Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="marelion" data-source="post: 5846991" data-attributes="member: 6679828">I totally agree with UngeheuerLich.I think the game could use something like a "Beginning Tier", too. Said Beginner tier would feature the aqquirement of class skills and basic equippment. It could feel a bit like Candlekeep in BG I: It was basically 'Get to know your interface' and I do think that beginners might want to do that in a P&P-game as well. I`ve seen quite a nouber of first-timers in my games and 90% of them felt overwhelmed by the options they had available, despite my efforts as a GM to make it as accessible as possible. I would actually split Level 1 into sub-levels, but I`m not sure what would be a good number for those. I`d suggest that two levels might be about right: The first sublevel would feature your basic attacks and racial features, while the second introduces you to spellpreparation/final choice of spells, feats and equipment. And yes, I have included feats in sublevel 2 because I think you should get to know your basic options before deceiding on a focus.After 2-3 seessions most beginners had succesfully accomodated to RPGs but I`ve seen many players who would prefer to switch their class/race/feats/powers after those few sessions because they had initially thought their character would play differently or because something else has struck their fancy they had not disciovered at their first look at the PHB("What? There are lycanthropes? Had I known there are shifters I would have chosen to play as one of those!")Including such a tutorial tier would hence give players the chance to experiment with their options and they would not have to settle for something before fully understanding what their choice means. And it would be advantageous for GMs as well: The classic "Kill the rats in my granary" sort-of-quests you give to complete beginners are easily designed and allow the GM to attune his style to the group`s preferences. And by the end of the tier players and GM alike will have spent some time together to see how it works out and if the chemistry in the group is right for a heroic campaign. I`ve seen some GMs get upset because the players subtely revolted against the carefully designed plotrails. Nearly all groups I have ever played in have done a players`expectancies-session at the beginning, but in most cases those were pretty fruitless because of  communication problems. For example, in my current group my GM told me he was totally into method-acting and since I absolutely love that I designed a charcter with a really detailled  background and a precisely defined personality. After two or three sessions I came to realize that his idea of acting out a character is have them sit down in a pub and bolster with their heroic exploits, but not so much on having an agenda or adding another layer of complexity to the game by holding to principles. For my GM, the focus was more on the group experience and on telling an epic story and not so much on character development and he didn`t like to see interparty conflict, which arose when the rogue in our group killed a goblin my Tempus cleric had declared a prisoner of war. This can cause a lot of frustration, so it is generally a good idea to get to know your players before designing the whole campaign. This way you have the option of pulling the switches early enough and setting your players back on the plotroad to fun.If you`re starting with a bunch of veterans you could skip this tutorial tier without risking sensory overload when the players take a first glance at their character sheets to start their heroic campaign and start at level 1 with mildly competent adventurers.</blockquote>

Verification