I'm curious how those of you who don't agree with the way the games are run approach your own games. "I don't agree with this" and "This isn't how I like my games" is too vague if you don't talk about what you like in games, so here are some questions:
1. What types of game do you run?
A player driven sandbox where I supply the setting and most of the major NPCs and then let the players primarily determine the direction of the campaign via their characters motivations and decisions. Furthermore, there are almost no dungeons and combat makes up between 20-40% of game play with some sessions having no combat at all.
My process for setting up the game is as follows:
I'll start by creating a setting.
- creating the continent(s) and nations,
- determing the deities (including domains, dogmas, tailored spell lists)
- determining how magic will work
- determing the races that will exist
- creating notes about the cultures ( including subsistance patterns, political organization, economy, kinship, social mores, physical descripton, dress, body adornment, religious practices, naming conventions, etc)
- make a list of classes and/or class variants found in each culture
- create some highlights of recent and past events for culture.
- place locations of interests (including important towns and cities)
- create notes about imporant NPCs and organizations for each culture including their goals
- make a list of houserules and supplements that will be used.
Once, I am finished with above, I get together with the players. I provide them with an overview of the setting and cultures along with houserules and a list of the supplements.
The next step is generating a character concept. Individual players find a culture or cultures of interest, I hand out notes on the chose culture and answer questions. I then let them come up with a character concept and ideas for a background and motivations. By this point, the players have a some istrong deas for a character . Often, they grab on to NPCs, organizations and/or events ( past and/or present) to shape their character's background and motivations, but sometimes they have other ideas.
After concept generation is concept approval. Each player approaches me with the character idea. We discuss it and make any necessary tweaks. Sometimes, their idea has a twist that leads to a slight tweak to what I had in mind.
Once the concept, background and motivations are determined, I let them create the character. At this point, I look it over the characters and we determine if any further tweaks are necessasry.
After the characters are built and approved, I'll use their backgrounds and motivations to create an initial adventure to bring the particular party "together" ( Actually, I bring them the character's to a location and let them bring the party together themselves)
Following the initial adventure, the players determine the direction of the campaign through their character's actions. They choose where their characters go. They create allies and enemies.
And, while the players have their own motivations, the world around them still goes on. NPCs have their own motivations. At times, the NPCs actions spark events that cross the PCs path. Whether or not the PCs take notice and investigate is up to the players. I had one campaign, where an old enemy had created a plague and the pc's would occassionally encounter it's victims and the undead spawned from its victims. The PCs really took no interest beyond curing the victims, killing the undead and continuing on to whatever interested them- that is until they realized the plague was spreading toward the homelands of their PCs. Suddenly, their goals was to protect all those NPCs that were intertwined with their backgrounds or whom they had befriended along the way.
2. What is the overarching goal of your game? What feel do you want and what experience should your players have?
Like Irda, I want the players and myself to look back and see a story or series of stories based on the events that unfolded over all the sessions of the campaign.
Furthermore, I agree with him about what it entails for this to happen.
3. Most importantly, what steps do you take to change the way the game plays, and in what way do they contribute to your goal?
With third edition, the changes involved using rules from UA (e.g, class variants, wizard specialist variant abilities, spontaneous divine casting, incantations, death and dying), third party supplements, and a few bits from WOTC supplements (e.g, expanded skill uses, a dozen or so spells, and a few feats at class variants) to find the elements that fit the feel of the setting that I wanted.
Some of the third party material that was important for me included
- Sean Reynold's Fewer Absolutes. I argued for this in my pre-3e questionaire.
- Book of Iron Might (Malhavoc) for it's maneuver system to allow martial characters to be creative on the fly with maneuvers
- Mutants and Masterminds style Hero Points: to provide some protection from the fickleness of the flat distribution of the d20.
- Green Ronin's Master Class Psychic, Shaman, and Witch's Handbooks to fill archetypes that I felt were missing and handled them in a way that fit my aesthetics.
- Artificers Handbook (Mystic Eye Games) to replace the rules for Magic Item creation. I hated XP costs for item creation and casting spells.
- Scrollworks Fatigue and Exhaustion
In addition, I created house rules to fix other elements that I didn't like about 3e including multiclassing and dipping to get proficiency in all armor and weapons or stack multiple good saves in a category.
With 4e, my solution is not to play or run.
4e does a few things that I wanted to see including a) removing the nonbiological aspects of race and turning them into feats; b) the universal save progression; c) the basics of heroic tier multiclassing; d) toning down the spellcasters; e) removes XP costs and level loss; and f) introduces the feywild.
However, upon listing everything that I wanted to change, it became apparent that 4e is not the game for me.
I have a problem with much of the 4e design and philosophy. Imo, they are grating and gets in the way of what I and my friends consider fun. Several of the changes (including implementations of things that I wanted changed) are not to my liking (e,g, per encounter abilties, removal of skill ranks, removal of craft and profession, spell durations, paragon paths and epic destinies) . Furthermore, there are sections where lack of logic/common sense with respect to in game events and setting which leads to disconnect and results in wtf moments which break me from immersion (e.g, the healing rules, per encounter martial/daily martial abilties, daily items, milestones, tripping oozes and flying creatures).
And, honestly, the 4e treatment of magic items and the Armorer's Vault didn't do anything for me- although, the web article on intelligent magic items was really good.
