-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Game Type--How Do You Play?
- Thread starter Paladin82
- Start date
Rhenny
Adventurer
Our games are similar to what IronWolf said. I try to get the characters to do their own thing in the beginning so that they can begin to define themselves, but soon after, I throw out some hooks to begin a story. I usually have one or two overarching goals, with many possible directions and let the characters decide how to proceed.
If I'm running a Maptools campaign/game, I usually have to set up the story more firmly so that I'm more prepared for the games. It is much harder to improvise when online gaming because I like to use maps so the players can see what's happening, and I pre-program the tokens with macros so setting up takes a little bit of time. My players understand, so they kind of accept the "railroad" tracks. Some times I can let them get off the track, especially when they are in a roleplaying situations, and that may influence how future games (or encounters) will play out.
If I'm running a live game at the table, it is much easier to improvise and let the characters run with it. I have lots of possible maps, or I can draw one on grid paper to suit the situation. If they want to sail to an island that is rumored to have gorgeous women who serve their guests and impart gifts to their visitors (of course there may be a catch), rather than continuing on their way to a nearby town to deliver an item to their patron's ally, I let them hire a ship and go.
I guess it just depends. I would check all of the options in the poll.
If I'm running a Maptools campaign/game, I usually have to set up the story more firmly so that I'm more prepared for the games. It is much harder to improvise when online gaming because I like to use maps so the players can see what's happening, and I pre-program the tokens with macros so setting up takes a little bit of time. My players understand, so they kind of accept the "railroad" tracks. Some times I can let them get off the track, especially when they are in a roleplaying situations, and that may influence how future games (or encounters) will play out.
If I'm running a live game at the table, it is much easier to improvise and let the characters run with it. I have lots of possible maps, or I can draw one on grid paper to suit the situation. If they want to sail to an island that is rumored to have gorgeous women who serve their guests and impart gifts to their visitors (of course there may be a catch), rather than continuing on their way to a nearby town to deliver an item to their patron's ally, I let them hire a ship and go.
I guess it just depends. I would check all of the options in the poll.
It depends on the game, but most of my campaigns have been storyline driven with sandbox elements. My most recent campaign began as a sandbox, and as the players tugged on various plot strings, I looked at what they found interesting and wanted to do and started generating additional material and plotlines to follow those. Some plot strings fell by the wayside as the party didn't take much of an interest in them, others advanced along without party intervention (some of which the party later chose to deal with, others they continued to ignore).
El Mahdi
Muad'Dib of the Anauroch
I voted other because I don't fall neatly into any of those. Multiple choices may have been beneficial. I understand you're looking for each persons "typical" play style, but not all gamers fit a "typical" mold.
For me, it's split evenly between "Sandbox style but with some overarching goal beyond power and alignment" and "Storyline-focused, without "story immunity". I don't believe the two are so diametrically opposed that they can't be mixed easily into the same campaign. Sometimes the campaign is a sandbox, and sometimes the same campaign is story based. I don't have a "typical" play style. I use whatever tool is best suited at the time, freely switching when necessary or preferred.
For me, it's split evenly between "Sandbox style but with some overarching goal beyond power and alignment" and "Storyline-focused, without "story immunity". I don't believe the two are so diametrically opposed that they can't be mixed easily into the same campaign. Sometimes the campaign is a sandbox, and sometimes the same campaign is story based. I don't have a "typical" play style. I use whatever tool is best suited at the time, freely switching when necessary or preferred.
Going by my best guess at what you mean, my games are typically mixed.
The players can generally go where they like, do what they like. In this sense, the game is sandboxy.
However, there are more than just themes - there are events that pertain to the PCs that I expect and intend will infringe upon their lives. These are mostly determined by things the players have suggested they want to have happen (if you put a BBEG in your backstory, and you think you can just ignore him, you've got another think coming), but sometimes they are things that I, as the GM want to insert in the game.
There may be times when there's some plot-immunity. If you put in that BBEG, and you haven't had a chance to face him and he's been moving the plot, I may way think twice or thrice about ways for you to not die before you get to him. Other times, especially if the player was being haughty or dumb, the player may find no such immunity.
The players can generally go where they like, do what they like. In this sense, the game is sandboxy.
However, there are more than just themes - there are events that pertain to the PCs that I expect and intend will infringe upon their lives. These are mostly determined by things the players have suggested they want to have happen (if you put a BBEG in your backstory, and you think you can just ignore him, you've got another think coming), but sometimes they are things that I, as the GM want to insert in the game.
There may be times when there's some plot-immunity. If you put in that BBEG, and you haven't had a chance to face him and he's been moving the plot, I may way think twice or thrice about ways for you to not die before you get to him. Other times, especially if the player was being haughty or dumb, the player may find no such immunity.
Zelda Themelin
First Post
Depends.
One way to go for me is heavily thematic game with player control, free world and some story immunity.
Another way to go for me is storyline, no story immunity, combat heavy
First is how I usually go with my own material and second how I do adventrue paths.
And when characters die in those games sometimes they get resurrected and sometimes new character is made.
I am falling more for combat heavy these day. My players have demanding work and they don't feel like deciding what adventure is when they play rpg these day. They tend to play their characters set themselves on trails and stepping out only when particualer sidetrek becomes tempting enough. While at it, happily slaughtering my happless monsters.
One way to go for me is heavily thematic game with player control, free world and some story immunity.
Another way to go for me is storyline, no story immunity, combat heavy
First is how I usually go with my own material and second how I do adventrue paths.
And when characters die in those games sometimes they get resurrected and sometimes new character is made.
I am falling more for combat heavy these day. My players have demanding work and they don't feel like deciding what adventure is when they play rpg these day. They tend to play their characters set themselves on trails and stepping out only when particualer sidetrek becomes tempting enough. While at it, happily slaughtering my happless monsters.
