Players: do you feel cheated if DM improvises?

[Turanil]

Well, I agree that I do not improvise everything. That's true that I have a pretty good idea of the general campaign plot, and the sort of things that should happen during the game.

Now, my own weakness as a DM lies in challenging the players. Usually, their PCs win most combats and do not much suffer. Until recently I carefully wrote down all the stat blocks; just a session or two I began to notice that improvising some monsters stats, adding magic items to a npc on the fly, would in fact help me tailor the encounter. However, it's where I feel the more shame: I cannot but think that it's like cheating (for example, I always roll NPCs' attacks, saves, etc. in front of the players). Much more cheating in fact, than when a player who has just rolled a bad number pretends he has not yet rolled and loudly declares: "Now it's my turn! See: I roll!..." (it happens all the time! ).

On the other hand, to improvise maps and buildings much helps me contain the adventure or part of the adventure within the time allowed for our gaming session. In addition, improvising let the players come up with great ideas. For example I have a player who loves to try to guess what's happening, what the enemies are really planning, etc. I often uses what he says to implement my improvisations, and thereafter the players is happy because he had correctly understood what was going on... (Hope he will never read that anyway...)

 

[S'mon]

Improvising monster stats - I can't imagine what's wrong with this, of course XP should be proportionate to difficulty of encounter.

Adding magic items to NPCs on fly - if you're adding items _during_ combat to nerf PC abilities that's a bit iffy IMO, better to let the PCs defeat that NPC easily and take note for future NPC creation. Of course you might add items so the PCs get more treasure if they win, which few will object to.
Generally speaking I like to stat my monsters & NPCs out pre-game and use the written stats, if there's an easier victory than I expected, that's fine. If the NPCs massacre the PCs, that's tough, but I won't boost or nerf the NPCs to prevent unexpected outcome.

 

[lior_shapira]

I prepare and write down my adventures before the sessions. I do try to do it in a modular fashion i.e. after each session add a little more (although I know the ultimate goal in advance). That way I can be more free with the pc's actions and not railroad them.

However, no matter how much I plan for every contingency and do it dynamically, my players always manage to find something to do that I would never dream of. So I'd say at least 30% of each session is pure improvisation, usually using encounters/ideas/traps that they skipped earlier (cant let all that hard work go to waste )

 

[Westgate Polks]

As a player, I never feel cheated as long as:

1. The players and the GM have fun. This is necessary and (usually) sufficient.

2. The overall story advances. I thrill in being part of the bigger picture, whatever that might be. If we just spin our wheels for 3-4 hours, then I might be a bit frustrated.

 

[Sledge]

Last game I ran was to introduce a new person to the game. After getting her character all set and everyone else ready I sat down without a thing. Her first comment was "Don't you need a book?"
She enjoyed the game a great deal and want to play on a regular basis. She was especially pleased that she could just talk to someone outside the expected basis for the adventure without having me tell her to get going. So I say improvisation lets the players know they can play freely. That said, don't improv monsters at anything but the lowest levels. I know if I improv'd combat in our level 42 game it would be less than a joke.

 

[drowdude]

I have improvised my way through just about every session/campaign I have run over the last 11 years.

Generally I just draw up a rough outline of adventure hooks and events that I want to happen (based on my ideas and PC history). Then I run with it, stringing it all together as I go.

Only truly important NPCs and monsters get stated up ahead of time.
Of course that doesnt mean I run other NPCs/monsters "by the book" or anything, their stats are mutable depending on what I need from them in a given encounter.

All that being said... there was one solo campaign long, long ago for which I planned out the majority of all the encounters and events ahead of time. I still consider that to be the most successful campaign I have ever run... but all that planning is WAY too time consuming for me nowadays.

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

The character's ability to choose the path of the campaign, I think, makes it absolutely necessary for the DM to improvise at least a little. If a DM isn't doing at least some things on the fly, I think that, as a player, I would feel railroaded...

I know the DM is the universe and has ultimate control over the game... but, if the characters choose to do something that isn't exactly in the cards, the DM needs to be ready to play along--even if it means making up some stuff.

 

[Cap'n Needles]

Both the games I occasionally run (D20 modern and Star Wars) quickly allows players to jump off the grid and get random real fast. Not just random syorylines but random cities and solar systems. So I start by asking for a detailed history of each character (which the players would insist on anyway), then I completely detail the first module, and make a list of short notes for the PC's. Over the course of the first module I get to know the feel of the group, and jot down minor story-arc ideas. That way, whenever the players go off the beaten path, I'm ready to improvise. Once I know the characters I can split the rest of the campaign between planned stories and improvised on the fly. My players enjoy it, and some of the more memorable games have come in improvised fashion. Depending on the group, they can feel when you're winging the detail, and the whole session can get very relaxed as the group explores the setting and background. I understand that some DM's aren't as comfortable winging it, and that's fine. Whatever style makes for the most fun is all that counts.

 

[Altalazar]

It doesn't matter to me - some of the best adventures have been improvised. There is such a thing as OVER planning.

A good DM, when led well off the planned path, is good at improvising, then after the session is over, takes time to build up the improvisation to a full-scale adventure for the next time.

 

[Morpheus]

It doesn't matter to me - some of the best adventures have been improvised. There is such a thing as OVER planning.

A good DM, when led well off the planned path, is good at improvising, then after the session is over, takes time to build up the improvisation to a full-scale adventure for the next time.

Exactly! As an example, in FotR, Gandalf asks Frodo which way they should go: the Gap of Rohan or through the Mines of Moria. Tolkien had the Gap all planned out thinking that the players would be crazy to go through the Mines. We all know what happened next. He didn't whine or complain. He just improvised and one of the greatest sequences in movie history was born.