Hunger games type game

[RingofThorns]

I have this idea to run a kind of hunger games type thing with my group but I am need of a little help. I have played in settings like this before, well once before and the DM just kind of went around the table and asked everyone what they were doing but more then a few times if melted down into chaos of people trying to shout over one another. Anyway my idea is to run the game in a large maze (making it bigger for more players, smaller for less) and having each of them spawn at kind of random points with their characters and pretty much going until only one is left standing.

1. I am wondering if there would be a more normal way to handle the players acting when not in combat I was thinking of using some kind of initiative based system, any thoughts?

2. I was wondering if there was anything specific I needed to ban players from using or abusing during the game? (i.e. certain feats,items,so on. I don't mind them having powerful characters I just don't want anything over powered or game breaking.)

[Venger]

I have this idea to run a kind of hunger games type thing with my group but I am need of a little help. I have played in settings like this before, well once before and the DM just kind of went around the table and asked everyone what they were doing but more then a few times if melted down into chaos of people trying to shout over one another. Anyway my idea is to run the game in a large maze (making it bigger for more players, smaller for less) and having each of them spawn at kind of random points with their characters and pretty much going until only one is left standing.

1. I am wondering if there would be a more normal way to handle the players acting when not in combat I was thinking of using some kind of initiative based system, any thoughts?

2. I was wondering if there was anything specific I needed to ban players from using or abusing during the game? (i.e. certain feats,items,so on. I don't mind them having powerful characters I just don't want anything over powered or game breaking.)

What is it specifically you're looking for help with? What is it that makes your planned concept different from a normal arena/gladiator style fighting game. Do you want help with traps, like in "catching fire?" are you seeking to replicate some of the stuff that the giant clock attacked the competitors with mechanically or are you trying to make your own? is it literally based off the franchise or is it just a loose framing device?

1) if you want to give everyone more or less equal focus, don't go by initiative, it'll favor people with a better value for more spotlight time. just go around your table clockwise and make sure everyone gets a turn.

2) do you want food/hunger/thirst to be something your players are forced to care about during the contest? if so, you might ask them not to have any food and water creating items, or to be undead or otherwise obviate the need to eat or sleep, since all that puny human stuff was somewhat central in the concept of the hunger games. a gravetouched ghoul could clean up by just turtling and waiting for everyone else to starve to death, like the morphlings back in the 50th games. as plutarch said, that doesn't make for a very interesting game.

the more specific you can be the better advice we'll be able to give. sounds like a fun campaign

[Tohsaka Rin]

I would suggest running it as a team game, so that the players can remain in a party together. This prevents several problems: You're not forcing the players to split, you're not encouraging infighting, and you get....

Insert Zelda item-get music here.

Replayability.

Doing it this way allows not only the entire party (should they all survive) to win, but it allows their characters the chance to return as 'champions' for a 'second season' or more. Gaining fame, fortune, and a connection to their characters.

The alternative doesn't allow for any of that, save for a single player, should they win.

...Barring necromancy, of course.

[Venger]

I would suggest running it as a team game, so that the players can remain in a party together. This prevents several problems: You're not forcing the players to split, you're not encouraging infighting, and you get....


Insert Zelda item-get music here.

Replayability.

Doing it this way allows not only the entire party (should they all survive) to win, but it allows their characters the chance to return as 'champions' for a 'second season' or more. Gaining fame, fortune, and a connection to their characters.

The alternative doesn't allow for any of that, save for a single player, should they win.

...Barring necromancy, of course.
derp. I completely forgot to address this earlier but I agree wholeheartedly. in the actual hunger games, it's normal to form alliances to hunt down the other tributes. I'd check in with the players first and make sure they were okay with pvp once it got down to party members only, assuming you didn't want to completely adhere to canon and have the party end up all falling in love with each other.

[Tohsaka Rin]

Well, keep in mind, the OP said 'I want to run a hunger games type thing' (emphasis mine), not explicitly the books/movies.

Letting/encouraging the party to think of themselves as a professional team of X (arena runners, maze champions, what have you) gives you more avenues to work with. It heavily suggests to the players 'do good together, and not only will you live, but you'll have a good thing going here, that can potentially last a long time'.

Personally, I'd turn down a straight-up Hunger Games, uh, game. PVP isn't my thing.

Now, a group game, where I can team up with a party that (probably) won't betray me? That's something I'd get on board with, and ride to the end of the line.

"Why yes, I AM a professional Labyrinth Leaguer, and yes, I did just win my third straight victory. And yes, I will have another gilded oyster on the half-shell. Open another bottle of something expensive!"

[Venger]

Well, keep in mind, the OP said 'I want to run a hunger games type thing' (emphasis mine), not explicitly the books/movies.

Letting/encouraging the party to think of themselves as a professional team of X (arena runners, maze champions, what have you) gives you more avenues to work with. It heavily suggests to the players 'do good together, and not only will you live, but you'll have a good thing going here, that can potentially last a long time'.

Personally, I'd turn down a straight-up Hunger Games, uh, game. PVP isn't my thing.

Now, a group game, where I can team up with a party that (probably) won't betray me? That's something I'd get on board with, and ride to the end of the line.

"Why yes, I AM a professional Labyrinth Leaguer, and yes, I did just win my third straight victory. And yes, I will have another gilded oyster on the half-shell. Open another bottle of something expensive!"

right, of course. until he responds, I don't know how big a part the whole hunger games aspect of it actually plays vs a normal arena dnd game, since that can change a fair amount about the approach and gameplay.

I agree with your assessment of the situation. pvp is bad.

[lylsyly]

There is and old AD&D Module (N4, Treasure Hunt) that starts Characters (ship-wrecked) off at 0 level and even tracks their actions towards a specific class. Perhaps it would give you some ideas if you can get hold of one.

Yeah, I'm showing my age :smallsmile:

[RingofThorns]

Sorry for taking sos long to respond, but yes 'hunger games' was just the easiest way to desrcibe what I was thinking of at the time. I have a program on my computer that randomly generates a maze of whatever size I require and this comes complete with traps,neutral monsters, and other things so mostly none of that would be an issue. I did think about running it as two teams against one another but I can think of two problems with that, first I don't know if I would have enough people to make two even teams, and second [and this goes with doing a last man standing game type] how do I keep people from meta gaming or cheating with ooc knowledge? I onnly worry about this because I know at least one player will be very competitive with it, and I don't want him using what he hears other players doing to try and help him get an edge.

[Cerefel]

There is the option of running the opposing team(s) yourself as NPCs

[RingofThorns]

I am really trying to step back and not run a character or group for this I want to just be the DM if that makes any sense.

[Vogie]

1. I am wondering if there would be a more normal way to handle the players acting when not in combat I was thinking of using some kind of initiative based system, any thoughts?

You can still use a sort of initiative based system, but using different skill checks depending on the situation. Keep official initiative for combat.

For example, after a day without food/water, you could base order off of Constitution/Endurance checks, reacting to an incoming trap with Wisdom/Insight checks, an argument is resolved using charisma/sense motive checks, et cetera


2. I was wondering if there was anything specific I needed to ban players from using or abusing during the game? (i.e. certain feats,items,so on. I don't mind them having powerful characters I just don't want anything over powered or game breaking.)

Obviously you want to limit any feats or items that would defeat the stated purpose of the game. This could be as simple as letting them choose their weapons/armor/items at the beginning of the game, but when they spawn, they don't have any of them. Seed their chosen items around the map attached to mooks and hidden in areas in the map.

If things like traps are a big deal, you don't want them to be able to easily detect/disarm them. If you're playing the 2D Maze game, limit flying, scrying and teleportation. You don't want them to just wish away the McGuffin.

At the same time, you can give them ways to interact with the environments as well. Maybe that wizard that you've taken the teleportation away from can now interact with the immediate surroundings like they're playing Portal. Maybe certain types of walls/traps can just be obliterated by brute force.



I did think about running it as two teams against one another but I can think of two problems with that, first I don't know if I would have enough people to make two even teams, and second [and this goes with doing a last man standing game type] how do I keep people from meta gaming or cheating with ooc knowledge? I onnly worry about this because I know at least one player will be very competitive with it, and I don't want him using what he hears other players doing to try and help him get an edge.

I wouldn't have them specifically be competitive at the start. Just let them all be people on the map. IN GENERAL, I've found that players will just join together in a group. You can then allow those groups to argue & go separate ways, or be separated by traps. If you have a way to easily indicate who is where on the map, you can keep going around in your normal orders, even if the players aren't in the same room or section of the maze. If some of them then realize what's going on, and do start to hunt down the other players, it'll be significantly more difficult.

[awa]

one worry in a hunger games style set up is turn length one players turn may be 1 sentence "okay I sleep 8 hours" and then a different character gets 8 hours of sneaking around and exploring before the other guy gets to go again.

[RingofThorns]

I suppose hunger games might not have been a perfect way to describe this, I suppose length wise I would imagine it more like the maze from the tri wizard tournament in Harry Potter. A single event meant to take a day at the most, so things like food and water shouldn't be that much of an issue for anyone [sorry I should have explained this from the start, may bad.] I have toyed around with the idea of kind of making it a 'series' of one shot games that way say a single person wins then the next time around they get a little bit more starting gold gear out their character, and I was planning on having the characters that won able to come back for the next game but putting some kind of ever increasing bounty of some kind on their head to encourage people to try and fight them instead of just playing a game of run away.

[awa]

that works better particularly if you design it to avoid challenges most effectively solved by long low interaction activities. How many players do you have? Something like this would work better with a small number of people. You should also minimize combats those take a long time in any edition and the higher the level the longer it takes.

[denthor]

Just for fun have your mage sling unforgettable verses like unforgivable curses.

[Quertus]

I ran something like this once; I called it The Grand Melee.

It took place in a small maze of rooms; each room had its own rules / properties / terrain / traps / whatever.

People appeared in random locations, and it was a "last man standing" game, like Hunger Games.

Preventing metagaming in that kind of scenario is difficult. Giving each person their own little minimap might help.

Just going around the table for actions when not in combat is fine. Just make sure to be fair about how long things take, including taking into account people's movement speeds.

As for nerfing abilities, I say don't. Now, there may be specific rules against (or things that prevent) going over, under, or through the walls, travel to other planes... or there might not. That's your call. I'd personally have both rules stated to the participants (the characters, not the players) about what is legal, and make the maze physically reinforce these rules: wall of force prevents flight above the walls, walls are very sturdy to prevent being accidentally broken, etc.

But, for a low-magic tournament, it may just be rules, and judges watching for rules breakers.

And then the social character gets to play the social minigame with corrupt judges...

[Tvtyrant]

The coolest scenario I have seen for this was a setting where the Ilithids conquered the multi-verse and would hunt people for sport. Having an all powerful monster race pit groups against each other seems like a fun setting, since you can justify them being able to make a super arena and stock it with whatever they want.