DM Schticks That Grind Your Gears

[shilsen]

A little. I mean, I don't see any upside to this.

Personally, I've found a lot of positives to it. I don't have to bother calculating XP based on CR and challenges. I also find that every one of the "should the PCs get more/less XP in this situation?" debates on these boards cannot exist in my game, since the XP gained is irrespective of the situation. It also significantly changes the mindset of the players, since they're no longer thinking of fights in the metagame sense of something that gives them XP, which for me is a good thing. They're a lot more likely to consider other ways of dealing with issues than combat.

And in a way I like to get xp from killing things

That, I think, would be the common downside for most players The way I figure it, if I make combat fun and interesting and challenging (which I think my players will say I've done), that's enough of a benefit.

I don't feel you need to roll dice, or kill monsters, but in the end the characters have to do something relevant and/or interesting before I'll give them XP. It can be action, it can be roleplay, just so long as the result isn't something I'd want to skip over if I were reading a novel.

That angle I have covered. We always have a lot of things happening every session. Most sessions have combat, and since I have very little dungeon crawling and rarely more than one combat in a given day, most combats are serious knock-down drag-out brawls, with PCs heavily damaged, unconscious or only alive due to action point usage. And combat or not, every session has a lot of roleplaying and interesting/fun things happening. The campaign's a heavily character-driven game, so every session produces things that drive the campaign and the plots the party have chosen to get involved in.

So, I could easily link the XP to things the PCs have achieved every session, but I don't think that's necessary. As long as the players are having fun every session and progressing in power at a speed that makes it easier for me to create sessions where they can have fun, I figure everyone wins.

 

[IcyCool]

Or is it just foreign to you that someone could come up with a character background, fluff, and extra cool things, but not get all bent out of shape if that character is also short-lived?

In my experience, these sort of players are rare. For the most part, the end result (that I've seen) from the "TPKs can happen at anytime, and if your character dies in the first session, so be it" mentality is that you wind up with a bunch of players who don't create characters, they create a set of stats that can be easily replaced (particularly when you are dealing with new players). I think that's sad.

As a GM, I sometimes fudge my dice rolls, and I'm proud to do it. I tell my players that I do this. I do it to keep one of them from dying to some weenie mook in an unheroic way. When they encounter something more serious, and there really is the possibility for death, I mention it, and roll in the open. To date, I've killed 3 characters in this manner. The player of the latest one, a paladin, suicided his character (I've got a problem with Paladins that act like serial murderers and social rejects, but perhaps my standards are too high). But what a way to go! Brought low by the evil Apothecary of Sin whilst defending his companions and his Gold Dragon cohort. As opposed to having his flesh stripped clean from his bones by a centipede swarm several sessions earlier.

No, I don't mind if the character dies. But I don't see why this would mean that you don't bother showing up for the next three sessions. You have no NPCs in the campaign that can be promoted to PCs? You have no way to introduce new PCs to the campaign?

Agreed. Can't think of a way to introduce a new character? Let them play an NPC or something. Or heck, let them NPC some monsters. But give them something to do.

 

[sniffles]

1. The villains who must always escape to menace the party again another day, no matter what the PCs do to stop them.

2. Stereotypical NPC types (i.e., the annoying pixie, the haughty elf, the clingy girlfriend, etc.).

3. Overlong recaps of last session.

4. Always starting combat an hour before the session ends (or two hours if it's Champions ).

5. Never letting a PC die.

6. Okay, it isn't really a schtick, but repeatedly cancelling sessions because one player isn't available really annoys me.

 

[Kormydigar]

Thats when you go find another game or DM. If you play by the book, then what happens when a DM runs a combat and rolls hot and ends up with TPK??? Don't you trust your DM to fudge the combat so that you don't have to put a "the 2nd" behind your characters name?

As a matter of fact my players might get upset with me if they found out that they lived only because I fudged for them. I have a similar attitude on the other side of the screen. Let the dice fall where they may.

 

[Particle_Man]

1) Fumble Rules. I hates them. I hates them forever!

2) Puzzles that are genre inappropriate. Conan comes up to the stone door, and must solve the riddle of the wizard Wundabar in order to pass. He hears the magical voice intone "If one chariot in the east approaches at 40 miles an hour, and another chariot in the west approaches at 30 miles an hour, and they start 400 feet apart, at noon, at what time and at what point will they meet?" Conan's player weeps.

 

[Storm Raven]

In my experience, these sort of players are rare. For the most part, the end result (that I've seen) from the "TPKs can happen at anytime, and if your character dies in the first session, so be it" mentality is that you wind up with a bunch of players who don't create characters, they create a set of stats that can be easily replaced (particularly when you are dealing with new players). I think that's sad.

Every player I know has more character concepts than he could ever hope to reasonably play (one of the reasons I DM is so I can introduce many of my character concepts as NPCs to the party to interact with, ally with, or oppose). For most of them, a character death is sad, but also an opportunity to put another one of their character concepts into play.

Oh, and for the record, no one uses the "the 2nd" schtick in my campaigns. A new character must be, at the least, a different race and class from your last one.

 

[IcyCool]

Every player I know has more character concepts than he could ever hope to reasonably play (one of the reasons I DM is so I can introduce many of my character concepts as NPCs to the party to interact with, ally with, or oppose). For most of them, a character death is sad, but also an opportunity to put another one of their character concepts into play.

Sounds like you know a lot of motivated players then. You should cherish that.

Oh, and for the record, no one uses the "the 2nd" schtick in my campaigns. A new character must be, at the least, a different race and class from your last one.

I've never seen that either, but I have seen an elven priest replaced by his identical twin brother (whose name was his brother's name spelled backward), a greatsword wielding paladin replaced by ... a greatsword wielding paladin (with less personality), an entire tribe of near identical half-orc barbarians (each one stepping up to avenge the last <-- entirety of the character backstory), and three incarnations of Karl the "insert class here", just to name a few. As always, YMMV.

 

[Kormydigar]

A bit. In my hindbrain, there is just something fundamentally wrong with gaining in power and ability for doing absolutely nothing. You don't become a great and powerful wizard by sitting in the tavern eating stew and playing canasta.

I don't feel you need to roll dice, or kill monsters, but in the end the characters have to do something relevant and/or interesting before I'll give them XP. It can be action, it can be roleplay, just so long as the result isn't something I'd want to skip over if I were reading a novel.

An excellent point here. I will add to this that players have a way of getting to know the levelling schedules and may "stall" before an important event by wasting a session preparing, planning, ect. so that they will be a level up before facing the challenge. The best way around this problem and the problem of beating up random creatures for XP is goal based awards with bonuses for quick decisive action. This method rewards paying attention to what is going on but not stalling or random kills just for a level-up.

As a bit of further explanation, this XP system does not depend solely on following the storyline that I provide the hooks for. Character driven goals that are achieved earn XP but not PLAYER driven goals. If the group decides that going on a quest for a rare thingy needed to craft an item then the group gets XP for any challenges faced in pursuit of that goal and a bonus for completion. If the PLAYER decides that he/she wants to go out and hunt down a troll for some crafting XP then XP is not awarded.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I couldn't agree less.

I prefer to play with game masters who let the dice fall where they may - if s/he is concerned about not killing a character during a particular encounter, then don't design an encounter where death is on the line should the player come up with a string of natural ones. This "dramatic moment" or "big final fight" stuff leaves me cold - design the encounters and leave the storytelling to the players after the battle is fought, the dragon slain, the princess saved, the treasure vault looted...and if my character falls in a pit and gets impaled on a half-dozen spears just outside the dragon's lair, then that is (1) the luck of the dice and (2) your poor choice to put a lethal trap at that spot.It sounds more like the story that Keifer113 makes, and we're not allowed to mess with it by dying at an "inopportune" moment.Miss out on what exactly? "Oh, I didn't really mean for you to get killed crossing that raging river - that was just to heighten the drama." "Really? It was already plenty dramatic for me when I had to make the Swim checks or die."

As you say, the fun is in facing the challenge - if the challenge isn't real (that is, lacks meaningful consequences), then the fun is significantly lessened.

Oh, and if a player lavishes so much attention on a character that s/he isn't willing to see the character die in the first round of the first encounter, then that character should take up a quiet life behind high town walls, maybe doing needlepoint or haberdashery. Adventuring is dangerous - get rich, or die trying.

He he he! I tell my players all the time that if they don't want to risK death everytime there are blades drawn they should go back to the farm. We are gamnig not havnig story hour darn it!

"make your crop planting check..."

 

[Rystil Arden]

On that note, I'm curious whether the following would grind your gears. Anyone else please feel free to answer too.

IMC, I don't award XP based on CR or any other in-game challenges. Instead, I just provide a flat XP award per session (usually about 1000 XP) to keep PCs advancing at a speed I'm comfortable with.

Apart from everything mentioned above, my main problem with this is that any player who falls behind will never catch up again no matter what. Even people who used the 3.0 XP division method with average party level could still help the character who died catch up by maybe throwing them a little solo encounter that explores their backstory or something. With this method, no matter what happens, the character who fell behind stays behind, and if she falls farther behind, she stays there, until eventually that character may be several levels behind if there is a chain reaction.