Hmm... some threads in the Talking the Talk forum cover this topic (it's mostly similar to PbP).
Some important observations:
- Remember that not everyone will be able to respond quickly to any given situation, this can either lead to waiting (if a response is absolutely required) or to the DM having to make up a response for the player on some occasions (esp. combat, if not everyone gives a reply in a 1-2 day period, which should be the max for a combat round to have at least some flow left
). Generally focus on the responses you have instead of wanting to know what
everyone does.
- PbP/PbEM is slow, therefore - if you do not want to have characters stay at the same level with no progress whatsoever for years - you should be generous with XP (basically reducing the amount of encounters needed to level up from the 13 the D&D levels are based upon). For example, normally I give only 1/2 combat XP and decent out-of combat XP (doubling the amount from combat and some more). In my PbP I give full combat XP and more generous out-of combat XP.
- Out of combat, you should respond quickly, if possible. As long as the DM posts regularily, the players usually will do so, too. Even if responses come in slow, don't let yourself get trapped in the down-spiral of slowdown. Rather encourage your players to post more often and keep up the pace to make them
want to.
- For the players, of course, this is the same... even if you cannot contribute much, a little post doesn't hurt to show that you are there and to honor the work the DM has with that kind of campaign.
- Maps (or a very detailed description) are crucial to get a good overview in combat. If you prefer tactical combat, maps are a definite must. If you like story-driven combat (that doesn't mean, that tactical combat cannot be combined with in-combat roleplaying) more, then it might work without, but in either case, descriptions should be detailed.
There are plenty options, from using one of the mapping programs out there, to Excel or Photoshop (or similar, like The Gimp (free)), scripted maps (Java Script, that's what I use), or even hand-drawn and scanned maps. As long as it gives a good overview, it works well. Pretty is good, but not necessary.
- Unless the posting frequency is really high, you'll need to use different initiative resolve rules, as it doesn't work well, if you go through the PCs and NPCs turns as normal, waiting for a post each time a new PCs turn comes up. This will just prolong combat to twice or thrice the time needed otherwise. Best to have an action declaration phase at the beginning of combat and then resolve one whole round at a time (keeping in mind, that the previous action declaration might lead to some situations, which lead to an unreasonable response from a PC, if things turn during the round - be most lenient in those cases!). It's good if players give options and conditions with their actions, but sometimes you must make them up. Make sure everyone understands this need beforehand. Also, try to think up actions for your NPCs in the same way (do not post them, but think about them), just to be fair.
About action declarations: I allow the players to "react" to actions posted already with their declaration. That is, even if the action they "react" to comes AFTER their own in the round, so their PCs wouldn't actually know that at the time their own action comes up. I do not consider this metagaming, altho it's similar in a way. For example, if player A states, that his PC moves up to opponent X, player B can then say that her PC will do so, too, if concentrating forces is good (altho her action comes first), or to opponent Y, if it seems better to split up.
This has several reasons. First, it's the order of declaration again... which is not the natural order. Second, it allows the players better to work together as a team and not as a bunch of seperate entities. Third, it's a little compensation for the lack of "table talk".
Bye
Thanee
