Players: it's your responsibility to carry a story.

[Neonchameleon]

I've struggled with this as a player, but especially as GM - it seems like crunch-heavy systems suck up mental energy I'd otherwise be using for fun roleplaying & creativity.

To me, crunch both gives and takes away. The longer something takes to calculate (and looking up is worse - I'm looking at you, Rolemaster), the more it takes from creativity. On the other hand, crunch can give back a lot in fluff - again, Rolemaster's injury tables - or the pushes, pulls, and slides in 4e. And those give hooks to hang creativity on in a way that not having them wouldn't.

What causes problems for me is when there's a distinction without a significant difference - i.e. the differences take too long and too much brainpower to resolve for only minor differences in results (spending any time to resolve something utterly irrelevant comes under this heading). Or when the ruleset ties you to doing something that isn't how your character would act.

 

[Lanefan]

I am not sure I entirely agree, although I can see groups of players making such a decision. But do you think this is still true when the party has access to spells like teleport and plane shift, which really open up their travel options?

Yes. Even more so, as they can now get to/from the biggest city more easily.

Also, is it necessarily a bad thing for the party to form an association with a town, regardless of its size?

Not at all. I've just learned from experience that if I spend design time fleshing out the town where they start (thinking that'll become their home base) it'll go to waste if there's a bigger city anywhere on the map; because that's inevitably where they'll end up.

Lanefan

 

[InVinoVeritas]

Yes. Even more so, as they can now get to/from the biggest city more easily.

Not at all. I've just learned from experience that if I spend design time fleshing out the town where they start (thinking that'll become their home base) it'll go to waste if there's a bigger city anywhere on the map; because that's inevitably where they'll end up.

Lanefan

Have you ever just killed Ye Olde Magick Shoppe? Getting rid of the magic shop does wonders to help people not seek out big cities--because, suddenly, they don't need to, mostly.

Then again, maybe your players are just the big-city type. Myself, I prefer the countryside.

 

[Negflar2099]

I can only speak to my own experience but as a person who has DM'd nearly every game he's ever been in (and I've been in a lot of games) my experience matches the OP's pretty closely.

That's not to say I haven't had players who are real leaders who either take the game in an interesting direction I didn't anticipate (which is great with me as long as something is happening) or they follow the clues I've laid out, pick a hook and run with it. Those players are great and not all the rare. The problem is when they do that other players complain, saying that they feel like they have no say in the game. Yet those complaining players never state their opinions and when asked just shrug their shoulders.

So to recap my players don't want sandboxes because most of them will just sit there for hours just doing nothing, but they don't want hooks because they don't want to be railroaded and they don't want a player to take charge because then they feel like they are not getting any say.

Sometimes being a DM just doesn't pay.

 

[Dausuul]

The problem is when they do that other players complain, saying that they feel like they have no say in the game. Yet those complaining players never state their opinions and when asked just shrug their shoulders.

Ugh. My reaction would be, "Bob here has a plan, so I'm gonna run an adventure for him. If you don't want to come, your characters are free to sit in town."

 

[DumbPaladin]

I've just learned from experience that if I spend design time fleshing out the town where they start (thinking that'll become their home base) it'll go to waste if there's a bigger city anywhere on the map; because that's inevitably where they'll end up.

Lanefan

I can understand where you are coming from. In that instance, it really is a group dynamic issue: our group likes the little hamlet we started in, but we've been all over the place. In fact, we avoid the capital city because of all the backstabbing politics that go on there. There's too much moral ambiguity in the big city for a little country paladin like my character is.

But you know, there are ALWAYS terrible things that can befall the big city ... or the heroes can simply be framed for something they haven't done, and have to find a new base of operations tout suite.

I think the idea of Ye Olde Magick Shoppe going KABOOM is good too.

 

[Lanefan]

Have you ever just killed Ye Olde Magick Shoppe? Getting rid of the magic shop does wonders to help people not seek out big cities--because, suddenly, they don't need to, mostly.

Problem is, they do. Not because they need to buy stuff (though to a certain extent they can, in my games), but because they need to sell it. And this isn't limited to magic items; a party might loot a dungeon and come out with a couple of minor magic items but also have about 20K g.p. worth of art, tapestries, and statuary that is only of any use to them if they can liquidate it into cash. Cities are good for this.

In my current campaign I've sort-of solved it by a) making the biggest city rather dangerous, b) putting the second-biggest city somewhat out of the way, and c) putting enough smaller cities that can handle a treasury into the setting that the party have some choice where to go and thus don't feel they have to always go to the biggest places to sort a treasury out. Result so far: they seem to be making a base out of a smaller town out toward the frontier, even though it too is now a bit removed from where most of the adventuring is taking place. (I fully expect they'll end up with two or three or even four towns and cities they call "home" once they get long-range transport, and flit back and forth between them)

Lan-"I stole a statue once. It turned me into an earthworm"-efan

 

[InVinoVeritas]

Problem is, they do. Not because they need to buy stuff (though to a certain extent they can, in my games), but because they need to sell it. And this isn't limited to magic items; a party might loot a dungeon and come out with a couple of minor magic items but also have about 20K g.p. worth of art, tapestries, and statuary that is only of any use to them if they can liquidate it into cash. Cities are good for this.

Sure, but what are they purchasing that requires that level of liquidity? Since the value of the objets d'art is set and (probably) does not fluctuate, then the lower liquidity of the art only comes into play if the PCs need coin for small transactions, that they do not otherwise have. Personally, I would be tempted to leave an artwork in my possession as an artwork until I need a buyer so as to fund another purchase, and then I would first see if the seller will accept the art at face value. A bag of coin, on the other hand, offers me no rate of return or stability over the artwork. Heck, for portability reasons, I carry gems all the time.

...but that's just the castle-building dreamer and finance professional in me. If I don't need the cash, I'd rather decorate my digs with my trophies.

 

[DumbPaladin]

This is a very good observation. I have a friend that DMs a game where he is upset his players are becoming more and more withdrawn.

He has a style of DMing where most of the encounters are more powerful than the party and seek to humiliate or put down the party.

[snip]

his DMing style is so out of date for today's players, I just don't know what to tell him that won't hurt his feelings.

Is he friends with these players? Whether he is or not, he's going to lose his group eventually. My first DM was this type of person, and I and another gamer left after we'd had enough of it. Sure, he found some new people, but he also lost two friends.

If you are his friend, wouldn't you prefer he not have his entire group dissolve before his eyes someday? I think this DM will ultimately appreciate that you were willing to say something hard to say in order to better him as a person -- and as a DM.

 

[Lanefan]

Sure, but what are they purchasing that requires that level of liquidity? Since the value of the objets d'art is set and (probably) does not fluctuate, then the lower liquidity of the art only comes into play if the PCs need coin for small transactions, that they do not otherwise have. Personally, I would be tempted to leave an artwork in my possession as an artwork until I need a buyer so as to fund another purchase, and then I would first see if the seller will accept the art at face value. A bag of coin, on the other hand, offers me no rate of return or stability over the artwork. Heck, for portability reasons, I carry gems all the time.

...but that's just the castle-building dreamer and finance professional in me. If I don't need the cash, I'd rather decorate my digs with my trophies.

Fair enough, but you gotta pay for the digs somehow. A bag of art ain't much good if you only have a ratty old tent to show it off in.

Where else does money go?

Magic item buying and selling is fine in my game; there's never any guarantee you'll be able to find what you want, but sometimes it happens and when it does you need ready cash. It's also possible to commission construction of an item if you're willing to wait half a year or more for it to get done.

I have training-at-level-up in my game, and training can be costly.

If you're a wizard type you're going to want to pick up new spells, and they don't come cheap.

Raises, resurrections, restorations, and other Fixing of Bad Stuff.

Lanefan