DragonLancer
Hero
I voted yes. While I don't usually use weird puzzles, I do like my players to consider their actions and plan ahead. They need to know how the game world works. Just playing the rules is no fun as either DM or player.
Do you reequire your players to think?
- Thread starter Crothian
- Start date
SweeneyTodd
First Post
Dude, your poll is about thinking, the first post is about doing paperwork. Which one am I supposed to vote on? 
Seriously though, your player was telling you, "I don't enjoy bookkeeping." You can make people do things they don't enjoy in a game, if it's needed, but I'd think hard about bringing a "eat your vegetables" attitude in. You're a GM, not a parent.
If you're talking about in the game, though, heck yes I make them think. Not so much solving puzzles, though, more that they'd better come up with interesting things to do.
Seriously though, your player was telling you, "I don't enjoy bookkeeping." You can make people do things they don't enjoy in a game, if it's needed, but I'd think hard about bringing a "eat your vegetables" attitude in. You're a GM, not a parent.
If you're talking about in the game, though, heck yes I make them think. Not so much solving puzzles, though, more that they'd better come up with interesting things to do.
Aust Diamondew
First Post
If you mean about game rules then no, I don't require them to think too hard and I'm usually willing to help but I do try to encourage them to learn things on their own.
If you mean in the game I require them to think through problems and situations on their own occaisonally I'll give them help or advice if I think the situation is paticuarly challenging or if the characters would know something the players don't. And they can usually get advice from NPCs which can be useful (though it might also be biased, bad, worthless or all three).
BTW recalculating skill points due to intelligence gain/loss is easy. At least for gain all you need to do is for every +1 modifier increase you gain skill points equal to your max ranks in a skill.
If you mean in the game I require them to think through problems and situations on their own occaisonally I'll give them help or advice if I think the situation is paticuarly challenging or if the characters would know something the players don't. And they can usually get advice from NPCs which can be useful (though it might also be biased, bad, worthless or all three).
BTW recalculating skill points due to intelligence gain/loss is easy. At least for gain all you need to do is for every +1 modifier increase you gain skill points equal to your max ranks in a skill.
The Shaman
First Post
Yes, I recalc skills, HP, and so on when stats change - I generally track it but it's helpful if the players do it, too, to check my work.
Yes, I encourage players to use their own observation and reasoning skills in-game instead of relying solely on die rolls - I do try to work the character skills into the results however.
For example, for Spot checks, if the player says something along the lines of, "My character is looking around," it's a straight Spot check, but if the player says, "My character is watching the steeple of the church," then the DC for detecting the sniper in the steeple drops by 5 while the DC for spotting the machine gun nest in the storefront goes up by 5.
In another example, if the players miss an important clue that I present, I'll call for a general knowledge check to see if someone remembers a pertinent detail, then I'll pass along a clue-to-the-clue, to hopefully get them looking in the right direction.
I'm admittedly a grumpy grognard, so I recall well the days when as a player if I didn't tell the GM I was checking the ceiling, the floor, the four walls, behind the door, &c., then the character didn't either. While I don't advocate a return to those days, I do think that the players should be encouraged to use their ingenuity and be rewarded for interacting with the environment. As Thanee cleverly remarked, this isn't a boardgame, and as a player I don't want to passively sit back and wait for the dice to tell me everything that happens - I want to be an active participant in the events of the game, with the dice resolving the element of chance.
Yes, I encourage players to use their own observation and reasoning skills in-game instead of relying solely on die rolls - I do try to work the character skills into the results however.
For example, for Spot checks, if the player says something along the lines of, "My character is looking around," it's a straight Spot check, but if the player says, "My character is watching the steeple of the church," then the DC for detecting the sniper in the steeple drops by 5 while the DC for spotting the machine gun nest in the storefront goes up by 5.
In another example, if the players miss an important clue that I present, I'll call for a general knowledge check to see if someone remembers a pertinent detail, then I'll pass along a clue-to-the-clue, to hopefully get them looking in the right direction.
I'm admittedly a grumpy grognard, so I recall well the days when as a player if I didn't tell the GM I was checking the ceiling, the floor, the four walls, behind the door, &c., then the character didn't either. While I don't advocate a return to those days, I do think that the players should be encouraged to use their ingenuity and be rewarded for interacting with the environment. As Thanee cleverly remarked, this isn't a boardgame, and as a player I don't want to passively sit back and wait for the dice to tell me everything that happens - I want to be an active participant in the events of the game, with the dice resolving the element of chance.
WhimsyTheFae
Explorer
I'll add another "Yes" vote, with disclaimers:
1. Regarding rules - I expect players to know the rules regarding their character and if they are unsure to ask (inaction or illegal action due to rules misinterpretation is frustrating - and easily avoided with a simple question).
2. Regarding the campaign - I expect the players to think about what there characters would do or know in a given situation, but will allow skill checks to avoid prolonged analysis or loss of fun (although I run games for players ranging from 10 years old to 40 years old, it is often the adult players who will fall back on the "my character has a +13 in Knowledge (Dungeoneering), so could I make a roll to figure this out?")
1. Regarding rules - I expect players to know the rules regarding their character and if they are unsure to ask (inaction or illegal action due to rules misinterpretation is frustrating - and easily avoided with a simple question).
2. Regarding the campaign - I expect the players to think about what there characters would do or know in a given situation, but will allow skill checks to avoid prolonged analysis or loss of fun (although I run games for players ranging from 10 years old to 40 years old, it is often the adult players who will fall back on the "my character has a +13 in Knowledge (Dungeoneering), so could I make a roll to figure this out?")
jgbrowning
Hero
No, I expect them to die, Mr. Gath.
joe b.
joe b.
Gold Roger
First Post
Voted Yes.
Roleplaying on itself requires thinking for character personality and developement.
But for my next campaign, I'm going really far. It's a Swahbuckling Sea Adventure Game and I expect my players to:
-have a understanding of the rules of their charakter
-think mostly in charakter
-find Adventures by themselfs, not constantly bite obvious plot hooks
-use strategy and tactics to their charakters best abilities
-have a understanding of the setting basic tone and play on it
-not metagame
This is explizitly told every player that wants to join. This is alot of demand on my part, especially among my player base. But my justification is that I know a lot of potential players that are all friends of my, with different expectations of the game. Rather than catering to the various expectations of 5-7 players, that may not even care much for the game or put real effort into it, I'll just play my game. I've allready got to players that will definitely play in this campaign. I'll just start up with them and see who joins.
Roleplaying on itself requires thinking for character personality and developement.
But for my next campaign, I'm going really far. It's a Swahbuckling Sea Adventure Game and I expect my players to:
-have a understanding of the rules of their charakter
-think mostly in charakter
-find Adventures by themselfs, not constantly bite obvious plot hooks
-use strategy and tactics to their charakters best abilities
-have a understanding of the setting basic tone and play on it
-not metagame
This is explizitly told every player that wants to join. This is alot of demand on my part, especially among my player base. But my justification is that I know a lot of potential players that are all friends of my, with different expectations of the game. Rather than catering to the various expectations of 5-7 players, that may not even care much for the game or put real effort into it, I'll just play my game. I've allready got to players that will definitely play in this campaign. I'll just start up with them and see who joins.
I expect them to think, but I know that after a long week of work, sometimes they just want to start a bar fight or slay some monsters.
I suppose I'm in the same boat as Wombat: Ask them to think about the situation, but don't focus on the rules.
The rules just help resolve the consequences of your actions.....
I suppose I'm in the same boat as Wombat: Ask them to think about the situation, but don't focus on the rules.
The rules just help resolve the consequences of your actions.....
VirgilCaine
First Post
I want players who think, strategize, and challenge me as a DM in their ingenuity.
Similar Threads
- Poll
