Plot and Background for my very first adventure!

[Zappo]

The ogre skeleton is going to be a deadly combat. It deals more damage and has more attacks than either of the PCs, it can't be stunned, the cleric has little chances of turning it, and it can drop a character in one blow with a critical hit (or even a good normal hit). Unless the monk and cleric use truly smart tactics, they have good chances of dying. Unless you'd rather change it, I suggest to make sure that the PCs see it before it sees them, and see what it can do. This way, the player will think twice before charging (which the worst decision), and if he doesn't know what to do, you have an excuse to let the NPC suggest a couple of ideas - using slings to damage it from a safe position, or distracting its attention before entering the cave.

 

[nikolai]

Rather than assuming what the DM says, let us consider what he actually reveals in his post. That is, “the PC Monk returns to the Monastery.” Likewise, “the Master sends the PC Monk to the Dwarven Ruins”. Therefore, the PC has no option but to pursue these.

I think what the DM has done is fair. By creating a character with a background the player accepts that his character will have a routine which can be exploited. If I made a character in the city-guard, the DM would be entitled to have something happen on my watch, if I made a Druid Herbalist, the DM might have me blunder accross something in the woods while collecting flowers, and so on...

I think that's just a good use of character background - and good character creation. As for going to the Dwarven Ruins, it's just an NPC pointing the character in the right direction, how the character gets there, and what he does when he arrives (or whether he just runs for the hills when he realises what's happened) is up to him.

Because PC are part of the world, there's always a conspiracy between players and DM in creating a good story. The world limits the players options, and the characters limit the DMs. It's only natural that they both work together to kick off a good adventure.

 

[dreaded_beast]

Thanks for all the responses so far! They have been very informative and enlightening.

I only have 3.0 Monster Manual, so I was using the 3.0 version of the large skeleton. I called it an ogre, just in case the PC asks what type of skeleton it is. Plus someone on the boards suggested it should be an ogre skeleton so I went with it since it sounded good enough to me.

I have a lot of player experience under my belt, but virtually no DMing experience, hehe. I know that rail-roading usually isn't the way to go, but I hope that it won't "seem" like rail-roading when actually play.

I really hope that the PC does what is intended, but if worse comes to worse, I guess I can think up some background options. I was thinking about either some random encounters in the woods or if the PC decides to go to town, an encounter on the way to town or even meeting the evil Cleric on the way to town.

Now I am making the map of the Dwarven Ruins and the key for the map, but I'm not too sure if I am doing it correctly or if I have enough info down. I will post it later and hopefully you guys can tell me what you think.

Map Key to the Dwarven Ruins
http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=76863

 

[Rel]

I was under the impression that your player was a relative novice and under that circumstance I think it is better to give the player a clear objective (call it railroading if you like), at least for the first adventure.

I think the Skeleton encounter will be challenging but not insurmountable considering that they'll be relatively fresh at that point. Under 3E he's only got 13 HP and 2 attacks at +2 (albeit for 1d6+2). With 2 HD, the Cleric stands a decent chance of turning him right off the bat.

On the other hand, the Sorcerer with that Sleep spell is scary. That's essentially "save or die" city right there. Monks and Clerics tend to have good Will saves so maybe that'll be enough but I think you should be considering what happens if they both fail.

One thing that this adventure could well hinge on is whether the Monk is quietly scouting ahead of the (presumably loud) Cleric. If so, perhaps he could wind up on top of the Sorcerer before he even knows there are intruders.

I did want to add that I think you're threads and the responses to them are an excellent primer for any novice GM. We should get Mark to put these in the GM Advice thread.

In any event, good luck and let us know how it goes.

 

[dreaded_beast]

I was under the impression that your player was a relative novice and under that circumstance I think it is better to give the player a clear objective (call it railroading if you like), at least for the first adventure.

I think the Skeleton encounter will be challenging but not insurmountable considering that they'll be relatively fresh at that point. Under 3E he's only got 13 HP and 2 attacks at +2 (albeit for 1d6+2). With 2 HD, the Cleric stands a decent chance of turning him right off the bat.

On the other hand, the Sorcerer with that Sleep spell is scary. That's essentially "save or die" city right there. Monks and Clerics tend to have good Will saves so maybe that'll be enough but I think you should be considering what happens if they both fail.

One thing that this adventure could well hinge on is whether the Monk is quietly scouting ahead of the (presumably loud) Cleric. If so, perhaps he could wind up on top of the Sorcerer before he even knows there are intruders.

I did want to add that I think you're threads and the responses to them are an excellent primer for any novice GM. We should get Mark to put these in the GM Advice thread.

In any event, good luck and let us know how it goes.

You are correct when you say that the player is a novice to DND. I have played DND for a long time but never as a DM. My friend has never played before and is pretty much a novice. Sorry about the confusion.

In regards to the sleep spell, if the PC and Cleric fails, the Sorcerer will capture them and hold them hostage until the Cleric arrives. Before that occurs, I think I will have the Master of the Monastery or the Head Priest of the Shrine save them.

I didn't realize there was a GM Advice Thread! I hope I haven't been posting in the wrong areas

You've been a great help Rel and everyone else who has posted!

 

[Rel]

In regards to the sleep spell, if the PC and Cleric fails, the Sorcerer will capture them and hold them hostage until the Cleric arrives. Before that occurs, I think I will have the Master of the Monastery or the Head Priest of the Shrine save them.

This sort of Deus Ex Machina tends to get somewhat frowned upon around here. The PC's are generally supposed to be the heroes who do the rescuing rather than the ones being rescued. Some players can get a bit irate when higher level NPC's step in to bail them out of trouble. But in this particular case it may be unavoidable. The simple fact is that a solo 1st level character (even with the Cleric tagging along) has got very little safety net.

It only takes one bad roll, one missed saving throw, one critical hit by the bad guy and the PC is history. This is especially dangerous in a solo campaign if the PC has nobody who can bail him out (you've seen to this after a fashion already) or bring him back from the dead. The problem is there's no larger context provided by the rest of the party to give the game direction if one player has to make up a new character.

I think you've got basically three options here:

1) Let the chips fall where they may. This can be rewarding for the player because you know the GM is pulling no punches and whatever you get, you earned. I'm not implying an adversarial relationship between player and GM, just that the GM isn't fudging.

2) Fudging. Here you roll behind the screen and just pretend that the Ogre Skeleton did not crit the Monk for 16 points of damage on the first swing. This method is simple and complex at the same time. It is simple because you can implement it whenever you want, in whatever fashion you want, to whatever degree you want. It is complex because it makes you improvise somewhat and also because you're lying to the player about what the dice told you. If they can read you well, you need to consider how they'll feel about that.

3) "Fate Chips". There are a lot of names for this, but basically some sort of "get out of jail free card" for when really bad stuff happens. I use this myself and I like it. I hand out poker chips to the players in the (very subjective) instances where they do or say something that has us all rolling on the floor laughing. We play this game to have fun and I reward that sort of thing. They can use these chips to re-roll any die that pertains to their character be it a to-hit roll by them or against them, a saving throw, whatever.

This method has the additional benefit that you can tie it to whatever you like. Hand out a chip at the start of every session or give out one (or more) each time the character gains a level. Or have it tied to revelations the Monk has while meditating in solitude. It can be tied to the game that way or be entirely metagame. Up to you.

I recommend it heartily when running a solo campaign. There is still a risk of course (the monster might crit the PC three times in a row) but it gives a bit more safety net than usual and it alleviates any need to fudge. It might be worth considering.

 

[Joe123]

Derulbaskul said:

I read it simply as this is what is most likely to happen. Heck, I write my plots up the same way

I did not read dreaded_beast's first post by assuming events he described are the most likely to occur. He never said this, in fact. Rather, he gave clear details about what the PCs will do at the beginning of the adventure, (so specific in fact, that they are indicative of railroading). Since you devise your adventures the same way, you are guilty of the same thing.

DragonLancer said:

Lets not put words in the DM's mouth here or second guess how he's going to run it. Its easier to put "the character returns to X" or "goes to investigate X" to give us an indication have potential outcomes.

I did not put words in the DM's mouth or guess how he intended running the game. I merely gave suggestions, based solely on what he said, which I quoted word-for-word. Imagining what the player will do is one thing. However, specifically saying, "the PC Monk returns to the Monastery ... the Master sends the PC Monk to the Dwarven Ruins”, is linear and restrictive, offering the player no choices.

I will not respond to nikolai's post, which is completely untrue and not representative of how all dungeon master's run a game, in general.

dreaded_beast said:

I know that rail-roading usually isn't the way to go, but I hope that it won't "seem" like rail-roading when actually play.

It does not matter whether the players realize they are being railroaded or whether the beginning of your adventure seems like railroading to the players.The fact is that, if in the beginning you present them with only a few restrictive courses of action to pursue, they will enjoy it less.

 

[Buttercup]

I will not respond to nikolai's post, which is completely untrue and not representative of how all dungeon master's run a game, in general.

With all due respect, none of us can know how "all dungeon masters" run a game. Let's focus on giving dreaded_beast the constructive criticism he asked for, instead of getting side-tracked like this, ok?

It does not matter whether the players realize they are being railroaded or whether the beginning of your adventure seems like railroading to the players.The fact is that, if in the beginning you present them with only a few restrictive courses of action to pursue, they will enjoy it less.

This is another generalization that, like all generalizations, isn't true. I have run sessions for newbie players who want and need the direction that more experienced players would consider railroading. For a player who is completely new to D&D, as this one is, and especially for a player who only has experience with the more linear CRPG, giving them a clear course of action to start is the best way to help them get their feet wet. And that means, the best way to help them have fun.

There is plenty of time to open out the world and the possible choices once the player has a few sessions under his belt.

 

[Joe123]

Buttercup said:

I have run sessions for newbie players who want and need the direction that more experienced players would consider railroading

New players can desire direction in following a path. It is the DM’s job, in turn, to explain that they have and should exercise choice. This is mainly what separates D&D from a computer game, which in its entirety cannot provide the breadth of options D&D can. If you permit even beginning players to cling to a DM’s narrow, linear and restrictive offering of choices at the beginning of the adventure, you foster a bad habit within the player.

This always short-changes them out the fun all players enjoy in having and making decisions about what to do, on their own. The DMG (page 99), is very clear about this – about the capacity for the player to have choices to make, essentially necessary for a good game.

Regarding this fallacious statement:

Let's focus on giving dreaded_beast the constructive criticism he asked for, instead of getting side-tracked like this,

… I will let dreaded_beast make his mind up about whether my advice is constructive. I believe it is.

 

[Derulbaskul]

I did not read dreaded_beast's first post by assuming events he described are the most likely to occur. He never said this, in fact. Rather, he gave clear details about what the PCs will do at the beginning of the adventure, (so specific in fact, that they are indicative of railroading). Since you devise your adventures the same way, you are guilty of the same thing. (snip)

Re-read what I typed.

Wow, pronounced guilty on a messageboard. Now there's a badge of shame....