Following up on the last post, I wanted to talk about using low level creatures at high level. Low level creatures can be used at high level effectively; once players are past level 3 you can still throw orcs at them, it just takes a bit of thought.
In specific with orcs, I used them in my last game at the midgame point (9-12) and the players seemed to enjoy them a great deal. The simplest way to improve monsters is to give them class levels, but if that is all you do; the impact to the players will be minimal. Presenting a story or mystique to these "new" monsters can greatly improve the splash they make.
In my game I needed a repeatable monster for where they were in the world and decided to populate the area with a superior, previously unknown, breed of orcs. To make the different from standard orcs, I gave their skin a reddish hue and mechanically gave them a dex bonus. Aside from that they were the exact same as any other orc.
To make them more interesting, I decided they would have three main classes: archers, shapeshifters, and barbarians. I assigned them each different classes and number of levels to make the difficulty ramping up. Finally I gave the different classes names that implied what they did without being 100% clear. The archers were the Far Killers, shapeshifters were Skin Walkers, and the barbarians were Blood Drinkers.
I introduced them over time, with each class of orc mentioning or introducing the subsequent class, culminating in the Blood Drinkers. Before they even encountered the Far Killers, I introduced them from the perspective of a besieged tower that was being assaulted every night by a mysterious force that could kill at exceptional ranges and they could do little to stop them. By the time they actually encountered the orcs they had been built up and their first combat was all the more memorable because the PCs approached it cautiously instead of the typical reckless charge.
With a little creativity and thought put into basic monsters, you can use them at nearly every level to great affect. Beyond increasing bonuses and assigning levels, it is crucial to build up an air of mystery about them rather than just have them be a random encounter that is soon forgotten.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Monsters in Transition - Orcs
This time around we're going to step up on the monster ladder, but not too far, and take a look at Orcs. The slightly less common, slightly larger goblin of the D&D world.
Orcs are the next step up in the goblinoid ladder. Bigger and stronger than goblins, they typically lead goblins in battle. They also abuse the hell out of them. Usually the first few encounters in a standard D&D game start off with goblins and the go to orcs soon after.
Orcs tend to be stronger and more brutish than the other humanoid races. Early on they are a significant threat to the players, since there standard damage is 2d4+4 which is enough to severely wound or kill many 1st level characters. They are the stock fodder of D&D adventures.
Between Pathfinder and D&D little has changed. Their stats are still the same, their saves are slightly better in Pathfinder (with a -1 to Will instead of a -2). Their main weakness is a lack of intelligence and Light Sensitivity. In daylight and bright light they are dazzled. This sets up an interesting problem for PCs. These already dangerous foes are more likely to ambush at night when the party is asleep and unarmored, and they can make use of their darkvision, making them that much more lethal.
A significant and odd change happened in Pathfinder though, that bears mentioning. Orcs have a trait called Ferocity that lets them take action when they are in the negatives for hit-points. They can only take one action a round and they still lose 1 hitpoint a round, but in Pathfinder you die when you reach negative con score, not negative 10. Bundled with the larger hit die this gives them nearly triple the hitpoints of a D&D orc. They lose those last hitpoints quickly, but it gives them at least a round or two to drop PCs.
That is the significant change. The odd change is that their challenge rating went down to 1/3 instead of 1/2. While characters are slightly more powerful in Pathfinder than D&D, that power doesn't become evident right away, so the increase in killing power and duration paired with a lower CR makes for a dangerous balancing act on the GM's part.
Orcs are the next step up in the goblinoid ladder. Bigger and stronger than goblins, they typically lead goblins in battle. They also abuse the hell out of them. Usually the first few encounters in a standard D&D game start off with goblins and the go to orcs soon after.
Orcs tend to be stronger and more brutish than the other humanoid races. Early on they are a significant threat to the players, since there standard damage is 2d4+4 which is enough to severely wound or kill many 1st level characters. They are the stock fodder of D&D adventures.
Between Pathfinder and D&D little has changed. Their stats are still the same, their saves are slightly better in Pathfinder (with a -1 to Will instead of a -2). Their main weakness is a lack of intelligence and Light Sensitivity. In daylight and bright light they are dazzled. This sets up an interesting problem for PCs. These already dangerous foes are more likely to ambush at night when the party is asleep and unarmored, and they can make use of their darkvision, making them that much more lethal.
A significant and odd change happened in Pathfinder though, that bears mentioning. Orcs have a trait called Ferocity that lets them take action when they are in the negatives for hit-points. They can only take one action a round and they still lose 1 hitpoint a round, but in Pathfinder you die when you reach negative con score, not negative 10. Bundled with the larger hit die this gives them nearly triple the hitpoints of a D&D orc. They lose those last hitpoints quickly, but it gives them at least a round or two to drop PCs.
That is the significant change. The odd change is that their challenge rating went down to 1/3 instead of 1/2. While characters are slightly more powerful in Pathfinder than D&D, that power doesn't become evident right away, so the increase in killing power and duration paired with a lower CR makes for a dangerous balancing act on the GM's part.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Splitting the Party - A Day Late
I want to sincerely apologize for missing yesterday. Apparently the 3 day weekend screwed with my internal get stuff done calendar and the post fell through the cracks. Here it is a day late, but hopefully with exact change.
A lot of things can be learned from our childhood heroes. Some good (Goonies never say die!) some less so. One of the worst examples comes from Scooby Doo, where they split the party at every opportunity, to cover more ground, to search for clues, to do whatever is possible to keep the party from being in the same room at the same time.
Why is this a bad idea? There are two main reasons why, the metagame and the mechanics of a system.
For the metagame, splitting the party means that some people will be sitting around bored. I've been in games where one person and I went off to investigate someone in a town and it took nearly two hours to resolve; so everyone else had to sit around doing nothing. I lost track of time otherwise I would have made a comment that we should perhaps take a break. However, we got involved and lost track of time and not many people had fun that day. I commend the DM for allowing us to follow through on things like that, but it is an excellent example of what can go wrong with it.
Another metagame reason is that it puts a lot of strain on the DM to maintain two separate plots while the party is split. If the split persists for more than part of a session then the DM will need to do twice as much prep work than before.
The other reason I mentioned has to do with systems. In the mechanics of D&D are designed with a minimum party size in mind. If the party splits they may not be able to handle encounters that would be appropriate to their level.
However, if you are in a game with multiple DMs then splitting the party is entirely acceptable and expected. There are multiple DMs to handle the strain and also handle the split. The only concern at that point is to make sure that you are still capable of handling combat encounters (if they are a mechanic or concern in your game)
A lot of things can be learned from our childhood heroes. Some good (Goonies never say die!) some less so. One of the worst examples comes from Scooby Doo, where they split the party at every opportunity, to cover more ground, to search for clues, to do whatever is possible to keep the party from being in the same room at the same time.
Why is this a bad idea? There are two main reasons why, the metagame and the mechanics of a system.
For the metagame, splitting the party means that some people will be sitting around bored. I've been in games where one person and I went off to investigate someone in a town and it took nearly two hours to resolve; so everyone else had to sit around doing nothing. I lost track of time otherwise I would have made a comment that we should perhaps take a break. However, we got involved and lost track of time and not many people had fun that day. I commend the DM for allowing us to follow through on things like that, but it is an excellent example of what can go wrong with it.
Another metagame reason is that it puts a lot of strain on the DM to maintain two separate plots while the party is split. If the split persists for more than part of a session then the DM will need to do twice as much prep work than before.
The other reason I mentioned has to do with systems. In the mechanics of D&D are designed with a minimum party size in mind. If the party splits they may not be able to handle encounters that would be appropriate to their level.
However, if you are in a game with multiple DMs then splitting the party is entirely acceptable and expected. There are multiple DMs to handle the strain and also handle the split. The only concern at that point is to make sure that you are still capable of handling combat encounters (if they are a mechanic or concern in your game)
Friday, September 3, 2010
Breaking Camp
In honor of the miniature camping trip I have planned, I'm going to do a post on the useful shortcuts people take while gaming that speed up play; in specific camping.
Actual camping is an incredibly time consuming process. If you actual bother to set camp correctly, setting up the tents and sleep bags, collecting firewood, preparing food, it can take a long time. Breaking camp can take just as long. If you're going for realism, then making your players roll survival check after survival check to set things up and then checks to prep the food makes sense. I'm not sure how much fun that would be; but it would be realistic.
But does it add anything to the game besides 5 or 10 rolls? Presumably any adventurer knows how to set a camp well enough to not die. It may not be a comfortable camp, but they won't die. Does it cost anything to assume they do an ok job setting and breaking camp? Not really.
Prepping spells is another shortcut that I've always been comfortable cutting. I don't need any descriptions for what they're doing. I assume that the characters do what they need to do which takes an hour. In that time; the rest of the party can break camp like any competent adventurer can do.
Even in other systems, some shortcuts are useful. Routine, mundane tasks don't necessarily need to be roleplayed out. A rolled check and a description of the outcome should suffice. Unless it serves a specific purpose in the game (building tension or setting a particular scene) making players go through the entire motions of roleplaying and then rolling is a waste of time.
Actual camping is an incredibly time consuming process. If you actual bother to set camp correctly, setting up the tents and sleep bags, collecting firewood, preparing food, it can take a long time. Breaking camp can take just as long. If you're going for realism, then making your players roll survival check after survival check to set things up and then checks to prep the food makes sense. I'm not sure how much fun that would be; but it would be realistic.
But does it add anything to the game besides 5 or 10 rolls? Presumably any adventurer knows how to set a camp well enough to not die. It may not be a comfortable camp, but they won't die. Does it cost anything to assume they do an ok job setting and breaking camp? Not really.
Prepping spells is another shortcut that I've always been comfortable cutting. I don't need any descriptions for what they're doing. I assume that the characters do what they need to do which takes an hour. In that time; the rest of the party can break camp like any competent adventurer can do.
Even in other systems, some shortcuts are useful. Routine, mundane tasks don't necessarily need to be roleplayed out. A rolled check and a description of the outcome should suffice. Unless it serves a specific purpose in the game (building tension or setting a particular scene) making players go through the entire motions of roleplaying and then rolling is a waste of time.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Tech at the Table
Technology has (and will continue to advance) at exponential rates. This has brought us phones and devices that are always connected to the internet and allow us access to every distraction known to man.
So how do you handle tech at the table? These devices can simplify our lives greatly as far as gaming goes, but they can also provide endless and frustrating distraction.
Back when I gamed in college, we had a simple rule: you paid attention to what was going on. Gaming books were to supposed to be kept closed unless you were looking something up. You were respectful of what the GM was doing so you paid attention to it.
However, things are more complicated now. The aforementioned tech allows us access to books on PDFs, dice rollers, or digital character sheets. Laptops also do the same. They also provide access to Facebook, e-mail, and other digital distractions. Also, family and jobs are more of a responsibility than they were in college. Players may be on call during the game or family members may need to check in with them.
So how do you deal with it? Personally, we use a lot of tech when we game. Dice rollers make life easier when you need to roll many d10s for a White Wolf game, or the number of d6s needed for my homebrew system TROPE. Laptops allow us to use spreadsheets to automatically update characters as they take damage or level up.
Tech needs to be used responsibly though. It can't be excised completely because emergencies come up and need to be responded to appropriately. However, whether you are player or GM; you need to pay respect to the people who are playing with you. You've all decided to spend time together enjoying a hobby, so do that. Pay attention so you can act when it is your turn without slowing the game down. Use tech responsibly to speed up the process even more; but use it to play the game not to be distracted from it.
So how do you handle tech at the table? These devices can simplify our lives greatly as far as gaming goes, but they can also provide endless and frustrating distraction.
Back when I gamed in college, we had a simple rule: you paid attention to what was going on. Gaming books were to supposed to be kept closed unless you were looking something up. You were respectful of what the GM was doing so you paid attention to it.
However, things are more complicated now. The aforementioned tech allows us access to books on PDFs, dice rollers, or digital character sheets. Laptops also do the same. They also provide access to Facebook, e-mail, and other digital distractions. Also, family and jobs are more of a responsibility than they were in college. Players may be on call during the game or family members may need to check in with them.
So how do you deal with it? Personally, we use a lot of tech when we game. Dice rollers make life easier when you need to roll many d10s for a White Wolf game, or the number of d6s needed for my homebrew system TROPE. Laptops allow us to use spreadsheets to automatically update characters as they take damage or level up.
Tech needs to be used responsibly though. It can't be excised completely because emergencies come up and need to be responded to appropriately. However, whether you are player or GM; you need to pay respect to the people who are playing with you. You've all decided to spend time together enjoying a hobby, so do that. Pay attention so you can act when it is your turn without slowing the game down. Use tech responsibly to speed up the process even more; but use it to play the game not to be distracted from it.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Where'd my Story Go?
This is post is based off of a request I received (Look! I do requests!) about what to do when your players derail your story and manage to circumvent traps and encounters.
If your players manage to circumvent your traps and encounters, there isn't much you can do. To an extent your encounters can be moved to later in the session. Your traps can be re-placed on your dungeon so that the players have the opportunity to encounter them again. However, this should be done with caution. Whether your players circumvented them by chance or design; they should be rewarded for doing so. Simply moving everything forward so they can encounter it again cheapens the experience of trying to solve problems by working around them.
So what do you do when your players derail the story and go off in their own direction? That really depends on what kind of game you're running. If you're running a sandbox style game, you have to go with it because that is the point of sand box games.
If you're running a more controlled game you can either roll with it and see where the players take the story or gently guide them back to what you intended. If you shut down out of hand everything the players do then you'll get to a point where the players will just ask, "What do you want us to do here?" And that isn't really fun for anyone. Unless you are running straight dungeon crawl after dungeon crawl, then the players need to have some input on where they're going to go next and they need to have the freedom on how to approach the encounters you put in front of them.
If things get really out of hand, then you might have to make some hard choices. In extreme situations you may have to speak with the players (or player, if it is only one person derailing everything). That should get everything back into line. People usually don't realize that they're causing problems, because everyone but the DM may be having fun. If you're gaming with mature players that should be all it takes.
However, this may not take care of the problem for some groups. You can kick specific people out if they're causing problems, but that will cause a variety of problems in the long run. A better option, in the worst case scenario, would be to can the game. Even though you are the DM, you are still playing a game and you need to enjoy it as well.
Stories in RPGs can be sticky. If you want to tell a story that you have brewing in your mind, then you'll need to restrict your players a bit. Or, you can allow your story to change with what they do and that can lead to a richer story and unexpected surprises.
If your players manage to circumvent your traps and encounters, there isn't much you can do. To an extent your encounters can be moved to later in the session. Your traps can be re-placed on your dungeon so that the players have the opportunity to encounter them again. However, this should be done with caution. Whether your players circumvented them by chance or design; they should be rewarded for doing so. Simply moving everything forward so they can encounter it again cheapens the experience of trying to solve problems by working around them.
So what do you do when your players derail the story and go off in their own direction? That really depends on what kind of game you're running. If you're running a sandbox style game, you have to go with it because that is the point of sand box games.
If you're running a more controlled game you can either roll with it and see where the players take the story or gently guide them back to what you intended. If you shut down out of hand everything the players do then you'll get to a point where the players will just ask, "What do you want us to do here?" And that isn't really fun for anyone. Unless you are running straight dungeon crawl after dungeon crawl, then the players need to have some input on where they're going to go next and they need to have the freedom on how to approach the encounters you put in front of them.
If things get really out of hand, then you might have to make some hard choices. In extreme situations you may have to speak with the players (or player, if it is only one person derailing everything). That should get everything back into line. People usually don't realize that they're causing problems, because everyone but the DM may be having fun. If you're gaming with mature players that should be all it takes.
However, this may not take care of the problem for some groups. You can kick specific people out if they're causing problems, but that will cause a variety of problems in the long run. A better option, in the worst case scenario, would be to can the game. Even though you are the DM, you are still playing a game and you need to enjoy it as well.
Stories in RPGs can be sticky. If you want to tell a story that you have brewing in your mind, then you'll need to restrict your players a bit. Or, you can allow your story to change with what they do and that can lead to a richer story and unexpected surprises.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Game Pacing
Game pacing is a crucial, yet often overlooked aspect of planning a game; and one that I need to start paying more attention to.
Game pacing is all about how fast the story moves in your world and also controls how the world feels. A setting or campaign that is non-stop action and adventure can quickly wear out players and characters. Much like real people, characters need downtime to heal and recuperate; to purchase and craft goods for the next adventure. If you're constantly throwing catastrophes and climaxes at the players, it can rob them of needed time to process information. On the flip side, if the world moves too slow the players will lose interest. If they have nothing to do, they won't want to do anything and may become lethargic or slow to react when something does need to happen.
Pacing can also shift from session to session. Everyone knows that there are slow, planning sessions and then their are frantic, the plan has gone to hell sessions.
So why does this matter? When our group was gaming on a weekly schedule, the slow sessions didn't matter as much, since next week we'd be moving onto the next part. Now that we're gaming every other week; the slow sessions become more of a burden. That means that everything that happens during the session needs to have some import to the overall story. Random encounters that are nothing more than an xp gain need to be removed. I'm not saying that each and everything they touch or talk to needs to be crucial to the story, but anything that takes a significant amount of time needs to be looked at before decided whether to use it or not. Roleplaying out an encounter with an innkeeper? Short and easily doable. Making high level players actually fight with low level city guards? A waste of time. Assume they win, have them each take a negligible amount of damage and move on.
Game pacing is all about how fast the story moves in your world and also controls how the world feels. A setting or campaign that is non-stop action and adventure can quickly wear out players and characters. Much like real people, characters need downtime to heal and recuperate; to purchase and craft goods for the next adventure. If you're constantly throwing catastrophes and climaxes at the players, it can rob them of needed time to process information. On the flip side, if the world moves too slow the players will lose interest. If they have nothing to do, they won't want to do anything and may become lethargic or slow to react when something does need to happen.
Pacing can also shift from session to session. Everyone knows that there are slow, planning sessions and then their are frantic, the plan has gone to hell sessions.
So why does this matter? When our group was gaming on a weekly schedule, the slow sessions didn't matter as much, since next week we'd be moving onto the next part. Now that we're gaming every other week; the slow sessions become more of a burden. That means that everything that happens during the session needs to have some import to the overall story. Random encounters that are nothing more than an xp gain need to be removed. I'm not saying that each and everything they touch or talk to needs to be crucial to the story, but anything that takes a significant amount of time needs to be looked at before decided whether to use it or not. Roleplaying out an encounter with an innkeeper? Short and easily doable. Making high level players actually fight with low level city guards? A waste of time. Assume they win, have them each take a negligible amount of damage and move on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)