|
7 months ago ::
Nov 03, 2012 - 4:17PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2001
|
What kinds of expectations do you establish for your players before play begins and after problems arise?
I've had trouble lately with people wanting to talk about their crappy life, politics, and other things that I'd rather not have come up at my game sessions.
Also, I've come to the conclusion that I've simply got to tell players that my campaign is really tough and characters will die, otherwise theres incessant whining when a character dies or has any trouble whatsoever (oh woe is me!).
What's the best way to go about addressing this stuff?
jh
Gamer Chiropractor - Hafner Chiropractic 305 S. Kipling st,Suite C-2, Lakewood, Co 80226 www.hafnerchiropractic.com
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 03, 2012 - 5:19PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2012
|
This sounds like session zero stuff, but I'll throw in my two cents.
When I am running a table I like to have a 20 minute "buffer" time. If we say that our game is 8, then from 8 to 8:20 is time to crack jokes, talk about the latest movies, eat pizza, grab beers, etc. The official purpose of this time is to do any bench audits or character sheet maintenance, or to confirm any OOC coordination we've made in between sessions. At 8:21 the TV goes off, laptops get put away, and I fire up an itunes playlist that is all instrumentals. The occasional off-color moment after the buffer time is OK, but the general rule is that once the game starts we're in the game until we call the session.
As for the relative mortality rate of your campaign, that's something to cover and agree upon in session zero. There are plenty of other threads and viewpoints around here on how to handle player death, so I will spare you mine.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 03, 2012 - 5:48PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
What kinds of expectations do you establish for your players before play begins and after problems arise?
I've had trouble lately with people wanting to talk about their crappy life, politics, and other things that I'd rather not have come up at my game sessions.
Also, I've come to the conclusion that I've simply got to tell players that my campaign is really tough and characters will die, otherwise theres incessant whining when a character dies or has any trouble whatsoever (oh woe is me!).
What's the best way to go about addressing this stuff?
jh
Primarily it would be handled in Session Zero, which is what we call a pre-game talk about game expectations and plans.
There's little point in killing characters if that's not the kind of challenge your players want to see. Challenge them in other ways. Ask them what kinds of consequences they'd like to see and impose those. Death is not the only way to fail.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 03, 2012 - 6:13PM
#4
|
|
|
What kinds of expectations do you establish for your players before play begins and after problems arise?
I've had trouble lately with people wanting to talk about their crappy life, politics, and other things that I'd rather not have come up at my game sessions.
Also, I've come to the conclusion that I've simply got to tell players that my campaign is really tough and characters will die, otherwise theres incessant whining when a character dies or has any trouble whatsoever (oh woe is me!).
What's the best way to go about addressing this stuff?
jh
Kerapalli's suggestion is good. It's what I do. I have games start at a specific time and before that chaos can reign. After that time though, it's game time. Having a set time puts peoples brains into game mode once that time comes up.
There's little point in killing characters if that's not the kind of challenge your players want to see. Challenge them in other ways.
As for this advice from Centauri, I disagree in that as the one providing the game and the challenges of the game it is your right to provide the challenges you see fit and enjoy providing. Does that mean some players will not necessary like that? Sure, but that is the nature of life.
A more important question about lethality in your campaign though is how it is delivered and how that challenge is created. On a game level, "tough" might not be tough...it might be unfair or poorly devised. Can you give some examples of how the challenge is provided? Basically, give me a run down of how you present the game and the challenges in it.
I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end.
If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it. #SuperDungeonMasterIITurbo
My blog and stuff http://dmingtowin.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 03, 2012 - 6:24PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
What's the best way to go about addressing this stuff?
The important thing to keep in mind is that the DM is not the game. The DM is a necessary part of the game, but so are the players. Without players enjoying the game, there is no game. The DM must be enjoying the game as well, but they traditionally have many more options for arranging that than players do.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 04, 2012 - 6:52AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2005
|
You should generally address this stuff in the character creation session, or what is commonly called session 0. This is before anyone has made a character or invested any time in the game. Here you can lay out house rules. They can be anything from "We use 32 point buy" to "Don't talk about politics here, it just turns the game into an arguement". You can also establish expectations and see what your players are looking for. Things like "There is a ton of magic in this game" "I'd like everyone to somehow work membership into the Order of Tall Dudes into your backstory" and "You will die often, thats expected don't worry about it".
If you start bringing these sorts of things into play mid game it can lead to conflict. If you didn't have a session 0, you should have one asap and just let everyone know that it applies from here on out.
During session 0, you should expect to field questions from players about the world, your DMing style, and house rule requests like "Can I play X race, ignore Y requirement". They may take the opportunity to debate rules with you, and this is good. Debate it now, before the game actually happens instead of mid session. Things like "Do we have to use a crit fumble chart?" are common examples. For many players this is a dealbreaker, and its better for them to bow out before character generation than after the second session.
5e comments and thoughts all in one place. Check it out to provide feedback, mock, or steal ideas.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/28835423/Krusks_5e_Design_Goals?sdb=1
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 04, 2012 - 7:27AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2007
|
There's little point in killing characters if that's not the kind of challenge your players want to see. Challenge them in other ways.
As for this advice from Centauri, I disagree in that as the one providing the game and the challenges of the game it is your right to provide the challenges you see fit and enjoy providing. Does that mean some players will not necessary like that? Sure, but that is the nature of life.
This is a situation where "I'm the DM, and its my game" can come bite you in the rear. If you have a group of people who invest themselves in their characters, plan for their futures, and whose primary joy is character development, then a high lethality game is going to be endless frustration for them. Eventually, they are going to leave your table as soon as a game that suits their playstyle comes along. The DM is lord and master of his table, only as long as there are players willing to sit at it.
If you clue the players in about lethality during your session zero, hopefully they will clue you in that they want to be able to develop characters rather than potentially needing to create a new one every ten sessions. If you want to keep those players, compromise is in order.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 04, 2012 - 8:21AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2012
|
I think if you take away death as a challenge to the charactres there is no chalenge left in the game. Yes?
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 04, 2012 - 8:27AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
I think if you take away death as a challenge to the charactres there is no chalenge left in the game. Yes?
No. There are ways to lose other than by dying. Any TV show, book, or movie with an action adventure storyline shows examples of this.
(And anyway, no one advocates completely removing death, just putting in on the players' terms so that they embrace death as a right and proper thing for their character. Many players find random death to be "right and proper," but that's not the only way it can be handled.)
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 04, 2012 - 8:38AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2007
|
I think if you take away death as a challenge to the charactres there is no chalenge left in the game. Yes?
Defeat is defeat. Sometimes that means death, sometimes not. The problem with death is that death is final. I would prefer to give a character a chance to die heroically on their own terms as the end to their life story, rather than have their death rest solely on the roll of the dice.
Death is not the only consequence of failure. Consider that for a while.
|
|
|
