file out and keep it at the table, with its (eventually) hundreds of stat blocks. Where monsters have special abilities that require special info, put that info into the stat block.
I did this with 3.x, and it made it a heck of a lot easier to run the game.
You can email me (see sig), and I'll be happy to send you a big Word file (or text, if you don't use Word) that should get you going.
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
#1 My idea of "encounter design" includes reasons why the fight is happening, terrain, etc [snip]
#2, you can't just pick a monster out of the 3.5E monster manual and run it. [snip] So putting six monsters in a random encounter table seems like a major undertaking.
Problem one is definitely manageable. Pick a few monsters of the appropriate terrain, and come up with a brief reason for the attack. Include it on the chart. Let's say the chart is for an orc fortress. My chart might be:
1. Orc patrol, 2-8 orcs, alert and armed.
2. Orc revelers, 3-12 drunk orcs, -2 to attacks, not alert
3. Orc slaves. 1-4, Timid and fearful, though not immediately hostile.
4. Escaped wolf pack - 5-8 wolves. Orcish Wolf Handler will follow after 3 rounds.
5. Escaped prisoner - "Buggs" 1st level dwarf fighter with eyepatch, slightly mad.
6. Pick a monster from an adjacent room.
As Remathilis points out, your second problem is more difficult in 3.5. These sorts of things are much easier in an earlier edition, but I'm playing in a 4E sandbox game right now, so I can tell you - it can work. If you want to prepare fewer monsters, add non-monsters to the chart. "A gust of wind blows out your torch" is a fine addition. "You hear crying in the next room" is fine too, particularly if you want a horror atmosphere. Grabbing a monster from an adjacent room is a good trick. That's really annoying that you can't run a monster straight out of the book in 3.5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven Crowking
Let the mayor, tired of nagging the PCs, hire some other would-be adventurers.
This is a hilarious idea. That would really get me steamed if I was a player.
Talking over how things are going is important; playing D&D is a social affair!
If your players are enjoying the looser approach, then it might be worthwhile to see whether your comfort level increases with experience. I suggest that because, in the long run, a campaign can offer the same pleasures as a series of linear scenarios -- and more besides.
It is possible to start with a more constrained situation and open it up gradually.
You have hit on a key element in the interactions with NPCs. I prefer not to go into much detail as to PC biographies prior to play, but a bit of that could help in providing "hooks" for planned adventures. The town is a pretty geographically bound nexus of relationships. Family and old friends (and enemies) might more easily be worked in wherever the PCs go.
In designing or adapting "modules", an important adjustment is not to focus on particular events meant to happen to the PCs -- and above all not to count on the players responding in any particular way. Save the effort you would otherwise put into such set-ups, or invest it instead in sketching more environments with "lives of their own".
The idea is that even if a "set" is moved "off stage", into a section in the referee's binder (or equivalent), the places and people can be revisited. Ideally, the players eventually will form long-term relationships with some of those -- all the stronger for having been developed naturally.
Leaving it up to the players to choose how they spend their time (rather than "pacing" it for them) introduces an element of skill. Skills tend to take some practice to develop.
The campaign approach to play benefits from a somewhat different (and perhaps less easily produced) arrangement than is common today. My impression (not having played any) is that MMORPGs are closer to the old model. Instead of having a small, set group of players meeting at regular intervals -- like the cast of a TV show -- there is a large pool of players forming teams for specific purposes and undertaking game sessions to play out those expeditions.
That tends greatly to reduce in-session dithering, waffling and intra-party disagreement. The practical limitations (and compensating advantages!) of the "TV show" model are worthy of serious consideration. They have, I think, contributed greatly to the decline of the traditional campaign model. Different approaches were adopted in large part because they were found better suited to circumstances.
Game mastering an RPG is always a bit of work, and good players should expect to do some work as well -- not merely to be entertained. That said, the work itself should be fun! Adjust your methods to suit the needs of your group, including yourself.
Print that Word file out and keep it at the table, with its (eventually) hundreds of stat blocks. Where monsters have special abilities that require special info, put that info into the stat block.
If you copy and paste the stat block as is, won't you just get a copy of the Monster Manual? I guess it depends on how much extra info you include. I'll e-mail you and see.
But I have got a different solution, which is to put the entire monster on an index card. All the complications are spelled out -- spell durations, immunities next to the saves, fast healing next to the hit points. This is how I think the monsters should have been packaged in the first place, so you can use them as initiative cards.
Sorry, I get off topic because I love them. It lets me harness all the monster's abilities, but it does not lend itself to casual random monster encounters.
Being able to use rolls on tables as inspiration for, and reasonable limits to, improvised encounters is a great asset for a DM running a wide-open game. The relative difficulty of doing that in 3E was one factor that dissuaded me from using the rules set for a campaign.
On the other hand, I think that greater complexity is in general associated with greater rarity. Ordinary animals and common types of human (and humanoid) NPCs and monsters are likely to appear most often in regions canny players of low-level characters frequent. As time goes on, more and more should be familiar from repeated use.
More powerful (and more game-mechanically complex) creatures are reasonably likely to require a bit of initiative to meet. One can, I think, carry that principle further than is usual in campaigns with rules-lighter older D&D -- thereby accommodating the needs of 3E design -- while creating a vibrant setting. It is after all contrast with the ordinary that makes the extraordinary so!
If you copy and paste the stat block as is, won't you just get a copy of the Monster Manual? I guess it depends on how much extra info you include. I'll e-mail you and see.
But I have got a different solution, which is to put the entire monster on an index card. All the complications are spelled out -- spell durations, immunities next to the saves, fast healing next to the hit points. This is how I think the monsters should have been packaged in the first place, so you can use them as initiative cards.
Either way works fine; the point is to have the info on hand without having to flip through a book.
Also, may I suggest finding Reynard's Blog on EN World? Very good reading for sandbox type DMs.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
The town is a pretty geographically bound nexus of relationships. Family and old friends (and enemies) might more easily be worked in wherever the PCs go.
It's true, I don't have to railroad the PCs to keep them close to a wizard the way I would have to to keep them close to the wizard's tower. But still, leaving town means leaving most of the plotlines behind unless they all follow you or can develop in your absence. I guess it's not the plotlines I fear leaving behind, really, it's the prepared encounters, because those go stale quickly with leveling up.
Quote:
"Legend says that the Staff of Horus is lost in the Dungeon of Boiling Warts."
You know, Dungeon Crawl Classics don't really use treasure as a hook very much, and neither did the game I was a player in. I'm pretty sure it would work.
My one player also wants me to threaten the hometown instead of just the sheriff's job. So I need better hooking skills if I don't want to railroad.
Quote:
Leaving it up to the players to choose how they spend their time (rather than "pacing" it for them) introduces an element of skill. Skills tend to take some practice to develop.
Hey, that addresses my pacing issue really directly. If they complain, I'll tell them "go take a hook next time, or ask for one. You can do it."
I don't know if it will be easy for them to develop this skill, though. I have seen them just sit around town drinking and fishing, how can they help getting bored. The development of the vodka-dipped flounder is an interesting new dish, but it's not enough to keep a game afloat.
Consider getting the players to make major decisions near the end of game sessions, particularly in ways that will irrevocably commit them for the next session. Then you can run the next session with preparation and direction as much as you like, and they still got to make the initial choice.
I'll take this one step further: Your players should be consciously doing this for you. In one long-running campaign that was very much a balance between player choice and plot threading, we would explicitly call on each other to make our big decisions before the end of the session so as to give the DM time to prepare. It's just good manners.
__________________ All role playing advice is given without knowledge of you and your group. Only you and your group knows what is fun for you. What you are doing is not badwrongfun. My advice is offered based on what I think might be fun for you to try.
"Art is the demonstration that the ordinary is extraordinary." - Amedee Ozenfant, Foundations of Modern Art
"I already have a place where I can get little recognition for my accomplishments, advance at a very slow pace, and have to work hard to eke out minimum rewards for my efforts. It's called work." - toberane.
Consider getting the players to make major decisions near the end of game sessions, particularly in ways that will irrevocably commit them for the next session. Then you can run the next session with preparation and direction as much as you like, and they still got to make the initial choice.
I'll third this, particularly in light of this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noumenon
I have been playing for one year or so. My players have been playing for over ten years. They seem firmly convinced that in D&D, it is perfectly OK to just get up one session and decide you're going to travel across the entire continent.
I think its something of a tradition in D&D that the session begins with the players deciding what to do. I think that's a bad tradition. I also think its something of a tradition to avoid talking about what the PC's are doing out of character. I think that's a bad tradition.
Let your players know: they can go anywhere they want and they can do anything they want. BUT, they need to give you a heads up before you sit down to play so that you can be ready to run the game.
You know, Dungeon Crawl Classics don't really use treasure as a hook very much, and neither did the game I was a player in. I'm pretty sure it would work.
Yeah, the idea there is to try to tell the players why their characters might want to look into the Creepy Olde Mansion, rather than merely assuming that they will do so simply because (1) it is a Creepy Olde Mansion, and (2) that's what's being served tonight.
As far as encounters stale-dating goes, I recommend allowing players to have multiple characters of various levels active in the campaign world over the course of the campaign.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
Here's a bit of the advice to players in the first-edition Advanced D&D Players Handbook:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUCCESSFUL ADVENTURES
First, get in touch with all those who will be included in the adventure, or if all are not available, at least talk to the better players so that you will be able to set an objective for the adventure. Whether the purpose is so simple as to discover a flight of stairs to the next lowest unexplored level or so difficult as to find and destroy an altar to an alien god, some firm objective should be established and then adhered to as strongly as possible. Note, however, that inflexibility or foolish stubbornness is often fatal. ...
Co-operation amongst party members is a major key to success, particularly when the characters are relatively low-level. Later, when players have characters of 9th, 10th, or even higher level it will be a slightly different matter, for then some adventures will be with but one or two player characters participating, and the balance of the group will be made up of henchmen whose general co-operation is relatively assured. But to gain the upper levels, it is essential that a character survive, and survival at lower levels is usually dependent upon group action and team spirit. Co-operation must begin when the party prepares for the adventure and continue through safe return to base and division of spoils -- including the special treatment required for any unfortunate characters cursed, diseased, maimed, or killed. ...
When everything is all set, it will take only a very few minutes to organize the group for the adventure once time for actual play begins. Your referee will certainly appreciate this, for his or her enjoyment comes from adventuring, not from waiting for a party to get their act together. ...
The time frame of "a game is scheduled for tomorrow, and you are going to get ready for it well in advance so as to have as much actual playing time as possible" is appropriate to an expedition into a traditional underworld or "mega" dungeon. It could also be adequate for a wilderness or city adventure, if those campaign elements are set up for running on such short notice.
If the DM needs more time for preparation, then it is reasonable to expect notice of intent further in advance. This highlights a difference between the old campaign model and the "TV show" style. An old-style DM had no implicit obligation to "provide an adventure" for Player X on a set schedule. It was up to Player X and his peers to put together an expedition and arrange for a session in which to play it. Better-organized players naturally took precedence in the allotment of the DM's finite resources of time and energy.
NOTE that the term "adventure" is used throughout to mean an undertaking by players! It is first of all a "venture" on their part, not a contrivance on the part of the DM.
Last edited by Ariosto; 6th May 2009 at 10:19 PM..
On the other hand, I think that greater complexity is in general associated with greater rarity. Ordinary animals and common types of human (and humanoid) NPCs and monsters are likely to appear most often in regions canny players of low-level characters frequent. As time goes on, more and more should be familiar from repeated use.
More powerful (and more game-mechanically complex) creatures are reasonably likely to require a bit of initiative to meet.
Maybe Goodman GAmes spoiled me; in Dungeon Crawl Classics, you don't meet rats, you meet mutated rats. You don't meet zombies, you meet zombie grigs. You don't meet a ranger, you meet a werebadger ranger with pipes of the sewers. My own encounters try to be that special too, special every time. It's like a game of Zelda that's all boss fights and no Octoroks.
Sounds like you just like railroading (in the broader sense) - you were still in a railroady "They must do this! Here are the adventures! Must have combat!" mindset the whole time, as opposed to creating an environment for the PCs to explore at their own initiative.
Or Prince of Persia, the merciful DM that just wants to make sure you see all the cool environments it's laid out in a straight line. That's a fun railroad too, despite having no branches whatsoever.
God, I hate that game.
A better term than railroad here would be "Linear Campaign", as discussed in the 1e Dungeoneer's Survival Guide, and contrasted with the "Open Campaign" (sandbox) or "Matrix Campaign" (interlocking threads - called Illusionism above - I disagree; Illusionism refers to illusion-of-choice).
Maybe Goodman GAmes spoiled me; in Dungeon Crawl Classics, you don't meet rats, you meet mutated rats. You don't meet zombies, you meet zombie grigs. You don't meet a ranger, you meet a werebadger ranger with pipes of the sewers. My own encounters try to be that special too, special every time. It's like a game of Zelda that's all boss fights and no Octoroks.
Definitely not my cup of tea - I tend to edit WotC/GG encounters to make them simpler, or for Dungeon Crawl Classics use the C&C version instead of the 3.5 version. To me this is is 'special' the way the hospital scanner operator used it to my pregnant wife: "99 in 100 parents will take home a normal baby, 1 in 100 will take home a special baby..." (we got a normal baby, thankfully).
(we got a normal baby, thankfully).
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
