PDA

View Full Version : Help a fellow DM? Please?



Silma
2011-09-29, 06:21 PM
Hello everyone. I just wanted to ask a few questions about being a DM.

Ok, let's take this from the beginning. I was always interested in fantasy stuff, kept reading fantasy novels (especially Forgotten realms, Tolkien, etc)
I had played lots of fantasy games, and I discovered D&D through Neverwinter Nights 2. I played the game with many different characters and I realized how D&d works, from my NWN2 experience. Then 4e came out and I thought I'd give it a try. The thing is, I couldn't find a DM (there are but a few people who play D&D here-Greece), and since I was the only one among my friend with at least minimal experience (and also the only one with the necessary dedication to the game) I had to be the DM. So, I practically became a DM without having played a single session of D&D.
So I have a few questions I'd like to ask, If you guys can help me. And of course any advice you could give me is greatly appreciated.

The things that come to mind right now are these:

1. How do we define a creature's line of sight? And I don't mean the thing where you draw lines from one square to another. I mean, how far can people see, and if we can assume that they take notice of what's happening behind them. The reason I'm asking this is because some mix-up we've been having with the stealth rules. According to the rulebooks, a character can attempt to hide in plain sight if the enemy is distracted. Which brings me to my next question.

2. When is someone considered distracted? If someone has his back on you can we assume he is distracted? How about when he is marked by someone else?

3. When I helped my players create their characters (in some cases I created the characters almost by myself, since some players had absolutely no idea how this game worked, and I just told them what each class does and made a character based on their choices)
The current party is: a human wizard (pyromancer), a human barbarian (rageblood), a gnome bard (cunning), a drow rogue, and a human fighter (dual wield).
Now I used the point buy system, cuz I wanted characters to be on a similar power level. The thing is, I helped my players optimize theis characters, ending up with a build of (for example) 20, 18, 11, 10,10, 8
As a result of that, some characters ended up too strong, which makes battles too easy. So far I had to make them face opponents of a higher level, so that they could actually feel challenged. The barbarian and wizard in particular. Any idea how I can make things a little harder for them ,without nerfing their characters?

4. Now one of my players, started the game as a deva wizard, but it was only a couple of sessions to help them understand the game. When we started the actual campaign, He decided he'd create a drow warlock, cuz he didn't quite like his previous char. Then he went away for a few weeks, and when he came back, he decided to make a vampire. Then he went away for a couple of months and now he's coming back (to stay, this time). The thing is, before he left I sensed he didn't really like this char too. And to be honest, the other players hated having a vampire in the party. How can I help him create a char (or keep this one) that he likes? I hate it when someone changes their chat just because he isn't as strong as they wanted. And this guy, wants to be the strongest in the party. He's kind of pissing everyone off, and I had sworn I'd never let him change his char again. The only reason I decided I'd let him do it one more time, Is because the other players would prefer it if the vampire was gone. So, how can I help him realize that d&d is all about being a team, supplementing each other (and in some cases hindering them :P), and that no one can be a one-man killing machine, who is also incredible clever and wise?

5. One of my players (the human fighter) isn't taking the game seriously at all. (I'm not talking about a couple of jokes, I mean, the game is all about having fun with your friend, everyone will say something funny once in a while, but when it's 99% joking and only 1% playing the actual game, you have a problem right there). He is the kind of guy that plays only Football games, and I understand that it was hard for him to adjust. However, the other guy (the barbarian) who had similar interests, adjusted just fine, and he is now a very serious player. How can I make D&D interesting for him, or at least (if he can't adjust at all) how can I tell him not to play without him feeling left out? Cuz right now he's ruining all my efforts to create an atmosphere, and he's preventing the others from playing as well as they'd like. (and that's not just my opinion, I mean everyone is complaining, but no one wants to tell it to him cuz he has a tendency to feel unwanted. Which is SO not true)

6. In PC games, usually your path is laid out before you and you only have a few choices. In some cases you have 2-3 different options. I always hated this, so when I started the campaign, I wanted my players to be able to do whatever they wanted. However that hasn't turned to well, because sometimes they want to do things that ruin the whole quest. And since I don't want to say no, I keep improvising. So my question is" How can I limit their choices without them realizing it?

Thanks in advance. :)

Kol Korran
2011-09-29, 07:10 PM
Hello everyone. I just wanted to ask a few questions about being a DM.

first of all, welcome to roleplaying! hoping you'll like it! i'm not familr with 4E much, so i won't answer the technical questions. however, two rules that served me well as a DM are:
- try to learn the relevant rules as best as you can
- when you don't know, enable a limited time to look up a rule (2/3 min?) and if it's not found, make an assessment judgment for the session, and you (or players) look up the rule afterwards. common sense works quite well.


4. Now one of my players, started the game as a deva wizard, but it was only a couple of sessions to help them understand the game. When we started the actual campaign, He decided he'd create a drow warlock, cuz he didn't quite like his previous char. Then he went away for a few weeks, and when he came back, he decided to make a vampire. Then he went away for a couple of months and now he's coming back (to stay, this time). The thing is, before he left I sensed he didn't really like this char too. And to be honest, the other players hated having a vampire in the party. How can I help him create a char (or keep this one) that he likes? I hate it when someone changes their chat just because he isn't as strong as they wanted. And this guy, wants to be the strongest in the party. He's kind of pissing everyone off, and I had sworn I'd never let him change his char again. The only reason I decided I'd let him do it one more time, Is because the other players would prefer it if the vampire was gone. So, how can I help him realize that d&d is all about being a team, supplementing each other (and in some cases hindering them :P), and that no one can be a one-man killing machine, who is also incredible clever and wise?

you can try and explain that o him. some poeple also justlike changing characters every so often, it'sp art of why they love the game.

if hoever, you feel he is being a jerk (hurting other's fun and not willing to compromise), then just don't invite him again. it's not worth the aggrevation.


5. One of my players (the human fighter) isn't taking the game seriously at all. (I'm not talking about a couple of jokes, I mean, the game is all about having fun with your friend, everyone will say something funny once in a while, but when it's 99% joking and only 1% playing the actual game, you have a problem right there). He is the kind of guy that plays only Football games, and I understand that it was hard for him to adjust. However, the other guy (the barbarian) who had similar interests, adjusted just fine, and he is now a very serious player. How can I make D&D interesting for him, or at least (if he can't adjust at all) how can I tell him not to play without him feeling left out? Cuz right now he's ruining all my efforts to create an atmosphere, and he's preventing the others from playing as well as they'd like. (and that's not just my opinion, I mean everyone is complaining, but no one wants to tell it to him cuz he has a tendency to feel unwanted. Which is SO not true)

a few ideas:
- try and ask the player what appel to him in the game, and try and incorporate more of that, combined with the others' interests.

- if he doesn't know, try different situations in a session, and tryto see what he responds more to.

- it just might be that joking about stuff all the time is part of the player's personality, or a coping/ interaction mechanism with the newcompany, this may pass. if he isn't that easily offended, comment him on the behaviour when it happens, it may recede.

- as to "making an atmosphere"- you can't rely on players playing along. very few parties are "all serious", and these things are a part of the game. i'd suggest to accept it.

- something that worked in a game of a friend of mine. he also had a joker of a player. so the DM inserted a sort of a prankster god/ deity that challeneged the PC, and confrontedhim in his own game (not ovely malicious), as side encoutners in the regular game, this drew the player like a shot! he becamenearly immediatly involved, though he looked at adventures and the game as possibilities/ resources andinspirations in his own match. slowly the DM woven this "side plot" into the main game, getting the palyer there too.


6. In PC games, usually your path is laid out before you and you only have a few choices. In some cases you have 2-3 different options. I always hated this, so when I started the campaign, I wanted my players to be abler to do whatever they wanted. However that hasn't turned to well, because sometimes they want to do things that ruin the whole quest. And since I don't want to say no, I keep improvising. So my question is" How can I limit their choices without them realizing it?

you describe trying to find the balance between "railroading" ("this is the only thing you can do") to "sandbox" ("you can do whatever you want"). some players like one more than the other. the railroad is frustrating due to lack of choice, but in a sand box there is so much choice, that the DM needs to improvise quite a bit, and often not so well.

i follow a few simple guidelines:
- don't plan an adventure as a series of encounters, but as a situation/ series of situations that demand solving/ dealing with, but let yourself adaptable forces/ situations and so on so you can react to many developments fairly fluidly.

- when designing the adventure, try to think of various things the PCs can do (this i often easier in 4E due to more limited powers), try to imagine a response of the enemies, situations, the world.

- the most important thing- just because players can do anything, doesn't mean it's boundto be easy, or that they'll succeed. prepare COSEQUENCES and RE PRECAUTIONS. anything can be done, if you are ready to facethe challenge. after facing a few crazy hard opposition going afterto wild ideas(unless they are cunning and inventive!) the players might stick mroe to "sensible" ideas.

hope this helped,
Kol.

Thanks in advance. :)[/QUOTE]

Silma
2011-09-29, 07:43 PM
first of all, welcome to roleplaying! hoping you'll like it! i'm not familr with 4E much, so i won't answer the technical questions. however, two rules that served me well as a DM are:
- try to learn the relevant rules as best as you can
- when you don't know, enable a limited time to look up a rule (2/3 min?) and if it's not found, make an assessment judgment for the session, and you (or players) look up the rule afterwards. common sense works quite well.

First of all thanks for replying!!! :D Really appreciate it!!
While I'm not new to roleplaying as a concept, DMing was not as easy as I thought it would be :P
What you said was in fact very helpful, although I have already tried some of those things...


4.
you can try and explain that o him. some poeple also justlike changing characters every so often, it'sp art of why they love the game.

I would accept that if it was a series of random adventures. But we've decided to play a massive adventure starting from level 1 and going all the way to level 30 (they are currently lvl 6) So if there is to be some consistency in the story, I can't let him change chars every month


if hoever, you feel he is being a jerk (hurting other's fun and not willing to compromise), then just don't invite him again. it's not worth the aggrevation.

He isn't. At least not by choice. His overall attitude is annoying (mostly to the players, not me) but he doesn't seem to realize it.

5.


- try and ask the player what appel to him in the game, and try and incorporate more of that, combined with the others' interests.

- if he doesn't know, try different situations in a session, and tryto see what he responds more to.


i did. More than one time. He barely shows interest... :(


- it just might be that joking about stuff all the time is part of the player's personality, or a coping/ interaction mechanism with the newcompany, this may pass. if he isn't that easily offended, comment him on the behaviour when it happens, it may recede.

- as to "making an atmosphere"- you can't rely on players playing along. very few parties are "all serious", and these things are a part of the game. i'd suggest to accept it.

- something that worked in a game of a friend of mine. he also had a joker of a player. so the DM inserted a sort of a prankster god/ deity that challeneged the PC, and confrontedhim in his own game (not ovely malicious), as side encoutners in the regular game, this drew the player like a shot! he becamenearly immediatly involved, though he looked at adventures and the game as possibilities/ resources andinspirations in his own match. slowly the DM woven this "side plot" into the main game, getting the palyer there too.


He is joking out-of-character. And while all the players do that once in a while, he overdoes it. (Joking in-character is not only acceptable but, commended imo.)
So how can I do that sort of prankster-god stuff if he's ALWAYS meta-gaming?
I mean that idea is very clever and I've done a similar thing when the bard, wanted to emphasize that he was a musician-prankster kind of type. I created a challenge where he had to prove his worth to an epic-level bard NPC.

6.


you describe trying to find the balance between "railroading" ("this is the only thing you can do") to "sandbox" ("you can do whatever you want"). some players like one more than the other. the railroad is frustrating due to lack of choice, but in a sand box there is so much choice, that the DM needs to improvise quite a bit, and often not so well.

i follow a few simple guidelines:
- don't plan an adventure as a series of encounters, but as a situation/ series of situations that demand solving/ dealing with, but let yourself adaptable forces/ situations and so on so you can react to many developments fairly fluidly.

- when designing the adventure, try to think of various things the PCs can do (this i often easier in 4E due to more limited powers), try to imagine a response of the enemies, situations, the world.

- the most important thing- just because players can do anything, doesn't mean it's boundto be easy, or that they'll succeed. prepare COSEQUENCES and RE PRECAUTIONS. anything can be done, if you are ready to facethe challenge. after facing a few crazy hard opposition going afterto wild ideas(unless they are cunning and inventive!) the players might stick mroe to "sensible" ideas.


that was really helpful, especially the last part. :) It's just that sometimes they over-complicate things, and due to my minimal experience I find it hard to cope with the situation.
For example, There was a quest where they had to eradicate a gang. They decided to do it by joining the gang, in order to reach the higher-ranked members and kill them. So there was this mission where the gang wanted them to escort a cargo of stolen goods to the warehouse, and the guard, had asked them to ensure that the cargo never reached the warehouse. Their goal was to eradicate the gang, yet they killed all the guards that came for the cargo instead of helping them (sticking to their plan to work on the inside) and then placed a false cargo on a different part of the city, etc.
I had no idea on how to deal with all of that! :P

erikun
2011-09-29, 08:39 PM
1. How do we define a creature's line of sight? And I don't mean the thing where you draw lines from one square to another.
Do you mean, in general? A character is assumed to see as far as a normal person would be expected to see. If they were outside in the middle of an open field, then they can see for miles in any direction. If they are sitting around a campfire in the middle of the night, then they can only see as far as the campfire lighting permits.


2. When is someone considered distracted? If someone has his back on you can we assume he is distracted? How about when he is marked by someone else?
I'd need to get my 4e books to be sure, but I believe that any active combat is considered a distraction. They would need to spend an action to take a Perception check to be considered "not distracted" in that case.

Outside combat, you as the DM would need to determine if the particular character is distracted or not. Are they dozing off, looking at something else, or playing a game? Then they are distracted.

I would generally say that if a guard sees a character out in the open, then they are not distracted and will pay attention to that character. The exceptions are if the character moves out of the guard's field of vision (can make a hide check) or if the character is part of a crowd and doesn't stand out.


3. As a result of that, some characters ended up too strong, which makes battles too easy. So far I had to make them face opponents of a higher level, so that they could actually feel challenged. The barbarian and wizard in particular. Any idea how I can make things a little harder for them ,without nerfing their characters?
Strategy and terrain can will make the fights more difficult for the players, because rushing in and bashing things won't always be the most optimal option. Try different strategies - a bunch of archers, a wizard or two making hazardous terrain, kobolds for shifting fun - and make them think of the best way to approach the situation.

20/18/11 for stats means that they have one defense, possibly two, with a very low score. Occasionally throwing in an opponent that targets Reflex, Fortitude, or Will will highlight the characters' weaknesses. I wouldn't recommend doing this too much, though, because they weren't the ones who build their characters, and may think you intentionally gave them low tertiary scores for a weakness.

More minions solves lots of problems, even if they are lower level. Tossing some fifteen 3rd level minions against a 5th level party shouldn't be overly dangerous, but will give a significantly different feel of combat.

Check with your players to see if they think fights are "too easy". It may be that, as the DM, you consider the fights easy because the characters don't leave combat badly injured. The players may see things different.

If all else fails, just increase your EXP budget a bit. There is nothing wrong with making things tougher for a stronger party.


4. The thing is, before he left I sensed he didn't really like this char too. And to be honest, the other players hated having a vampire in the party. How can I help him create a char (or keep this one) that he likes? I hate it when someone changes their chat just because he isn't as strong as they wanted.
Some people just like trying new things - perhaps you could ask him if you could use his characters as future (perhaps villainous?) NPCs.

Beyond that, there really isn't anything you can do to stop a player from changing characters if they wish. While it is harder in 4e, characters can still charge in suicidally and get killed if that is the player's intent, so putting down a "no more character changes" rule won't work out well.

Sit the player down and explain that, especially in D&D 4th edition, power is about playing a team game. He can be the uberdestroyer, dealing lots of damage, but only with the rest of the team lining up the enemies for him correctly. Trying to one-man everything will just get him killed, high stats or no.

I would also recommend a Barbarian or Ranger for his character choice, if he just wants to do a bunch of damage to everything.

Silma
2011-09-29, 09:00 PM
2.
I'd need to get my 4e books to be sure, but I believe that any active combat is considered a distraction. They would need to spend an action to take a Perception check to be considered "not distracted" in that case.

Outside combat, you as the DM would need to determine if the particular character is distracted or not. Are they dozing off, looking at something else, or playing a game? Then they are distracted.

I would generally say that if a guard sees a character out in the open, then they are not distracted and will pay attention to that character. The exceptions are if the character moves out of the guard's field of vision (can make a hide check) or if the character is part of a crowd and doesn't stand out.

I pretty much have my answer. What I was mostly concerned about, was if line of sight is an area around someone, or just the direction he is facing.
So if a guard takes patrol down a corridor, the rogue can sneak behind him and stab him in the back right? Even if he doesn't have any sort of concealment or cover?

3.
Strategy and terrain can will make the fights more difficult for the players, because rushing in and bashing things won't always be the most optimal option. Try different strategies - a bunch of archers, a wizard or two making hazardous terrain, kobolds for shifting fun - and make them think of the best way to approach the situation.

20/18/11 for stats means that they have one defense, possibly two, with a very low score. Occasionally throwing in an opponent that targets Reflex, Fortitude, or Will will highlight the characters' weaknesses. I wouldn't recommend doing this too much, though, because they weren't the ones who build their characters, and may think you intentionally gave them low tertiary scores for a weakness.

More minions solves lots of problems, even if they are lower level. Tossing some fifteen 3rd level minions against a 5th level party shouldn't be overly dangerous, but will give a significantly different feel of combat.

Check with your players to see if they think fights are "too easy". It may be that, as the DM, you consider the fights easy because the characters don't leave combat badly injured. The players may see things different.

If all else fails, just increase your EXP budget a bit. There is nothing wrong with making things tougher for a stronger party.

I created the barbarian's char, according to his own preferences of course, and he is so far very happy with his character, even in a few occasions where he had a hard time, he thought it was only natural and didn't complain at all. So I guess what u suggest would pretty much solve my problem. I can't be sure before I test it of course, but it seems solid.

As for the wizard, he created his char by himself, so he is well aware of his character's weaknesses.

So far, they are all pretty happy with their chars except for that one guy.

I have so far been increasing my EXP budget, but they gain levels too quickly as a result... :(

4.
Some people just like trying new things - perhaps you could ask him if you could use his characters as future (perhaps villainous?) NPCs.

Done that already. :P


Beyond that, there really isn't anything you can do to stop a player from changing characters if they wish. While it is harder in 4e, characters can still charge in suicidally and get killed if that is the player's intent, so putting down a "no more character changes" rule won't work out well.

The only reason I don't like people changing characters is because it kinda ruins the story. The main problem is that the other players complain about him changing characters.


Sit the player down and explain that, especially in D&D 4th edition, power is about playing a team game. He can be the uberdestroyer, dealing lots of damage, but only with the rest of the team lining up the enemies for him correctly. Trying to one-man everything will just get him killed, high stats or no.


The problem isn't that he rushes in recklessly. It's that he it trying to get more attention than the others. That's the main reason why he keeps changing chars. Because the barbarian and the wizard deal lots of dmg and in so doing, they keel the "spotlight" focused on them.


I would also recommend a Barbarian or Ranger for his character choice, if he just wants to do a bunch of damage to everything.


He only likes classes with "magical" flavor. I really don't know what to do with him. :P

erikun
2011-09-29, 09:37 PM
What I was mostly concerned about, was if line of sight is an area around someone, or just the direction he is facing.
No, facing does not matter in D&D 4e. A character is assumed to be "facing" in all directions for the purposes of observation, Perception, and wielding a shield (for example).


I have so far been increasing my EXP budget, but they gain levels too quickly as a result... :(
You can increase or decrease the experience awarded to the characters, if needed. Giving yourself an extra 10% EXP budget (or however much) to provide the sufficient challange to the characters would be just fine.


He only likes classes with "magical" flavor. I really don't know what to do with him. :P
The Barbarian spits lightning and sets himself of fire during his rages. Another option would be the Warden; the class doesn't deal high damage, but it does have big, noticable transformations for its dailies, and it tends to have a wide area of influence around itself. Perhaps that would be more to the player's liking.

Excession
2011-09-29, 10:34 PM
Points 1 and 2: The rules for things like sight, stealth, and distraction are different whether you're in or out of combat. For in combat, the best writing of the rules that I've seen is The Rules Of Hidden Club (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/25474357/The_Rules_Of_Hidden_Club:__Targeting_things_you_ca nt_see_in_DD.).

IIRC distraction is something that comes into play outside combat, and comes down to DM discretion. A guard just walking down the corridor probably isn't going to be distracted; he might even be making active perception checks. He might become distracted if he's been on shift for hours and just wants to go home to his family (successful streetwise check to find out when the guard changes), or sees something unusual but not suspicious (can't think of a good idea, but a bluff check would be involved). Success lets you sneak up and get a surprise round, failure means no surprise round and maybe he shouts a warning. Attacking from cover, either by charging or using a ranged power is another alternative.

Point 3: You mean 20/16/11/10/10/8 right? Because you can't get 20/18/... at level 1 with point buy. Also, the difference between 20/16, 18/18, 18/16, 18/14, or even 16/x is not all that big. Choice of powers, class, role, type of encounter, and player skill make far more difference. As others pointed out these specialised builds come with weaknesses, a 20/16 Barbarian (or any careless played Barb really) can be seriously fragile against magical artillery or controller enemies, so put him on the floor a few times IMO. Admittedly the Wizard probably has fewer problems with those stats.

Secondly, use MM3 or Monster Vault monsters. They're far better built and don't need to be many levels above the party to challenge them. You can adjust older monsters to match the new ones using the damage values in the errata. Monsters well above the party's level artificial boost characters that have, like your 20/16'ers, optimised their to-hit chance and still often don't do enough damage.

Point 6: Sandboxes can be hard, especially for a new DM. Getting better at improving is part of it, and I know how hard that can be. You can put the players on, if not rails, then at least a road by giving the PCs an in-game motivation. Having them employed by a church of government for example; they go from a band of murderous hobos to a special ops team. You will need to talk this over with the players though. Limiting character options should always be done with consent, as their character is the only thing players have control over. You can also try to pace things so that big decisions are made near the end of a session so you have time to prepare before the next one. If you need to pad, or need time to think, remember Chandler's Law (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChandlersLaw): "When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand."

Kol Korran
2011-09-30, 06:10 AM
I would accept that if it was a series of random adventures. But we've decided to play a massive adventure starting from level 1 and going all the way to level 30 (they are currently lvl 6) So if there is to be some consistency in the story, I can't let him change chars every month

a few ideas here:
- give some sort of advantage to long staying characters: an item that gains abilities as they level, maybe some hidden power that does the same, or perhaps ties with some organization (mundane, divine or exotic) that offers favors or help depends on past help granted, or reputation in the SPECIFIC cause of the campaign. if the player meta games, and wants any advantage, he might not want to lose these advantages when changing a character. don't make these too powerful (as then new characters replacing dead ones will be far behind)

- arrange some sort of agency/ organization that lends the main PCs (the serious players) the help of a mercenary/ "simple" help. that way, you focus the story on the serious players, and this guys just "tags along" till he is replaced by the next in line. if the player complains, explain the situation to him, and say he sort of forced you to it with his behavior.

- i assume you have tried this, but just in case- talk to the player. how many characters did he change so far? if just a few, then maybe he is trying to find his sttle. note: 4E is quite restricting when it comes to what characters can do, so maybe he is looking for more freedom, things that he saw/ heard /was inspired from in books/ movies.

- does he change character roles? (defender strikers and so on?) or does he mostly stay in the same type? (probably due to the roles of other players?) maybe he just really dislikes this role, maybe not even knowing it. maybe a change of roles might do well? controlers especially specialize in varied effects, leaders after that, but you need to like being a buffer. do this EVEN if it breaks the normal suggested party composition. 4E is geared towards the PCs, and they should find a way to cope.



He is joking out-of-character. And while all the players do that once in a while, he overdoes it. (Joking in-character is not only acceptable but, commended imo.)
So how can I do that sort of prankster-god stuff if he's ALWAYS meta-gaming?
I mean that idea is very clever and I've done a similar thing when the bard, wanted to emphasize that he was a musician-prankster kind of type. I created a challenge where he had to prove his worth to an epic-level bard NPC.

i'm no longer in contact with my friend, but i think it might work something like this:
- there is a fair/ festival for that god (or many gods and he might be included), prepare all kind of light hearted things that can be found in fairs- drinking contests, wenches vying for attention, absurd contest of silly skill, and well, you know, dumb college stuff. this should make the player become a bit more interested, and his out- of -character might turn in character, but is not necessary.

have SOMEONE the guy takes itnerest in, become partly confrontational, but in a comical way. daring him to some of the contests, or starting a jokeful insulting contest, in good spirit ("your mama jokes?") but try to keep them in the spirit of the world, and have the crowd boo the player if he uses too much "real life" jokes.

then, whether the guy wins or loses, the SOMEONE makes some prank on him (there is a thread with fey tricks here somewhere, you'll have plenty of ideas), and have a message be given/ imprinted in his brain/ tattooed on his chest: "the game has begun, merriment and fun for all! "X" trials shall you meet, some obvious, but more often not. and in turn you may visit same tricks on... suitable candidates. (i'll leave that to you to decide). make me laugh, gain a boon, make me anger, gain a dragoon!flip of a coin, toss of a hat, the mask is on, whats says the cat?"

from here on the prankster and the player takes turn pulling pranks on each other (the prankster taking the forms of various people, or "suggesting various people- the queen, the arch bishop, the great devil, the magic item merchant, the patron). and so you go.make these nearly always using wit, setting info, and humor, not mechanical aspects of the game (powers will help little, as will magic items. skills might be used, but think of "on the spot" skill challenges, where he doesn't have all the skills)




that was really helpful, especially the last part. :) It's just that sometimes they over-complicate things, and due to my minimal experience I find it hard to cope with the situation.
For example, There was a quest where they had to eradicate a gang. They decided to do it by joining the gang, in order to reach the higher-ranked members and kill them. So there was this mission where the gang wanted them to escort a cargo of stolen goods to the warehouse, and the guard, had asked them to ensure that the cargo never reached the warehouse. Their goal was to eradicate the gang, yet they killed all the guards that came for the cargo instead of helping them (sticking to their plan to work on the inside) and then placed a false cargo on a different part of the city, etc.
I had no idea on how to deal with all of that! :P

a small suggestion that stood me in good stead- when the party makes something totally unexpected, request a 5-15 min break, where you think of this. good players know it's to their benefit- it helps the DM think things logically, and give a better gaming experience. these minutes sure make a difference.

- the killed the guards. it should be after them, sending special forces. they may be persecuted, and either pay a severe fine (player HATE loosing their loot), have some special magic (ritual) placed on them to make sure they behave (see this comic's mark of justice on Belkar) or even have some of them sentenced to a hanging!. (with a tirual that prevents raising from the dead)harsh, maybe, but those are the consequences when you kill guards! they might decide to try and escape (likely with little equipment) or one of them might be charged as the "leader" and only he dies.

-false cargo, that is quite smart, but you let the players know there is a chance their ruse will be found out. depending on perception, familiarity with the cargo you decide a certain DC, and a roll for who checks it. then you tell these to the players, and ROLL IN FRONT OF THEM. (this is done to let them know that you're neither protecting them, or try to "get at them" on purpose) apply the results immediately- either everything is fine, or someone comes a knocking.

the main thing is- don't get too attached to "the story/ the plot/ the campaign". this makes you unable to adjust fast, and more important- reluctant to let the players do their thing. if things go to hell, don't wiggle and squirm trying to get things on track. swallow the bitter pill, improvise the best you can in the session. and later sit down and think hard where you can take it from here, what changes are made, and how you can make it fun!

an example story? (no more points are made, just an anecdote): in my current campaign the party at some point was in a small settlement in the jungles, besieged by a small army of undead, drow and Yuan Ti. these were led by an impressive bone knight necromancer, who was far beyond their level. he was supposed to be terror incarnate, drove the fear into the PCs heart, and eventually win the siege, gaining access to "the key" (won't go into that now) while the party escaped through some magical means called the "blood pool". the bone knight was to be a recurring villain, and he was in fact the second most strong enemy in the campaign (they were about a 3rd of the way through it)

but... first, i made many kinds of strategical key points the party could gain, they did get some, but then they totally neglected others, and more than that- came with two new ones! so i had to think on the spot. i took my 5-15 minute break, and though of things. remember i said "prepare situations, not encounters?" i knew the composition ofthe army, and the general locations, so i was able to "whip up" defending forces at the locations, and general tactics expected of them to take. i decided they take one location quite by surprise (easy fight, well deserved for quick thinking), but the second place turned into a trap, since their plan was obvious. that turned into a nearly deadly fight.

and i adjusted the general adventure to fit.

the second instance however is more interesting. due to their success i decided the bone knight would make a second appearance (they met him once and ran), leading a battle over a bridge. i expected the party to spend a few rounds fighting it, and then run. only... they didn't want to run. they decided to go all out, using everything they got! (different mechanic than 4E), the battle was epic, and both sides fought hard, but to make a long story short- they won! (and id did give all my effort. it was a simple and yet unused tactic that won at the end)

you can imagine the party's elation, they never believed they could beat this guy! neither did i... :smallwink: but this posed BIG changes in my campaign:
- the second in command was down! and he was the "team evil" main source of undead! he had a key role in a far later siege! and other minor appearances, how do i fill this void?
- how would the "team evil" respond to such a blow to their command?
- "the key" that "team evil" was supposed to obtain was key to the plot. what could they do?
- i really really wanted to use the blood pool for an awesome encounter! what? should i just let it go now?
- one of the players who joined just the meeting before had this bone knight as a major part of her story, and planned to take this fight on towards high levels where the climax will come. what happens to her now?

so i sat, thought, consulted with the forum, and came to the following:
- the victory MUST have an effect. later on the party faced fewer undead, and the entire team evil became much more subtle and cautious around the PCs. they used subtler tactics, nearly deadly ones.
-the undead force was PARTLY compensated for by constructs, some new kind of magic, and a few other trinkets.
- the team changed it's composition a bit, changing it's character, much more power focused on the main leader, not sharing it.
- "the key" was the main problem. but i though about it, and came up with a plausible solution that team evil can work. according to my concept that the victory should matter, team evil wasted time thinking of this soulution, and the solution is HARDER for them. however, and this may be the most important- it's also a fun and intriguing plot for the party to counter! the tough situation, the "breaking" of plotturned out to make it better, more interesting.
more than that- the party have recently returned to that place, where "the key" is now used by them in their battle! which makes for a cool turn of events.
- the pool of blood. you have any idea how many encounters get "shoved aside" and supposedly never used again? but keep them accesible, and you can change some details, adjust some things, take core concepts and the more and introduce them a new. this happened to me MANY times, andthe pool of blood was no different. the players as i said, arenow back in the place. and they will (most likely) use the pool of blood to gain serious tactical advantage. it is more appropriate now than it was at first, more epic, and what's more- i had time to think about it, and make it better!
-the player and her back story. this too proved as an opportunity! (it is my firm belief to never have a character's development mapped out, but rahter let it evolve from the story). at first the character was consumed with confusion, anger and what not, but later on it used this as a sort of growth, and focused her attention on the main evil, and even used this as a leverage to change faiths (plays a cleric)

i guess my main point is- take time to think of things (in game 5-15 minutes, out of game more), but react to things with the world's logic, whether good or bad, DON"T FORCE A PLOT!. the best, the very best moments for DMs and players come when things change unexpectedly, and suddenly challenge them. if you want to tell the story in your head, write a book, don't play an RPG.

hope this helps, sorry for the length (i'm wordy).
my signature has my campaign log, from the DM's point of view. though it's in 3.5, in Eberron (no prior knowledge needed), and is... wordy :smallbiggrin:

good luck, and fun game,
Kol.

Silma
2011-09-30, 08:18 AM
Wow. You guys sure helped A LOT! :) I mean ,some of the things you said, pretty much concluded the whole argument.


- does he change character roles? (defender strikers and so on?) or does he mostly stay in the same type? (probably due to the roles of other players?) maybe he just really dislikes this role, maybe not even knowing it. maybe a change of roles might do well? controlers especially specialize in varied effects, leaders after that, but you need to like being a buffer. do this EVEN if it breaks the normal suggested party composition. 4E is geared towards the PCs, and they should find a way to cope.


he does, unfortunately. But still i don't care about that, my issue is that he's not enjoying his characters, and imo the most important part of being the DM is to make sure your players are having a good time. It's the other players that keep complaining about him doing so, cuz they want the group to be consistent.



-false cargo, that is quite smart, but you let the players know there is a chance their ruse will be found out. depending on perception, familiarity with the cargo you decide a certain DC, and a roll for who checks it. then you tell these to the players, and ROLL IN FRONT OF THEM. (this is done to let them know that you're neither protecting them, or try to "get at them" on purpose) apply the results immediately- either everything is fine, or someone comes a knocking.


I don't usually roll in front of my players, but at least when it comes to attack rolls, I tell them the result and THEY tell me if it hit or not.




Points 1 and 2: The rules for things like sight, stealth, and distraction are different whether you're in or out of combat. For in combat, the best writing of the rules that I've seen is The Rules Of Hidden Club.

IIRC distraction is something that comes into play outside combat, and comes down to DM discretion. A guard just walking down the corridor probably isn't going to be distracted; he might even be making active perception checks. He might become distracted if he's been on shift for hours and just wants to go home to his family (successful streetwise check to find out when the guard changes), or sees something unusual but not suspicious (can't think of a good idea, but a bluff check would be involved). Success lets you sneak up and get a surprise round, failure means no surprise round and maybe he shouts a warning. Attacking from cover, either by charging or using a ranged power is another alternative.

That was more helpful than you can imagine... :)


Point 3: You mean 20/16/11/10/10/8 right? Because you can't get 20/18/... at level 1 with point buy. Also, the difference between 20/16, 18/18, 18/16, 18/14, or even 16/x is not all that big. Choice of powers, class, role, type of encounter, and player skill make far more difference. As others pointed out these specialised builds come with weaknesses, a 20/16 Barbarian (or any careless played Barb really) can be seriously fragile against magical artillery or controller enemies, so put him on the floor a few times IMO. Admittedly the Wizard probably has fewer problems with those stats.


I meant 20/16/11/10/10/8, I'm sorry. :( I typed the wrong number.
Yes, both the wizard and the barbarian are quite skilled at making the right decisions in combat. While I'm extremely happy for that, sometimes they make encounters too easy. And I can't really say anything other than congratulate them and build tougher encounters for the next session.

Y
ou can increase or decrease the experience awarded to the characters, if needed. Giving yourself an extra 10% EXP budget (or however much) to provide the sufficient challange to the characters would be just fine.


Yeah, I might just do that.



The Barbarian spits lightning and sets himself of fire during his rages. Another option would be the Warden; the class doesn't deal high damage, but it does have big, noticable transformations for its dailies, and it tends to have a wide area of influence around itself. Perhaps that would be more to the player's liking.

Hehe, that's not gonna cut it. He is (by choice) restricted to arcane and divine classes. But what can I say to him, when he didn't like his deva wizard because he wasn't consistent, then he didn't like the deva invoker, because he didn't have any decent flavor (in his opinion), then didn't like his drow warlock because he didn't have many aoe spells, and it seemed to him that he didn't have the potential to become "the most powerful" storywise, and now he doesn't like his vampire because, he is not as much of a spellcaster as he wanted him to be. I mean he asked me to make some new spells for his vampire that use fire, and in the same time, keep the flavor as it is now.
And while I was certainly willing to try, my other players openly objected because they think (And I can't say I blame them) that he is trying to create a "living God"



Any way I wanted to thank you all once again for the time you have spent on your posts. I couldn't have hoped for all of that. You guys have been very helpful so far. I mean some of the things I asked in my first post are completely clarified to me now. Of course I would welcome any advice you might give me, but I can't ask for more. I am grateful for your help. :smallsmile::smallsmile::smallsmile::smallsmile:

Tyndmyr
2011-09-30, 08:35 AM
1. How do we define a creature's line of sight? And I don't mean the thing where you draw lines from one square to another. I mean, how far can people see, and if we can assume that they take notice of what's happening behind them. The reason I'm asking this is because some mix-up we've been having with the stealth rules. According to the rulebooks, a character can attempt to hide in plain sight if the enemy is distracted. Which brings me to my next question.

2. When is someone considered distracted? If someone has his back on you can we assume he is distracted? How about when he is marked by someone else?

If this is 4e, I have no idea. The 4e forum likely has more detailed information for you on this.


3. When I helped my players create their characters (in some cases I created the characters almost by myself, since some players had absolutely no idea how this game worked, and I just told them what each class does and made a character based on their choices)
The current party is: a human wizard (pyromancer), a human barbarian (rageblood), a gnome bard (cunning), a drow rogue, and a human fighter (dual wield).
Now I used the point buy system, cuz I wanted characters to be on a similar power level. The thing is, I helped my players optimize theis characters, ending up with a build of (for example) 20, 18, 11, 10,10, 8
As a result of that, some characters ended up too strong, which makes battles too easy. So far I had to make them face opponents of a higher level, so that they could actually feel challenged. The barbarian and wizard in particular. Any idea how I can make things a little harder for them ,without nerfing their characters?

Variety in encounters. Use very different types of situations, so even if the char is completely capable of handling it, the player needs to think about what to do.

Plan a fight while dangling from ropes beneath an airship. Or while dodging timed plumes of hot gas. Or while on a castle that's rapidly being flooded.

See, challenge need not come in purely numerical form.


4. Now one of my players, started the game as a deva wizard, but it was only a couple of sessions to help them understand the game. When we started the actual campaign, He decided he'd create a drow warlock, cuz he didn't quite like his previous char. Then he went away for a few weeks, and when he came back, he decided to make a vampire. Then he went away for a couple of months and now he's coming back (to stay, this time). The thing is, before he left I sensed he didn't really like this char too. And to be honest, the other players hated having a vampire in the party. How can I help him create a char (or keep this one) that he likes? I hate it when someone changes their chat just because he isn't as strong as they wanted. And this guy, wants to be the strongest in the party. He's kind of pissing everyone off, and I had sworn I'd never let him change his char again. The only reason I decided I'd let him do it one more time, Is because the other players would prefer it if the vampire was gone. So, how can I help him realize that d&d is all about being a team, supplementing each other (and in some cases hindering them :P), and that no one can be a one-man killing machine, who is also incredible clever and wise?

Help him create a character, but warn him that time is limited, and thus, this really is his last time. Blatantly say that regardless of char, he's going to have to be part of a team. It's what the game is all about.


5. One of my players (the human fighter) isn't taking the game seriously at all. (I'm not talking about a couple of jokes, I mean, the game is all about having fun with your friend, everyone will say something funny once in a while, but when it's 99% joking and only 1% playing the actual game, you have a problem right there). He is the kind of guy that plays only Football games, and I understand that it was hard for him to adjust. However, the other guy (the barbarian) who had similar interests, adjusted just fine, and he is now a very serious player. How can I make D&D interesting for him, or at least (if he can't adjust at all) how can I tell him not to play without him feeling left out? Cuz right now he's ruining all my efforts to create an atmosphere, and he's preventing the others from playing as well as they'd like. (and that's not just my opinion, I mean everyone is complaining, but no one wants to tell it to him cuz he has a tendency to feel unwanted. Which is SO not true)

Just make him tell his jokes in character, and treat them as such. He can still be funny, but if he just made a crack about the queen being a hooker, in front of the king...it'll be even more funny. For everyone else.

Nothing wrong with humor, it just has to be appropriate.


6. In PC games, usually your path is laid out before you and you only have a few choices. In some cases you have 2-3 different options. I always hated this, so when I started the campaign, I wanted my players to be able to do whatever they wanted. However that hasn't turned to well, because sometimes they want to do things that ruin the whole quest. And since I don't want to say no, I keep improvising. So my question is" How can I limit their choices without them realizing it?

Thanks in advance. :)

Bait. It's much harder to plausibly block off all the options than it is to make sure they find rumors of wealth and power along the option(s) you want them to take.

However, be aware that you don't WANT it to be like a PC game. Because PC games have better graphics and can be played any time. You don't want to go down that path. Do some prep for various options for the times when the players don't take the bait. If they ignore quest point x...what realistically happens? Does the villains subplot work, and what does that mean for the players? Ideally, too much ignoring of the plot will result in undesirable things happening to stuff the players care about.

Excession
2011-09-30, 05:04 PM
Hehe, that's not gonna cut it. He is (by choice) restricted to arcane and divine classes. But what can I say to him, when he didn't like his deva wizard because he wasn't consistent, then he didn't like the deva invoker, because he didn't have any decent flavor (in his opinion), then didn't like his drow warlock because he didn't have many aoe spells, and it seemed to him that he didn't have the potential to become "the most powerful" storywise, and now he doesn't like his vampire because, he is not as much of a spellcaster as he wanted him to be. I mean he asked me to make some new spells for his vampire that use fire, and in the same time, keep the flavor as it is now.
And while I was certainly willing to try, my other players openly objected because they think (And I can't say I blame them) that he is trying to create a "living God"

I don't know much about the Vampire class, but from the other stuff it sounds like a Sorcerer might suit him. They get more AoE and damage than a Warlock, and there's certainly a lot of built in flavour to attach a character to. You can choose between a surprising tough front row blaster or a more sneaky and hard to hit ranged type. They're not "the most powerful" though. Nothing should be really, and he's going to have to give up on that to some degree to enjoy the game. If he's constantly trying to compete with a Barbarian for damage and a Fighter for toughness he's going to lose.