Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[General Roleplaying Games] It is our Fate to Run the Shadows Bearing Torches

1457910100

Posts

  • HogwartsneedswifiHogwartsneedswifi Registered User
    Me and a group of friends who have never gamed before (well, i've played a bit of dark heresy) want to start up a campaign. They all insist on the DnD starter kit. I want to do Mouse Guard, as I feel it will be a better introduction, and, as the GM, it will be more enjoyable for me. I need you to either confirm my desire, or comfort me with the knowledge that the first DnD session WON'T be painful and complicated.

  • Gandalf_the_CrazedGandalf_the_Crazed Vigilo ConfidoRegistered User regular
    DnD can be as simple or as complicated as you want it to be.

    When things feel too complicated, use this: http://roll1d12.blogspot.com/2012/04/dms-emergency-dodecahedron-outcomes.html

    PEUsig_zps56da03ec.jpg
  • schussschuss Registered User regular
    If you're going DnD, just sign up for 3 months of DND Insider for all the info you could ever want and a sweet character builder.

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    schuss wrote: »
    If you're going DnD, just sign up for 3 months of DND Insider for all the info you could ever want and a sweet character builder.

    I very strongly think for people who have never played the game before using the character builder the first time can be a huge hinderence. It's a great help to speed up rote tasks for people who know the system and just want to create a character. But for people trying to learn the system I think it glosses over too much so the players don't know what any of the numbers on their sheet mean, don't understand their powers or what their options are and don't notice if any of the numbers on their sheet are incorrect. Which is super common for a new player! It's easy to forget to equip your armor or some other little mistake in the tool which means your AC is off and a new player relying on the builder wouldn't know.

    Just use Essentials characters and set aside a full session for character creation. This thread (being the kind of strange, anti-D&D-angst-ridden beast it is) isn't the place for continuing this discussion but if Hogwartsneedswifi steps over to the 4th ed thread I am sure we can provide all the support he'll want if his group goes with D&D.

  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    I would honestly start with the free adventure and go from there to see if you like it before dropping a bunch of money. It's all set pieces, pretty easy to set up.

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    Vanguard wrote: »
    So these were released yesterday:

    dd-reprint-covers.jpg

    Anyone grabbing them?

    The covers are nice but I (and I think most people who would be interested in the product, god WOTC is just shitting themselves these days) have 30 year old copies of those same books sitting on my shelf already.

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    If they were cheap, I would. Just for the hilarity of owning 1E.

    But yeah, not paying a lot for something I'll probably never play. Been there, done that.

    the 1st ed Dungeon Masters guide is a pretty interesting read. Hundreds of pages, small type, multiple columns per page (!) and with little artwork. There is a ton of content there.

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    I would honestly start with the free adventure and go from there to see if you like it before dropping a bunch of money. It's all set pieces, pretty easy to set up.

    Keep on the Shadowfell is indeed a very good adventure yeah. Though both the "red box" intro set for 4th ed and the mini-adventure in the back of the Dungeon Masters Guide can act as a prologue for that module.

  • VanguardVanguard Je suis le savant au fauteuil sombre. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Yeah, I really want a copy of that book. The other stuff, not so much. Well, if I don't get fined into oblivion tomorrow at my court hearing, I will snag at least the DMG.

  • Gandalf_the_CrazedGandalf_the_Crazed Vigilo ConfidoRegistered User regular
    I have a hard-on for random tables right now. Currently filling up an Evernote account with tables for every conceivable situation. My favorite so far is labeled, "What the hell is that?" It's a series of d12 lists (from the blog I linked earlier) containing weird shit that could potentially be seen in different environments.

    So thread, what is your favorite table?

    PEUsig_zps56da03ec.jpg
  • LochielLochiel Registered User regular
    Me and a group of friends who have never gamed before (well, i've played a bit of dark heresy) want to start up a campaign. They all insist on the DnD starter kit. I want to do Mouse Guard, as I feel it will be a better introduction, and, as the GM, it will be more enjoyable for me. I need you to either confirm my desire, or comfort me with the knowledge that the first DnD session WON'T be painful and complicated.

    I guess I'll be the lone voice advising against D&D, mostly based on the fact that your group has never done TT RPGs before. It's complicated, rules heavy, and lends its self towards antagonistic play. 4D is much better in all of these regards; but as much as I love it, it is miniature war-gaming with some role play elements. Earlier editions are basically an excuse for the rules lawyer/bookworm to win arguments and break the system. My first experience was with 3ED, and it convinced me to not play RPGs. If you or other members of the group had experience with TT RPGs then I would not be saying this. An experienced / good GM can overcome D&D's faults easily.

    I can't speak for Mouse Guard; it's a system I want to try but I haven't had a chance yet.

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    edited July 2012
    I have a hard-on for random tables right now. Currently filling up an Evernote account with tables for every conceivable situation. My favorite so far is labeled, "What the hell is that?" It's a series of d12 lists (from the blog I linked earlier) containing weird shit that could potentially be seen in different environments.

    So thread, what is your favorite table?

    hehe, ok then yeah you really should get hold of the 1st ed DMG. There is a chapter (with as much text as a full RPG book the way they print stuff these days) with enough random tables to roll up an entire dungeon (including architecture, room dressing, monsters etc...)

    hmm, what else.

    The aptly named Rollmaster also had hell of charts up ins.

    edit: I think my favorite tables would be the critical hit charts from MERP (which are based on Rollmaster).

    RiemannLives on
  • VanguardVanguard Je suis le savant au fauteuil sombre. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    I have a hard-on for random tables right now. Currently filling up an Evernote account with tables for every conceivable situation. My favorite so far is labeled, "What the hell is that?" It's a series of d12 lists (from the blog I linked earlier) containing weird shit that could potentially be seen in different environments.

    So thread, what is your favorite table?

    DCC is probably your speed, too.

  • VanguardVanguard Je suis le savant au fauteuil sombre. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Favorite table is probably The Mercurial Magic table in DCC RPG.

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    Lochiel wrote: »
    Me and a group of friends who have never gamed before (well, i've played a bit of dark heresy) want to start up a campaign. They all insist on the DnD starter kit. I want to do Mouse Guard, as I feel it will be a better introduction, and, as the GM, it will be more enjoyable for me. I need you to either confirm my desire, or comfort me with the knowledge that the first DnD session WON'T be painful and complicated.

    I guess I'll be the lone voice advising against D&D, mostly based on the fact that your group has never done TT RPGs before. It's complicated, rules heavy, and lends its self towards antagonistic play. 4D is much better in all of these regards; but as much as I love it, it is miniature war-gaming with some role play elements. Earlier editions are basically an excuse for the rules lawyer/bookworm to win arguments and break the system. My first experience was with 3ED, and it convinced me to not play RPGs. If you or other members of the group had experience with TT RPGs then I would not be saying this. An experienced / good GM can overcome D&D's faults easily.

    I can't speak for Mouse Guard; it's a system I want to try but I haven't had a chance yet.

    I would phrase it differently but yeah, this.

    Though if what his players (who are the ones rooting for D&D) want is a game where they slay monsters in a dungeon with interesting tactical combat then hells yes go 4th ed. I would add that I think 4th ed is also the best route for that style of game from the DMs perspective as well. The 4th ed DMG (or, even moreso, the Essentials Dungeon Masters Kit) + the way they do monsters makes DMing interesting tactical combat and dungeon crawling a lot easier than any other game I've played (eg: every previous edition of D&D). It requires a tiny fraction of the prep time of 3rd ed.

    But yeah if they want something more focused on storytelling then go with something else.

  • Gandalf_the_CrazedGandalf_the_Crazed Vigilo ConfidoRegistered User regular
    Oh hey @Hogwartsneedswifi you should compromise with your group -- give them a D&D setting, but use the rules from a much more simple game. Example systems that might fit the bill:

    FATE -- can be any setting, including fantasy
    13th Age -- "rules-light, but not rules-lacking". This system has the crunchy bits your players seem to be looking for, but not quite so complex as D&D.

    If all else fails, you have 3 more options.

    1) "Well I'm the GM, so I'm choosing Mouse Guard. If you guys want D&D, one of you guys can GM."
    2) "Fine. But if we're playing D&D, I'm porting in some rules from FATAL that I think will fit nicely with what I'm planning for you guys."
    3) "You are a group of adventurers, met in a tavern. You somberly pledge your lives to each other, and set out to seek glory and riches. Just outside the tavern door, you encounter a grumpy wizard who transforms all of you into mice. But what kind of mouse are you? Fortunately, I have a system here to determine such things..."

    PEUsig_zps56da03ec.jpg
  • Mr_RoseMr_Rose 83 Blue Ridge Protects the Holy Registered User regular
    Favourite tables will always be any of the critical hit tables in WFRPG 1st and 2nd edition and their spiritual successors in the various 40kRPGs.

    ...because dragons are AWESOME! That's why.
    Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
    DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
  • AspectVoidAspectVoid Registered User regular
    Oh hey @Hogwartsneedswifi you should compromise with your group -- give them a D&D setting, but use the rules from a much more simple game. Example systems that might fit the bill:

    FATE -- can be any setting, including fantasy
    13th Age -- "rules-light, but not rules-lacking". This system has the crunchy bits your players seem to be looking for, but not quite so complex as D&D.

    If all else fails, you have 3 more options.

    1) "Well I'm the GM, so I'm choosing Mouse Guard. If you guys want D&D, one of you guys can GM."
    2) "Fine. But if we're playing D&D, I'm porting in some rules from FATAL that I think will fit nicely with what I'm planning for you guys."
    3) "You are a group of adventurers, met in a tavern. You somberly pledge your lives to each other, and set out to seek glory and riches. Just outside the tavern door, you encounter a grumpy wizard who transforms all of you into mice. But what kind of mouse are you? Fortunately, I have a system here to determine such things..."

    Your 1 and 3 are good ways to lose your gaming group. Your 2 may be a bit too complicated for new players.

    In all honesty, D&D 4th ed is not a bad system to introduce people to gaming. Everything is spelled out, your options are fairly limited, and there aren't very many ways for the PCs to break the game. 3rd Ed is fine for beginners who don't really understand gaming, but an even semi-experienced player (for instance, when your players start reaching the early teens in levels) will be able to break the game. A really experienced gamer will make the monster manual bend over and ask for more.

    PSN|AspectVoid
  • Gandalf_the_CrazedGandalf_the_Crazed Vigilo ConfidoRegistered User regular
    Your 1 and 3 are good ways to lose your gaming group. Your 2 may be a bit too complicated for new players.

    thatsthejoke.jpg

    PEUsig_zps56da03ec.jpg
  • LochielLochiel Registered User regular
    I agree with everything @RiemannLives said; including the part about how I should have phrased it more gooder. The word brain thingy not worky.

    BTW, I think that saying "Sorry guys, this isn't a system I'm interested in GM'ing, thus I won't be able to GM it well. One of you will need to GM it" is the perfect way to deal with most of the group wanting to play system X. Just be sure to follow through and play it as a player when someone steps up to GM. I also think that rotating GMs and game systems are healthy and productive things for a group to do.

  • AspectVoidAspectVoid Registered User regular
    Your 1 and 3 are good ways to lose your gaming group. Your 2 may be a bit too complicated for new players.

    thatsthejoke.jpg

    I've seen WAY too many people in my gaming life actual use both 1 and 3 that I wasn't going to risk it. Better safe then sorry. Like how at the start of a dungeon your rogue should always say "I am always searching for traps." Better safe than sorry.

    I am also a big supporter of rotating systems and DMs. It really does help keep things fresh and interesting.

    PSN|AspectVoid
  • SUPERSUGASUPERSUGA Registered User regular
    Lochiel wrote: »
    Me and a group of friends who have never gamed before (well, i've played a bit of dark heresy) want to start up a campaign. They all insist on the DnD starter kit. I want to do Mouse Guard, as I feel it will be a better introduction, and, as the GM, it will be more enjoyable for me. I need you to either confirm my desire, or comfort me with the knowledge that the first DnD session WON'T be painful and complicated.

    I guess I'll be the lone voice advising against D&D, mostly based on the fact that your group has never done TT RPGs before. It's complicated, rules heavy, and lends its self towards antagonistic play. 4D is much better in all of these regards; but as much as I love it, it is miniature war-gaming with some role play elements. Earlier editions are basically an excuse for the rules lawyer/bookworm to win arguments and break the system. My first experience was with 3ED, and it convinced me to not play RPGs.
    Original d&d and the basic sets that followed are both good entry points but can be poorly laid out. Swords & Wizardry and Labyrinth Lord are much more accessible clones of od&d and basic d&d respectively. The microlite20 games would also be great introductions for new players.

  • kaortikaorti Registered User regular
    Lochiel wrote: »
    Me and a group of friends who have never gamed before (well, i've played a bit of dark heresy) want to start up a campaign. They all insist on the DnD starter kit. I want to do Mouse Guard, as I feel it will be a better introduction, and, as the GM, it will be more enjoyable for me. I need you to either confirm my desire, or comfort me with the knowledge that the first DnD session WON'T be painful and complicated.

    I guess I'll be the lone voice advising against D&D, mostly based on the fact that your group has never done TT RPGs before. It's complicated, rules heavy, and lends its self towards antagonistic play. 4D is much better in all of these regards; but as much as I love it, it is miniature war-gaming with some role play elements. Earlier editions are basically an excuse for the rules lawyer/bookworm to win arguments and break the system. My first experience was with 3ED, and it convinced me to not play RPGs. If you or other members of the group had experience with TT RPGs then I would not be saying this. An experienced / good GM can overcome D&D's faults easily.

    I can't speak for Mouse Guard; it's a system I want to try but I haven't had a chance yet.

    I agree with Lochiel here. D&D can be a lot of fun, but it brings some unvoiced assumptions with it which can trip people up. The system can break down if you play it in a way which it wasn't designed for, and it can be hard to notice those breakpoints until after they've hurt your game. It's good if you just want to move through a dungeon killing monsters though.

    If you players want a medieval fantasy game and you want mouse guard, Burning Wheel might be a good place to start. A copy of burning wheel gold will cost about $25, add some six sided dice and you have what you need to run the game. It was written by the same person who designed mouse guard, and uses a bunch of the same mechanics.

    New players often have some of the most imaginative contributions to the game. D&D Isn't really set up to take advantage of that, and often promotes more rules-focused gameplay.

  • poshnialloposhniallo Registered User regular
    If people want to try D&D, give them a game of D&D.

    The starter set is free, if it turns out they don't like it.

    I figure I could take a bear.
  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    poshniallo wrote: »
    If people want to try D&D, give them a game of D&D.

    The starter set is free, if it turns out they don't like it.

    I think the advice about having someone else run it is good. I don't think it's a good idea going into a game when the DM is not into it.

  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    My favorite table is the potion mixture table from 1E AD&D. Like, in 1st ed, you could not drink more than one potion at a time and not risk exploding. Of course, you might also get one of the potions with a permanent effect (better hope it wasn't the speed potion that ages you a year...).

    Ugh. Tables. So we're starting a 3.5E Ptolus campaign, and I have an idea for a druid/monk (Druid to 8, get brown bear wild shape, then go Monk thereafter for Literal Bear Style Kung Fu). My DM is a good guy, I've gamed with him plenty, but he's extremely rules-centric, to the point where he insists that the Flurry of Blows is only based on monk BAB because that's what the table (which is clearly a just a handy reminder for single-class monks) shows. Don't read the actual text where it goes into detail about what Flurry means. Ignore the fact that all 3.5E logic dictates that BAB bonuses stack between classes.

    Don't even worry that my character will have just as many attacks with vastly superior BAB just by using the normal BAB attack progression, rendering Flurry truly meaningless until Druid 8/Monk 11 (when it gains its last bonus attack).

    I hate to argue with the DM, and the character definitely has something to contribute regardless, but the whole "let's hobble monks just because" attitude really bugs me.

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • AspectVoidAspectVoid Registered User regular
    jdarksun wrote: »
    I hate to argue with the DM, and the character definitely has something to contribute regardless, but the whole "let's hobble monks just because" attitude really bugs me.
    Flurry stacking with natural weapons has the change to get out of control really fast. If you do want to discuss it with him, showing that your character isn't getting a damage advantage out of Flurry of Bearform would probably be a good avenue.

    This is speaking as a DM who had to stop a player from playing a 3.5 Gravetouched Ghoul Monk because of ridiculous damage output.

    Personally, speaking as a DM, I would allow Flurry of Bear Arms in a 3.5 campaign. There are far more breaking combinations, after all. As a player, my favorite was Fighter/Barbarian/Sorcerer/Dragon Disciple/Frenzied Berserker. Play Human, set STR to 18, make and Fighter your Favorite Class. You go 2 levels Fighter, 1 Barbarian, 2 Sorcerer, 5 Dragon Disciple, and the rest into Frenzied Beserker.

    Taking the build to just Level 10:
    Start with an 18 STR. Put both of your ability boosts into STR, making it 20. Your five levels of Dragon Disciple increases it to 24. Cast Fist of Stone on yourself increasing it to 30. Next, you Rage, increasing your STR to 34. Finally, you Frenzie, giving you an effective Strength in battle of 40 at Level 10.

    PSN|AspectVoid
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    jdarksun wrote: »
    I hate to argue with the DM, and the character definitely has something to contribute regardless, but the whole "let's hobble monks just because" attitude really bugs me.
    Flurry stacking with natural weapons has the change to get out of control really fast. If you do want to discuss it with him, showing that your character isn't getting a damage advantage out of Flurry of Bearform would probably be a good avenue.

    This is speaking as a DM who had to stop a player from playing a 3.5 Gravetouched Ghoul Monk because of ridiculous damage output.

    Well, he's not allowing me to use my natural weapons in Flurry without the Feral Combat Training feat from Pathfinder (and for the most part just being a large monk does similar or better damage anyway), and he's not letting me add my natural weapons to my attack like a monster would (like a Hound Archon's BAB sequence for weapon, then creature multi-attack-rules Bite). So I'd only be doing my Large Monk damage. Yes, I would get my full Str bonus on all hits, which is significant, but the attack progression would be hilarious:
    BAB Only:

    Character Level 9 (Druid 8/Monk 1)
    Normal Punch: +6/+1
    Flurry Punch: -2/-2

    Character Level 12 (Druid 8/Monk 4
    Normal Punch: +9/+4
    Flurry Punch: +1/+1

    Character Level 17 (Druid 8/Monk 9)
    Normal Punch: +12/+7/+2
    Flurry Punch: +6/+6/+1

    Character Level 19 (Druid 8/Monk 11)
    Normal Punch: +14/+9/+4
    Flurry Punch: +8/+8+8/+3

    I'm not even getting more attacks until character level 19 which... I can't imagine that this was the intent when they created the power.

    I laid this out for him last night, and linked him to the Pathfinder errata that's like "dude, yes, they get their BAB for Flurry. What's wrong with you?" this morning. Haven't gotten a response yet.

    If he doesn't cave, I'm going the Improved Grapple route and slowing every combat down to a standstill. Actually I might do that anyway, bear form has some ridiculous good grapple rolls.

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • OatsOats Registered User regular
    So I think I may be Watcher-ing a game of the Marvel Heroic Roleplaying.

    I've never GM'd, ST'd, etc before.

    Tips and tricks? One of the characters I expect to munchkin rather hard, and the other I expect not to. The third I imagine won't.

    I've heard the system is pretty hard to break though.

  • DenadaDenada Registered User regular
    edited July 2012
    Oats wrote: »
    So I think I may be Watcher-ing a game of the Marvel Heroic Roleplaying.

    I've never GM'd, ST'd, etc before.

    Tips and tricks? One of the characters I expect to munchkin rather hard, and the other I expect not to. The third I imagine won't.

    I've heard the system is pretty hard to break though.

    Yeah you really can't break it too much. No matter how crazy a character is, they're still assembling the same size dice pool as anyone else. At worst one or two of their dice will be bigger than another character's, which isn't that big of a deal. There are point-buy character creation rules online that people have posted that you can take a look at. I used them in my game so that the players would feel at ease about being balanced with each other.

    I just ran my second session of MHR last night (post incoming about that), and in my limited experience, here are some things that might be helpful:

    -Spend some time talking about how to assemble dice pools. The faster you and your players can do this the better the game will flow.

    -Spend some time talking about the different things effect dice can do (causing stress, creating complications, creating assets, performing stunts, creating resources, etc) and how those different things work.

    -Read the rules a couple of times, particularly the section on the doom pool. It can be tricky to remember all the nuances of the doom pool, and you might miss out on some cool things if you're not familiar with it.

    -Be flexible. Your players will try to do crazy things, which is great. They're superheroes and this is a comic book game, so crazy stuff should be happening. If they want to grab the enemy robot and teleport it to Antarctica, just go with it.

    Seriously, "Just go with it" should be your motto for the game. It makes things easier for you and more fun for your players, which are two excellent things.

    Denada on
  • SageinaRageSageinaRage Registered User regular
    1) "Well I'm the GM, so I'm choosing Mouse Guard. If you guys want D&D, one of you guys can GM."

    I'm not sure why people are talking down on this, as this is exactly how it should be. The person who should be most excited about playing a game is the GM, and if they're not, then the game is going to suffer. As being GM requires the most work and effort, it should absolutely be up to them what they want to run. I've been the gm of a system I didn't really want to run before, and it became a miserable slog.

  • AspectVoidAspectVoid Registered User regular
    1) "Well I'm the GM, so I'm choosing Mouse Guard. If you guys want D&D, one of you guys can GM."

    I'm not sure why people are talking down on this, as this is exactly how it should be. The person who should be most excited about playing a game is the GM, and if they're not, then the game is going to suffer. As being GM requires the most work and effort, it should absolutely be up to them what they want to run. I've been the gm of a system I didn't really want to run before, and it became a miserable slog.

    If the players don't want to play the game, they will first make the GM's life miserable, and then they will stop showing up. It doesn't matter how excited the GM is if he has no players. In order to have a successful game, both the players and GM must be equally interested and invested. If this is not the case, the game will fail, normally within two or three sessions.

    PSN|AspectVoid
  • OatsOats Registered User regular
    I got MHR for 10 bux yesterday (PDF only). The system is neat, but all of us are heading in to it without any prior experience.

    Thanks @Denada for the tips.

  • LochielLochiel Registered User regular
    AspectVoid wrote: »
    1) "Well I'm the GM, so I'm choosing Mouse Guard. If you guys want D&D, one of you guys can GM."

    I'm not sure why people are talking down on this, as this is exactly how it should be. The person who should be most excited about playing a game is the GM, and if they're not, then the game is going to suffer. As being GM requires the most work and effort, it should absolutely be up to them what they want to run. I've been the gm of a system I didn't really want to run before, and it became a miserable slog.

    If the players don't want to play the game, they will first make the GM's life miserable, and then they will stop showing up. It doesn't matter how excited the GM is if he has no players. In order to have a successful game, both the players and GM must be equally interested and invested. If this is not the case, the game will fail, normally within two or three sessions.

    Which is why the 2nd part of that quote is so important. "If you guys want D&D, one of you guys can GM." Ok, sure, the original phrase isn't phrased well (it sounds petulant); but the meat of what is being said is dead on.

  • DenadaDenada Registered User regular
    Alright, so my second session of MHR:

    Pre-Session:
    While we were all gathering together, finding dice, tweaking character sheets, and generally getting ready, I had a slideshow up on the monitor on a loop that went over some of the basics of rolling dice and spending plot points. It wasn't required reading or anything, I had it there just so that everyone could see it and get a refresher on how to play while we were gearing up to start the session.

    The Heroes:
    Artemis - Shapeshifting weather controller with a magic whip.
    Omniknight - Arcane elemental controller with magic armor and a big sword.
    Technicus - Technological whizkid with crazy gadgets.
    Aura - Telepath that can talk to animals and control emotions.
    Rock Man - Mutant with mimic powers, super-strength, and a high-tech bass-weapon.

    The Game:
    At the end of the last session, the players destroyed a pair of robots (stolen directly from The Incredibles) right before finding out that the robots were communicating with someone or something called SHIELD and right before being visited by someone calling himself Iron Man, who said he knew some people they needed to meet.

    The start of this session was right where they left off. The twins (Technicus and Aura) fled the scene and started digging through the robot's command log, where they found a set of coordinates that they traced to Antarctica. Their computer was hacked by someone, who told them that they should go to the airport in two hours if they want to find out what's going on. Since the twins could teleport wherever they wanted to go, they decided to just start packing up their stuff and go to Antarctica themselves.

    Meanwhile, the other heroes started talking to Iron Man, who told them to meet him at the airport in two hours for answers and a mission. They agreed to go, hid the remains of the robot, then dispersed to get ready.

    While everyone was getting ready, four more omnidroids landed in the area, conveniently near wherever they were at the time. Technicus took on one of them himself, teleporting it (and himself) to Antarctica where they fought on a snowy ridge overlooking a jungle. Aura took on an omnidroid by herself, flying around it and using the robot's telepathic interface to override its control system and basically tell it to destroy itself.

    Elsewhere, Omniknight and Artemis took on another omnidroid, using a tidal wave to wash it into the ocean, a whirlpool to keep it in place, and a supercharged bolt of lightning to make it explode. While they were doing that, Rock Man was dealing with another omnidroid nearby, which he smashed with his bass before using his Mimic powers to phase inside of it and destroy it.

    With that done, all of the heroes were eager to get to the airport to find out what the hell was going on with all these robots and where all these black helicopters and SUVs were coming from. There they met Tony Stark, who told them some of what was going on and asked them to work for SHIELD to investigate a top-secret (and supposedly shut down) SHIELD base in Antarctica, which is where the omnidroids appear to be launching from. They agreed to help, boarded a plane, and we closed the session as they arrived on the SHIELD helicarrier.

    Behind the Scenes:
    Two sessions in, this game is still incredibly fun to run. Reacting to their decisions is no harder that jotting down a couple of Scene Distinctions if they end up somewhere I wasn't expecting. I kept putting them in charge of narrative aspects that I would normally take care of myself, and the combination of an easier burden for me and more narrative control for them was wonderful. They would ask me question about what's happening, like "Did he see me driving away?" and I would respond with, "What do you think? Did he see you driving away?" and I loved it. They went from asking if they could do things and asking about what happens to saying "I do this." and "This is what happens."

    I'm excited about the next session, which will be in a couple weeks. They're going to head to the abandoned SHIELD base in the Savage Land, fight some dinosaurs and rogue shield agents, and find out that it was all a distraction while the real threat breaks open a supervillan prison that they didn't even know existed.

  • LochielLochiel Registered User regular
    edited July 2012
    My TT RPG group, it turns out, is abnormally organized. We've got the next 3 months scheduled out and we usually don't have last second changes. However, we suck at actually showing up. In the next 3 months we're having a full group show up twice. The GM of the primary campaign (4th Edition) doesn't want to play with a partial group at this time as a whole lot of plot is about to go down.

    Instead, we are getting together and one shotting other gaming systems. We did Fiasco Thur night using a custom built playset that put the story in the same world as the primary 4E campaign at a major city that might be plot significant. Make a note here, it was a huge success. It's hard to overstate my satisfaction. Not only did we have an insane amount of fun playing Fiasco, but we added some depth and NPC's to the primary campaign. Even if we may never see or interact with it directly, it is still there.

    But that leaves 3 more months of one shots. What systems do people recommend that would be good for one session games?

    Lochiel on
  • SageinaRageSageinaRage Registered User regular
    Lochiel wrote: »
    AspectVoid wrote: »
    1) "Well I'm the GM, so I'm choosing Mouse Guard. If you guys want D&D, one of you guys can GM."

    I'm not sure why people are talking down on this, as this is exactly how it should be. The person who should be most excited about playing a game is the GM, and if they're not, then the game is going to suffer. As being GM requires the most work and effort, it should absolutely be up to them what they want to run. I've been the gm of a system I didn't really want to run before, and it became a miserable slog.

    If the players don't want to play the game, they will first make the GM's life miserable, and then they will stop showing up. It doesn't matter how excited the GM is if he has no players. In order to have a successful game, both the players and GM must be equally interested and invested. If this is not the case, the game will fail, normally within two or three sessions.

    Which is why the 2nd part of that quote is so important. "If you guys want D&D, one of you guys can GM." Ok, sure, the original phrase isn't phrased well (it sounds petulant); but the meat of what is being said is dead on.

    Exactly. If a player doesn't like the system, they can feel free to take on the burden of GM'ing themselves, instead of complaining about the burden that another GM has taken on. Having invested players is important, but having an invested GM is MORE important, especially when the GM is the one doing all the work (or at least the majority of the work).

    Maybe other people have had different experiences, but in my gaming life, finding players is usually fairly trivial, but finding someone willing to GM (and good at it) is way more difficult. I'm willing to play what they want to GM in order to keep them happy.

  • VanguardVanguard Je suis le savant au fauteuil sombre. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    I hate to entitle one side of the equation more than the other, but the DM has to be excited about what they're running because it's their job to get the players to react and engage. If the DM is not engaged themselves, this is going to be harder.

    One of my groups is almost exclusively Pathdinder. I introduced them to DCC a few months back and most like/ love it. Only one player isn't sold, but is willing to play. I'm currently in the DM seat in that group and have told them that I'll play anything, but I refuse to DM Pathfinder. The amount of prep and the pace of the game make it absolute torture fr me to DM.

    That should be the attitude of everyone in a group. Try/play anything, but GM the system you want the most.

  • AspectVoidAspectVoid Registered User regular
    I firmly believe that players and DM are equal, and if either side is lacking, then the campaign is doomed. If either side of the table is lacking, then the game will go nowhere and everyone will have a rotten time, leading to the destruction of the campaign.

    No matter how excited or invested the DM is, if the players do not want to play the campaign, its going to go nowhere.

    No matter how excited or invested the players are, if the DM doesn't want to run the campaign, its going to go nowhere.

    You MUST have full investment from both sides. I've been the excited DM who's had the players abandon and kill the campaign. I have been the excited player who has had the DM abandon and kill the campaign. I have also been the DM who has fully run a successful campaign. And I have been the player who has fully played through a successful campaign.

    The successful campaigns have ONLY happened because both players and DM were excited to play every session.

    PSN|AspectVoid
  • kaortikaorti Registered User regular
    In any system where the GM is expected to manage the setting or the plot, the GM must be excited and invested. An excited, invested GM can make a game fun enough that players who would prefer another system still enjoy the game. Whenever the players expect the DM to keep the game running or to develop new plot points, the GM must be on board, because the GM has the wrangle the system into creating a fun time for the players.

    The players and the GM are equal in the sense that they both deserve to have a good time, but the differences in the roles of a player vs a GM in the more traditional RPGs mean that the GM has the greatest need for an agreeable system, and that if the system is agreeable to the GM, then the players can have a great game, even if the system isn't their first choice.

    If we only play games when everyone thinks the same system is the best choice, more often than not there won't be any gaming for long.

This discussion has been closed.