PDA

View Full Version : PC's in the dark.



Tharck
2010-08-18, 01:45 PM
Thinking about running a campaign with the following guidelines:

- The DM keeps all PC character sheets. At no time does a PC get to see their sheet until after they are dead and a new one is being rolled up.

- The DM creates the character to a style of the player's choosing. Such as - I want to be a Evoc Spec Wizard. The DM fills in all other details, including skill selection, history, gear, skills, feats, spells ect.

- PC's will manage their own consumables, items, and spells.

- PCs roll d20s but only tell the DM what they rolled, the DM secretly modifies all results based on characters stats, skills, ect. PCs also roll their own dice of damage but again any modifiers I done by the DM.

- The DM will have to accurately describe when a PC takes damage, how they're feeling, ect. Such as "The snake sinks his fangs into the side of your face while wrapping you up in body, constricting you. You can feel your ribs bending as your breath gets knocked out of your lungs. Shooting fire erupts in your veins before a cold numbness washes over you, making you feel sluggish and weak" This describes some damage taken from the bite (in his face might mean considerable damage), the constriction is hurting but hasnt done anything really bad yet, and he's obviously poisoned.

This is in hopes that the PCs will take descriptive cues more seriously, Min/Maxing is no longer an issue, and hopefully encourage more role-play. Also damage will seem more sincere, as will hitting or missing. Action should be easier to visualize because it's all the PCs have to go on.

This is of course a large undertaking for the DM, but once they get a few sessions down it shouldn't be much more than keeping track of a few more mobs.

What do you guys think? Advice or heckling is welcome.

Comet
2010-08-18, 01:50 PM
It's risky, that much is for sure. Some players might throw a hissy fit because you're "taking their character away from them".

Other players, like me, would be all for it. It sounds like a fun way to make the game into a fresh experience.

It's a lot of work for the GM, requires some amount of mutual trust around the table (but then again every group should have that already) and could potentially get old after a while. But it still sounds like a fun experiment!

Kylarra
2010-08-18, 01:53 PM
I'd play it once, but that's about it. We tried black-boxing HPs once, it ... didn't turn out too well. It was too hard to even approximate health based on descriptions, admittedly that's more of a DM issue than inherently a system one, but this puts a great deal of emphasis on the strength of the DM's ability to describe effects, as that is the only interaction the players have with the world in order to gauge anything.

Flickerdart
2010-08-18, 01:54 PM
It would work a lot better if the players wrote up a lot for the character. If they want, say, a Sorcadin, let them justify it through the fluff first.

drengnikrafe
2010-08-18, 01:56 PM
I strongly agree with Kylarra. The DM would need to be absolutely phenomenal at descriptions for the PCs to have any idea of how their characters are doing.

valadil
2010-08-18, 01:56 PM
It's risky, that much is for sure. Some players might throw a hissy fit because you're "taking their character away from them".


I wouldn't suggest doing this midway through a game. But if you're starting up a new game they have no basis for a hissy fit. Play or don't play, that's all there is to it.

I've thought of running something like this before. But then I realized GMing takes most of my focus without rolling dice for 4-6 PCs. I'm just not interested in adding that much bookkeeping to an already demanding activity.

I'd consider playing a game like this out of curiosity, but probably wouldn't like it long term. If you're supposed to be reacting to the GM's descriptions instead of your stats, I'd rather just throw out the rules and play free form.

Mina Kobold
2010-08-18, 01:59 PM
I think it would be a brilliant idea, wish I could be among the players even :smallsmile:

It would make the roleplay much more interesting and could make for unique characters made over time instead of from the get-go.

Which is similar to why I want to roll my next character randomly. Race, gender, social status, stats, everything would be rolled at random.

Only the choices made in life are mine, just like if it was real!

But your idea is even better, mine wouldn't even deal with half those issues (still gonna use it though)

Tharck
2010-08-18, 02:02 PM
Thanks everyone for the feedback so far, keep it coming, negative or positive. Any ideas or suggestions for making it easier on the DM (Me) while keeping the spirit of the idea intact let me know.

valadil
2010-08-18, 02:05 PM
Thanks everyone for the feedback so far, keep it coming, negative or positive. Any ideas or suggestions for making it easier on the DM (Me) while keeping the spirit of the idea intact let me know.

A system that isn't D&D might work better. I feel like D&D has a lot to keep track of. Do you really have table space to have 4 PCs, several enemies, and a pile of dice in front of you?

I also feel like if you give your players things like spells, they'll find ways to reverse engineer information about their characters. While that ought to be an interesting challenge intellectually, it goes against your goal of removing system knowledge from the PCs' side of the DM screen.

Vangor
2010-08-18, 02:06 PM
I think the work required to create multiple characters and manage all of the modifiers of an entire party plus provide additional details will probably amount to a disconnect between the players and characters, potentially the players disliking what they feel you stuck them with which can cause further problems.

While this seems a good idea, I just don't think the execution will give you the desired results. I recommend instead as the DM rolling all d20s in hiding and hiding your damage and similar rolls while keeping track of vital statistics for the party and making no numerical mention, just the details. Gives you the same feeling with no character problems and far less work.

ZeltArruin
2010-08-18, 02:08 PM
This sounds like a lot of fun, but also a huge amount of work for the gm. A simpler might be desired, as that would help reduce the amount of book keeping for the dm to do. I have actually considered doing this before, and also running a game where PC's are not allowed to show each other their sheets/stats/etc, but I have yet to do so.

SurlySeraph
2010-08-18, 02:11 PM
Too much work for you, too annoying for the players. I'd go with Vangor's suggestion.

Kylarra
2010-08-18, 02:14 PM
I have a better suggestion, just have a computer preroll a lot of D20s (and other dice as applicable) for you, so you just have a stream of numbers that you check off as rolls are needed. You will go the entire session without having to roll a single dice. :smallcool:

jpreem
2010-08-18, 02:17 PM
How can i prepare spells if i dont know which spells i hacve ? Or act in combat I cast --- SOMETHING!!!!

Comet
2010-08-18, 02:21 PM
How can i prepare spells if i dont know which spells i hacve ? Or act in combat I cast --- SOMETHING!!!!

Read the original post a bit more carefully. The players would be handling items, gear and spells.

Starbuck_II
2010-08-18, 02:24 PM
Does the DM tell him how many spells he has left?

Does he mention what you can do (in laymans terms if not class features).

Does he mention how healthy you are by a bar/mark?
Fully Healthy= 100% hp and no bad effects (no poison, etc)
Almost Healthy = 100% but one bad effects
Healthy = 100% but more than 1 bad effect
minor injury = 80% or more health (but less than 100%)
meduim injury= 60% or more health (but less than 80%)
Major Injury= 40% or more (but less than 60%)
Serious Injury = 20% or more (but less than 40%)
Almost Severe Injury = 16-19 % hp
Severe Injury = 15% or less (but more than 5%)
Almost Mortal injury = 5% or less
Dying = Less than 0 hps

You'd need good descriptions of poisons, curses, etc though.

Mina Kobold
2010-08-18, 02:39 PM
A system that isn't D&D might work better. I feel like D&D has a lot to keep track of. Do you really have table space to have 4 PCs, several enemies, and a pile of dice in front of you?

I also feel like if you give your players things like spells, they'll find ways to reverse engineer information about their characters. While that ought to be an interesting challenge intellectually, it goes against your goal of removing system knowledge from the PCs' side of the DM screen.

I would use a computer to help with some of that but I actually think it could be done without one. Just have the character sheets and some basic enemy stats, the DM have to keep track of a lot of detailed about the characters already so why not all of it? It negates the need to ask the players about where they are standing, if they have this or that and what their stats are (My old DM had to do this a lot as we didn't always have maps)

Spells could let them figure it out but, really, would you enjoy playing with people who munchkin that much? I would just give them the old 'You're only ruining it for yourself' response and otherwise ignore it.

They can't use it to become better, just more annoying since it ruins the game for those who don't wish to turn an experimental game into a standard one for no reason, so I don't see why I should stop them.

Tharck
2010-08-18, 02:44 PM
Adhering to a forumla of percentages make's things a bit more accurate but degrades into:

PC1: How am I feeling?
DM: Weak and Moderately Injured.
PC2: What's moderately injured again?
PC1: About 60%-70% of my life left.
PC2: Oh, from 5 hits and you're a elven rogue and im a dwarf fighter so... I could prolly take 8 or 9 before that. Fine im no longer defensive.

Rather be descriptive without formula. As for me it defeats purpose. While I appreciate the suggestion and lord knows i've used it to describe monster status in the past im trying to get away from specifics. I might have a key word or two to clue people in: Hits you like a "wet goldfish slap", to "obliterates you into unrecognizable pulp." But it will come from loose math, not solid percents.

Tharck
2010-08-18, 03:05 PM
How can i prepare spells if i dont know which spells i hacve ? Or act in combat I cast --- SOMETHING!!!!

Play Schmendrick the Magician! Magic do as you will.

Umael
2010-08-18, 03:18 PM
The very first Vampire: the Masquerade game I was ever in, the Storyteller made all the die rolls in secret. While admittedly, this is the Storyteller system and not d20, it worked very well. As players, we really felt the paranoia of not knowing how dangerous things actually were or if we were being watched, and so forth.

In particular, I remember when my PC and another pranked a bunch of people and then took off running. We looked behind us after quite some distance and asked if we saw anyone coming after us. The Storyteller rolled our respective die pools, and then said, "No."

We kept running.

That one point is what captured the feel of that game for me - not knowing, as players and as characters, just how successful we were. We could have gotten away, there might never have been anyone after us in the first place, there could have been someone that we just didn't detect. In any case, we ran because we didn't know and our paranoia was so high we weren't going to take any chances.

So...

Can this idea work? Yes, and be a lot of fun.

But it will be a lot of work.

If you keep on with it - good luck. Let us know how it goes.

dsmiles
2010-08-18, 03:20 PM
As a DM, it seems like too much work to keep track of the PCs, NPCs, and monsters. As a player, I would just hate it. I like to know exactly what I'm capable of (because in real life, I do know).

I mean, when I DM, I keep track of the charcaters' skill modifiers, in case I need to make any checks behind the screen (or passive checks). I also track their HP, to ensure no one cheats. But they also have those numbers. I'd need a secondary DM to keep track of all that stuff that you're suggesting, and I'm an engineer.

Tyndmyr
2010-08-18, 03:23 PM
I'd play it once, but that's about it. We tried black-boxing HPs once, it ... didn't turn out too well. It was too hard to even approximate health based on descriptions, admittedly that's more of a DM issue than inherently a system one, but this puts a great deal of emphasis on the strength of the DM's ability to describe effects, as that is the only interaction the players have with the world in order to gauge anything.

This. Inevitibly, you will have a time when you make a minor slip-up, and players will take actions without understanding the situation. Sometimes, it can go a few rounds or even longer before the misunderstanding is uncovered, and it's usually sticky to sort out. Kinda a giant pain.

Plus, it IS a ton of work for the GMs. Running a PC is generally more fiddly than running an NPC...PCs almost invariably have more build detail. It also assumes the DM has a fair degree of experience in building characters....enough to represent essentially any character concept decently well mechanically.

I wouldn't bother with it.

Tharck
2010-08-18, 03:38 PM
Thanks for all the feedback. I'm looking forward to doing all of this and as I planned going to go ahead with it. I have a good idea of some of the fears some of my PCs might be facing though thanks to your guys input.

Building a character a level or two at a time is simple work, as long as you know the end goal ahead of time it keeps the character fluid and balanced.

As for playing the PC some of you may not understand. I just keep track of it, which is generally no more than most DMs do already. Remembering attack bonuses, ACs, saving throws, ect is simple enough with a small cheat sheet and list. The PCs will be doing all the work, rolling the dice, rolling the damage dice, saying what they're doing ect. All I have to do is add a number to it and refrence it against a DC. I also level the character, roll its hp, do its skills and stats ect. For spells the players choose them or find them and scribe them. They're knowledgeable of their mems, prayers, number of uses for the day. Though I use spellcards so it makes it easy. The PC selects what they memorized, or hand me a number of cards with the level written on it (for spont casters) and whenever they cast a spell I just hand them the card back.


I agree there will be mistakes. I'm fair about honest ones. But even if people have their sheet in hand, I'd see the same mistakes. They didn't hear me say take 20 points, they wrote it down wrong, they didnt think someone was using an Adamantine weapon when they had stoneskins up even though it was stated 5x and now if they convert the damage to be true then they die and they wouldnt have (adlib) if they had known. Mistakes are a part of being human. It's not wether or not we make a mistake or are forced to deal with someone else's, it's how we deal with it that shows true character.

Balain
2010-08-18, 03:40 PM
It can be done in D&D but you are taking on a lot of extra work for a game that wasn't really designed for that. I would switch to a different system and try those ideas. Ars Magicka works well for a fantasy setting. You might want to try Something like Amber as well. It's been to long since I even looked at amber it might take some work to use in a D&D style setting.

An idea for HP for players, combine White wolf with coda and D&D. Have levels of health the characters will keep track of. Healthy/bruised/minor injuries/major injuries/maimed/near death/dead (as an example) Each level has an amount of hit that you know but the players don't (this amount changes as they gain levels or some such thing). The you can tell the players you are now bruised or you have minor injuries. You may also want to change healing spells so Light healing heals up to one level of injuries.

Lord Vampyre
2010-08-18, 03:41 PM
I would probably allow the players to write their own backgrounds. Then as the DM/GM you would have a basis on how to create their characters. The background would give them a sense of ownership that is generally needed to get them involved with the game.

I also wouldn't use the conventional D&D system of magic. Perhaps give them spell points or use a fatigue based system like they have in GURPS. Since your the only one who knows how much energy they actually have left, you'll be able to treat it similar to hit points.

Now, to be honest it sounds like a lot of work. It's not the kind of game I'd probably run, simply because of all the work involved. However, it does sound like a lot of fun from a players perspective. Plus it sounds perfect for a horror campaign, where having to look at your stats can remove you from general atmosphere of the game.

Tharck
2010-08-18, 03:55 PM
Plus it sounds perfect for a horror campaign, where having to look at your stats can remove you from general atmosphere of the game.

Indeed! Fact was thinking horror campaign and Ravenloft. Mmmm.

Ernir
2010-08-18, 04:11 PM
I... don't think I would like to play like that.

D&D, at least in-combat, is too much of a wargame to make me want to play it without knowing precisely what my character is capable of. Running into things like not knowing whether punching someone in the face provokes an AoO (does my character have Improved Unarmed Strike?) or whether there's any chance of Tumbling through an opponent's square (I know I'm an athletic guy, but do I have ranks in Tumble?) would get on my nerves really fast.

For games where combat is de-emphasized and mystery, intrigue and survival are the focal points, this might add to the atmosphere. But I wouldn't play D&D if I wanted a game like that.

Tharck
2010-08-18, 04:37 PM
I... don't think I would like to play like that.

D&D, at least in-combat, is too much of a wargame to make me want to play it without knowing precisely what my character is capable of. Running into things like not knowing whether punching someone in the face provokes an AoO (does my character have Improved Unarmed Strike?) or whether there's any chance of Tumbling through an opponent's square (I know I'm an athletic guy, but do I have ranks in Tumble?) would get on my nerves really fast.

For games where combat is de-emphasized and mystery, intrigue and survival are the focal points, this might add to the atmosphere. But I wouldn't play D&D if I wanted a game like that.


I must not have been specific enough. If you're a wizard, you're likely not going to have tumble. If I tell you your background consisted of being a young hoodlum on the streets, and evading arrest by running between guards, over walls, and such until one day you ran smack dab into a powerful wizard who "asked" you to become his apprentice. You might think you are capable of that kind of task.

The PCs will be aware mostly of what they're good at, okay at, and downright untrained at. They'll know if they've had training in their life with a longsword or a fist or none at all. They just wont know if their tumble skill is a 3, or a 7. But they would know if it was lets say a 15 compared to a 1. It's precisely the people who know wether they will automatically make on a 1 or not - or that they can take precisely 8 hits from that mob - that greases my engine to undertake a game like this.

Ernir
2010-08-18, 05:11 PM
The PCs will be aware mostly of what they're good at, okay at, and downright untrained at. They'll know if they've had training in their life with a longsword or a fist or none at all. They just wont know if their tumble skill is a 3, or a 7. But they would know if it was lets say a 15 compared to a 1. It's precisely the people who know wether they will automatically make on a 1 or not - or that they can take precisely 8 hits from that mob - that greases my engine to undertake a game like this.

Hmm. The "will I make it on a 1?" issue is something I'd really think the characters should know, too. My former hoodlum Wizard isn't going to try tumbling through a mob of angry orcs unless he's sure he can pull it off. Any risk-prone skill (UMD, Climb, Balance, Swim) is likely to cause me to think about similar things.

Anyway, I suppose that's a difference in how we like our games to be...

democritic
2010-08-19, 12:17 PM
With a phenomenal DM, that's the only way I'd want to play. But I don't know any DM's that good, so I think it would be an exercise in seeing how long it would take for the novelty to wear off and become frustrating.