Herobizkit
Adventurer
Keep up posted. We love hearing DM war stories.
party wants railroading
- Thread starter ffy
- Start date
I would say spoon feed them role playing opportunities - a bit here & there and then hopefully build upon that.
Maybe even have good King Jeffrey ask them to recount their exploits in rescuing his daughter. Then, have the king give them the option of choice A or choice B for their next adventure.
Don't overdo it. I think if you can see them growing, it will add to your satisfaction over time - you just have to be patient.
Maybe even have good King Jeffrey ask them to recount their exploits in rescuing his daughter. Then, have the king give them the option of choice A or choice B for their next adventure.
Don't overdo it. I think if you can see them growing, it will add to your satisfaction over time - you just have to be patient.
The Monster
Explorer
Just to toss in, another thought might be to start a war - the PCs are essentially a special ops team. The y don't have to make big decisions about where to go, they're sent on missions with fairly specific goals - destroy object/person x; bring back object/person x; see what's at location y and report back; deliver person/object x to this place, or to that person; hold location x until relieved.
The emphasis for them remains on tactics and fighting, but there's a broader purpose behind it besides more lewts, and there are roleplaying opportunities you can put in that are quite reasonable: dealing with local refugess, spy contacts, potential traitors, prisoners, persuading local villagers to not report your presence, and so forth.
For the GM, you can use the decisions of the players, and how they handle situations both combat and noncombat to infuence the overall events of the war. If you're at all into that kind of thing, it can provide some interest for you, and the players can dig into overall strategy and wider events of they want to, or pretty much ignore them if they just want to follow directions and blow stuff up. And the history of warfare can provide inspiration for all kinds of situations, terrain, and opponents.
The emphasis for them remains on tactics and fighting, but there's a broader purpose behind it besides more lewts, and there are roleplaying opportunities you can put in that are quite reasonable: dealing with local refugess, spy contacts, potential traitors, prisoners, persuading local villagers to not report your presence, and so forth.
For the GM, you can use the decisions of the players, and how they handle situations both combat and noncombat to infuence the overall events of the war. If you're at all into that kind of thing, it can provide some interest for you, and the players can dig into overall strategy and wider events of they want to, or pretty much ignore them if they just want to follow directions and blow stuff up. And the history of warfare can provide inspiration for all kinds of situations, terrain, and opponents.
Herobizkit
Adventurer
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MVonyVSQoM[/ame]
Hannibal = "Leader", likely a Doppelganger Warlord (orders his men around while also being a master of disguise)
Face = "Striker", likely a Warlock (maybe a Rogue?) with focus in all Social skills plus Thievery (because he's a smooth talking con-man who's also 'acquires' stuff)
Howling Mad Murdock = "Controller", likely a Psion (he's crazy, and that makes other people crazy and/or run far, far away)
B.A. Baracus = "Defender", likely a Half-Orc (maybe Dwarf?) Fighter (he fights. And takes hits. And he can fix stuff).
Hannibal = "Leader", likely a Doppelganger Warlord (orders his men around while also being a master of disguise)
Face = "Striker", likely a Warlock (maybe a Rogue?) with focus in all Social skills plus Thievery (because he's a smooth talking con-man who's also 'acquires' stuff)
Howling Mad Murdock = "Controller", likely a Psion (he's crazy, and that makes other people crazy and/or run far, far away)
B.A. Baracus = "Defender", likely a Half-Orc (maybe Dwarf?) Fighter (he fights. And takes hits. And he can fix stuff).
Last edited:
Aenghus
Explorer
There is generally better buyin with self-generated characters rather than PCs. The players can make any PCs they wish, but often some DM guidance and/or limitations can help, and group creation of PCs can work very well.
The problem with completely individual PCs is that some PCs depend on other PCs to work well. This particularly refers to eg tactical warlords who need a good melee base attack or two in the party to be effective. Other issues are the role breakdown, how many ranged PCs vs melee PCs, whether there is any defender.
I know of a group where the entire party are ranged PCs, and the nearest thing they have to a frontline PC is a dragonborn sorceror with close range attacks. This sort of party can work in 4e but it requires customisation from the referee, so as not to penalise them too much for their choices. (or alternatively when PCs start dieing, someone makes a defender PC).
The problem with completely individual PCs is that some PCs depend on other PCs to work well. This particularly refers to eg tactical warlords who need a good melee base attack or two in the party to be effective. Other issues are the role breakdown, how many ranged PCs vs melee PCs, whether there is any defender.
I know of a group where the entire party are ranged PCs, and the nearest thing they have to a frontline PC is a dragonborn sorceror with close range attacks. This sort of party can work in 4e but it requires customisation from the referee, so as not to penalise them too much for their choices. (or alternatively when PCs start dieing, someone makes a defender PC).
Dice4Hire
First Post
I have never minded adventures that have a bit of railroad in them, as long as they are fun to play. As a DM, I sometimes get tired of player who insist on having things their 'own way' but then do not have the ambition to make the game work that way.
Sometimes a railroaded game can be a lot of fun.
Sometimes a railroaded game can be a lot of fun.
Similar Threads
