PDA

View Full Version : So how do I run a 3.5 bootcamp?



DericksDM
2010-06-04, 04:45 AM
So, long ago I began to DM... my experience at the time included 1 campaign in which i was the "new guy". So i rounded up my posse of friends and decided we would do a jaunt through a world comprised of my random thoughts, i lovingly named it Valorah, I am terrible with names.

So I started my players off with some bad habits, i heavily regret these but to be honest as inexperienced a DM as I was I was probably doomed from the start.

Examples: I would roll a random magic item off the Major scale DMG.And give 1 to each PC on roll up.
I would encourage power-playing by demonstrating great combo's, this template with that race and this class .......

Now its been 6 years, I've dealt with so many broken rules, and a character summoning/dominating an Effreti and getting wish spells for copper on the gold.

Now I am left at a crossroads, and ive desided to take door 1, and rehabilitate my players <this is going to be tough>.

So far I've come up with:
All characters are lvl 1 in next campaign, generation will be restricted to Core 3 books, back story requisites.
Pick one thing that the character will die for. This thing should be carefully thought out, as it could easily cause the demise of the character. Maybe your character cannot stand slavery. Whenever he runs into it in his travels he is forced to address it and correct it. And, he will fight to the death to do so. This will be a focal point of the character due to the deadly nature of the characteristic.
Decide on three things that your D&D character will always fight over. Maybe he has an unrelenting hatred for trolls and whenever he is near them he must find them and attack them. Or, maybe whenever he encounters citizens from a small, secluded town he feels compelled to fight them over past wrong-doings. Choose three possible situations or trigger mechanisms that your character will fight for.
Choose one thing that your character absolutely fears. This fear is something that will drastically alter how you play the character when he encounters this fear. It could be that the character has a fear of the open sea and will absolutely not travel on boats. Or, maybe he has a fear of fighting in high areas, like on a large bridge or in an open tower.
Pick one characteristic that defines your character to other people. This characteristic is what NPCs or other players usually refer to your character as being. "Yeah that Fighter, he's crazy." A crazy fighter could be someone that fights in a completely unpredictable matter. Perhaps there is method to his madness, but if there is only he apparently knows what it may be.
Decide on one supplementary character that is somehow connected with your character and very important. For example, perhaps your character is a distant relative of the king of a foreign land. Although you've never met the king, you bear the same last name and if you really needed it he may help you. Or, you might be the enemy of a powerful politician. You could have spoiled his election one year by casting light on misdeeds he had done, and he has still not forgotten of this.


So here's the challenge, i need to beat the Munchkin, meta-game, power-play, and kick in the door reflexes out of my Pc's..

Suggestions?

Jair Barik
2010-06-04, 04:54 AM
Have them pick their class and race then rolls 4d6 best three for stats 6 times, in order. That would prevent power gaming. Alternatively just veto really broken combos, limit your players to certain books, rule 0 certain things (e.g. the demons required for Punpun don't exist in this world, a God gets pissed off with you if you start chain summoning solars). If you want to be more harsh about it you could try tuckers kobolds on them. 'Yes you can all power game but I'd prefer you didn't, if you do powergame I will have to play the enemies intelligently.' For magic items don't roll randomly, don't give them items that are too powerful for their level and don't let them buy whatever they want. The books may give prices for the aid of a high level cater or for magic items but that doesn't mean those things are readily available, or that the people who have them are willing to help.

taltamir
2010-06-04, 04:59 AM
90% of the most broken stuff are in the core rulebooks, so limiting players to those will not solve anything...

in general limiting them would not be the solution. Talk to them, suggest that you try having a more roleplaying oriented game and come up with a balanced party that isn't grossly overpowered, doesn't metagame everything, and doesn't always resort to violence.

Some of them might not be interested in such a game, but there is nothing you can do for tastes. You can still be friends and find new people to play with. But I see no reason why most mature people would not be able to adapt and play at least a few games in such a manner, and who knows, maybe have new kinds of fun.

Just remember that your actual problem has absolutely nothing to do with game rules and cannot be solved with those. You are here asking for psychological advice for a social issue you are having. Be aware that this is a social/psychological issue and treat it as such.

J.Gellert
2010-06-04, 05:13 AM
This may be overkill, but I am tempted to suggest switching to a different system... Your players cannot abuse what they don't know, and may approach it more emphasis on roleplaying.

Alternatively, do the bookkeeping for them. Ask: "How do you picture your character?" to make them actually come up with a character, not a set of stats. You can also make them a series of questions, a test in this manner:
"You see a strange hooded figure in your home. How do you react?"

Then you take the character's description and reactions and try to extrapolate stats, handing your players custom-made character sheets.

Of course, that's a lot of work for you... But it can be fun.

DericksDM
2010-06-04, 05:15 AM
in general limiting them would not be the solution. Talk to them, suggest that you try having a more roleplaying oriented game and come up with a balanced party that isn't grossly overpowered, doesn't metagame everything, and doesn't always resort to violence.


I think limiting is a good way to show each of the players they are not without boundary's, I also consider it very important to not let them see this as a power fight. For some time now i have allowed all WOTC 3.5 material and 3.0 available upon approval and updating. Could you suggest another way of developing habits which lead the players to generate characters that aren't designed specifically to maximize a purpose rather than be a vehicle for a personality?



Some of them might not be interested in such a game, but there is nothing you can do for tastes. You can still be friends and find new people to play with. But I see no reason why most mature people would not be able to adapt and play at least a few games in such a manner, and who knows, maybe have new kinds of fun.

This may be the case, but as i have seen all involved play in a much heavier RP mode, you know when you see the twinkle in your players eyes, and they are on the edge of their seat? I think it came because they felt truly a part of their characters but now its gone, a symptom i believe of stat maximization being priority one now, and i suspect reducing the options available for generation will allow for a better integration to the character as a concept rather than a stat block.



Just remember that your actual problem has absolutely nothing to do with game rules and cannot be solved with those. You are here asking for psychological advice for a social issue you are having. Be aware that this is a social/psychological issue and treat it as such.

I agree, this is definitely a matter which is going to be only correct by modifying habits, and quite possibly rearranging the group, these are suggestions for different player types in one group in the dmg somewhere, but these guys are all friends, me included, i couldn't imagine another group after these last 6 years. I would like to do something to repair rather than disband this group, i expect it may be a lot of work and i expect a lot of resistance, but i expect in the end it should be worth it, thank you for your response i found your thoughts insightful and helpful.

DericksDM
2010-06-04, 05:18 AM
This may be overkill, but I am tempted to suggest switching to a different system... Your players cannot abuse what they don't know, and may approach it more emphasis on roleplaying.

Alternatively, do the bookkeeping for them. Ask: "How do you picture your character?" to make them actually come up with a character, not a set of stats. You can also make them a series of questions, a test in this manner:
"You see a strange hooded figure in your home. How do you react?"

Then you take the character's description and reactions and try to extrapolate stats, handing your players custom-made character sheets.

Of course, that's a lot of work for you... But it can be fun.

Its interesting you would suggest switching systems, i was just discussing with one of the players the other night the possibility of switching to GURPS for just that reason, I'm familiar with it so i could still handle the reigns and it would be uncharted territory. As for the generation idea I like it very much, but as munchkining has become so important to them i expect i couldn't conquer the resistance.

Eldariel
2010-06-04, 06:40 AM
Its interesting you would suggest switching systems, i was just discussing with one of the players the other night the possibility of switching to GURPS for just that reason, I'm familiar with it so i could still handle the reigns and it would be uncharted territory. As for the generation idea I like it very much, but as munchkining has become so important to them i expect i couldn't conquer the resistance.

Creating characters by rolling in order would mean many would have completely unplayable characters; rolling stats in order is a relic of OD&D and belongs as such. If you pick any class and roll low Con, you're dead. Sucks to be you. And if you roll low on the key ability, well, you're dead. Sucks to be you. OD&D had much more lenient curve in abilities.


And well, frankly, just simply rewording or banning some broken stuff so the game becomes less breakable along with gentlemens' agreement should do fine; whatever they use is a fair game to be used against them. That should help them rein themselves in somewhat. There are fixes going on all over the internet for 3.5; you could just use one of those.

And removing Pazuzu just delays Pun-Pun to level 5. What's the broken thing is the stupid Sarrukh and its "Manipulate Form"-ability. But Pun-Pun is just Theoretical Optimization so it shouldn't ever be a real factor in a real gaming table. Just avoid the strict RAW so things can't be broken because of RAWtarded readings and inform your PCs of it before the game.

Greenish
2010-06-04, 06:49 AM
Make them all play (non-casting) NPC classes. Use Burlew's Diplomacy fix (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/jFppYwv7OUkegKhONNF.html). Don't let them buy any magic items or trained animals they wish.

taltamir
2010-06-04, 06:36 PM
Its interesting you would suggest switching systems, i was just discussing with one of the players the other night the possibility of switching to GURPS for just that reason, I'm familiar with it so i could still handle the reigns and it would be uncharted territory. As for the generation idea I like it very much, but as munchkining has become so important to them i expect i couldn't conquer the resistance.

This is a good idea if you insist on trying to change them instead of having a mature discussion with them.
You could potentially form better habits, they might still psychologically associate DnD with "hacky slashy" while associating gurps with more mature roleplay... might being a key word.

TheThan
2010-06-04, 06:58 PM
A few random thoughts
Force them to play the NPC races. That way they have to survive through wit alone.
Try for a game with absolutely no combat, encounters should be of the Role-playing variety
Make them roll randomly for class, race, and stats (best method is 3d6 down the line).
Roll up character sheets for them and put yourself in charge of leveling up. they can control everything else though.
Switching systems is always an option.

742
2010-06-04, 07:37 PM
make them play characters more in the narrative sense than the 18 10 16 13 10 8 sense.

Prodan
2010-06-04, 07:38 PM
This may be overkill, but I am tempted to suggest switching to a different system... Your players cannot abuse what they don't know, and may approach it more emphasis on roleplaying.

What I'm hearing is a recommendation for Paranoia.

retkin
2010-06-04, 09:35 PM
Make xp much harder to obtain and then reward roleplaying and non munchkiny stuff that you see fit with xp bonuses. Don't force harsh roleplay restrictions on them as that just hampers their own ability to roleplay without said restrictions. Hating trolls doesn't make a character interesting.

DragoonWraith
2010-06-04, 10:13 PM
The number of people suggesting that you "force" the players to do anything is really depressing.

DericksDM
2010-06-04, 10:25 PM
Creating characters by rolling in order would mean many would have completely unplayable characters; rolling stats in order is a relic of OD&D and belongs as such. If you pick any class and roll low Con, you're dead. Sucks to be you. And if you roll low on the key ability, well, you're dead. Sucks to be you. OD&D had much more lenient curve in abilities.

Very much agreed, and "RAWtarded" has been added to my dictionary.


Make them all play (non-casting) NPC classes. Use Burlew's Diplomacy fix (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/jFppYwv7OUkegKhONNF.html). Don't let them buy any magic items or trained animals they wish.

I couldn't imagine I even finding that fun to play :-p and fun is rule -1. But as for the diplomacy revision,

The Big Reveal:

Diplomacy (Cha)

Use this skill to ask the local baron for assistance, to convince a band of thugs not to attack you, or to talk your way into someplace you aren't supposed to be.

Check: You can propose a trade or agreement to another creature with your words; a Diplomacy check can then persuade them that accepting it is a good idea. Either side of the deal may involve physical goods, money, services, promises, or abstract concepts like "satisfaction." The DC for the Diplomacy check is based on three factors: who the target is, the relationship between the target and the character making the check, and the risk vs. reward factor of the deal proposed.

The Target: The base DC for any Diplomacy check is equal to the 15 + level of the highest-level character in the group that you are trying to influence + the Wisdom modifier of the character in the group with the highest Wisdom. High-level characters are more committed to their views and are less likely to be swayed; high Wisdom characters are more likely to perceive the speaker's real motives and aims. By applying the highest modifiers in any group, a powerful king (for example) might gain benefit from a very wise advisor who listens in court and counsels him accordingly. For this purpose, a number of characters is only a "group" if they are committed to all following the same course of action. Either one NPC is in charge, or they agree to act by consensus. If each member is going to make up their mind on their own, roll separate Diplomacy checks against each.

The Relationship: Whether they love, hate, or have never met each other, the relationship between two people always influences any request.
-10 Intimate: Someone who with whom you have an implicit trust. Example: A lover or spouse.
-7 Friend: Someone with whom you have a regularly positive personal relationship. Example: A long-time buddy or a sibling.
-5 Ally: Someone on the same team, but with whom you have no personal relationship. Example: A cleric of the same religion or a knight serving the same king.
-2 Acquaintance (Positive): Someone you have met several times with no particularly negative experiences. Example: The blacksmith that buys your looted equipment regularly.
+0 Just Met: No relationship whatsoever. Example: A guard at a castle or a traveler on a road.
+2 Acquaintance (Negative): Someone you have met several times with no particularly positive experiences. Example: A town guard that has arrested you for drunkenness once or twice.
+5 Enemy: Someone on an opposed team, with whom you have no personal relationship. Example: A cleric of a philosophically-opposed religion or an orc bandit who is robbing you.
+7 Personal Foe: Someone with whom you have a regularly antagonistic personal relationship. Example: An evil warlord whom you are attempting to thwart, or a bounty hunter who is tracking you down for your crimes.
+10 Nemesis: Someone who has sworn to do you, personally, harm. Example: The brother of a man you murdered in cold blood.

Risk vs. Reward Judgement: The amount of personal benefit must always be weighed against the potential risks for any deal proposed. It is important to remember to consider this adjustment from the point of view of the NPC themselves and what they might value; while 10 gp might be chump change to an adventurer, it may represent several months' earnings for a poor farmer. Likewise, a heroic paladin is unlikely to be persuaded from his tenets for any amount of gold, though he might be convinced that a greater good is served by the proposed deal. When dealing with multiple people at once, always consider the benefits to the person who is in clear command, if any hierarchy exists within the group.
-10 Fantastic: The reward for accepting the deal is very worthwhile, and the risk is either acceptable or extremely unlikely. The best-case scenario is a virtual guarantee. Example: An offer to pay a lot of gold for something of no value to the subject, such as information that is not a secret.
-5 Favorable: The reward is good, and the risk is tolerable. If all goes according to plan, the deal will end up benefiting the subject. Example: A request to aid the party in battle against a weak goblin tribe in return for a cut of the money and first pick of the magic items.
+0 Even: The reward and risk are more or less even, or the deal involves neither reward nor risk. Example: A request for directions to someplace that is not a secret.
+5 Unfavorable: The reward is not enough compared to the risk involved; even if all goes according to plan, chances are it will end up badly for the subject. Example: A request to free a prisoner the subject is guarding (for which he or she will probably be fired) in return for a small amount of money.
+10 Horrible: There is no conceivable way the proposed plan could end up with the subject ahead, or the worst-case scenario is guaranteed to occur. Example: A offer to trade a bit of dirty string for a castle.

Success or Failure: If the Diplomacy check beats the DC, the subject accepts the proposal, with no changes or with minor (mostly idiosyncratic) changes. If the check fails by 5 or less, the subject does not accept the deal but may, at the DM's option, present a counter-offer that would push the deal up one place on the risk-vs.-reward list. For example, a counter-offer might make an Even deal Favorable for the subject. The character who made the Diplomacy check can simply accept the counter-offer, if they choose; no further check will be required. If the check fails by 10 or more, the Diplomacy is over; the subject will entertain no further deals, and may become hostile or take other steps to end the conversation.

Action: Making a request or proposing a deal generally requires at least 1 full minute. In many situations, this time requirement may greatly increase.

Try Again: If you alter the parameters of the deal you are proposing, you may try to convince the subject that this new deal is even better than the last one. This is essentially how people haggle. As long as you never roll 10 or less than the DC on your Diplomacy check, you can continue to offer deals.

Synergy: If you have 5 or more ranks in Bluff, you get a +2 synergy bonus to Diplomacy. No other skill provides a synergy bonus to Diplomacy.

Its now a house rule... that diplomacy fix un-breaks a lot i believe. Thanks for the link.



This is a good idea if you insist on trying to change them instead of having a mature discussion with them.
You could potentially form better habits, they might still psychologically associate DnD with "hacky slashy" while associating gurps with more mature roleplay... might being a key word.

Yes i am trying to tread softly, I don't want to change them, I really just want to remove habits i caused. GURPS probably wouldn't work to solve the issue just delay it, so I must in fact have a good conversation with my players.


Make xp much harder to obtain and then reward roleplaying and non munchkiny stuff that you see fit with xp bonuses. Don't force harsh roleplay restrictions on them as that just hampers their own ability to roleplay without said restrictions. Hating trolls doesn't make a character interesting.

Ya know i think I should change the way we reward players, if i shift the xp from combat over to rping, god knows how i could come up with a non ad-hoc system for that, they just might start swinging back. Has anyone come up with a RP'ing experience cheat sheet of sorts? I award Good Role Play experience at end of scenario, but maybe ill get rid of that, make it happen right when rp'ing gets heavy so they can see the change.

Thanks for all the reply's the advice is much appreciated everyone!

dariathalon
2010-06-04, 11:22 PM
I think the system change idea might be a good one. GURPS is a wonderful system, don't get me wrong. I like it a lot; it is one of my top two systems. But I think that you're not moving in the right direction here. I think a lighter rules system is a better choice. I saw Paranoia mentioned. That would be a good idea. It is light on crunch. And better still, it lays the smack down on the characters and the players can still have a good time with weak characters. Any system that focuses more on characters and less on mechanics could be a good one. Also, let the rule of cool run wild here. If players see that they can still have fun without a lot of rules saying they can, it'll go a long way.

Then when you do go back to a more rules heavy system (which honestly, I expect your players to be happier with from what you've said) don't make it be D&D right away. They'll slip right back into those old habits. Now might be the time to introduce GURPS or 4th Ed D&D or something like that. Let them retain the focus on character above cheap tricks in at least one solid campaign. Use system in which they don't know the cheap tricks, but do remember their recent experiences with creating fun characters which should translate to the new system.

On the other hand, maybe your players are happy playing the game this way. Some people are. If you aren't well, then that's something to have a conversation about. Ask them if they're willing to try to do things your way for awhile. I like to have a quick post-game discussion with my players after each session. I ask questions like what would they like to see more of? What do they think went well or not so well? Etc. You could also include a brief synopsis of what you thought went well. Praise them if they don't fall back into old habits.

Changing how you do experience might also have a positive effect. Instead of the DMG's suggestions give experience for achieving goals. Make sure the players realize that the harder they have to work to achieve their goals, the more they will get. Relying on munchkinly tactics means many goals will be trivial, whereas using more traditional means will result in higher xp gains. I personally don't like this method, because it still leaves the player's focus on their mechanics, but it might help to steer them into a way of playing that you're more comfortable with.