Would you quit a game if....

[JamesonCourage]

Since that almost happened in my game, I'm not really sure about your concept of denying them storylines. Exactly what you use as an example did almost happen.

So...I'm afraid I still don't understand your point on this.

If he did stand his ground, and you did intervene with a backup plan or contingency, you'd be exchanging one story arc for another. That's fine in one set of games, but not in another. It's fine when I expect it (as with my brother's games), and not when I don't expect it (players who play my game).

Interesting. From time to time, over the years, I've let on, here and there, with some players about things like this. I never heard a negative word about it. In fact, the few times I let the cat out of the bag (I usually keep it quite closed), I was slapped on the back for a job well done--the player really feeling the feelings his character experienced, usually because of a Meta-game trick or lie.

Whereas my players take great pride in knowing that they "earned" each and every bit of each and every victory they ever won. If they later found out "I fudged this part to keep the game going" then that victory would feel a little hollow to them. It's just a taste thing.

Never. And, sometimes.

I've had a lot of success with the Meta-game lying bit, as well.

No doubt. My brother puts on the front of "you coulda died there!" when we know that we lived because the evil magician betrayed the bad guys mid-fight (when we started losing). We're used to it from him, and we play the game knowing it'll happen. As I said, though, while it's tons of fun for all of us, my players prefer my game to his. I think the concept of "earning" each victory -and the real world feeling of pride- has a lot to do with it.

I semi-sorta do that, too. Depends on the situation.

I mean, for the campaign's first big quest, the PCs are chasing the missing girl, right? These are 15 and 16 year olds, not yet recognized as adult warriors by the clan.

What would you do for them?

I wouldn't have a "first big quest" personally. I play it pretty much straight sandbox. Whatever they want to look into, they can (with varying degrees of success). I don't use adventure paths or modules, I don't craft adventure plots, or the like.

How would you have handled a game with two 1st level PCs?

I'd let them look into whatever they wanted to. If they heard about some political intrigue, they can try to insert themselves. If they hear about the dozen and a half cave beasts harassing or killing slaves in the north, they can look into it. If they want to explore the Serpantlands in search of a big carcass to bring back, they can look into it. If they want to start up a fishing company, I'm actually cool with that, too.

It's really up to them. My players would make the call, not me. They'd probably look into people teaching them, as of that level. They're decidedly below the average hit die in the setting (which is about hit die 4), so they'd likely look for strong mentors who they could suck up to for protection/teachings. As always, play what you like

 

[Water Bob]

I don't do that much work as a DM.

I wouldn't have a "first big quest" personally. I play it pretty much straight sandbox. Whatever they want to look into, they can (with varying degrees of success). I don't use adventure paths or modules, I don't craft adventure plots, or the like.

Well, both of you must be much better at ad-libbing than I am. Plus, I'm learning a new rule set. I bet you've been playing your games for years with the same rules.

Preparation is the key to a great game session in my games.

And, I tend to be very story-oriented. Making up cool, convincing stories takes time. At least, it takes me a lot of time.

Creating the sandbox is a real job. I do think that published adventures and APs are easier to GM...they take me a lot less time. Editing is always easier for me than creating.

As I get more familiar with the game system, I'm sure I'll be more comfortable ad-libbing impromptu encounters.

As it stands now, I usually go into a game with a pre-set order of encounters that I think will happen. Now, many times, the players do not go or do what I had planned. And, that's good. I like that. Keeps me from becoming bored. As for the work, I just recycle it--I don't like to waste prep effort.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Well, both of you must be much better at ad-libbing than I am. Plus, I'm learning a new rule set. I bet you've been playing your games for years with the same rules.

I have some advantages, yeah.

1) I've done it this way since I started GMing, and my brother, who I played under for years beforehand, always did it this way.
2) I made the rules for the system we use.
3) I've not only played with most of the group for years, the majority have been very close friends for 10-13 years.

Creating the sandbox is a real job. I do think that published adventures and APs are easier to GM...they take me a lot less time. Editing is always easier for me than creating.

For me, when I've looked over modules, adventures, or settings, I've always thought it must be so much work to run, as crazy as that sounds. I need to learn NPC names, I need to learn political areas and how they interconnect and interact. I need to learn about the races, maybe their history, etc. There's a lot of learning that needs to be done.

I can make a decent colored map for an entire region in an hour, write up some guidelines on the style of nations, name them all, etc. I'll have it all done within three hours, most likely, and I'll be very familiar with them. I only need to learn it once, too. Any of my preferences are already plugged in. I can make interesting terrain, like passes or straits, not to mention firelands, enchanted or haunted forests, etc.

I realize you said you can just edit these things, but I can simply name an area "the serpantlands" and there's an expectation there as to what you'll find. The same for the place on the map named the Wraith Forest, or the Spider Wastes, or the Cave Hills, or Giant's Green, etc.

It's really easy for me to remember things I make up, rather than things I read about. I don't have to reference books, stat blocks, and the like. I can just follow the God Document (a couple pages of "if someone is this hit die [and here's what hit die means], and they're this invested in a skill set, they're this good). I can even look at a quick NPC template to give me all of this already:[sblock]Warrior
Soldier, mercenary, bandit.
Str: P, Dex: S, Con: S, Int: T, Wis: T, Cha: T
HP: Interested, THP: Hobby
Skills: Assess: Interested, Martial Prowess: Interested, Profession: Interested, Tactics: Interested
Fort: Hobby, Ref: Hobby, Will: Hobby, Ini: Hobby
Melee Attack/Damage: Professionally Skilled / Professionally Skilled
Ranged Attack/Damage: Interested / Interested
ACvM: Professionally Skilled, ACvR: Professionally Skilled
CMA: Professionally Skilled, CMD: Professionally Skilled[/sblock]If I plug in hit die 4 (described as "the average settled adult"), I get this: [sblock]Warrior
Soldier, mercenary, bandit.
Str: 18, Dex: 16, Con: 17, Int: 11, Wis: 10, Cha: 10
HP: 15, THP: 10
Skills: Assess: +5, Martial Prowess: +5, Profession (guard [or whatever]): +5, Tactics: +5
Fort: +5, Ref: +5, Will: +5, Ini: +3
Melee Attack/Damage: Longsword +7 / 1d10+12
Ranged Attack/Damage: Heavy Crossbow +5 / 1d8+8
ACvM: Longsword +7 / 1d10+12, ACvR: 18
CMA: +14, CMD: +14[/sblock]That's easy to check during combat without writing it up. I just plugged in the numbers. If I think they're fighting an average settled adult warrior, I look at the initiative bonus when we roll for it. When he's attacking, I look at his attack bonus for his hit die. Etc. Makes it really easy to do whatever on the fly.

As I get more familiar with the game system, I'm sure I'll be more comfortable ad-libbing impromptu encounters.

I think that's normal.

As it stands now, I usually go into a game with a pre-set order of encounters that I think will happen. Now, many times, the players do not go or do what I had planned. And, that's good. I like that. Keeps me from becoming bored. As for the work, I just recycle it--I don't like to waste prep effort.

I think that many people go for this method when they're running a game. As always, play what you like

 

[Hussar]

Just as a point, I do this regardless of how familiar I am with a system. I spent the year before last year or so hopping lots of systems and I've now been DMing off and on 4e for the past year. I am hardly a system devotee.

Like you, I like story based games. I just like it better when the players hand me the first draft of the story.

 

[haakon1]

I can retell the story of Bear

Good story.

Just in case you've never heard the Roman story of Horatio at the Bridge:
Horatius Cocles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I had not heard that one! My inspiration were the stories of Roland in the mountain passes and the 300.

 

[S'mon]

My Southlands Sword & Sorcery campaign ended last night with a '300' style last stand at the Bisgen Bridge against a thousand ghouls and their Necromancer commander, a Prince of Nerath Restored:

The Southlands Campaign: 4e D&D in the Wilderlands: Southlands Campaign Timeline

S20 Night Day 44 29/7/4434
Bisgen's defense of the north wall has been led by Gurstang, a Skandik Paladin of Mitra. Parre leads Varek, Eldrin Halfelven, and Gurstang with a force of her veteran Lancers to hold the bridge against the onrushing Ghoul horde. They fight fiercely, but the ghoul horde is hundreds strong and supported by the vampire lord Nexull and by Boritt Crowfinger, whose death magic roots Varek to the spot. First Gurstang falls, then Varek. Then Parre is overwhelmed. Eldrin, the last one standing, is on the bridge amidst a sea of ghouls when the masons finish their work and the bridge collapses, sweeping him and several ghouls into the deadly torrent.
The ghoul horde is trapped on the north side of the river, and Parre has already given the order to abandon the town. With Tal Lorvas and his Dread Warriors miles to the south pursuing the retreating Altanian barbarians towards the Onslaught Stream the people of Bisgen flee east, screened by their remaining soldiers, towards Winged Ape Clan territory. The future will be harsh and uncertain for them, but they evade the armies of the dead. As dawn rises over the eastern mountains, with the noble Rameses now Clan Chief of the Winged Ape it seems likely that many will survive.
Tal Lorvas at last returns to meet his old master, Borritt Crowfinger, in the semi-ruined city of Bisgen. The new capital of Restored Nerath is now a ghost town, where only the dead walk...

There was a chance of it going more like Horatio on the bridge at Rome, but the PCs deployed too far forward, allowing the ghoul horde to attack them from three directions instead of just one. It did make for a suitably epic three-hour final battle.

 

[Water Bob]

My Southlands Sword & Sorcery campaign ended last night with a '300' style last stand at the Bisgen Bridge against a thousand ghouls and their Necromancer commander, a Prince of Nerath Restored:

Now, that sounds like my kind of game!

 

[Zhaleskra]

Anecdote from the most recent GURPS session I was in (Sunday, April 1). The party is down a hole rooting out giant scorpions that attacked the city. We make waste of the first chamber, follow a tunnel, and encounter the queen and three diggers. Another fight. My character, had only 5 hits after being healed from the previous fight. Takes another hit for 3 damage. Later . . . digger scorpion gets a natural 3 (automatic critical) on Arzuk. My character is at -25 HP, is currently in a coma, and is going to lose his left leg. This will make most of his weapon skills take a -6 penalty and reduce his movement to 2 if he uses a peg leg or crutches.

 

[haakon1]

Lots of good stories . . . bridges and the 300.