First Campaign as a DM

[Amaroq]

That whole experience is undermined completely if .... if you know that your DM will fudge the dice or pull a rabbit out of a hat to ensure that the players always win. When mistakes (or plain old terrible luck) have no consequences, then success is pretty empty.

This statement, without the reference to player death, is 100% true for both styles of play.

However, just like a Skill Challenge, failure can mean many things, not just "character death": in the fatality-free game, failure still needs to be an option, and it needs to have painful consequences for the party -

- the NPC hostage they were attached to, dies
- the villain gets the McGuffin and his evil plot is now a step closer to completion
- the city is captured
- the PCs are captured
- - the PCs lose their magic items
- - the PCs lose their companions, pets, mounts, etc
- - the PCs lose their gold

Bad Things can still happen without equating to "character death" ... but if nothing bad can ever happen, then the characters' actions have no consequences, and boredom ensues.

 

[Antithetist]

True enough. There's a rather lengthy and heated thread in General Discussion right now about this very issue (PC death), so perhaps I was overly glib in my response.

I've had bad experiences in the past with my DM taking a half-assed approach to encounter design and then remedying his own mistakes by fudging rolls left, right and center, or pulling deus ex machina stunts to avoid the TPKs he set up. So, well, I like DMs who design fun, challenging encounters and run them by the book. But that's just me, and YMMV.

It's also worth mentioning that my idea of 'by the book' includes Raise Dead access as per the RAW, so individual deaths are only ever setbacks.

 

[Amaroq]

I've had bad experiences in the past with my DM taking a half-assed approach to encounter design and then remedying his own mistakes by fudging rolls left, right and center, or pulling deus ex machina stunts to avoid the TPKs he set up. So, well, I like DMs who design fun, challenging encounters and run them by the book. But that's just me, and YMMV.

Full agreement here!

I hate that style of DM with a passion.

So, phrasing it back to the OP: spend the time to design a fun encounter : your prep work will pay off in fun-at-the-table for everybody!!

 

[Blackbrrd]

My first thought is that I have tried to run a campaign like you are describing - and really it's very hard.

Personally I HATE dungeons and if you can run a campaign without a single one I really think you are doing a good job.

I have just run Scouring of Gate Pass (first module of War of the Burning Sky) and I think it's a very good module with a city as it's setting. It has a good mix of encounters: skill challenges, planned combat's and ambushes. In addition there is quite a lot of options for how the players want to solve their problems. There are a lot of small twists to the story.

What you have to be aware of - in addition to the encounter balancing mentioned above - is that you have no clear-cut story. When you don't have that it's very easy for your players to get stuck not doing ANYTHING. To avoid these situations, be ready to spring something on the players. Don't let them have the initiative all the time. Poke and prod them until you get a reaction. It's fun, both for you and the players.

Create NPC's that are memorable in some way. Eccentric, mean, tough or whatever. Give the characters some allies, enemies and some people they can make enemies - or allies with. It's important that they players feel attached to them in some way.

A sandbox isn't an excuse for sitting back and waiting for the players to take initiative. Make things happen. If the players take initiative reward it and escalate, broadening their options and making them ponder their decisions. If there are no hard choices, it isn't really that interesting.

... And good luck. From your post I get an attitude that suits a DM. Bringing energy to the table is very good for getting something back from your players.

 

[Derulbaskul]

(snip) I'm trying to figure out ways to work in solo monsters and such without it seeming arbitrary and forced. and ideas?

Some suggestions:

1. Every city has sewers... and most fantasy cities have more ancient ruined cities and temples and whatnot beneath them. I know you sound like you don't want dungeons, per se, but a few delves (3-5 encounter dungeons) might be just the thing from time to time beneath the city.

2. Rival syndicate/faction bosses can make good solos, and monstrous ones at that. Perhaps you have a faction headed by a gelatinous cube cleric, an otyugh wizard or a cunning and greedy black dragon?

3. What about missions outside of the city or to another city? Actually, that makes it feel like even more of a sandbox with various wilderness encounters.

4. Something I have been experimenting with is taking a higher level standard or elite monster, halving the level (roughly) and then making it an elite or solo monster. I can later reverse the process, if the monster is still alive, and make it level-appropriate again but still feel fairly similar because of the hit points. Anyway, it's a nice way to throw a higher level monster at the party without stealing the feeling of the threat it poses when fought at its "appropriate" level.

Another suggestion I would make about a sandbox campaign is make sure you use obsidianportal.com. There is a page there for characters. What I do for my current campaign (and for the campaigns I am planning) is everytime I have an idea for an NPC and find a suitable picture I post it on the characters page as a reminder for later. When the party subsequently encounters said NPC I can fill in details in the player section as a mnemonic aid for the players... while I fill in the DM-only section with information that I better not forget!

Anyway, that site is an absolute godsend if you're looking to run a sandbox because it makes it so much easier for the DM and players to keep track of everything.