Do you reequire your players to think?

[SweeneyTodd]

Paperwork and thinking are very much related.

I still don't know what to vote, but that's okay.

I actively avoid having anybody, including me, do math during the session more complicated than "This number is higher than this number." We use an extremely light system. Mostly this is due to the players; some of them are relatively uninterested in rules, and others just don't want to know about them.

We do think a lot about what's going on in the game and what we'd like to do, though. Basically what VirgilCaine said.

 

[Azul]

I answered yes, but a better answer would be "sometimes". I like to mix up the types of challanges faced by my players. Sometimes I present them with puzzles or intrigues, sometimes tactical challanges and sometimes a good old fashioned brawl. If my players look tired and/or stressed (due to a tough week), I'll tone down the thinking and let them bash stuff to get a nice cathartic blast of fun. In that state, a rampaging band of tough mooks is perfect. When they are sharp and caffeinated, I'll make'm think just to stay alive.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I have utterly no problems doing math during the session. I've started writing down the marshal and bard's modifiers on the edge of my Excel printout, so I won't forget.

Now, as for thinking...it depends. One problem that comes up is that what one person may find obvious, another may find incredibly unlikely. This becomes an issue when it's the DM who thinks differently than the party does.

"Well, obviously, you were supposed to go check out the Foreign Ministry's file on this country."
"Um...dude, you didn't tell us we had one of those."

Brad

 

[frankthedm]

I had to gently remind them to take notes. Since thier characters remember more than they can.

 

[swrushing]

A thread in rules brought this up as someone said recalculating skill points with int gain or lose would be a hassle. And while that may be,m I don't think requireing the players to think is a bad thing.

non-sequitor.

EXPECTING players to think, sure. I expect them to listen and analyze whats happening, to figure out clues, to catch inconsistencies, and basically to think in character during my game.

That is a wholly different animal from increasing the workload/bookkeeping in chargen.

I know my players can do tax audits, that doesn't mean i should require them to do them in order to play in my game.

So, should the players be required to think in the game? Do you dumb it down for your players or do you smart it up for them? Would the players refuse your game if you made them think at the table? It just seems that sometimes people don't want their players to think or expect much of them. I expect a lot from my players and I think it rewards the game.

I am sorry, but do you require your players to do chargen and levelling up at the table? or are you somehow expanding "chargen paperwork" ala retroactive skill changes to also include all the usual puzzles clues and observations and deductions involved in actual play?

it really seems like you are taking one issue, complexity of chargen and the work involved, and morphingn that point into something else.

I do all that i can to simply and streamline the chargen process, to make it as quick and painless and as little WORK and as much FUN as possible while still keeping just barely enough to allow the character definition and detail needed for player character refinement. I want as little to stand between "i wanna play" and "i get to play" as possible while keeping the ability to develop interesting characters.

A rule saying "you get to do restroactive skill pt changes when int raises" DOESN'T increase pc defininement but does increase workload. Heck, if anything it DECREASES definement since a guy with int 14 all along will no longer be different from a guy who had INT 12 and just went to int 14 at level 10.

So that sort of a house rule would not immediately appeal to me, losing in what I want (definition and discrimination) and adding to what I dislike (OOC OOG workload/bookkeeping).

 

[Crothian]

EXPECTING players to think, sure. I expect them to listen and analyze whats happening, to figure out clues, to catch inconsistencies, and basically to think in character during my game.

That is all I'm looking for in terms of an answer, everything is is just over thinking it. Ironic, I know

This isn't about character generation or about anything other then how people run their game. This was a simple example, and one I admit to not fully explaining becasue the thread is not about the example, it is about the question.

I am sorry, but do you require your players to do chargen and levelling up at the table? or are you somehow expanding "chargen paperwork" ala retroactive skill changes to also include all the usual puzzles clues and observations and deductions involved in actual play?

Nope, we are much better organized then to have characters generated at the gaming table. I don't even follow the second question which more then likely means the answer is no. THe retroactive skill points is just when characters increase their intelligence. Its a house rule and frankly not at all important to this thread.

 

[TheGM]

Well, I voted yes, but the truth of the matter is that I only encourage them to think. I do require them to make new characters when a lack of thinking has got them killed though.

Does that count?

ROTFL.

I voted yes also, but like many have said, I prefer them to be thinking about the adventure, not how to next tweak their character.

However, I do require them to adjust for level loss. It's an effect caused by the story line.

 

[Tarangil]

I like making my players think. It keeps them on their toes.

It doesn't always have to be puzzles and such, but put them in situations where bashing their way out is not the wisest of options. My favourite was starting 9 first level players and having them stroll into a village that's only populated by werewolves. Now that makes them think (and run) especially when none thought to spend a little extra on any silver when they start. But they do now!

In cases like that though there must be different avenues to help them. Sometimes they'll suprise you with a solution of their own.

 

[iwatt]

I voted no because I've just about given up on them

we play late on a weeknight for about 3 hours. My players don't want to think, they just want to play simple hack n slash and release some pent up frustration.

 

[kolikeos]

in all the previous games i ran i didn't require any thinking from the players, neither did the players want to think beyond which bad guy to kill first, except one player.
in the next game i will hopefuly run i do intend to put the players in situations where they will have to think a little in order to not get killed.