Design & Development: Quests

[Jinete]

One more time: MMOs are influenced by D&D!

Just like video games are influenced by movies.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Huh, I'm totally not a 4E booster but this quest card thing is actually a pretty good idea.

I think that I might actually snatch this up. I use Item Cards for my games (both Paizo and TOGC) as well as Spell and monster cards. It's easier for my players ( and players in general seem to be a particularly focused and and also a forgetful lot. Meaning focused on one or two particular things and forgetful of most others...) to keep track of things. As an example, for my player who is a summoning based sorcerer I printed out a deck of Summoned Monster cards for each level of Summon Monster that he has access to. So now there's no flipping through the book to see what he can summon or having to jot down it's stats. It's on a card right in front of him.

Is it metagamey, hell no. does it make things flow a little easier, hell yes.

I really don't see how it's metagamey except if you have an really narrow (re:elitist) idea of what D&D is and should be for everyone. And to be blunt, what works for your table, may not work for 60 different players at 20 different tables. I use cards and miniatures and props to enhance play not to turn it into a boardgame. If your players are easily distracted by these things then that has to do with your players (which is not saying anything bad about your players) not the game. and even if they are distracted initially after a while these things (cards and such) just become an accepted part of the game.

 

[Baby Samurai]

The cards aren't collectible.

But Feats will be…

 

[Baby Samurai]

Just like video games are influenced by movies.

And films are influenced by comic books, and comic books are influenced by films, and so on and so on.

All forms of media/entertainment affect each other these days. It's like Aunt Edna's ass; you don't where it begins or ends…

 

[vagabundo]

I forgot my point I guess I just miss that time when my D&D experience wasn't so much about number crunching and metagaming as it is now.

I've been toying with the fantasy of just keeping the rules to myself (or as much that is possible). I think I may have pushed my players to learn more of the game (since 3.x) to take some of the pressure from me. If 4e is easier to run I may just ask what the person is doing (fluff) and translate that internally (crunch). With mechanical incentive to use the scenery it may make the battles more cinematic.

I'll still use the minis as it takes some of my bias out of the picture. I can see if someone is going to get hit with the fireball spell.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

I'm not sure I understand this "system".

What's the difference between this quest thingy and writing reminder notes to forgetful and/or lazy players?

Nothing.

However, is the idea such a bad one? My players do enjoy the game, but they often forget key details of plot elements that they ought to remember. If you like introducing a plot element, and then letting it sit on the back burner for 5 games, odds are good that when you drop the clue, your players will not pick up on it if the game where you gave them the clue was a month ago.

If you like running campaigns where you have multiple long term plot arc's active, then this system will allow you to have many things going on at once while letting you players have some idea of what things are worth keeping an eye out for.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[vagabundo]

If you like running campaigns where you have multiple long term plot arc's active, then this system will allow you to have many things going on at once while letting you players have some idea of what things are worth keeping an eye out for.

I think this is one of the best reasons to use the card system. I just think that I will get the players to right out thier own damn cards

 

[Imaro]

Huh, I'm totally not a 4E booster but this quest card thing is actually a pretty good idea.

I think that I might actually snatch this up. I use Item Cards for my games (both Paizo and TOGC) as well as Spell and monster cards. It's easier for my players ( and players in general seem to be a particularly focused and and also a forgetful lot. Meaning focused on one or two particular things and forgetful of most others...) to keep track of things. As an example, for my player who is a summoning based sorcerer I printed out a deck of Summoned Monster cards for each level of Summon Monster that he has access to. So now there's no flipping through the book to see what he can summon or having to jot down it's stats. It's on a card right in front of him.

Item, monster & spell cards are totally different from mapping out what you want your players to do with cards. In what way does having a card with your abilities listed shape or influence the choices your character will make?

Is it metagamey, hell no. does it make things flow a little easier, hell yes.

How is this not "metagamey"? Emphasis Mine...

Metagaming is a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game.

Won't what storylines/quests a DM gives you an XP value for, affect the direction and actions of a character? It's basically a less heavy-handed way of saying...This is what I want you to do.

I really don't see how it's metagamey except if you have an really narrow (re:elitist) idea of what D&D is and should be for everyone. And to be blunt, what works for your table, may not work for 60 different players at 20 different tables. I use cards and miniatures and props to enhance play not to turn it into a boardgame. If your players are easily distracted by these things then that has to do with your players (which is not saying anything bad about your players) not the game. and even if they are distracted initially after a while these things (cards and such) just become an accepted part of the game.

Because it is a card that tells you what choices your adventurers will, (and thus will not) be rewarded for. No one said not using them was how D&D must be played, but it's perfectly reasonable that people may not like it. To me it feels like laying a path of mission tiles down...and I don't like it. IMHO, it greatly depreciates the type of organic play that differentiates a TTrpg and a MMO. IMHO, the challenges you face, no matter what you choose to do or not do, should be the xp reward you get. I really hope these quest rewards aren't integrated into the calculations for rewarding PC's. If they are optional then I'll have no problem.

 

[Arnwyn]

Nothing.

However, is the idea such a bad one?

Oh. Then why are people suggesting that this is some sort of "new idea", and they're going to "yoink" it, and other such nonsense? Are people honestly trying to say that they've never thought of writing something down? I find that highly unlikely.

It's not "bad". It's also not "new", nor is it even an "idea". Writing things down is just something normal people do. Weird. (Except, the suggestion given by WotC is that the work is to be done by the DM when it can be done by the players, and that's always a bad thing.)


Now with all that said, some sort of standardized reward for completing a goal is fine and dandy - too bad the original article barely gave any details on that (ie. thanks for nothing). Of course, that's not new, unique, or special either, since I've been doing it for multiple editions now, including 3e (in which the CR system makes it easy-peasy). Like I said - weird.

 

[Maggan]

Then why are people suggesting that this is some sort of "new idea", and they're going to "yoink" it

Maybe it's because it is a new idea to them, and they feel like they like this idea enough so that they'll yoink it for their play.

Even if it's an old idea for you and ten thousand other D&D veterans, doesn't mean it is new to a thousand others, and neither is it nonsensical for them to want to use said idea, if they feel that it would add to their games.

/M