Monsters like a challenge!

[Raven Crowking]

Games <> Life

Not everything has to be serious business.

Not relevant, AFAICT.

 

[Fifth Element]

Not relevant, AFAICT.

Totally relevant, just explaining why I don't consider the advice to be a problem when playing the game with 6-year-olds. Thanks for the input, though.

 

[awesomeocalypse]

There's a pretty wide canyon between "monsters intentionally adopt the worst possible tactics short of actively stabbing themselves" and "monsters are ruthless tactical masters who always shift+charge to avoid AoO's, focus fire like maniacs, set up cdg's, etc." and most kids I've known and DMed for would probably like to play somewhere in that canyon.

Monsters that are intentionally not hurting people they're actively fighting is stupid, and will feel that way even for a lot of kids. But a monster can make a good faith effort to attack a character and still use less then 100% optimal tactics. The monsters don't always have to focus fire the one guy with the lowest defenses or the best dpr. Sometimes if they're next to a pc and want to attack someone else, they can just move away instead of busting out a shift+charge. If a PC gets knocked out, the monster might think he's been dealt with and attack someone else rather than lay down a CDG to finish the job.

 

[Raven Crowking]

(Shrug)

You're welcome.



RC

 

[Benimoto]

That advice is kind of cute. I like it. I don't think it's good advice once you hit the point that your players realize that it's actually not-so-great advice in disguise, but for an introductory game it's fine.

Plus, making sure that the monsters take time to hit everyone ensures that everyone gets a taste of what that feels like. One of my favorite parts of DMing is that players behave in interesting and unpredictable ways when they feel that their character is threatened, and this is a decent way to give that experience to beginning players.

 

[Wicht]

Given that we are talking about a ruleset designed for 6 year olds, the advice would therefor seem sage.

I think 6 years old is too young to coddle in this fashion. If you were talking three year olds and maybe four year olds I might not be tempted to argue. But a six year old should be mature enough to handle in game difficulties. Of course, even when my kids were three and four years old I was patiently explaining strategy to them as I beat them in games. Not letting your kids win makes it all the more sweeter for them when they finally do manage to best you at something. And thats when, after years of teaching them how to be good losers, you start explaining how to be a gracious winner.

 

[MrMyth]

I think 6 years old is too young to coddle in this fashion. If you were talking three year olds and maybe four year olds I might not be tempted to argue. But a six year old should be mature enough to handle in game difficulties. Of course, even when my kids were three and four years old I was patiently explaining strategy to them as I beat them in games. Not letting your kids win makes it all the more sweeter for them when they finally do manage to best you at something. And thats when, after years of teaching them how to be good losers, you start explaining how to be a gracious winner.

On the other hand, I'm not sure the goal of this game is to have a 'winner' and 'loser'. The fun here is largely a chance to let the kids take on the roles of aspiring heroes and get to beat up some monsters! Victory certainly isn't guaranteed, but I don't think this fight is about the challenge or overcoming difficult trials, and I think it is good to have advice that lets the kids feel the danger of the encounter, without having one character just get knocked out and unable to participate.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

We're busy teaching the three little pigs that straw is the best building material, because sticks are too much work, and working with bricks might take you out of the "fun" for too long.

Besides, the pig with the brick house will always save you from a TPK when the wolf comes. That is, apparently, the only reason he has a brick house -- so you can frolic while he works.

Maybe it's just because it's Friday afternoon, but WTFAYTA?

 

[Wicht]

On the other hand, I'm not sure the goal of this game is to have a 'winner' and 'loser'. The fun here is largely a chance to let the kids take on the roles of aspiring heroes and get to beat up some monsters! Victory certainly isn't guaranteed, but I don't think this fight is about the challenge or overcoming difficult trials, and I think it is good to have advice that lets the kids feel the danger of the encounter, without having one character just get knocked out and unable to participate.

Well to be fair to me, I was talking about gaming in general including checkers, chess, cards, miniature skirmishes, risk, monopoly, tic-tac-toe, etc, etc.

That being said, while I don't think that the goal of roleplaying is to win so much as it is to overcome challenges, each fight to the death (and aren't most of them) has a clear winner and loser.

 

[Scribble]

I pretty much agree with billd91...

Just like anything people learn in stages. You first teach kids sometimes they loose... Then you teach them that sometimes in addition to loosing you loose because you were the easiest target.

So in this case, first you teach them monsters have the power to kill characters. Then you teach them monsters also have the power to single YOU out because you're the easiest target.

But I don't have kids yet so what do I know?