NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 8997983" data-attributes="member: 93670">In an effort to get back on topic I want to talk about the TCoE session zero rules mentioned by Perkins.  They are on page 139 v& pretty much continue on to 141 with various related tangents.  On more than one occasion I've gone to look for those rules because someone mentioned them, but each time I'm quickly reminded "oh yea, I scrobbed them from my memory because they are  useless to me as a GM".  I might even be giving them too much credit there because I spent a while trying to decide if they are actively harmful or just needlessly hostile but decided it's close enough that they are just useless.Through those pages the GM is given the following responsibilities:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">As the DM, youcan help players during the character creation process by advising them to select options that will serve the adventure or campaign that awaits.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The players are under no obligation to work with you, have no guidance on doing so, & even have character creation rules in the PHB  that don't even bother to mention working with anyone until a character is gfully built.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Each player has options when it comes to choosing a character race, class, and background, though you mayrestrict certain options that are deemed unsuitable for the campaign.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Same problem as before but worse.  You as the GM need to either strictly limit or foresee any possible clash & squash it now even though players have nothing encouraging them to work with you or describe how they might do so during chargen</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If there are multiple players in the group, youshould encourage them to choose different classes so that the adventuring party has a range of abilities.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">No.  Just no... 5e was made so every character is a one man army with isekai main character plot armor levels over the top skills abilities & insulation from risk.  I can't encourage it because players have no pressure to do so and nothing telling them how they might do so.  I'm tired of trying to push this only to have most or all of the group go mute, open their books, & start following "chapter 1: step by step character creation" in silent isolation as described in RAW.  This isn't something the GM can accomplish with so little support we have players using a core rulebook actively working against the GM's efforts.  Even more frustrating here is that back in 2e & 3.x players would often actively engage in this unprompted because they wanted to make sure their weaknesses  were covered by someone else in the group, it was just common sense that the tank would make sure someone could heal them & the controller would make sure someone could make use of their controlled targets & so on with the healer glass cannon rogue & so on.  PCs don't have weaknesses they feel pressure to be worried about getting hung out to dry anymore & the player facing rules don't even hint at doing it.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">you should work with the player to decide who that generous benefactor is and build relevant storylines into the larger campaign.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This is a reference to a BIFT based example of ""I'm trying to pay off an old debt I owe to a generous benefactor" but it's a mess for several reasons.  I have 5 players barely working with me & some of them only doing it in hopes of invoking rule zero to gain extra abilities   like whatever is linked to the generous benefactor... I don't have the ability to weave in five of these kind of threads at this point because none of those five are making any effort to work with each other at this point. Worse than those reasons is the fact that players are one hundred percent free to simply <a href="https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoSell" target="_blank">nosell</a> anything related to this if I do bring it up.... Even if that nosell would result in burned bridges the players have PCs that don't actually need anything that might be put in the lurch & the GM has no fate compel type tools that might be able to at least patch a prepped adventure linked to such a thing.  Don't relegate the GM to the role of author for a player's self insert fanfic if the  Players are not discouraged from ignoring the hooks or even slightly pressured to bite the hook. No this is not a case of "give your players what they want" or "you & your players need to agree on the type of campaign" because the GM has multiple players in no way pressured to work together. Not only that the players come to the session zero & zero+N primed by a PHB to believe that they are The Main Character surrounded by sidekicks who have the job of getting with The Main Character's story.. "D&D is about telling your story" & all that. A player should write a book if they want to tell a story because the order of operations is GM describes ->players react. With that order a story forms through the events that develop & choices made not by a player telling it</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">During session zero, your role is to let the players build the characters theywant and to help them come up with explanations for how their characters came together to form an adventuring party.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">How about a player facing section about how they need to work with the GM to fit the GM's world campaign & so forth rather than just stonewalling & trying to work in loopholes to get things the GM said no to or a section on how it's important for the player to remember this kind of stuff & act as if it remains the case rather than just <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZknKIWDA1XU" target="_blank">ignore it</a></li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Here are some questions you can ask the players as they create characters to get a sense of the party's relationships: • Are any of the characters related to each other? • What keeps the characters together as a party? • What does each character like most about every other member of the adventuring party? • Does the group have a patron? See chapter 2, "Group Patrons," for patron examples.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Again everything from the last point still applies, the GM is still in a position where they need to fight the PHB in a ryuleset that provides no pressures for the players to actively participate on this rather than just saying whatever needs saying to convince the GM to let them continue by making characters in isolation & throwing their backstories at the GM.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If the players are having trouble coming up with a story for how their characters met, they may choose an option from the Party Origin table or let a d6 roll choose it for them. You should spend part of session zero helping the players flesh out the details. For example, if the characters came together to overcome a common foe, the identity of this enemy needs to be determined. If a funeral gathered the group, the identity of the deceased and each character's relationship to them will need to be fleshed out.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Don't just dump this on the GM & walk away without player facing guidance here.  The GM has very little control over this and this is a system that makes efforts to defang any risks that could be associated with doing this poorly or simply ignoring it on a later session.  The bulk of this text needs to be player facing not aimed at the GM.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Session zero is the perfect time for you and the players to discuss the experience they're hoping for, as well as topics, themes, and behavior they deem inappropriate.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It's hard to be more blatant with telling the GM to just give the players what they want  and do your <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W90bIdMHqMQ&t=107s" target="_blank">job</a> without actually saying it.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"></li> </ul></li> </ul>At no point are the players encouraged to work with the GM or accept the fact that sometimes the GM might need to make changes not covered during a session zero doctoral thesis presentation because one or more players forced their hand.  You as the GM need to cover every possible thing during session zero without losing player interest or allowing unexpected loopholes/problematic cracks & plsyers are under no obligation to really work with you.That goes on & on in a loop like that with all of the responsibility put on the GM's shoulders.  The only exception is these [spoiler="two player responsibilities"]The players will respect you and the effort it takes to create a fun game for everyone. The players will allow you to direct the campaign, arbitrate the rules, and settle arguments. When you are talking, the players are listening. • The players will respect one another, listen to one another, support one another, and do their utmost to preserve the cohesion of the adventuring party. [/spoiler]Players are not directed to help or work with the GM on any of that... just sit back and "allow" the GM to do it all because they showed up to be The Star.That's not a reasonable or even useful section of GM facing text. Experienced GMs can handle those things easily enough given active player participation & doesn't need to be told such vague generalities.  Inexperienced GMs need advice on  handling it.  Both types of GMs need players who are amenable to actively working with them in good faith because much of it is areas where the GM has very little control or say over things the players can't simply ignore later, getting players to that state is where the bulk of the Session Zero  text needs to lie. This couple pages in TCoE may as well be a tvtropes or wikipedia entry intended for a hostile GM who doesn't understand why they are toxic.</blockquote>

Verification