What Makes a Convention Game Great?

[Pbartender]

- Pacing. Don't hesitate to sacrifice encounters just so you can get to the good stuff. I'd much rather skip a minor combat encounter if it means I get to the end of the adventure! Talking about pulp gangster novels, Raymond Chandler wrote, "When in doubt, have a man come through the door with a gun in his hand." It's great advice; before things get boring, introduce time pressure or some sort of conflict. that way the session never drags.

This reminded me of something I do for the adventures I build for the Chicago Gamedays.

PC talks about skipping minor combat encounters to get to the end of an adventure, but lately I've been looking at it from the other end of the rope... That is to say, tossing in an extra minor encounter to fill in for time.

So, I'll take a similar tack to PC, and plan out no more than three major encounters that are essential to the plot, and nothing else. Then I come up with a half dozen short encounters -- and not always combat encoutners -- that are fun and can tie in to the adventure setting and plot, but are not necessary to the completion of the adventure.

That way, if the players are blowing through the adventure or are sitting around looking bored, I've already got the proverbial man with a gun ready to come through the door. If things are going smoothly, I just set them aside and don't include them.

The great thing, is that depending on which extra encounters I toss in, and depending on how the players handle them, the adventure is significantly different every time I run it.

 

[Matchstick]

Great thread idea QueenD, I have been thinking about starting a thread like this since I got back. I feel like I've been all take take take with no give, so I'm really going to try and run a game next year, and this will be very valuable info.

Is rules lite better? In other words, is D&D better than something like Iron Heroes with all its stunts? Or would Iron Heroes Lite be OK? Do the rules fall under the "less is more" theory? I would think so.

 

[froggie]

Pirate Cat...a book?

on how to DM?...interesting

 

[Rystil Arden]

Great thread idea QueenD, I have been thinking about starting a thread like this since I got back. I feel like I've been all take take take with no give, so I'm really going to try and run a game next year, and this will be very valuable info.

Is rules lite better? In other words, is D&D better than something like Iron Heroes with all its stunts? Or would Iron Heroes Lite be OK? Do the rules fall under the "less is more" theory? I would think so.

Based on our experience with my IH one-shot attempt, I would say that something that is not rules-lite and adds complexity for the players (like IH) is tricky unless everyone knows how to play already, based on how long we had to spend explaining. Something of equal complexity that places the complexity in the GM's hands instead is probably a safer idea.

 

[Piratecat]

Well, this thread has inspired me. Next year at GenCon I'm going to run four games.

Two will be Feng Shui, high calibre action movie blowing-the-crap-out-of-things for people who want glorious cinematic destruction.

The other two will be run by KidCthulhu and I acting as co-DMs, and I think will be something I've never tried before: the whole D&D party as highly competent and experienced con-men who actually have a chance to put one over on the NPCs. Could be glorious, could be an unmitigated disaster, and with the right group we expect to be scrambling as they totally out-maneuver us... I can't wait!

 

[Piratecat]

The other side of the coin: Gothmog's How to organize excellent rpg campaigns.

 

[Matchstick]

Based on our experience with my IH one-shot attempt, I would say that something that is not rules-lite and adds complexity for the players (like IH) is tricky unless everyone knows how to play already, based on how long we had to spend explaining. Something of equal complexity that places the complexity in the GM's hands instead is probably a safer idea.

That was what I was thinking about too. IH is certainly more complicated than straight up D&D, but I think that an emphasis on the theatrical action might lend itself well to a con game. I was thinking about the demo game that I had played last year, and how they had a sheet that listed all the offensive and defensive options an IH character has in combat.

Perhaps emphasizing those options and de-emphasizing the use of feats/skills as much as possible (or just including them in figured stats, or summarizing them for the player) might lend itself more to a con type game. It would be simplifying IH for sure. It also might lower the learning curve, because in a lot of ways it would be D&D with the additional combat actions, and everyone could handle that.

Skills could be written out in more D&D fashion ahead of time, obviating the need to learn about skill groups etc. Feats could perhaps be super summarized on char sheets.

Dunno, still thinking about this...

 

[Henry]

Skills could be written out in more D&D fashion ahead of time, obviating the need to learn about skill groups etc. Feats could perhaps be super summarized on char sheets.

One thing I've found: The more complex the system, aim for lower-level characters. If you have lots of sub-systems to try, aim for a one-shot with, say, 1st to 4th level characters, rather than 6th to 12th. If the game is pretty familiar to people, then you can think about higher level.

In general, I try not to build a character with more than five or six abilities that are non-standard or complicated, and use that as my guide to what level they should be. If it were something like Grim Tales, anyone familiar with d20 modern is familiar with 75% of the rules there. For Mutants and Masterminds, my PL 10 pre-gens would have three or four powers, not an array of ten different ones necessarily.

On the other hand, my Spycraft demo had the characters at 5th level, just outside of the 6th level feats, for a total of about six or 8 things they could do, and one or two of those intentionally pretty straight-laced, like lightning reflexes or similar. A good game should ideally be attractive at any level of play, from 1st to whatever, from green characters to experienced ones, so lower level shouldn't be a burden.

 

[sniffles]

This is a little tangential to the topic, so I hope you'll forgive me. But I've never been to a gaming con. I've always thought that playing a game with a bunch of total strangers would be, well, not much fun. I don't like the idea of having no control over who I'm playing with. But from the descriptions of most games at Gen Con, it sounds like my assumptions may be way off. Is it the element of surprise that makes these games so much fun?

I'm also wondering: does Gen Con offer 'adults only' games? I don't mean in the sense of sexuality or profanity allowed; I mean games during daytime hours that only allow adults to play, even if the game itself is perfectly innocuous. I'd be more comfortable sitting at a table full of tarantulas than a table full of kids, so the concern about having to share my time with children is a big deterrent to me in trying out con gaming experiences. Do there tend to be a lot of kids at the game tables?

 

[mcrow]

This is a little tangential to the topic, so I hope you'll forgive me. But I've never been to a gaming con. I've always thought that playing a game with a bunch of total strangers would be, well, not much fun. I don't like the idea of having no control over who I'm playing with. But from the descriptions of most games at Gen Con, it sounds like my assumptions may be way off. Is it the element of surprise that makes these games so much fun?

I'm also wondering: does Gen Con offer 'adults only' games? I don't mean in the sense of sexuality or profanity allowed; I mean games during daytime hours that only allow adults to play, even if the game itself is perfectly innocuous. I'd be more comfortable sitting at a table full of tarantulas than a table full of kids, so the concern about having to share my time with children is a big deterrent to me in trying out con gaming experiences. Do there tend to be a lot of kids at the game tables?

Most of the Con games I have played in had fully adult player parties. Now, many of them were young adults 17-21 but still adults. Don't be put off by kids playing to much, some kids are really great RPers.