GMing help

[NewJeffCT]

D20 system, we all hate 4e... lol

Depending on the campaign, I tell my players what type of campaign I.e. heroic, wide open, evil, etc... and that their charas should fit the mood of the campaign, but they tend to make their charas the complete opposite

I have a player that knows how to break just about any class, and winds up at 3rd lvl sometimes with a chara that can't be touched by anything less than 3 or 4 or more lvls higher than he is, and even than they only scratch him, and he teats through them w/ relative ease...

I had that problem when running 3.5E. I switched to 4E and I spend like 5-10% of the time on prep work that I did with 3.5E, so when the players do something unexpected, it doesn't derail hours of prep work...

However, if your buddy is 3rd level and can't be touched by anything that is less than CR 6 or 7, then you're not running the right kind of bad guys at him...my 3.5E campaign had a guy playing an elf paladin of freedom/champion of Corellon and he could jack his AC up to 60+ when we got close to the end of the campaign...(of course, he couldn't hit much when he took a -18 to hit to add 18 to his AC) If that happens, just hit him with Area of Effect spells, spells that require ranged-touch attacks, something that imposes a condition (Dazed is a lot deadlier in 3.5 than in 4E, as is Dominated...) and so on.

And, if you're worried about a feeble spellcaster falling to your super PC, then surround the spellcaster with some bodyguards the PC has to fight through. Or, have the spellcaster on the other side of a pit trap, in a tree under cover, or have the floor in front of him covered with a Grease spell, etc.

However, you also can't abuse that, either. You have to give the PC the satisfaction of not being able to get hit in melee at times as well.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

This is great! Use this to your advantage. Townsfolk see his obvious combat superiority and start telling rumors about him: he's a natural prodigy, he's a demigod in human flesh, he's a more powerful warrior in disguise, he's sent by the gods to protect us. They then start to idolize him; little kids follow him around and pretend to be him. Townsfolk start singing songs about him, and bards carry those songs across the land. People buy the party drinks. Nobles invite the party out for festivals.

Then strangers show up asking for his help against a monster much tougher than he can handle. If he refuses them, it will hurt his reputation. Rivals who want to show how tough they are arrive to challenge him for prestige, like gunslingers in the old west, and some of these people are much tougher than he is even without magic items.

He has a choice: either put his life on the line against monsters and NPCs who can actually threaten him, or risk this cool reputation he's accidentally developed. It's the best of both worlds because it's an endless source of plot hooks, it celebrates what the player likes to do, and it gives scenarios where both the player and the rest of the party can be challenged by a boss monster and its assistants.

Just be careful that you don't award too much treasure for the tougher foes. That just compounds the problem.


Don't assume the group is supposed to help the players. The group is neutral and CAN help them, but only if the PCs earn their trust and respect. Basically, make the players work for it. If the default state is "no free lunch," the PCs might try to win over the group just to be contrary.

Wow great advice here from Piratecat, I'll have to reward some more exp to him later when I've "spread xp around." I'd take this piece of advice about blowing up the PC's reputation and run with it. It would make for some really great role playing situations, it'd add to the plot, and give everyone playing a great bit of fun when they decide how to handle the situation and not the story.

 

[pemerton]

Avoid the temptation to punish the PCs for doing or not doing something you think they should have done.

<snip>

Resist the urge to "teach" the PCs which way they should go by having bad stuff happen to them when they zig instead of zagging.

<snip>

If the PCs didn't know about it that means you can change it.

I agee with this.

On the alliance point, for example, if the PCs ally with B rather than A what does it matter? Is it the GM's job to tell the players what ideals and relationships their PCs should cultivate?

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

On the alliance point, for example, if the PCs ally with B rather than A what does it matter? Is it the GM's job to tell the players what ideals and relationships their PCs should cultivate?

Good point, I've always been a more "reactionary" DM. I like to see what the players do and react as I think the NPC would depending on what the Players do. You can't plan out every little nuance in a game, so to me the most fun comes when you shoot from the hip and react in the moment. I think all of my favorite memorable moments in my gaming history have come from the spontaneous ideas that came to me when a player threw a curve-ball my way in going a different direction that I expected.

 

[Ariosto]

My preferred solution is not to plan campaigns for my players. Let them plan their campaigns, and there's nothing to "break"!

For a plotted scenario, what I find works best is

- only 1 to 3 players, each with but one character

- a plot that relates directly to the interests of those players and characters.

The further ahead one tries to rig things, and the more specifically, the more trouble it is! Also, I find more good heroic fantasy material for inspiration in short stories involving a few protagonists.

For a campaign, what I want is not "a plan", but plenty of intriguing NPCs and interesting places to visit. PCs who are instigators as well as reactors also help.

The main thing is not to have the fun depend on players doing (or not doing) anything in particular, except maybe occasionally.