tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26242442421177010702024-03-13T09:54:25.875-04:00Reality RefractedRants, Ramblings, and Essays on Gaming and RPGs
<br><br>
Also on Game and Story Design
<br><br>
Contact <a href="mailto:blog@realityrefracted.com">Here</a>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.comBlogger2175125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-26910383253222829842021-01-08T00:00:00.002-05:002021-01-08T00:00:04.878-05:00Eleven Years! That's Probably Long Enough...<p> This blog began in January of 2010. It moved to Blogger on January 10th I believe but started before that. The nice thing about starting in 2010 is it makes tracking the age of the blog really easy.</p><p>I started this blog because I figured I could write about running games more or less endlessly. After 11 years I've more or less proved that, even if I have recovered some topics from time to time. However, I am also thinking that 11 years is also a good run and I may - officially - leave it at that.</p><p>I never did this for an audience or a following. I hoped it could be a helpful tool for other people. I hoped it could be a place for discussion. And at times it was that and that was awesome. However, blogs were starting to be on the way out way back in 2010 when I started, and now it feels like even their successor in podcasts and vlogging is nearing that point of oversaturation. </p><p>On top of that, while I still love gaming, and running games, and talking about games, my life is very different. I don't always have time. I'm missing more posts. It sometimes feels more like a chore than a fun thing to do to write posts, and that is increasing.</p><p>This isn't to say I will never update the blog. I've done this for 11 years, for all I know I mean to stop but will keep posting. There will also be times when I want to break things down for myself. It's entirely possible I'll take a break and maybe try to come back with a different format or structure.</p><p>For now though, I'm going to hang it up. The blog will hang around. The posts will hang around. I just won't be reliably updating it. </p><p>Thank you to everyone who has contributed or just read some of the posts. I hope I gave you a new perspective to look at things with. And I hope you have fun in all your future games.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-2443801433757113552021-01-04T00:00:00.001-05:002021-01-04T00:00:06.017-05:00Reading People - Insight & Insight Type Skills<p> There are moments that happen in works of fiction where one character reads another character like a book. A conversation happens, and as the characters separate one explains a whole slew of things they took from the conversation that were never discussed. To the viewer it looks like they discussed a grocery trip. However, from discussing that grocery trip the hero - or sometimes villain - knows that the secret plan kicks off on Tuesday and starts at Steve's house. How do they do that?</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>While my above example is hyperbolic, it hopefully go the point across. Most systems have a way of pulling something like that off, and it comes in the form of whatever skill covers reading a person. In D&D 5e this is the 'Insight' skill. In Legend of the Five Rings (at least before their 5e) it was the Courtier skill. I believe the Dark Heresy system uses Scrutiny, while FFG's Star Wars uses several skills for everything depending on the character's approach and the situation.<p></p><p>These skills cover the ability of the characters to read people, but there are two common problems I find most games - and groups - run into.</p><p>1. How do I know when I should be using this skill?</p><p>2. What can I discern from interacting with someone?</p><p><b>How Do I Know When?</b><br />The normal answer - and the one most systems have - for this question is that you - the player - should tell the GM when you want to scrutinize someone to see what else you are gleaning from a conversation. However, this involves the player needing to recognize the need in a situation and unlike their character the player may not be well versed in this. My character is a super spy that makes James Bond look like an amateur. I am not. We just accept this for things like infiltration and hacking, so why am I reliant on my ability to discern someone is being "shady" or "hiding" - and even worse - why am I reliant on my GM's ability to portray someone being 'shady' or 'hiding something' and pick up on how that is different from the GM just trying to improv a character they maybe aren't comfortable with or weren't prepped to roleplay?</p><p>On the inverse, if the GM just volunteers "you should roll insight" you can tip the hand of when things are going off kilter when that knowledge should not necessarily be conveyed. It's like asking someone for a perception check and then saying "they don't notice anything." Sure, the players know they're supposed to go forward thinking everything is fine. But they also know that a perception check was just failed which means they missed <i>something.</i></p><p>This is one of the places where I really like 5e's "Passive" score. By making a roll for the NPC against the passive insight of the PCs, I can then volunteer extra stuff they glean from interactions. I can do this when it is important, and when it is unimportant. It can happen with small things - like haggling over a box of healing potions - or big things like talking with the King about the advancing army on the castle and why he doesn't seem as shocked or dismayed as everyone else.</p><p>The passive score also lets me copy from naval warfare on 'passive' vs. 'active' scans. A character's passive insight is what they just pick up from normal interactions. Sherlock Holmes sitting in a restaurant cleaning his utensils. He's not <i>trying</i> to read the room, but he can't help but pick up all the details because of how perceptive and insightful he is. Then, when a player tells me they'd like to roll insight, they are 'actively' assessing. This is where - narratively - you get the long pause as the character's eyes narrow and they visibly weigh the information they have. It is a moment that, if nothing else, conveys a brief "is this person fucking with me/on the level?"</p><p>How do you use a passive score for non 5e systems? Well a passive score just assumes the roll of a 10, which is the average roll of a D20 when you round down. So take the average roll for the character and just use that for the PC's passive score. After all, on average that is what they'll get.</p><p><b>What Can I Discern?</b><br />What one can read on the other hand is a bit trickier. Fiction, and even real life, is full of people who will glance at someone and then tell you that they're lying. Sometimes it is explained as human psychology. Sometimes it is a 'tell' like in poker. Sometimes it is because the character knows something that conflicts with the story told.</p><p>Beyond that really depends on a few factors. One of which is how well does the PC know the character in question? The better you know someone, the more you read on them. Picking up that your friend Michelle has been sitting in the back of the room quietly for an hour means different things depending on how well you know Michelle and her tendency to sit quietly for an hour present but mostly disengaged from the room.</p><p>Context is king here, but as the GM also ask yourself something: Does the insight serve the game better by being the answer to the question, or by leading to another question? </p><p>While answering that question, also keep in mind other information the player may already have. Insight is as much about reading people as it is about putting together disparate information (as is scrutiny, and those other skills.)</p><p>Also consider the roll or degrees of success. Insight, and Perception, are two places I very much enjoy using a sliding scale where the higher the degree of success the more information given.</p><p>As an example of how this could break down consider the following responses to an insight check (passive or active) to watching an NPC react to some visual evidence of a person.</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><i>You definitely catch a hint of recognition in the person's eyes when they see the person in the footage.</i></li><li><i>You catch a hint of recognition and a shifting of a hand to cover the mouth suggesting familiar, even fond recognition along with surprise. Like a long lost loved one.</i></li><li><i>You catch a hint of recognition, and note some striking similarities in the eyes and other aspects of the face between this person and the person in the picture.</i></li><li><i>You catch a hint of recognition in the eyes, but it is gone quickly. The shift in stance speaks of military training, and not the 'basic grunt' stuff either.</i></li></ul><div>All of those have different levels of information that tell about the situation, the focus of the PC watching the person, and either the roll or other information the PC has. The last one for example I'd give to a character playing someone like Elliott from Leverage or someone with a Spy background, while the ones above could be from different levels of rolls, familiarity with the person, or information that is important to be conveyed now.</div><p></p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-44357964485999077252020-12-25T00:00:00.001-05:002020-12-25T00:00:05.603-05:00Happy Holidays!<p> Happy Christmas to those who celebrate Christmas! Happy late Hannukkah for those who celebrate Hannukkah. Happy Kwanza for those who celebrate Kwanza. Happy Solstice for those who celebrate Solstice. Happy Samhain for those who celebrate Samhain. </p><p>Whatever your faith, or lack thereof, I hope you are having a wonderful - and safe holiday.</p><p>I'll be taking next week off as my own holiday. And then we'll see what happens with 2021.</p><p>Stay safe! Stay comfortable! I wish you all the best!</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-41722957949868476132020-12-23T00:00:00.001-05:002020-12-23T00:00:04.997-05:00Bosses Can Break The Rules<p> One of the challenges you can come across as a GM is how to make a boss character stand out mechanically or feel like a boss in a fight. There are some obvious ways to do it such as the bag of HP and high powered attacks. They're tried and true for a reason, they work, and every boss has to be able to absorb enough damage to feel like a challenge to take down while doing enough damage to feel like a threat. The thing is <i>how</i> does the boss do that, and how can you do it in a way so that a good round doesn't just blow up a player and take them out of the game while starting the death spiral for the encounter?</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>A common way to do this is to let bosses break normal rules. This can be a special, 'rule breaking' talent or ability like the 'Adversary' talent in FFG's Genisys and Star Wars systems where checks made against the boss are harder simply because they're made against the boss. There is 5e's "Legendary Actions" and "Legendary Resistances" which gives the boss options outside of their turn to act and move. There are even a ton of fan made ones. Matt Colville's "Villain Actions" is a take on Legendary Actions and one I much prefer.<p></p><p>Do some googling and you'll find tons of options. But how do you bring this into your game? There's a couple of things to keep in mind.</p><p><b>Don't Break the Rules Just to Break the Rules</b><br />Despite the temptation, don't break the rules just because. Yes, it is a Boss. Yes that should be a significant. However, that doesn't mean you just toss out the normal established rules of a game just because. In general a boss should have only one or two 'mechanics' that break the rules. For the purposes of this I consider "Legendary Actions" to be one mechanic even if you can have up to 3 or more of them over a round.</p><p><b>Rule Breaks Should Never Be Done On The Fly</b><br />You should not be introducing rule break mechanics on the fly. I'm not saying it will never happen, but avoid it as much as possible. Even if you don't know everything your boss can do, the way the boss can work outside normal established mechanics should be planned. Don't make up stuff just to save the boss or to give the boss another chance at killing a PC during the combat. Even if you think the boss is getting his ass kicked, the PCs might be feeling very tense over how things are playing out, and if you allow yourself to ramp things up mid combat you could tip things over from a fun but challenging encounter to an unfun party wipe before you know what has happened.</p><p><b>Mechanics Should Be Removed As The Fight Goes On, Not Introduced</b><br />Speaking of, as the fight goes on the Villain should have mechanics fall away, not coming into play. Yes, things like the Villain Action have the 3rd one tend to be the 'big' desperation play, but you introduce that the Villain gets a Villain Action in round 1, and in Round 4 it is gone. This doesn't mean that your Villain can't have tricks up their sleeve, but the later the fight goes the more those tricks should be ones that can be pulled off with mechanics of normal play and things already established.</p><p>The big reason for this is feel. To you, the GM, the whole fight you know the Villain has this trump card held in wait to reveal. To the PCs it can feel like just as they're about to win the GM pulls some bullshit to protect their villain.</p><p><b>Understand Rules Before Breaking Them</b><br />Finally, and most importantly, understand the rules before breaking them. By this I don't just mean know what the rule does, but know <i>why</i> the rule does that thing. If you don't understand the what, why, and how of a rule and you break it you're going to have unforseeable consequences bite you in the ass. For example, why does 5e give such a big multiplier to combat difficulty from multiple monsters? Why is 4 CR 1/4 Goblins a bigger fight than a CR 1 creature? The reason is because a lot of power in 5e comes from what is called the Action Economy. Simply put, the side with more turns has a lot more power. That is why a single boss monster in 5e can feel lackluster, getting blasted down every round while waiting for their turn and eating the focus fire of the group (hence Legendary Actions, btw! :) )</p><p>This goes for all rules by the way. If you're new to GMing, I'd consider my advice above to be rules. Things to do to stay safe. Once you understand the what and why of them though, you are going to do a much better job of breaking them in ways that adds to your game instead of detracts. You know your group. I don't. Maybe they'll love the opposite of what I suggest.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-31008951983586982182020-12-21T00:00:00.001-05:002020-12-21T00:00:04.891-05:00Does Your Game World Have Holiday Traditions?<p> What are the holiday traditions of your game world? Is there one for Winter? Have you considered it?</p><p>Holiday traditions aren't really necessary for running a game. You could run a game for years and never once need to set things during a holiday. However, holidays are a big part of cultures. How holidays are celebrated are also a big part. So if you're building a world it can be a good idea to include that - even if just a few here and there - to help sell the world and setting.</p><p>Some things to keep in mind.</p><p><b><span></span></b></p><a name='more'></a><b>Holiday Celebrations Often Have a Practical Element</b><br />There is often a practical element to how certain holidays are celebrated. For example, Harvest Festivals often include feasts and may include marriage ceremonies. Why? Well, for one, you just harvested a <i>lot</i> of food so you have it on hand. For two, you're going into winter so fattening people up can be a good thing. For three not all of that food can be stored, so it is going to go to waste, so you may as well eat it. As for wedding ceremonies, again, you're going into Winter. A celebration can be good to help fight off the fears of the coming darker months, and when you don't have TV, Videogames, and Books there's really not much to do for entertainment. So why not have newly weds there together. Pregnancies that happen are likely to not be far enough along that the wife can't help with spring planting, and the child should be born before the next harvest giving the child time to get some strength before the following winter (when mom and dad will also have free time to care for the kid.)<p></p><p><b>Holiday Celebrations Can Have a Political Element</b><br />Feast days, celebrations, and other reasons to not work and celebrate bring joy and excitement. They give people something to look forward to. They raise morale. They give people a time to rest and recover. A ruler who is demanding of the people in their county can keep those same people from revolting or demanding better treatment by having frequent holidays to help distract them.</p><p>Holidays are also used as celebrations of events (more on this later) but also a time to teach a specific way things happen. Blurring what a holiday is about can help the political goal of assimilating a culture. Teaching messages about specific things and how they happened can give people a shared viewpoint. Not to mention the actions or events being celebrated will also encourage those types of behavior from others - afterall, acting like that got someone a holiday!</p><p><b>Holiday Celebrations Celebrate Events</b><br />Holidays celebrate events. Some of these are natural events, the Solstice and Equinox celebrations or the New Year for example. Other events are things people did. Hannukah is the celebration of a miracle that happened for the Jewish people over 8 nights. The Christian version of Christmas celebrates the birth of their messiah. Saint's days celebrate saints. Canada Day celebrates the birth of Canada as a sovereign nation.</p><p>Holidays can celebrate things big and small.Alamo Day celebrates the defense of Fort Alamo in Texas as a good example of a more "local" type holiday that could be in your world.</p><p>Not to mention the above mentioned things like "Harvest Festivals" and "Spring Celebrations" that happen (more or less along with the solstice/equinoxes).</p><p><br /></p><p>So think about it. What holidays are in your world? What do they celebrate?</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-58210093469653724392020-12-18T00:00:00.004-05:002020-12-18T00:00:04.332-05:00Three Maps, One Location<p> Back when I first started trying to make maps I had an idea. I made an island to be the starting point for a campaign I ran. The idea was simple. The game would start with the PCs washing up ashore on one end of this island, and need to make it to the other end in order to escape. This would be the first 'adventure' which could be anything from a simple 1 level one shot, to bringing the PCs to level 3 or maybe even as far as level 5 if so desired.</p><p>Ultimately I only used it for a one shot intro for what ended up being only about half the group by the end.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>All three versions of this map were made with Campaign Cartographer 3+. I believe they're the same map with different appearances on them, though I am honestly not as sure about that as I'd like. They're close enough either way.<p></p><p>As always, feel free to use them or not if you'd like.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-7o21vXzIuQs/X9v5fNGj_7I/AAAAAAAACMA/m49B81tl0psk4lMS7arS7eg_RT1n95wLACNcBGAsYHQ/ShipwreckCove.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="2000" data-original-width="2000" height="240" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-7o21vXzIuQs/X9v5fNGj_7I/AAAAAAAACMA/m49B81tl0psk4lMS7arS7eg_RT1n95wLACNcBGAsYHQ/ShipwreckCove.JPG" width="240" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-27TcFTrI5Tg/X9v5gqf8m6I/AAAAAAAACMI/T-0OVtdQJXkzM2cAuK0OsxQBzdMTL6zFwCNcBGAsYHQ/Goblin%2BIsland.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="2000" data-original-width="2000" height="240" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-27TcFTrI5Tg/X9v5gqf8m6I/AAAAAAAACMI/T-0OVtdQJXkzM2cAuK0OsxQBzdMTL6zFwCNcBGAsYHQ/Goblin%2BIsland.JPG" width="240" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-F-3h95BQT8A/X9v5fsUf3cI/AAAAAAAACME/DFEtEL3giZsJpIQI1DuLJQ5GPGKO0EHawCNcBGAsYHQ/ShipwreckIsland.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1991" data-original-width="1941" height="240" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-F-3h95BQT8A/X9v5fsUf3cI/AAAAAAAACME/DFEtEL3giZsJpIQI1DuLJQ5GPGKO0EHawCNcBGAsYHQ/ShipwreckIsland.JPG" width="234" /></a></div><br /><br /><p></p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-24579002526313320952020-12-16T00:00:00.001-05:002020-12-16T00:13:58.901-05:00A Villain You Want Your PCs To Smash<p> Quick tip for today. I've seen some people talk about how sometimes they have trouble when running games with certain villains because they like the character too much. They think the character has a lot of mileage and could be good for the game in the longrun, which in turn makes them not want to let the PCs kill them now - even if there is no way to really plausibly save said villain.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>This isn't a sign of a bad GM by the way. it happens. We all have ideas for what could happen, and no one wants to see a loved character get removed before they realize their potential. It is, however, the fate of many a villain in RPGs. Players aren't dumb. In fact, players are often incredibly genre savvy because - well - like you they watch similar movies, read similar books, and all that stuff.<br /><br /><p></p><p>However, if you think you may have that problem, may I recommend this: make your big bad someone you despise. Make it have traits you hate. Or make them in general just reprehensible. Someone that you not only don't care if they die, but you actively <i style="font-weight: bold;">want</i> the PCs to destroy. You still have to play the villain properly, sure, but having a villain be someone you want to see get wrecked can make cheering the PCs on in those important moments so much easier.</p><p>The experience is also not without its own catharsis too. Giving a villain traits or qualities you despise, or that are causing problems for you in other ways, can at least give the satisfaction of watching them get their due in a world where there are heroes - or at least people with enough strength and agency to do something about it.</p><p>it can also be fun. Plus you can make that really cool villain you love into a lieutenant, and maybe get a heel-face turn in to turn them into an anti-villain where they're not quite an ally but also not quite an enemy. Keeping them in the game, but also with tension for the players.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-73005326295262785752020-12-14T00:00:00.001-05:002020-12-14T00:00:00.339-05:00Keep It Simple, Stupid. And yes, in Combat Encounters too.<p> KISS is a standard rule of design. Often though we forget about it when designing our encounters. It's a natural thing to happen. You want a fight to be cool. You want the big NPCs to be cool. And being cool means being able to do special stuff. I mean, all the 'cool' stuff your PCs can do comes from abilities they can do that trump or otherwise modify the normal rules of combat.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>The thing is, when you are a player you only have one thing to worry about: your character sheet. When you are the GM you have a ton of things to worry about. Everything from initiative order, to every character - yes even the PCs - in the encounter, to all the special abilities, to health levels, to the environment. Not to mention things like rules, rule disputes, and helping players figure out what they can and can't do.<p></p><p>This is why things like enemy spell casters can be a huge pain in the ass to run. Unlike the players you can't spend the round reading and deliberating what spells to use. You have to be resolving every action and deciding for every NPC.</p><p>Because of that, try to keep your encounters simple. And by that I don't mean every encounter has to be the same. But don't involve more mechanics than you can easily keep track of. Which is why I prefer Matt Colville's "Villain Actions" over the standard 5e Legendary Actions. Legendary Actions are complex. If done with a solo monster it works, but when the solo monster has allies it is more things to juggle and gets weird. A Villain Action on the other hand is simple: round 1, this happens. Round 2, this other thing happens. Done.</p><p>What if you can't keep the encounter simple for whatever reason? Well, that happens. Try to avoid it, but you can't always. In those cases, go in with a plan. Write the plan down too. Give yourself a cheat sheet to go off of. This is how "The Monster's Know What They're Doing" basically suggests with his strategy options for monsters. Round 1, this monster does X if possible. Round 2 it does goes to its next ability.</p><p>No plan survives contact with the enemy, but going in with a plan gives you something to pivot from. Going in without a plan aside from "the bad guys ambush the PCs" gives you nothing, and leaves you having to figure out complex arrangements of abilities from 0.</p><p>Give yourself the safety net. Take the time to make yourself a plan and a cheat sheet. And whenever possible, don't make encounters any more complex than they need to be in order to work.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-17950723098693212702020-12-11T00:00:00.001-05:002020-12-11T00:00:04.089-05:00Three "Friends" From Your Past<p> I've been toying with an idea in my head I want to try the next time I start a campaign - provided it works for the type of campaign said players want. The idea is a simple one. Better yet, it is work the players will do that will help bring their characters into the game while also helping them with problems they may face in game and the GM with ways to bring them into future adventures or quests. The idea is, like the title of the post suggests, for each player to make 3 "Friends."</p><p><b><span></span></b></p><a name='more'></a><b>The Anatomy of a "Friend."</b><br />For this, the anatomy of the "Friend" is simple. It is an NPC with a connection to one or more player characters. When making the NPC the Player will be responsible for naming the NPC, giving a brief indicator of what they are, an area they can help with, and then finally a hitch.<p></p><p>The hitch is the answer to one of two questions: Why does this NPC never want to see my character again? <u style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">or</u> Why does my character never want to see this NPC again, but will help them if they ask?</p><p><b>An Area of Help</b><br />The idea behind the area of help is it is a mechanical or in game reason the PCs will want to engage with this NPC at some point in time. It gives an area of interest for the NPC, but it also gives an area where they can help the player out. This could be something as simple as "involved in the criminal underworld of X city" to as broad as "Can help with Magical needs"</p><p>These topics also give you - the GM - an idea as to what the player is expecting (read: wants) to see in the campaign. At the same time, since the PC in question has a connection to NPCs tied to these areas, it also gives a hint of what the PC has already been dealing with.</p><p><b>The Point of the Hitch</b><br />The point of the hitch is not to have a cost, but rather to have some tension and roleplay associated with the character. It is one thing to "have a friend" who will help out with the area. However, we learn more about a character when there is tension in that relationship. And it makes the player think more about their character, this NPC, and how they work together.</p><p>One of these two characters has wronged - or is believed to have wronged - the other. Either the player is not welcome by the NPC, or the NPC is not welcome to the player. How that happened, and how it may or may not be resolved, means tension, conflict, and growth or change.</p><p>When the NPC is the unwelcome one, we make the PC go the extra mile to establish why they will help. This is to help keep things ultimately positive or functional. You can't leverage the PCs and tension if the player is just making an enemy who they want nothing to do with There needs to be something deeper there than the wound inflicted to make the PC engage and pull them in.</p><p><b>How It Works: The PCs Need Help</b><br />When the PCs need help this idea works by giving avenues of help. One of the players gets to have the "I know someone who can help us...but they're not going to be happy about it" moment. The players now have an avenue to move things forward and help them resolve whatever the current problem is. In addition, the table gets to learn more about the character pulling in their ally. They get to learn about a connection to the past. They get to learn about a wound left or a story unfinished. And in going for help, they may even get to see the resolution of that or see how things play out from there.</p><p><b>How It Works: The NPC Needs Help</b><br />The other way this works is the NPC needs help with something. They've gotten in trouble, and the PC is the only one who can help. Only the PC has conflicting compulsions built into them for this NPC. Afterall, they have a written down reason why they never want to see this NPC again. And they also have a written down reason why they will help the NPC anyhow.</p><p><b>Why 3 Friends?</b><br />I settled on 3 because it is a good number. Partly I like doing things in threes, but for this I feel it is important. On top of making 3 my only other rule for this would be that at least one NPC has to not want to see the PC again, and at least one has to have the PC not want to see them again. This way you get one of each tool provided by this as a GM - and the player gets a chance to show if they've wronged more of their one time allies or been on the receiving end of that wrong.</p><p>I feel like three also gives us a better look at the character than one or two NPCs would, while not going into being a lot of extra work. Especially since the NPCs don't have to be broadly fleshed out - but they can be if the player wants to explore the relationship more often.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-6452840692292943332020-12-09T00:00:00.001-05:002020-12-09T00:00:04.249-05:00Making a Ruling<p> One of the most common things a GM has to do when running a game is make rulings. The ability to make rulings is - in my opinion - one of the key things that makes a Table Top RPG infinitely more flexible than any computer game can be. See, every option before you in a computer game has to be specifically programmed for by the designers. If a player wants to do something that the designers didn't account for, well then they're just shit out of luck. But in a table top game, the GM can figure out a way to make it work.</p><p>So what should you consider when making a ruling? Let's go over the basic steps.</p><p><b>What Does The Player Want to Do?</b><br />The first thing you need to consider is what is it the player is trying to do? When asking yourself - or the player - this question don't just focus on the means by which they hope to bring about the end, but the end as well. There is a big difference between a PC trying to befriend the druid's wolf companions so he's on their good side, and a PC trying to do that in order to convince the local villagers that the wolves aren't something to be afraid of. And if you don't know what the player is going for, you may make the wrong ruling, or one that needlessly complicates things.</p><p><b>Does The System Do Anything Close To That?</b><br />The second thing is to check if your system does anything that is close to what the PC is trying to do. If nothing else you should have the system's 'core resolution mechanic' - the basis around how skill checks, combat checks, and all that are determined. But sometimes there is a more specific system or rules around things the player wants to do. If nothing else, a GM handbook may have some quick guidance if not full mechanics of something adjacent to the task.</p><p>This is a good idea to check just because why do work that is already done? And you may get ideas from for how you want to handle it for your game.</p><p><b>Can You Steal A Method From Another System?</b><br />If you have access to multiple systems, do any of them do the thing the player is looking to do? If so, can those rules be stolen if only for ideas? Taking from other systems is in general just a good idea as a GM. The 5e Legendary Actions mechanic can work in any system to make a boss feel more boss like. Aspects from FATE are easily stolen to give and track penalties and bonuses in a situation or to even tag or invoke on players and scenes as needed.</p><p><b>Is This Ruling Liable To Become A Rule?</b><br />The difference between a ruling and a rule, is that a ruling is meant to resolve something in the moment so that normal play can resume and the game can continue. A rule on the other hand is part of the game. It will be referenced again. It will come up again. A player wanting to make a magic sword as a one time thing is a ruling. A player wanting to make magic swords as a thing their character does on the semi-regular? That's a rule (or rule set.)</p><p>The more likely something is to be a rule, the more complex you can be with it as needed - provided it works, is fast enough for your needs, and is fun. The less likely it is to come up again? The more I suggest you stray to a simple method that gets the job done and move on.</p><p><b>Make Your Ruling</b><br />At this point, in most circumstances, you should be able to make your ruling. This may seem like a lot, but in the moment at the table it goes by very quickly. And when given time to make a decision you can more slowly indulge in looking for rules.</p><p>Don't get hung up on looking up rules at the table. When in doubt, make a ruling and move on. You can always look it up later and adjust as needed from there. But do consider what you know of the system, and how it works.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-51021300392751602062020-12-07T00:00:00.001-05:002020-12-07T00:00:00.230-05:00Designing Mini-Systems: Don't Get In Your Own Way<p> Sometimes for a session you find you want to try, or need to try, to handle something that your system of choice just doesn't prepare you for. Perhaps you're running a game and want to have a crafting competition that the PCs are engaged in. Or perhaps your PCs are beginning a business or criminal enterprise. Perhaps the PCs are getting involved in politics and you need a way to manage influence across factions.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>This is the kind of thing where in a videogame you'd go into a mini-game or minisystem where you're almost playing something else in order to manage it. And when it comes to your RPG you can do that too. However, unless you have something to steal from another game that just works with your system of choice, that often means you have to design something. And with that comes the risks of getting in your own way of the game.<p></p><p>I find myself doing that right now for one of my D&D games. So let's talk about some pitfalls to watch out for.</p><p><b>Remember What Your Game Is About</b><br />Remember what your game is about. Yes, it can be fun to build a system for handling deep, intricate politics in a world. But if your game is about adventurers going on travels you need to keep that in mind. That is what your players signed up for. That is what you signed up for. Be careful before changing that.</p><p><b>A Simple Tool Is Probably Best</b><br />Speaking of that, and assuming that this isn't going to be the main focus of your game for the rest of time - or foreseeable future - remember you don't need a complex tool. You just need a tool that can get the job done. That game about adventurers? It doesn't need a 40 page politics rulebook unless you are now a game about political factions and ruling a kingdom. And since you don't need that, don't build that.</p><p><b>You Can Just Fake It</b><br />Never underestimate how much can be done on the spot with improvisation and simple tools. Things like the Forged in the Dark Clocks + skill checks can cover a lot of ground for handling longer term projects. A couple of random tables for events can give the illusion of a deep and complex setup for how the world is set to work. Your players don't need to know it is all bubblegum and duct tape holding it together, as long as you have the means to track things as you go forward.</p><p><b>Don't Go Against The Grain</b><br />Finally, try not to go against the grain of your system. Some systems are better or worse at certain things. D&D 5e for example, is a horrible system RAW for a survival game, because there are just so many ways to avoid the mechanics and drama of survival with a certain group. That doesn't mean you can't have a survival section, but any toolkit you build for it (or even trying to use the one in the DMG) is going to struggle to bring drama or tension because a lot of things just come with handwave mechanics to avoid the struggle.</p><p>Instead, try to work with your game. Try to latch onto the abstract tools already in place to leverage things. Temporary wounds can be a wonderful way in a lot of systems to denote granular fatigue if you don't have a mechanic for it - or if the mechanic uses bigger steps than you want to use. Just remember that fatigue heals faster than most wounds and you're good to go.</p><p><br /></p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-28310209241992703922020-12-04T00:00:00.002-05:002020-12-04T00:00:02.575-05:00GMs Should NOT Be Aiming To Kill PCs<p> I feel like I keep stumbling across stories about this over the past week. RPG Horror stories that frequent the theme of the GM or DM planning on, and in some cases outright saying, that they were going to kill at least one PC in a given scenario or boss fight. If I'm being charitable I can kind of get the idea. They want a boss to be scary. They want it to stand out. They want it to be a fight that the PCs remember or that meets their definition of 'adequate' amounts of cool for the boss. And that means not being a chump who gets wrecked without even taking someone with them.</p><p>The problem is that if you have in your notes, or your head, that you're killing a PC you're already doing it wrong. And if you tell the players you are doing this, you've already ruined the encounter - and likely their trust in you as a GM.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>PC death should come from three places. First, the dice themselves. If bad dice rolls add up to a player dying, while unfortunate it is part of the risk of combat and RPGs. Second, a player made mistake or choice. If the player's own actions lead to their death, then that is on them. Third, at a player's request. Sometimes a player wants a character to die for some reason - how they see the story ending or to bring in someone new. If a player asks for it and you work it out, hey, no problem.<p></p><p>PC death as a deliberate part of the GM's plan though? That's just being a dick. But let's break it down.</p><p><b>From the GM Side</b><br />Your boss doesn't become cooler, more powerful, or more memorable if it is hard written or planned for them to be able to kill a player. To be clear, there is a big difference between "this is a challenging fight and could result in some deaths if the dice go wrong or the PCs play it wrong" and what I am talking about. One is making a challenging and dangerous encounter. The other is an execution.</p><p>And it is an execution because as the GM you can control this. You can force the outcome. You can cheat the dice rolls. You don't even have to roll to attack, or for the bad guy to make saves. There's no drama in the boss killing a PC, because it was never in question. It's not a testament to how cool or powerful they are, because you are fiating the death instead of using the boss well or in a fashion where they can 'earn' that themselves so to speak.</p><p>Finally, you as the GM should never be planning to kill the characters. Even if you think it would make the story better. Even if you think it would add tension or gravitas to a story. Unless the player has asked for help killing their character, you shouldn't be planning it. NPCs can, and you can make threatening encounters. But not "and I'm going to kill at least 2 of them before XYZ happens."</p><p><b>From the Player Side</b><br />Let's say you do this. Let's say you plan to kill a PC. Even if you don't tell the players they're going to pick up on it. It's easy to tell when a fight is meant to kill someone and when a fight is meant to be beaten - especially from a GM who occasionally just decides to kill a PC. And when it is done to sell an NPC it becomes more obvious because quite frequently there are tell tale signs that this NPC can't be beaten - at least not yet - and is going to be coming for more.</p><p>So what does that mean on the player side? Well, for one it kills investment in the game. Why should a player get invested in making a character, exploring a character, and trying to grow a character if at some point the GM is just going to arbitrarily decide to kill them? Why invest at all in that situation?</p><p>For another, with trust broken, it means even when things happen legitimately they'll be suspect. You can't trust the GM to run it straight. You can't trust you have a fair shot or your ideas will be given a fair chance unless they're what the GM planned for. So why bother?</p><p>And for third, with the above two happening quite frequently the third part is "this game is no longer fun for me, so I'm out."</p><p>I've been a player in a game where only things the GM wanted to happen happened. And quite literally no one cared about what happened. We didn't quit, but we also didn't really help. We just went along with things and there was no gravitas or drama. Big moments fell flat. We didn't care about NPCs. We didn't care who we helped or didn't help. The game continued - it was something to do and several people had to be at the location at the time anyhow - but it never got better. And after? No one has agreed to play with that GM again because it just...felt bad.</p><p>Other groups may like that. And that's fine (hooray for Session 0). But it wasn't for us, and ruined what could have otherwise been a fun game.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-49140361147371364492020-12-02T00:00:00.001-05:002020-12-02T00:00:08.877-05:00Change Creates Tension Creates Adventure<p>Making adventures can be hard. There is a reason all the major RPG producers sell pre-written adventures. There is a reason the DMSguild exists. There is a reason you can barely throw a rock in the RPG side of the internet and not hit any number of adventure idea/seed generators. There is nothing wrong with them. In fact, a lot of them are <i>really</i> good with some amazing adventures I'd imagine the vast majority would never consider let alone be able to pull off unaided.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>However, it is also easy enough to make your own adventures with a little bit of thought. And if you consider this when making your world or designing your setting, you can bake in near endless sources of adventure ideas into the world itself. What is even better when you do this, is the adventures stem naturally from the world which makes it feel like the setting and world is a part of the adventures of the campaign, as opposed to just the backdrop for where it happens.<p></p><p><b>Change Is At The Heart Of Adventure</b><br />Change, and the seeking of it therein, is at the heart of every adventure that happens. Lost Mine of Phandelver happens when the local goblins have a change in leadership with the arrival of a drow wizard with a plan. There is also the resistance of the town to the gang that more or less took over Phandelver, which is more kicked off by the arrival of the PCs who are a threat to the gang (and thus a potential agent of change.)</p><p>The Jewel of Yavin for FFG's Edge of the Empire is a Heist story around a major gambling event. In that there is change on Bespin with the arrival of all the gamblers, all of whom have their own desires (mostly to make money) and the PCs are there to try and change ownership of the jewel of yavin to themselves (or their patron, depending on how you run it.)</p><p>Much of Curse of Strahd is Strahd toying with the PCs because the change they bring is entertaining. The PCs themselves are looking to be agents of change either in overthrowing Strahd, or breaking his hold enough they can leave.</p><p><b>No Change Goes Unresisted</b><br />The thing to remember with change is the mechanics of it are very simple. Someone, or thing, wants something and so takes steps to make it happen. The thing is, no change is unresisted and that is where the story goes. For personal stories the resistance can be internal. For example, if I want to lose weight I am going to face resistance from my body as the actions needed to lose weight involves changing established patterns my body is fond of. There is also resistance from the natural degradation of my body as I age and that the actions taken will be further drains on my "energy pool" already divided up among my various daily tasks I do.</p><p>External change is even easier, and where most adventures happen. There is <i>always</i> someone who benefits from the current status quo, and people looking to make changes disrupt that so there is resistance. A gang looking to make more money will have resistance from rival gangs that have their markets encroached on. A movement to promote the rights of a suppressed group will face resistance from the people who benefit from that group being suppressed. A wizard looking to build a tower near a city will face resistance from the people who don't want a wizard tower disrupting their view, or worried about the dangers of a nearby wizard tower.</p><p><b>Change Means Two Sides and Tension</b><br />The push for change, and resistance to that change creates tension. That also gives us two sides and tension between them. And that more or less sounds like an adventure to me. Even better, it is one that can be used multiple times in multiple ways from both angles.</p><p>Take the Wizard Tower for example. The PCs could be hired by the Wizard to help make the case as to how the Wizard can help the town. Either by talking to the people in the city, solving problems the city may have with local monsters/threats, or something else. Alternatively the PCs could be hired by the PCs to investigate the tower and find out what the Wizard is actually up to. Or the PCs could come in to find the local townfolk looking to lynch the wizard. Or the Wizard could need help because a summoned demon escaped, and if it gets out that the Wizard did it that could ruin him since he'll lose the ability to build his tower and all his money is already tied up in it.</p><p>And then there are the stories around it. People, monsters, and other threats coming because a wizard in the area means magic and thus likely treasure. A rival wizard/city/kingdom feeling threatened and attacking before they get attacked. Someone bringing a curse into the area while seeking the wizard's help to cure themselves and not realizing they're contagious.</p><p><b>Build Change Into Your Setting</b><br />Build moments of change into your setting. At worst you have a backdrop to other stories you want to tell. At best, you have a potential endless source of inspiration for things that can cause adventures and interactions to happen in your game.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-62705887950044148482020-11-30T00:00:00.001-05:002020-11-30T00:00:04.446-05:00For Feedback Ask Specific Questions<p> I am trying something new at the end of my sessions. At least, I am trying to try something new. We'll see how it goes with attempt #2 on Friday. The idea is to change how I am asking for GM feedback at the end of the session.</p><p>Most sessions I end with the following: "Any feedback for me? The NPCs? Things you liked? Things you didn't like? Things you want more of? Things you want less of?"</p><p>The idea is simple, I'm asking several questions with different possible answers. The idea is to solicit general feedback of the session. Players tend to engage at least somewhat with it telling me something they liked or something I did well, which is good. It gives me stuff to keep up on. However, a lot of times the responses I get are more simple.</p><p>In the game on Friday I found myself curious about a couple specific scenes that happened. So I asked to the two players who were directly involved "What did you think of X scene? How could I have done it better? What didn't work for you?" And I got an answer specific to that. I also asked the players who were outside the scene and got a different perspective.</p><p>The end result was that the scene went over better than I thought it had. The players understood why things went wrong. But there was still some ideas on what I could have done better to communicate things in the scene.</p><p>It worked out well. And I hope to keep doing it.</p><p>I guess we'll just see if I can find a specific scene in the next session I want to pull apart and get ideas on.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-63191093816392936832020-11-27T00:00:00.001-05:002020-11-27T00:00:06.344-05:00More Maps!<p> Just another couple maps today. These two I feel came out really well and I used them in the D&D game last weekend. Both made with Dungeon Draft, but found more tools - namely the Shadow Path tool and the Cliff Path tool. </p><p>Also, after playing Elder Scrolls Online I realized how boring a lot of cave maps are for color and textures, and so I tried a different way to get a cave effect but with room for water and plant life growing inside. You can decide for yourself if you like it or not.</p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-wHPnGO3mFW8/X8CACg2TL4I/AAAAAAAACLA/mX4AF4xyVPcGP6HTVvem8-UdUUQ4IgrTgCNcBGAsYHQ/s1750/GnollCaveEntrance.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1750" data-original-width="1750" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-wHPnGO3mFW8/X8CACg2TL4I/AAAAAAAACLA/mX4AF4xyVPcGP6HTVvem8-UdUUQ4IgrTgCNcBGAsYHQ/s320/GnollCaveEntrance.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The first map was the entrance to the cave system. Idea is PCs approach from the bottom area and there are lookouts at the cave mouth and on the ridge above. It gave the PCs a chance to plan their takedown of the entrance - did they want to try to be stealthy or loud. They ended up getting a solid alpha strike off on the Gnolls which made for a quick fight.</div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q_cI9_5cnFM/X8CAD4COh7I/AAAAAAAACLE/OzFnX77a7vEIa6-OCY400gNy5dARgmxdgCNcBGAsYHQ/s2048/GnollCaves.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="2048" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q_cI9_5cnFM/X8CAD4COh7I/AAAAAAAACLE/OzFnX77a7vEIa6-OCY400gNy5dARgmxdgCNcBGAsYHQ/s320/GnollCaves.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This was the inside of the cave. The overall shape is a little wonky, but overall I'm happy with how the effect of doing a cave with negative space instead of the cave tool came out. Someday hopefully DungeonDraft will let me paint textures on cave floor and building floors, but that is not today so for today we work around it. The pool at the top has a bunch of freshly killed (and not so freshly killed) bodies in it, that is staining the pool red and making a small stream of bloody water down which powers the demonic portal. I really like how well tinting the water red came out, and how it really catches the eye. I am also pleased with how the cliff path tool under water does a good job of showing a steep depth increase right at the edge, which helps sell the depth of the pool along with a darker texture beneath and some shadow work.</div><p></p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-69009444678735197422020-11-25T10:36:00.001-05:002020-11-25T10:36:24.839-05:00Hatred vs. Empathy<p> I recently finished The Last of Us 2. I found the game to be a lot better than the Last of Us 1, and the story was a surprisingly mature dissection of hatred and othering. At least, that is what I took from it. You can agree or disagree, but to me The Last of Us 2 through both Abby and Ellie (the two main characters) shows us how hatred can take over our lives, cost us all the things we once held sacred, and how - ultimately - empathy is the solution to hate, but also very frequently one of the first victims of hatred. </p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>For anyone looking to have this in your games, it is important to understand the basics of this. Both so you can add those "moral shades of gray" and layers of nuance to villains to make them seem more complex, but also - and perhaps more importantly - so you can avoid doing that in places where perhaps it is no appropriate. Sometimes people don't want moral complexity, endless shades of gray, and depths of nuance to their gameplay. Sometimes they just want a straight up villain they can hate and fight against. Sometimes we need the control of an evil that can be punched in the face to make things right. And when players are looking for that, when the game is sold on that, you don't want to accidentally spike it with things that are counter to that.<p></p><p><b>The Other</b><br />The key to hatred in a lot of cases is 'othering' the person. This is easier to do with less contact, less nuance, or contact and nuance focused on how the person is different from those that hate them. This, throughout history, is most easily done through religious grounds but can be done along any lines as long as you have a clear delineation of an "in group" and an "out group." You see this along things such as "they're not like us" but also in projections of hate (they hate our freedom, anyone?) and just in general wrong doing.</p><p>With making someone an "other" you highlight why they are different and why they are a threat. And those are the things you focus on.</p><p><b>A Reflection of Self</b><br />Empathy on the other hand allows us to see ourselves in other people. For all the mockery in the "Why did you say Martha?" bit in Batman vs. Superman, what was being attempted there was in begging to save Martha, Superman made (unknowingly) Batman see himself in the man he was fighting. A person powerless to save his mom. In seeing that connection, and in seeing himself in Superman, he can see past all the othering he has done and instead see the person inside. It is still a poorly done scene, but that is what they were going for.</p><p>The same is true with people. If you can get someone to sit down with someone they claim to hate and have an honest conversation you start to see where things are similar. And once you can start showing someone where they are the same as someone else, and how they can view things from the perspective of the other, it becomes a lot harder (but not impossible) to hate on those grounds.</p><p><b>The Key to a Simple vs. Nuanced Villain</b><br />this boils down to the key to a simpler vs. more nuanced villain. The more you keep the villain the other, the easier they are to hate and the more morally simple the game you run can be. The more you add nuance and avenues to show how the villain is a reflection of who the PCs could be/are, the harder they can be to hate and the more morally complex things can be. Or at least the more tragic things can be.</p><p><b>A Line Too Far - a.k.a. Kick the Dog</b><br />The trope "Kick the dog" is done to show someone is truly heinous and villainous by having them kick a dog for no reason other than it being in the way or the delight of it. The concept applies to villains as well. It is possible for a villain to be a reflection of the heroes, but still be a villain because they've gone too far. Just because the road to get where the villain is can be understood, does not mean they can have redemption. It just makes them a bit more tragic because they went too far.</p><p><b>And More</b><br />There is more to this discussion, but I am not sure I am ready or able to unpack it in a blog post. So for now I'm going to leave it with this. While it is simplified, just remember, the more nuanced something is - and the more understood those nuances are by your players - the harder it is to hate it. The more simple, the eaiser. And the same is true when you need a group of NPCs to hate another group of NPCs. </p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-33860074430258824022020-11-23T00:00:00.001-05:002020-11-23T00:00:05.199-05:00The Mandalorian's Narrative Loop Works For Campaigns Too<p> Over the weekend I saw some people on twitter talking about the Mandalorian's narrative loop. No one was saying they disliked the show, just that the story telling in it is not very complex. In a world full of serialized shows with serialized plots, the Mandalorian is a big old breath of nostalgia with the majority of episodes being standalone while the over-arcing plot moves slowly and ponderously in the background until it builds up to where it needs to do <i>something</i> towards mid-season or end of season.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>It is, in my limited experience, not an uncommon format for science fiction shows. You have the concept of the show, the world, and so you primarily focus on building the world using standalone episodes to show different aspects of what is going on. If you go back and watch the early episodes of Supernatural, a lot of them are phenomenal stand up movies. I really love Season 1 where you have ~20 mini 1 hour horror movies, that just happen to go off the normal horror movie plot because Sam and Dean show up and they have a bag of tricks and a book of obscure knowledge to help them solve the supernatural horror thing before it gets too out of hand. Meanwhile, in the background, is the overarcing plot of them looking for their father, and the yellow eyed Demon that killed their mother.<p></p><p>What happened in Supernatural - and other shows - and I expect will happen in the Mandalorian is as the show goes on season to season more and more will be built up, more will happen with the characters, and then without really realizing it we'll hit a point where standalone - or 'filler' - episodes are the rarity while most episodes deal with the overarching narrative of what is going on. Too much stuff is established and moving to really not give it screen time, and that takes over the show.</p><p>But I brought you here to talk about table top RPGs, not television shows. So what is the Mandalorian's loop and how does it work for game?</p><p><b>The Loop</b><br />The loop itself is simple. The Mandalorian arrives at a planet looking for something - most often information. When he arrives he finds the source of the information, but they have a price. The price is help doing a job. The job is then the content of the episode. At the end of the episode, the job is done and the Mandalorian collects his payment - which shoots him off to the next bit of information/thing he is looking for in the next episode.</p><p><b>The Loop In Game</b><br />This <i>can</i> work for a lot of games. The PCs need information. Someone will give them the information - or where they can get the information - but they need help with X/Y/Z. The PCs help with X/Y/Z and get the information and move along. It is an established loop and it works. Though it needs some prep from you, or buy in from the PCs.<br /></p><p><b>Breaking the Loop</b><br />PCs may try to break the loop. The most common way for this is to try and pressure the NPC for the information or to try and steal it. Stealing the information can be an adventure in and of itself, so maybe allow for that sometimes. It sounds like fun. Pressuring the NPC for information can be in the form of bribes, threats, or flat out torture like actions.</p><p>In the Mandalorian he goes on the adventures because it is a scripted show. In character the reason is because despite the grit, the Mandalorian <i>is</i> a heroic character. He helps people because his code holds him to it, and because in his core he wants to help people.<br /></p><p><b>Setting Up To Protect The Loop</b><br />You know your PCs, but you can also set up to protect the loop. And you can do so along the means the show does too. Reasonable NPCs with reasonable requests - if dangerous - or in situations where it is clear they need help and is either 1) the right thing to do (heroic PCs) or 2) could lead to its own independent source of profits for the PCs.<br /><br /><b>Background Meta Elements</b><br />The tricky part then is the background meta elements. However, in a TTRPG you don't <i>need</i> an overarcing story planned. You can do just fine bringing up elements of the PCs backstories and connections to their pasts for episodes. And you can weave stories with those NPCs in the future. A villain who was defeated but not killed coming back. An ally who needs help again. A rival wanting to take something the PCs have rightfully stolen. All hooks that can tie back and show building arcs.<br /><br />You just got to have fun with it!</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-63807080756590119362020-11-20T00:00:00.001-05:002020-11-20T00:00:08.625-05:00Some Maps I Made<p> In lieu of the normal Discussion post, I thought today I would share some maps I've made. These have already been revealed to my PCs in the relevant game - or don't have spoilers. Feel free to use them for your own games. These maps were made with <a href="https://dungeondraft.net/">Dungeondraft </a>and/or <a href="https://www.wonderdraft.net/">Wonderdraft</a>.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>For this release, there are two city maps, a subterranean Dwarven City called <i>Kor Mahldur</i>, and a Drow port city named <i>Selamnaiqure</i>. There is also a random city street battle map for a random urban encounter.<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BWUN-Y-0c0k/X7cIT0oXA9I/AAAAAAAACKY/-kPjwAV67Zgb5_9FbA1RppOc273eSGrOACNcBGAsYHQ/s1920/Kor%2BMahldur.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BWUN-Y-0c0k/X7cIT0oXA9I/AAAAAAAACKY/-kPjwAV67Zgb5_9FbA1RppOc273eSGrOACNcBGAsYHQ/s320/Kor%2BMahldur.png" width="320" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">This is the Dwarven City of <i>Kor Mahldur</i>. It is the Capital of the Ultridge Kingdom. Not shown on the map is that the three separated districts are also on different levels from each other. The <i>Skygate</i> district is near the surface and leads out to the surface world. The <i>Abyssgate</i> district is in the Underdark and comes up against an Underdark Sea. <i>Ultridgegate</i> on the other hand is in the middle and leads to Dwarven Deep Roads and the rest of the subterranean Ultridge Kingdom.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kYHBhZRVTXI/X7cIWZf-P9I/AAAAAAAACKs/y0l2BYgOT3sl9YrT4BHqflr6BKzP9bOQgCPcBGAYYCw/s2048/Selamnaiqure.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1152" data-original-width="2048" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kYHBhZRVTXI/X7cIWZf-P9I/AAAAAAAACKs/y0l2BYgOT3sl9YrT4BHqflr6BKzP9bOQgCPcBGAYYCw/s320/Selamnaiqure.png" width="320" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The drow port city of <i>Selamnaiqure.</i> The PCs haven't arrived here yet. Like the <i>Kor Mahldur</i> map above, this was made in Wonderdraft with the Underdark Theme from <a href="https://cartographyassets.com/">Cartography Assets</a>. I'm glad I could get the general spider shape into it along with the hidden roads.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TtCUIiPpvRk/X7cITY4hA6I/AAAAAAAACKk/BUhM5Kt_Bk0RaeapB_qywJ7CMUzBoZ2VwCPcBGAYYCw/s2048/KMStreets.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2048" data-original-width="2048" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TtCUIiPpvRk/X7cITY4hA6I/AAAAAAAACKk/BUhM5Kt_Bk0RaeapB_qywJ7CMUzBoZ2VwCPcBGAYYCw/s320/KMStreets.jpg" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">The aforementioned urban encounter map made when I realized Dungeondraft had added a roof tool for buildings. While simple, I like that the rooftops and ladders give a real shot for multi-level combat with archers on the roofs or players fighting up ladders. One thing I wish I had known about when I did it was the 'Shadow Path' tool, but I may take it back and update it to try with that.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IDUn-XEdnq0/X7cISsSNY0I/AAAAAAAACKg/koWKsZjFJBkTTRam63ZglG6i9N4S-ZFswCPcBGAYYCw/s1540/LongHouseInn.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1470" data-original-width="1540" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IDUn-XEdnq0/X7cISsSNY0I/AAAAAAAACKg/koWKsZjFJBkTTRam63ZglG6i9N4S-ZFswCPcBGAYYCw/s320/LongHouseInn.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">As a bonus, here is a map of an inn. Made quickly when I realized I might need to fight my PCs in their current place of rest. Still, it came out well enough all things considered. I'm also a fan of the purple bedding, even if it was mostly from me being too lazy to change the currently selected color after placing bottles on the bartop.</div><br /><p><br /></p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-85490822213302187362020-11-18T08:00:00.001-05:002020-11-18T09:32:57.438-05:00Do Mono-Cultured Races Ever Make Sense?<p> One of the chief complaints WotC has received about Dungeons & Dragons, especially in recent years, is the monocultural display of races the system gives. Choosing your race in 5e gives you a number of benefits. Some of those benefits are clearly bloodline/genetic related things - like the elves lacking the need to sleep or Dwarves being a short/stout build that is resilient against poisons. Other things though, are very much <i>cultural</i> aspects - such as weapon, tool, skill, and language training.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>The way the books talk about races is also very mono-cultural. Mountain Dwarves <i>all</i> fall into these broad brush strokes of personality types, expected training, views of other races, etc, etc. The same is true for the various types of elves, gnomes, dragonborn, and pretty much every other race with a couple key exceptions: humans and half-breeds (including tieflings and aasimar.)<p></p><p>Humans are allowed to be as culturally varied as we are in the real world. A human from the country will be different than a human from the city. A human from Waterdeep will have different aspects to their personality than a human from Baldur's Gate. </p><p>Half-X races on the other hand also have room for some cultural variation, but built around a theme of their being excluded or otherwise treated as social pariahs due to their mixed-race heritage. In some cases - like half-orcs - the strong implication they are the unwanted child of violence.</p><p><b>Why Is This A Problem?</b><br />The chief problem with mono-cultured races comes from the systemic racism in our own world. Humans are allowed to be varied so that shouldn't be a real problem, right? Well, no, not really. The Western European centric style of D&D means that "humans" in this case means primarily white people - however much better the art is getting at showing variety - who are allowed to be good or evil depending on their personal wants. While the 'other', the other races, are locked into alignments and alignment patterns along with broadstroke guidelines for how they will act.</p><p><i>All</i> elves (the surface elves anyhow) are Neutral Good or Chaotic Good leaning, trained experts with sword and bow, live in artistic forest cities, are creatures of grace and beauty, speak eloquently, dress tastefully, and are the type of people who drink wine.</p><p><i>All</i> dwarves (again, excluding the underdark) are Lawful Good or Lawful Neutral leaning orderly types. Stout and hearty, hard working, like to make things with their hands, like to drink, speak with gruff voices with stoic personalities, and they pound their ale when not drinking the harder stuff like whiskey.</p><p>You start to see the problem? If not, I just gave details on how you could expect every elf/dwarf to act/be down to their alcoholic drink of preference. Not a lot of room for individual personality or creative expression within those stout tropes.</p><p>Thing is, it gets even worse when you factor in that the more monstrous races - representing the old xenophobic fears of those from further away/less understood lands - are often coded around minority identities. Orcs in particular have a lot of Black, particularly African iconography, encoded into their racial presentation while simultaneously being presented as dumb (they get an intelligence negative modifier even in 5e), strong, and savage people. You can just watch Django Unchained to get one reference to those very traits being mass attributed to black people in US History.</p><p>Beyond the problems of racism - which I am not in a position to talk about - there is also a major academic issue with this...</p><p><b>Culture Builds on Shared Experience</b><br />Culture is built around shared experiences, both the challenges and the aides. This is why the broadstrokes of culture are very much regional. In areas like Europe there is "French Culture" and there is "Irish Culture" but within those cultures are subcultures. The culture of Paris is different from that of Nice. The culture of Dublin is different from that of Wicklow.</p><p>How big the region is will impact how different those subcultures are because the larger the area the more different the shared experiences are. In part because distance will change those experiences, and in part because distance will keep the reactions to those experiences from being shared.</p><p>In a fantasy universe the dwarves who lived in the frozen north would be very different than the dwarves who lived along a coast, and both would be different from the dwarves who lived in a more arid or desert like region. There would still be some similarities from how their natural biological tools gave them ways to deal with challenges, but there would be many differences as well in mannerisms, diction, forms of expression, sustenance, and even libations.</p><p><b>Cultures Mix When They Clash</b><br />On top of that, you have to remember that as cultures clash and come in contact with each other they mix. Yes, this is part of where Cultural Appropriation comes in, when a powerful group just takes something from a weaker group without respecting or understanding it. However, there are other things as well. Language comes from this and changes with this. Ways of life can change with this. And entirely new subcultures can form out of the clash as groups of what was once two different cultures grow to have more in common with each other than their respective 'home' groups.</p><p>You see this in the real world all the time. Drive far enough on any road and you can see how slight changes in cuisine and other aspects of culture shift. There is no jagged line in the U.S. where you go from being in 'the North' with the yanks to being in the South. There is a slow, messy transition where aspects of southern culture have reached up into more northern states, and as you go further and further you see more and more of it until the aspects of northern culture are no longer reaching. It is a bit harder now a days with how connected everyone is, but you can still see it.</p><p><b>Classic D&D Is Always An Old World</b><br />This blending of cultures that happens with contact and conflict is where the mono-cultured approach of D&D always feels weird to me. See, in a brand new D&D world where the gods just made their races, mono-culture could make sense. There is only one kingdom of Wood Elves, and they've never interacted with non-wood elves, or at least non-elves. Same for the dwarves, humans, etc, etc. They've never come in contact with anything but themselves, and so they would have their way of dealing with life and that would be that.</p><p>However, that is never the case with a D&D world. We are always ages and millennia and eons later. The races of the world have been in contact - and in some cases in conflict - with each other for generations of even the longest lived races. There should be a mix and blend of the races in every major population center. The cultural lines shouldn't be along race but along region with potential sub-cultures around race/class inside those regions as like groups with like.</p><p><b>So Do Mono-Cultured Races Ever Make Sense?</b><br />Honestly, I don't think they do. Not if you actually look into it. As I said above, there is the possibility in the newest of fantasy worlds but those mono-cultures would break down almost as soon as contact with other people were made, and even then you wouldn't have a "Wood Elf" culture, you'd have a culture that the wood elves of a particular area had, which would be different from those of a different area. The closer two races were to each other, the more similar they would be from facing similar challenges - with clashes and blending then happening on contact.</p><p>In a Sci Fi world where an entire world or region was represented by one unified government it could appear that way on the surface. Just how there is "American Culture" and "European Culture" depending on what side of the Atlantic you're on. But that is less than skin deep, and below that would be myriad sub-cultures and individual identities that defied and conformed to the idea of the mono-culture in various ways.</p><p><b>All Of Which Means?</b><br />All of this means that if you're building a world don't think about culture as a matter of race. Think about it as a matter of shared experiences. Those shared experiences are likely to be more region based than anything else. So consider that and how it works. And never be afraid to show counter-culture examples inside an area. It doesn't break the world. It adds depth to the people in it.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-66368863412815112232020-11-16T00:00:00.001-05:002020-11-16T00:00:02.277-05:00Be Ready For Open Ended Choices<p> Open Ended choices are a necessity to come up in RPGs at times. There is simply no avoiding situations where the PCs have a blank slate in front of them - or just a problem - and all the options in the world open to them for how to overcome this obstacle. It is a chance for the Players to show their full creativity. However, it is also prone to bringing the game to a screeching stop if not worse if you, the GM giving the choice, are not ready for what it means when you give an Open Ended Choice to your players.</p><p><b>How We Think It Will Work</b><br />The idea is simple. It is the core essence of how RPGs should work. You provide a situation to your PCs, and they tell you what they do and the game goes forward from there. If the obstacle is in the way, the PCs tell you how they try to overcome it. If the choice is more about where they're going, they tell you which way. Easy, right?</p><p>Well, kind of...</p><p><b>How It Goes Over</b><br />Frequently what happens when an open ended choice is given out - especially in what could be a tense situation - is the game freezes. The Players presented with a simple "what do you do?" either freeze and look around like they were caught not having done their homework, or they start asking all sorts of questions that have at best limited relation to the situation you have in your mind. So what is going on?</p><p><b>In Your Head vs. In Their Head</b><br />The first problem, and the reason for all the questions and some of the freezing, is how the picture looks. You likely have the whole scenario in mind and know what everything looks like and what the relevant information is. This is easy for you, because you built the scenario. In the players head it may look completely different. And odds are it is <i>not</i> a complete picture.</p><p><b>Option Paralysis</b><br />The second problem is option paralysis. With <i>every</i> option open to the players (perhaps hyperbolically but you get the idea) choosing <i>one</i> option can be near impossible. This is especially true when there is a feeling of a choice being potentially wrong. If your players are creeping around and come upon a strange box in the middle of the road there are potential wrong answers. Which means the obvious choices - go and check it out - could lead to potentially bad results. Very often the players are frozen because they fear a wrong choice could cost them their character - or someone else's character. Other players are afraid of being ridiculed or mocked by their fellow players for doing the "stupid thing" that triggered an obvious trap.</p><p><b>Players Are Not As 'In Game' As They Should Be</b><br />Sessions tend to be 4 hours long. That is a long time to be in game, and frequently players will fall in and out of game as a session goes on. If one person is talking for a long time - especially if there is no change in the tone of voice - some people will check out. Even if they're completely interested in the game, the constant stimulus in unchanging tone/pitch from one person just turns into noise and their brain goes to check other things. It is essentially the 'falling asleep in class' problem, just for fantasy pretend games.<br /><br />How is this a problem? Because the player knows they're supposed to do something, but they don't know what, and they don't fully understand the situation. Only they don't want to ask questions or clarify because they're worried they'll come across as uninterested in the game or otherwise not engaged because their brain slipped out.</p><p><b>How To Be Ready?</b><br />So three problems, how can we be ready for this? First, be ready to answer questions, and when answering your questions keep in mind that your players don't have the benefit of picturing the scene in their head with the same clarity you do. Be kind to questions and give full answers. Point out what the important information is. And when players ask about doing potential actions, ask them what their hoped for results will be and work with them on achieving those.</p><p>Whenever possible be able and ready to summarize the situation in short, distinct points as a sort of summary. "In summary, there is a gift wrapped box in the middle of the road sitting there. You don't think this is a good place for an ambush. It is definitely strange. There is no way to continue forward without going past the box, or backtracking a third of a day to go the long way adding 2 more days to your trip." This loses a lot of the drama of the narration you did, but it sums up the situation into digestable bites your players can work with. It also helps bring anyone who may have missed something up to speed when their brain goes "shit, he asked a question. Pay attention!"</p><p><b>Better: Provide Options</b><br />An even better idea though is to never just drop an open ended question on your players. Instead, give them options with one of those options being room to go their own way. For example, with our gift box scenario you could present it as "Would you like to go forward as a group to investigate, have just the rogue go forward to check for traps, try to scan it from a distance, or do something else?"<br /><br />This doesn't cure the above problems, but by giving options and ideas you give people something to latch onto and work with. You show routes forward that they can take and ways they can deal with the problem.<br /><br /><b>Don't Open Session With An Open Choice</b><br />Finally, as a word of advice, try not to open session with an open choice. Your players aren't fully in their characters yet. The game isn't fully in mind. The session has no momentum. An Open choice starting things off can be a painful, grating experience and in some cases can kill a session dead because everyone will want to do something else, or won't know what to do, and then that is your session.</p><p>A closed choice however works well here. A few limited options to get things moving. Build up some momentum. And once the game is going and people are fully in character, you can open up the choices more and more.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-77717482935198708562020-11-11T00:00:00.001-05:002020-11-11T00:00:08.739-05:00Three Facts for an Intrigue Adventure NPC<p> Intrigue and political navigation can be hard to run. There are a lot of moving pieces, and it is a game more about subtlety and reading people than it is about killing and fighting. Most systems aren't built to handle intrigue, and even games that purport to have 'social interaction' as one of their <i>pillars of play</i> don't actually provide mechanics or much in the way of suggestions for playing this out.</p><p>For my own uses, when needing to prepare multiple NPCs for an intrigue attempt, I've found there are three things that can be good to have on hand - in addition to whatever normal stuff I prepare to be able to play the character. This does make an intrigue NPC more work, but you knew that by default when you chose to make a path of adventure for intrigue. Consider it this way though, you're choosing social mechanics and spygames over combat. So really this is just your combat prep time put to a different use.</p><p><b><span></span></b></p><a name='more'></a><b>Fact 1: An Embarrassing Secret</b><br />Everyone has secrets, and in an intrigue plot everyone is going to have multiple secrets. The Embarrassing Secret is the entry level secret. It is something that the NPC in question does not want getting out. Not because it will destroy them, but because it is embarrassing in some way. This could be as small as the fact they have sexual proclivities they'd rather not get out because it destroys their image as being a staunch traditionalist on family values, or it could be that they have a family member that commits crimes that they are keeping out of the paper to avoid assosciation.<p></p><p>The Embarrassing Secret is something that can be used for leverage on an NPC but it doesn't necessarily control them. It is good to know, and a player can help to hide it - or resolve it - to get in good graces, or they can exploit it to be taken seriously. Just remember, it is leverage not a <i>Rod of Control.</i></p><p><b>Fact 2: A Devastating Secret</b><br /><i>This</i> is the secret that is more of a <i>Rod of Control.</i> The Devastating Secret is just that, a secret that would be devastating to the NPC if it got out. It could lead to their death, loss of position, or otherwise just take them out of the game. The point is the NPC will do a <i>lot</i> to keep this secret from getting out, and a PC can get a lot of leverage over an NPC by knowing it whether they use it to blackmail the NPC or protect it for the NPC is up to them.</p><p>Just remember, this is the type of secret that the NPC would prefer no one had. Just knowing this secret exists can make the PCs dangerous to the NPC. So even if the PCs are using it to control or help the NPC, the NPC may still want out from under it.</p><p><b>Fact 3: What Hold, If Any, Someone Has Over Them</b><br />Finally we need to know what hold, if any, other characters have over them. Essentially, if the NPC is working or being coerced to work with another NPC, why are they doing it and what do they get out of it? Are they having their family held as leverage? Does someone else know one of their secrets? Are they being paid under the table exorbitant sums? Is someone feeding their addiction for rare underdark drugs or exotic, fluffy creatures to hug and snuggle when they're sad?</p><p><b>Between The Three</b><br />Between these three facts, along with my normal thing of defining the NPCs goal and their desire, you have a good picture of how they can work in your intrigue plot. You give them vulnerabilities to defend, levers for other characters to use, and things they are working towards.</p><p>Then all your PCs have to do is throw a bunch of monkey wrenches into the mix and you have an intrigue based plot.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-7187211955861608672020-11-09T00:00:00.002-05:002020-11-09T00:00:07.065-05:00PC Pets<p> In a couple of the games I run I have had PCs look to have pets for their characters. Pets are a weird things when it comes to RPGs - especially combat heavy ones like D&D. Why are they weird? Because animals tend to be fairly squishy and easily killed, especially as PCs get stronger. This isn't normally a problem, except that the idea of a pet also implies an emotional attachment.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>RAW it looks like a quick recipe for disaster and in character heart break. There's a reason in 5e your familiar is simply 'unsummoned' when reduced to 0 HPs, and the Ranger Beast Master companion gets extra HP and survivability.<p></p><p>So how do you handle it?</p><p>In both of my games I've made a simple deal with the players. Positioning in a fight is their responsibility. Beyond that, as long as they don't look to gain some kind of mechanical advantage with the pet in combat, I will not target it. This holds true for monsters and sentient creatures.</p><p>A mechanical advantage is more than just attacking. Helping fetch an item, blocking a square, threatening a square for an opportunity attack, getting an aura benefit. Riding it like a mount. All of these are examples of a mechanical benefit.</p><p>So far it has worked well. The pet can be there. The pet can do things. But as long as the Player doesn't involve the pet in combat, I also don't involve it in combat. It greatly reduces but doesn't remove the danger in combat. After all, if you're inside with your pet positioning can matter when people are throwing 20' radius AOE templates around. However, it does mean that I'm not going to just randomly obliterate someone's pet their character - and potentially player - is emotionally invested in.</p><p>Some people will feel different about this. Sam Riegel on Critical Role constantly jokes about killing the animal pets of Laura Bailey's characters. At the same time, the GM in that game also sees no reason to just randomly take away something the player loves for no reason. Ultimately it is a game, and unless you're going for a gritty, hardcore type game, why not let the creature alone until such time as it makes itself be noticed.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-28663609487108150832020-11-06T00:00:00.000-05:002020-11-06T00:00:05.036-05:00Discussion: Do You Alter Game Plans Based On Players Real World Situation?For those of us living in the United States this has been....a hell of a week. At the time of writing this it is showing no signs of slowing down either. From what I've seen online, the whole world may be watching the U.S. elections with held breath. I am not going to go into that, but I am curious about something tangentially related to it.<div><br /></div><div>When anxieties are high in real life, do you modify your game plans? I don't mean canceling vs. having game. I mean as the GM do you change the tone of a session? Lower the strain/stress? Up the mechanical crunch? Shift it up to hopefully be a more palatable experience for your players?</div><div><br /></div><div>I've found myself doing that this week. With the time I can spend focusing on prep. The session had the potential to be fairly grim, but with time to review plans and consider how the session would go over I've found ways to shift and adjust things to still hit the story beats I want, but keep things from getting as dark and depressing. A more obvious road to a 'heroic' path so to speak.</div><div><br /></div><div>I've only - that I can think of - done this once before. And that is back in February I specifically dropped a plague related arc in one of my games. With the Corona Virus starting to go rampant and people getting worried about it, it just felt a little "too close to home" to have in game at the time. The game didn't miss a beat, and any of my players who read the blog are only finding out now it was ever on the table.</div><div><br /></div><div>How about you? Do you adjust and shift to fit the mental and emotional reality of yourself and your players? Or do you find enjoyment in keeping it the same and just digging into it through the game?</div>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-46724689290336295002020-11-04T00:00:00.001-05:002020-11-04T00:00:08.208-05:00How Are Your PCs Known To The World?<p> After an adventure or two odds are your PCs have done something worth talking about. The exact story may not get out, but that a villain was defeated or a scheme was disrupted will get out and around. People will take those stories. They will embellish them. They will run with them and tell them all over the place. And by the time your PCs catch up with a version of their story they may not even recognize it.</p><p>But do you?</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>Running with the rumors and stories of a PCs deeds is not only a great way to have fun and show how things twist and disrupt over time, but can also put the PCs in fun situations where NPCs have expectations for them that they can't possibly match - for good or for ill.<p></p><p>So think of the outcome of your last adventure. How does the story of that spread? How do the bards and storytellers of your universe change it to 'be a better story'? How do you add drama, adventure, heroism, and villainy to it? Even if it already has those things in spades, people will still tweak and change things to suit their needs.</p><p>What do people where the PCs are next going know about it? How do they feel about it? Do people looking for a hero see this as their salvation? Or is it just another group of thugs coming to take what is theirs? Can the PCs change that view?</p><p>Have fun with it. let the PCs run into it. Let them enjoy the fame. Let the fame bring them to the attention of a bigger villain. And then have fun with that too.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2624244242117701070.post-63331672310152942382020-11-02T00:00:00.001-05:002020-11-02T00:00:03.804-05:00Be Careful With Hard Nos<p>Sometimes PCs take the wrong approach with an NPC. Sometimes the approach is so bad it is hard to conceive of a way for the NPC to do anything but give a hard no and shut off an avenue of inquiry. Doing so doesn't even violate the normal advice for GM's to not say no, because this isn't the GM saying no but the NPC. Still, it is something I find that you want to be really careful with - and if possible find a way to warn the players before it happens.</p><p><b><span></span></b></p><a name='more'></a><b>The Danger of the Hard No</b><br />The danger with a hard no, even from an NPC, is that it can leave the players feeling like they have no direction to go in. This can be the furthest from the truth. You could establish multiple options for people to use, and this is just shutting off one of those paths. In the moment however, the players won't feel that way. They'll feel like the path they tried was rejected. This, in turn, can make them feel like there is only one right way - and that you will only let them do a thing one way.<p></p><p>To say the least, this is not a constructive attitude and can bring a game session to a screeching halt. Even then, and even with time to cool off, I've rarely seen players fully acknowledge that the problem was in how they approached the NPC as opposed to approaching the NPC at all. Even when the 'approach' was taking hostages and making threats to an NPC who had no reason or positive gains from what the PCs wanted, nor any value to the things being threatened or taken hostage.</p><p><b>If Possible, Warn Before</b><br />You should know your PCs. And you should definitely know your NPCs. If you see the two heading for a clash - where perhaps there ought not be one for what the PCs are trying to do - it can be beneficial to warn the PCs ahead of time about the possibility. A simple "Your characters would know that this NPC won't react well to X/Y/Z approach, so it might be better to try A/B/C." Or an even less specific "How you approach the social situation will determine as much as your rolls whether or not you can gain anything. Just be aware before hand."</p><p>These warnings are good to give early in a campaign when social situations first come up. They are also good to remind people of if you haven't had social situations for a long period of time.</p><p>This is good because it lets the players know ahead of time that 1) this avenue is open for them to explore if they want, but 2) how they play it is more important (or as important) as their dice rolls. Having that established ahead of time makes when that hard no is earned feel a lot less like a capricious GM and more like the in character consequences of their actions.</p><p><b>Warn During the Scene</b><br />If you see the scene going south fast, and PCs responding to soft nos by doubling down on the path that is hurting them, it can be beneficial to give the most socially aware character an aside that their current plan is not only not working, but liable to shut down the possibility of any gain going forward. This lets the player know <i style="font-weight: bold;">before</i> things get locked out that that can happen. It is less good than warning before the encounter, but still a warning that something about what they're doing is down a path less than optimal for their intended goals.</p><p>This works particularly well as reinforcement if you did warn before the scene. It can also be done softer and earlier. "The king is taken aback by your approach and hardens his resolve before saying..." can be a big clue that the path taken is not the right way to get a 'social' win with this character - at least not with what the PCs have shown they have in paly.</p>A.L.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05306497273874881493noreply@blogger.com0