PDA

View Full Version : And with a sense of Dread….



Earthwalker
2013-04-01, 06:49 AM
Taking Tekkin’s post as an example I thought I would share the start of my latest game. Now I am going into this with a sense of dread but I am willing to give it a try, I am playing with friends and people I have known for a while. I am not asking advice here just sharing with you all. I am sure if I did ask for advice it would be “Leave the Game”

Let start with some background. We have four people involved in the game. Myself, Albert,Bob and Carl. I am currently playing in a game where Bob is GM in a Pathfinder game. Albert, Carl and myself are players. It has got to a natural break point and Bob would like a break from running things so Albert is going to run an idea he has.

Now Albert plays with us but does not have a good grasp on the rules and generally takes about 4 times longer to have his turn than the rest of us in the group. Albert has played DnD way back and comes from an AD&D background, where he used to GM, so far he has not really bothered learning the Pathfinder rules.

He wants to run a game so Albert and Bob have come up with a plan. They will co-GM. Albert will work with plot and deal with the Story. Bob would handle any Rules issues. So that they can enjoy the game both are creating PCs to play along when the other is GM.

So once this plan was sorted we got to character creation. We had a few limits from the game world.

Alignment : Lawful Evil only, if given a choice I would never play Evil, I have played evil in the past and just not liked it. I don’t really enjoy playing the bad guys, but for the game to work we need to be this alignment so I say I will give it a try.

Race: Human only, you are all playing siblings, as such you are all human.

Age: You are Quintuplets so you all have to be 19 years old.

Class: Any. YAY at last I get a choice to make, I can decide what class I want to be. After some time looking over my books and the SRD I decide on playing a necro cleric. At last a chance to play a role I would never normally would. I can get the feats to allow me more Hit Dice of undead. Use my negative channel to heal up my undead. All seems shiny

Stats: No rolling stats, Albert and Bob rolled stats but when it came to me and Carl we were given a good array of stats and told to place them where we like (17,16,14,14,13,10)

Name: Being a family we didn’t get to choose our surname only our first name.

Before the first meeting we get together for Bob’s current game and go over what ideas we have for characters. I explain my plans (I generally like to let a GM know what character I am playing and what my plans are) After explain as a cleric at lvl 5 I can get (I think) 7, 5Hd undead under my control both the GMs seem to think this might be a bit over the top. If I was going to play a necro cleric they would have to nerf it a bit, so I would get one undead like a familiar or animal companion (At lvl 5). With HD equal to my own. I scrap the idea of necro cleric as it hardly seems like the undead controller

So I ask what the others are playing and try to fit into that.

Carl is planning on playing a Witch as he is a monk in the other game.
Bob is going to play a Melee character with some magic. (At the time he didn’t say what kind of melee)
Albert is going to play a Magus. (In the other game he is playing a Barbarian)

We are ok for melee and magic. I am not going down the healer route (for one thing there are limited healing options left when Druid (alignment) and Cleric aren’t there) so I decide just to putz along as a Rogue.

After working on my rogue I send it out to the GMs and ask if it’s all ok. The only comment back is that the name I choose reminds one of the GMs of a nephew of his and asks me to change it. So I do. At the same time I find out that Carl has been asked to change the Gender of his Witch. Carl is Male but wanted to play a female Witch, the GM explains it would be better if the Witch was Male, no other explanation is given.

To sum up so far.

Not one but 2 DMPCs in a group of 4 characters.

For the players

No choice of alignment
No Choice of Race
No Choice of Age
No Choice of Gender
No Choice of Name

Limited Choice of Stats
Limited Choice of Class (Anything seen as too powerful is nerfed)

Now I have played games with Pre-Made characters and I am happy with that, but this seemed to get introduced as we went along that more and more limits came from character creation, limiting what we could make, so far it does not bode well.
I am going to post more as we have had a world background conversation now, which again I found…. Interesting.

LokiRagnarok
2013-04-01, 07:41 AM
I don't really know much about the mechanics of Pathfinder, so the part with the cleric might be sensible. Have you asked for reasons for the other restrictions? He might think they are self-evident(tm).

Totally Guy
2013-04-01, 07:53 AM
What is the game going to be about?

aberratio ictus
2013-04-01, 08:08 AM
Hm. Honestly, you haven't even played a session yet, so I'm not sure if everybody would actually tell you to leave the group if you asked for advice.
True, the restrictions and two DMPCs are a bit worrying, but I'd say just give it a try. Maybe those guys know what they're doing.
I've had the "rules guy" play a character before when the story-GM (who didn't have his own character, granted) didn't know the rules very well, and it did work quite well, since the rules guy didn't have any idea about the story and only offered his advice if the GM didn't know how to handle something.

Angel Bob
2013-04-01, 08:08 AM
Sounds terrible to me, at least according to your explanation. I would suggest calmly and politely asking the DMs why they've placed such heavy limitations on your character choices, explaining that you are not having fun with this situation. Ask the other players if they are also feeling confined. Hopefully, you can negotiate some wiggle room into the equation. If not, then at least give it a chance for a few sessions, and if you still find it not to your liking, then politely leave the game. Keeping a cool head is integral.

Earthwalker
2013-04-01, 08:52 AM
What is the game going to be about?

I am going to add in more detail. We are part of an evil family that wants power within the empire. The PCs will be a strike force used for secret missions for our family.


Hm. Honestly, you haven't even played a session yet, so I'm not sure if everybody would actually tell you to leave the group if you asked for advice.
True, the restrictions and two DMPCs are a bit worrying, but I'd say just give it a try. Maybe those guys know what they're doing.
[snip]

I have been reading Tekkin's thread about his car crash campaign and so was wanting to post something similar. Partly to give the forum another nice read and partly to show how much I sympathize with Tekkin.

This campaign could turn out to be fantastic, in which case we have something good to read. Or it could dive, again it gives us all something to enjoy.

aberratio ictus
2013-04-01, 10:09 AM
Very well. Go on then, I'll be sticking around for the first session, at least.

illyrus
2013-04-01, 12:26 PM
Limitations pre-game seem fine to me as they're spelled out before hand. Especially when a newbie GM is involved I have no issue cutting them some slack on what I bring to the table.

I've never had a game involving co-GMs go well, especially one with GMs alternating as PCs but I've known other groups where this worked.

Do you know if this is going to be a railroad game, sandbox, or what? I'm assuming from what is said before that you can expect the former.

Personally I'd want to find out how theft relates to your lawful code. I'd think being able to plan and execute heists would be a large part of having fun as an evil rogue but that whole lawful thing could easily get in the way.

Tsriel
2013-04-01, 12:57 PM
Basically echoing what's already been said, he's new at DMing. Be patient with it. You should voice your opinions on what you'd like/expect from the game, as it's part of his role in the game to make it fun and enjoyable. Just be prepared for some rough spots as he discovers where his niche is.

NikitaDarkstar
2013-04-01, 01:21 PM
Personally I'd want to find out how theft relates to your lawful code. I'd think being able to plan and execute heists would be a large part of having fun as an evil rogue but that whole lawful thing could easily get in the way.

There's more ways to play a rogue you know. The social rogue. The assassin (completely possible to play as lawful). The spy. The dirty-tactics fighter. Etc. They may be called rogues, but far from all of them are thieves.


That said I would be wary of these limitations and question some of them. For example, same family and all siblings? Sure I could buy that. But quadruplets (of the same gender) that seems contrived. Same with Evil. All Evil I could accept without an issue, but all Lawful Evil? That seems very strict.

Of course there might be reasons for it, but if it's background reasons you should have been given those reasons up-front since it's fairly obvious they already got a detailed background in mind.

Anyway, good luck with this and I hope you enjoy the game, please keep us updated. :)

illyrus
2013-04-01, 01:40 PM
There's more ways to play a rogue you know. The social rogue. The assassin (completely possible to play as lawful). The spy. The dirty-tactics fighter. Etc. They may be called rogues, but far from all of them are thieves.


Edit - Actually I'm just going to reword my reply. Yes I know all of those are valid types of rogues. Really anything is because it just a bunch of tools and not how you play. A rogue with the right magic items could make a good healer etc too.

I would be curious about which of my tools can be used within my alignment constraints though. If the GM is going to say "no you can't use pickpocket to plant evidence because that is against the law" then it could limit my options whether I'm playing a burglar, assassin, crooked cop, etc.

Scow2
2013-04-01, 02:06 PM
If you're lawful evil, don't worry about not breaking the law too much. The only reason Lawful people care about 'laws' is because most laws are created to make the world more orderly and defined against chaos and anarchy. Mafia/Al Capone-style Organized Crime breaks laws (Otherwise it would just be Organized Law-abiding, not Organized Crime), while still being a strongly Lawful social construct.

illyrus
2013-04-01, 02:25 PM
If you're lawful evil, don't worry about not breaking the law too much. The only reason Lawful people care about 'laws' is because most laws are created to make the world more orderly and defined against chaos and anarchy. Mafia/Al Capone-style Organized Crime breaks laws (Otherwise it would just be Organized Law-abiding, not Organized Crime), while still being a strongly Lawful social construct.

Which for a normal game makes sense. With this being a fairly restricted game right off the bat I'd want to talk with the GMs pretty extensively on what THEY think LE means and what they plan to allow or not.

Getting into an argument 3 sessions in when you find out your GMs don't support your character concept is no fun at all.

Rhynn
2013-04-01, 02:27 PM
Limitations pre-game seem fine to me as they're spelled out before hand. Especially when a newbie GM is involved I have no issue cutting them some slack on what I bring to the table.

Setting limitations are fine, but telling the players who their characters will be in a campaign is bad. It can be great for a one-off, but this is an obvious railway station.

Choo choo! All aboard the train to Exactly Where the GM Wants It To Go!

illyrus
2013-04-01, 02:55 PM
Setting limitations are fine, but telling the players who their characters will be in a campaign is bad. It can be great for a one-off, but this is an obvious railway station.

Choo choo! All aboard the train to Exactly Where the GM Wants It To Go!

To me there are two kinds of limitations. Those imposed before the game that everyone agrees to and those done after. Some GMs might limit "no evil alignment" or "no splat books" or no elves. It is not like the lack of elves or having a specific shared character history automatically means the game has to be a railroad.

Personally I'd rather discuss with the GMs their reasoning over actions and how they actually want the gameplay to flow (railroad, sandbox, etc) than draw a line in the sand and judge everything off which side of the line it is on. You can have a railroad game with every option available at chargen after all.

Now probably these is going to be a game of both types of limitations and will be a railroad game (as I said in my previous post).

NikitaDarkstar
2013-04-01, 03:48 PM
If you're lawful evil, don't worry about not breaking the law too much. The only reason Lawful people care about 'laws' is because most laws are created to make the world more orderly and defined against chaos and anarchy. Mafia/Al Capone-style Organized Crime breaks laws (Otherwise it would just be Organized Law-abiding, not Organized Crime), while still being a strongly Lawful social construct.

This pretty much. Lawful isn't so much about following the laws, as it is about following a specific set of rules, or moral codes etc. (and often trying to advance a specific cause, but that's not really lawful exclusive). If those just happens to line up with that societies laws then that's great, if not? Well to bad.

Another take is that Lawful Evil follows the laws as written, not as intended. Pretty much a really good defense lawyer. :p

But yes, I'd make sure you're on the same page with the DM, just so everyone knows exactly what "Lawful Evil" means in this specific game.

Earthwalker
2013-04-01, 05:31 PM
Setting limitations are fine, but telling the players who their characters will be in a campaign is bad. It can be great for a one-off, but this is an obvious railway station.

Choo choo! All aboard the train to Exactly Where the GM Wants It To Go!

I think this campaign is going to have a lot of railroading, I don't mind that too much but it would be nice to make some choices for my character.


This pretty much. Lawful isn't so much about following the laws, as it is about following a specific set of rules, or moral codes etc. (and often trying to advance a specific cause, but that's not really lawful exclusive). If those just happens to line up with that societies laws then that's great, if not? Well to bad.

Another take is that Lawful Evil follows the laws as written, not as intended. Pretty much a really good defense lawyer. :p

But yes, I'd make sure you're on the same page with the DM, just so everyone knows exactly what "Lawful Evil" means in this specific game.

I am planning on playing it LE as being loyal to the family and following their rules but not caring about the laws of the land.

Good plan to confirm with the GM I am playing what he expects of LE.

I am going to post more details on the campaign world as I have had another conversation with the GM, I will also post more concerns with the game.

Scow2
2013-04-01, 06:00 PM
I think this campaign is going to have a lot of railroading, I don't mind that too much but it would be nice to make some choices for my character.

Meh... I sort of see it as a campaign with similar design ethos as a Bioware or old-school Eastern role-playing game(Final Fantasy/Breath of Fire, etc), where you have a predetermined character/party, but you get to choose how they progress and interact with the world.

Rhynn
2013-04-01, 09:58 PM
Meh... I sort of see it as a campaign with similar design ethos as a Bioware or old-school Eastern role-playing game(Final Fantasy/Breath of Fire, etc), where you have a predetermined character/party, but you get to choose how they progress and interact with the world.

That's fine for a video game with a strong story, but TTRPGs are not video games. (Indeed, one reason some GMs flail horribly is that they do not understand the distinction.)


To me there are two kinds of limitations. Those imposed before the game that everyone agrees to and those done after. Some GMs might limit "no evil alignment" or "no splat books" or no elves. It is not like the lack of elves or having a specific shared character history automatically means the game has to be a railroad.

Those are setting (and game system) limitations, and completely fine. "Here's your character, now play a long campaign with it" is a character limitation and asking for trouble.

Scow2
2013-04-01, 10:53 PM
That's fine for a video game with a strong story, but TTRPGs are not video games. (Indeed, one reason some GMs flail horribly is that they do not understand the distinction.)
Actually, even in the first editions of D&D, character creation was on the DM, not the players.

TuggyNE
2013-04-01, 11:17 PM
Actually, even in the first editions of D&D, character creation was on the DM, not the players.

Wait, what?

Rhynn
2013-04-02, 01:19 AM
Actually, even in the first editions of D&D, character creation was on the DM, not the players.

Er, care to back this up and/or clarify what you mean?

Because I've got the rulebooks for the "first editions" (whatever you define that as; OD&D, BD&D, BECMI, AD&D 1E, AD&D 2E), and I don't see anything to support that.

OD&D:
"Before they begin, players must decide what role they will play in the campaign, human or otherwise, fighter, cleric, or magic-user." (Men & Magic, page 6)
"Each player notes his appropriate [ability] scores" (Men & Magic, page 10)

Moldvay Basic D&D:
"The players will create characters by following the instruction given in Part 2" (Basic rulebook, page B3)

Trekkin
2013-04-02, 01:52 AM
It's Trekkin, if anyone was confused. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SpellMyNameWithAnS)

I'm actually optimistic, reading your description of the campaign premise. It sounds like he's limiting you two ways. The family thing is probably his way of starting the campaign outside a tavern, if you will, and giving the party a reason to stick together.

It also sounds like he's trying to keep the party to the PF equivalent of tier 3, which might be easier for him to DM.

The DMPCs...depends on their lifespan. In general, the longer it takes them to drop to push the plot along, the more worried I get--unless they're there to fill out roles no one else wants to play. I've run clerics in the past on that template, because no one wanted to be a healer. Now, I ran them by handing the party a literal menu of healing spells, but still.

Earthwalker
2013-04-02, 03:47 AM
It's Trekkin, if anyone was confused. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SpellMyNameWithAnS)

Apologies my haabbit of reading words that aren't there.


The Game World

We had a session to discuss the world. Before I start with that some background on other games.

Bob likes the idea of mentors for the players, he always has. We always get an NPC that is usually the same class as the PC that “guides” them. In the game that is just finishing Bob had NPC Mentors for us all, basically high level NPCs (I am talking about lvl 15 NPCs for lvl 5 players) that were there to train us, it did always come across as them being there just to point out how much more uber they were than the PCs. I also always had the question “Why isn’t Uber NPC dealing with this missions I am on, he could do it with zero effort”

This always having higher level NPCs around has in the past lead to fights where myself and the other PCs have basically watched as combat happened, one high level NPC fighting the bad guy as we ineffcectually try to fight.


Back to the discussing the world.

So with Albert taking over I had hopes of having a world where we might see someone with NPC class levels. A world where even a level one PC was considered dangerous. My hopes were soon dashed.

We are part of an evil empire, the empire is split into 30 separate states, our mother (A high level wizard) is the ruler of one of these states. Our father is dead and our mother paid very little attention as we were growing up. Our care was left to one of the servants, a seemingly kindly butler. Our mother’s household had several important members of staff, a spy master, a general in charge of armies, a trained magic user. All these NPCs are high level and can help us train. (Oddly Carl gets off sort of ok, as witchs come with their own mentor / patron)

After telling us of all the NPCs we know from our mothers household we then get into more detail of the world, I will carry on with this later.

Earthwalker
2013-04-02, 04:21 AM
After the list of NPCs we then started talking and asking questions. I ask if our mothers position is a hereditary post. It is, it passes to the eldest child. I jokingly point out that although we are quads (The GM corrects me, we have a younger sister I get told about) DMPC 2 (Bobs PC) is the eldest. Albert’s DMPC is the second eldest, the two GMs worked this out before me and Carl arrived.

Our sister, is a cleric of darkness. She will also be joining the group. She is the youngest child. Me and Carl can decide between ourselves who is 3rd and 4th.

I am not sure how the DMPC to PC ratio stands after this information, is the Cleric another DMPC ? Are we at 3 DMPCs to 2 PCs ? Time will tell.

The next bit of information is that we all wear a ring with our family crest upon it, it is clearly magical, if we try to remove it, it grips tighter causing pain. The first chance Carl got, he declared he was going to cast identify on the ring.

Ahhh that key moment when you roll your first die of a new game. A spell craft check, this was it. After this roll the game had really started. No roll was made, Albert informed Carl that it was impossible to tell what the ring did.

illyrus
2013-04-02, 08:58 AM
That mentor thing seems very lame in prior execution. Before this new campaign gets under way would be a good time to bring that up.

A GM tried a similar ring thing on our group one time, conversation went like this:
GM: You can't remove the ring.
Player: I cast remove curse.
GM: It doesn't work.
Player: I chop off my finger.
GM: .... wait what?

Earthwalker
2013-04-02, 09:27 AM
Oddly I had a very similar thought. How many HPs are in a finger, I am sure I can lose one and magically heal it back.

I am not acting on this as I am going into this trying to be a constructive player and will just hope things turn out right.

My problem is everytime I hear a little more about the game the more worried I become over what is going to happen.

Krazzman
2013-04-02, 09:51 AM
Oddly I had a very similar thought. How many HPs are in a finger, I am sure I can lose one and magically heal it back.

I am not acting on this as I am going into this trying to be a constructive player and will just hope things turn out right.

My problem is everytime I hear a little more about the game the more worried I become over what is going to happen.

I know that feeling. I would advice you to sit it out and if it really turns out bad... say something. You are supposed to be friends, right? Take a few notes and tell them what you didn't like and why but don't try to accuse or insult them. Such things are genereally "volatile" since they put effort into it and you not liking it makes it harder for them or they think you don't value it enough or yadda yadda. Don't know your situation as there is a great possible interpretation spectrum of the word friend...

NikitaDarkstar
2013-04-02, 09:52 AM
So you got a ring that clearly identifies you as a member of a ruling house, that can't be removed, and actually causes pain when you try, despite the fact that such an item can seriously trip you up in some situations?
Who gave you this item? Your mother? Someone else?
From where I'm sitting the only reason that's the least nefarious for such an item is for someone to be able to keep track of your characters.

Also, if the position is hereditary and you're evil... Well there is a time-honored tradition about that. It's called killing your older siblings until you're the oldest. And possibly in this case remove the youngest sister, just in case it's some weird hereditary system (oldest female child inherits the power because the current ruler is female.), and in case she sympathizes with the two "oldest" quads.They have some terrible accidents, mother falls mysteriously ill and the 3rd and 4th in line shares the power and rule...

And I agree the "mentor" thing sounds stupid. It's acceptable within reason at lower levels (fighter training under a more skilled arms master, wizard studying under an arch mage), but after the first couple of levels they need to be out of the picture in one way or another.

Earthwalker
2013-04-03, 02:32 AM
So you got a ring that clearly identifies you as a member of a ruling house, that can't be removed, and actually causes pain when you try, despite the fact that such an item can seriously trip you up in some situations?
Who gave you this item? Your mother? Someone else?
From where I'm sitting the only reason that's the least nefarious for such an item is for someone to be able to keep track of your characters.

The ring appeared on my finger one night when I was very young and has grown with me. None of the staff really talk about it when we have asked, tho some believe it originally belong to our father.
At the moment none of the players are really concerned about this.


Also, if the position is hereditary and you're evil... Well there is a time-honored tradition about that. It's called killing your older siblings until you're the oldest. And possibly in this case remove the youngest sister, just in case it's some weird hereditary system (oldest female child inherits the power because the current ruler is female.), and in case she sympathizes with the two "oldest" quads.They have some terrible accidents, mother falls mysteriously ill and the 3rd and 4th in line shares the power and rule...

We generally operate as non PvP for the group. Of course we generally aren't evil. I am going to check but I think its fair to say that working together is expected. I think that was the point of the Lawful alignment assignment to make sure we played nice together. For me the GM could have just said play any non good alignment and play nice together.


And I agree the "mentor" thing sounds stupid. It's acceptable within reason at lower levels (fighter training under a more skilled arms master, wizard studying under an arch mage), but after the first couple of levels they need to be out of the picture in one way or another.

Yeah it fires off "a bad feeling about this" when I have sat in a session with the GM rolling dice against himself as the PCs stand there out matched.

NikitaDarkstar
2013-04-03, 06:12 AM
Well, don't forget that pretty much any of the Evil alignments are selfish when it comes down to it. They're in it for themselves, and while they have different ways of doing things... Well there's a reason they're not Neutral or Good.

Of course not saying that they can't have certain codes of honor to follow, or that PvP is necessary in an Evil game, I'm just saying that I, personally, don't consider getting rid of DMPC's PvP if they get to annoying/uber/etc. The DM has an entire world to play, players only have the one character, removing a DMPC bothers me about as much as killing the local, aggressive, orc tribe leader.
and within an Evil game it's far easier to justify IC since Evil characters tend to be more willing to go over a few corpses to get what they want.

But obviously it shouldn't be the first reaction either. Play the game, see how things go and go from there. The PvP comment was perhaps ill-placed, but it's something I would start to consider if I was in a game like this. But I can be a somewhat... hostile... player when I get to many restrictions put on me.

As for the ring, it's clearly some form of plot-device, and if it just "appeared" one night I got this nagging feeling that it would just show up on your other hand even if you pulled the old "I chop my finger off to get rid of the clearly cursed item"-trick. You could make it a point for the character to do more research into the ring etc. to try to discover what it is, where it came from, any powers, and how to get it off. RP'ing an actual interest in it might give you more than the magic would, but then again, it might not. But personally I would be wary of a plot-device that acts a whole lot like a cursed item.

Rhynn
2013-04-03, 07:34 AM
Oddly I had a very similar thought. How many HPs are in a finger, I am sure I can lose one and magically heal it back.

Oh, this one's easy.

You chop off your finger and the ring re-appears on another finger.

If you run out of fingers (and maybe toes), things will get more interesting.

Scow2
2013-04-03, 08:13 AM
Oddly I had a very similar thought. How many HPs are in a finger, I am sure I can lose one and magically heal it back.None in and of itself. The act of removing the finger would probably deal 1d4 points of damage at most - but healing that damage will not recover the finger.

There IS one spell that can regrow lost body parts like this though: Regenerate (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/regenerate.htm)

Totally Guy
2013-04-03, 08:22 AM
You chop off your finger and the ring re-appears on another finger.

Twice that trick would have worked out well for Sauron.

illyrus
2013-04-03, 08:37 AM
Yeah it fires off "a bad feeling about this" when I have sat in a session with the GM rolling dice against himself as the PCs stand there out matched.

Yeah I'd certainly bring this up as an unfun part of the game and ask them to have your party succeed or fail under its own merits. Failing that:

Maybe your PCs should buy some playing cards. Then when this happens they can pull out the deck and begin to play Rummy. To make it extra realistic you could also pull out cards as a player and mimic the game so you're at least doing something.

Extra bonus points if one of the NPCs attacks the deck and you can point out that the NPC wasting that round on destroying the deck made more of a difference in the battle than anything you could have conventionally done.

Angel Bob
2013-04-03, 08:46 AM
^ Ahahaha, that's a great suggestion. But only play that card (ba-dum-tish!) if the DMPCs reach Gandalf-level domination.

Earthwalker
2013-04-03, 08:55 AM
Oh, this one's easy.

You chop off your finger and the ring re-appears on another finger.

If you run out of fingers (and maybe toes), things will get more interesting.

With this in mind I am going to keep the ring where it is for now :)

I have had a thought on what the ring is for, it may be it allows the cleric of the group to use channel negative energy to heal us. When we started discussing the campaign one of the first things I pointed out was that the usual trick of (NPC) cleric health battery using channel energy healing would not work.
In fact Albert seemed upset by this asking well how do evil armies heal. I thought the answer was mainly by being largly undead and also just using spells to heal not channel energy.


Yeah I'd certainly bring this up as an unfun part of the game and ask them to have your party succeed or fail under its own merits. Failing that:

Maybe your PCs should buy some playing cards. Then when this happens they can pull out the deck and begin to play Rummy. To make it extra realistic you could also pull out cards as a player and mimic the game so you're at least doing something.

Extra bonus points if one of the NPCs attacks the deck and you can point out that the NPC wasting that round on destroying the deck made more of a difference in the battle than anything you could have conventionally done.

This idea is pure genius and I am adding a pack of cards to my equipment list just in case.

Deepbluediver
2013-04-03, 09:32 AM
While I know that Railroading can and does ruin games, starting out with a little direction to the plot is not inherently bad.

Not all GMs have the time, the energy, or the talent to construct and run an entirely open sandbox style gameworld. If there is a plot and a story that the DM has prepped, they might just be trying to guide you along the appropriate path. Particularly if they are inexperienced.

A game can be equally ruined by the players trying to force their "I can do anything I want" mentality on the DM.
Imagine, for instance, the following scenario

DM: Welcome, stalwart heroes of the land, the kingdom is in dire need of your assistance. You start in a tavern-
Player 1: I'm playing a cuthroat Rakshasa mercenary!
Player 2: I'm playing an Ithillid assassinn!
Player 3: I'm playing an awakened Fleshraker druid whose parents where murdered by poachers and now I hate all humans!
DM: Wait, what?!?
and half a session later 90% of everyone is dead and the entire city is in flames; true story :P

All I really want to say is, "relax and give it a chance".


I can basically boil your complaints in the first post down to "I have a pre-generated background, and the DM doesn't want us being OP". I can't speak for anyone else, but those don't exactly seem like deal-breakers to me. :smallconfused:
And that Stat array is a pretty damn good one. You're not likely to get much better with rolls. (full-disclosure, I'm a fan of stat arrays)


To address a couple of additional points directly:

How closely is "Bob" really working with the DM? If he does, in fact, limit himself to helping balance encounters and solving rules disputes, that doesn't seem like an issue. If he knows far more about the plot than anyone else and is metagaming, well thats an issue because he's not suposed to be involved in the Story aspect. But I think you need another session or two to determine if that is the case, or if he's just helping Albert get things moving.
(and sure, it can be hard for a DM to let go sometimes, even if they claim they want to be a PC again)

For the "mentor" thing, it's fine, so long as they don't start accompanying you along on missions. And again, if Bob/Albert are working together, then this might be Bob being overbearing and needing to be discouraged from PC-DMing a little, or it might be Albert simply going with what he knows (from having watched Bob DM).
The solution here might be to take Albert aside before any real comabt starts and say "Look, we're going to actually get to do stuff this game, right? I'm sure all our mentors where friendly to us back at the family mansion, but they've probably got missions of their own to deal with, and can't be babysitting us along the way, yes?"

Non-game discussions can be very helpful for resolving issues so that they don't interupt the flow of the game.


Now, maybe this will turn out to be a total clusterfrell, but if Albert is trying to DM for the first time, I would encourage you to roll with it for now (the world always needs more DMs). Think of ways to work WITH the DM instead of against him. Instead of pointing out all the little ways his game-world doesn't work (all D&D breaks down under close scrutiny), send him questions or suggestions regarding aspects of it in between sessions, so that he isn't required to come up with something on the spot that might put him in a bind later. Etc, etc, etc....

Malrone
2013-04-03, 11:03 AM
Now, maybe this will turn out to be a total clusterfrell, but if Albert is trying to DM for the first time, I would encourage you to roll with it for now (the world always needs more DMs). Think of ways to work WITH the DM instead of against him. Instead of pointing out all the little ways his game-world doesn't work (all D&D breaks down under close scrutiny), send him questions or suggestions regarding aspects of it in between sessions, so that he isn't required to come up with something on the spot that might put him in a bind later. Etc, etc, etc....
Quite. If you don't want to push him to be defensive (wherein no one wins), keep most your talks and disputes away from the table, in private.

The rings, the mentors, the somewhat strict game requirements: they might very well help enrich things if handled well. I've dealt with each situation before (no joke), and each time the game was better for it. Since this DM is new, it could very well be clumsily done, but be merciful. If you help him to learn, you help yourself to better games, after all.

On [Evil] clerics:
3.5- Note that they can cast Cure spells, just not spontaneously.
PF- And as for channeling, isn't it possible to rustle up some Neutral-but-Patriotic types that channel positive? I feel like doing [good] acts and healing for your [evil] homeland would balance out to a proper neutral alignment.

Hyena
2013-04-03, 12:02 PM
DM: Welcome, stalwart heroes of the land, the kingdom is in dire need of your assistance. You start in a tavern-
Player 1: I'm playing a cuthroat Rakshasa mercenary!
Player 2: I'm playing an Ithillid assassinn!
Player 3: I'm playing an awakened Fleshraker druid whose parents where murdered by poachers and now I hate all humans!
DM: Wait, what?!?
and half a session later 90% of everyone is dead and the entire city is in flames

May I sig this one?


On topic: This seems like a bad case of railroading. All lawful evil characters of the same gender, all look-alikes? Oh, and DMPCs in the party. And irremovable artifacts of the screwover.
Please, tell us the story of your sessios in details from now on. Personally, I think this one will be a gem of a game.

Deepbluediver
2013-04-03, 12:47 PM
May I sig this one?

Anything I post is open for sigging.



On topic: This seems like a bad case of railroading. All lawful evil characters of the same gender, all look-alikes? Oh, and DMPCs in the party. And irremovable artifacts of the screwover.

I think that the term "railroading" has gotten somewhat overused lately. If the DM continually forces the players back to one particular series of events via fiat, then yes it makes for a less fun (or even terrible) game, but so far this group has only just gotten started. I think we need to see a little more before we declare it a total write-off. You can't determine trajectory with a single data-point.
Maybe this will be bad, maybe it'll just be mediocer. I think we'll need to wait and see.

On a slightly different topic, is there a general term for when the players go so far off course despite the DMs best efforts that the game is essentially a washout? For example, if the DM preps plots and drops hooks for a campaign involving nobles and politics, a kidnapped princess, evil cultists, and a mysterious plague, and the players decide they want to take to the high seas and be dashing pirates, what would you call that?

Feddlefew
2013-04-03, 12:54 PM
Anything I post is open for sigging.




I think that the term "railroading" has gotten somewhat overused lately. If the DM continually forces the players back to one particular series of events via fiat, then yes it makes for a less fun (or even terrible) game, but so far this group has only just gotten started. I think we need to see a little more before we declare it a total write-off. You can't determine trajectory with a single data-point.
Maybe this will be bad, maybe it'll just be mediocer. I think we'll need to wait and see.

On a slightly different topic, is there a general term for when the players go so far off course despite the DMs best efforts that the game is essentially a washout? For example, if the DM preps plots and drops hooks for a campaign involving nobles and politics, a kidnapped princess, evil cultists, and a mysterious plague, and the players decide they want to take to the high seas and be dashing pirates, what would you call that?

A Henderson?

NikitaDarkstar
2013-04-03, 01:50 PM
A Henderson?

Sounds about right yhea.

Earthwalker
2013-04-04, 05:29 AM
Well the first session is next weekan I have some more to share on the situation. Here is make up of the group.

Carl is playing a Witch. After speaking to him I know he is mainly going to be hexing taking as his first two feats Extra Hex and starting the game with Evil Eye, Cackle and Fortune. Carl is going to play as a general buffer / debuffer. (In the last campaign I played a buffer bard it looks like Carl is taking the role of team player, which is nice)

I am playing a crossbow rogue. My Rogue is not really a team player. My main tactic is going to try to hide and snipe from cover. My first two feats are point blank shot, precise shot. (planning to get, deadly aim, focus shot) I am planning on only shooting once a round (I know, not really optimal)

Bob is a Magus. No details have appeared yet but I suspect this is a character DMAlbert has helped him build.

Albert is playing a synthesis summoner with a wolf motif. He describes himself as equally at home in the wilderness with his wolves or dining at court. It also appears that Albert also has two wolves that he can command, these wolves appear to be around at all times so I am guessing not summons. Not sure of the power level of the wolves or if they are going to level up with him. This has been worked out with Bob as they have been doing the planning of the world.

After hearing about Albert’s character the dread scale has gone up one more notch. It is a repeat of Albert’s Max-Maxing. Getting to have the best physical stats thanks to the Eidolon then also having the best mental stats. Physically powerful with spells to back it up. I also get the impression now we will be heading out of the city where my pampered lordling will have problems coping (least I can role play that up) The two wolves are a real mystery, being told no it’s not a good idea for me to play a character that can animate dead and have lots of monsters to deal with, followed by one of the players getting two monsters to deal with for free.

NikitaDarkstar
2013-04-04, 06:31 AM
Well it could be that he was worried that you'd summon a bunch of weird outsiders etc. that would draw the wrong kind of attention (but you'd think an evil kingdom in a magical setting would be used to that idea. Somewhat anyway). Or he didn't want the team stepping on each others toes (1 summoner = good, 2 = bad, thinking) and the summoner had already been created. Still, it would have been nice if he had told you why.

the wolves, they could just be trained animals, which is perfectly fine. They'd know a few tricks and he'd need a few ranks in handle animal to manage them, and they don't level up.

Just keep an eye out so he doesn't start to treat them as full animal companions. If he does, remind him that even if he has some (homebrew ?) feat to get an animal companion you can only have one at a time, and even then it's sort of iffy considering he gets an eidolon. A third option is that the wolves actually IS the eidolon, and have just gone through some serious refluffing, and come to think about it, that would be pretty cool.

illyrus
2013-04-04, 08:39 AM
You might want to consider some smokesticks for when you don't have any available cover/concealment (though they can be a double edged sword). For a bit of cheese you could carry some feather tokens (tree, swan boat) for cover on demand. Hopefully not a common issue but always nice to have a backup plan ready.

Angel Bob
2013-04-04, 09:05 AM
I have to say, venting to the GitP forum likely helps relieve stress, but your situation isn't going to improve unless you bring up your dissatisfaction with your DMs -- as politely as possible. For example, the deck of cards idea is hysterical, but has the potential to really get to people... especially a first-time DM, who's likely to be rather sensitive about criticism of his playing style. Choose your actions carefully.

Earthwalker
2013-04-04, 09:44 AM
You might want to consider some smokesticks for when you don't have any available cover/concealment (though they can be a double edged sword). For a bit of cheese you could carry some feather tokens (tree, swan boat) for cover on demand. Hopefully not a common issue but always nice to have a backup plan ready.

I have looked up smoke sticks and that sounds like a fine plan. I will have to wait till I have some money, most of my starting cash went on the cross bow and bits and bobs. I think I will skip the feathers for a while. By level 2 I should be able to have a few smoke sticks available and by level 4 I get vanish twice a day.


I have to say, venting to the GitP forum likely helps relieve stress, but your situation isn't going to improve unless you bring up your dissatisfaction with your DMs -- as politely as possible. For example, the deck of cards idea is hysterical, but has the potential to really get to people... especially a first-time DM, who's likely to be rather sensitive about criticism of his playing style. Choose your actions carefully.

Oh I agree, I am mearly setting a scene here and we will see what happens after the first few session. If things do go the shape of a pear then I will sit down and talk it over with the GM(s).

Hyena
2013-04-04, 09:45 AM
So, the story-DM created for himself an all-around awesome DMPC, who is both powerful, clever and welcome at the court? Sounds like a good start. But I know what could have made him even more awesome - why have lame wolves, anyway? Dragons are so much better.

Sith_Happens
2013-04-04, 12:28 PM
So, the story-DM created for himself an all-around awesome DMPC, who is both powerful, clever and welcome at the court? Sounds like a good start. But I know what could have made him even more awesome - why have lame wolves, anyway? Dragons are so much better.

This is technically a PC, though the player is assistant-DMing to an unknown extent.

Rhynn
2013-04-04, 12:57 PM
But I know what could have made him even more awesome - why have lame wolves, anyway? Dragons are so much better.

There is a correlation between RPGs and neckbeards, and a correlation between neckbeards and thinking wolves are the coolest.

Q.E.D.

Hyena
2013-04-04, 01:19 PM
And the question to the OP - did your DM answer what does he think Lawful Evil character should be?

Earthwalker
2013-04-05, 03:39 AM
And the question to the OP - did your DM answer what does he think Lawful Evil character should be?

I will check we are all singing from the same hymn sheet when it comes to the LE alignment. The simplest thing will be for me to just go with what the DMs think and play it as that.

VeisuItaTyhjyys
2013-04-05, 04:40 AM
Not all GMs have the time, the energy, or the talent to construct and run an entirely open sandbox style gameworld.

Or, to be fair, the volition; it's not as though all the DMs who run plotted games simply washed out of running sandboxes because they were too busy or didn't have the talent. I don't mean to say that that's what you intended to imply, just that I thought it was worth clarifying.

The biggest problem with the Synthesist isn't even min/maxing, it's the lack of viable ways to combat it at low levels without DM fiat. In other words, the problem isn't its ability scores, it's that a Synthesist will have almost two characters' worth of hit dice in addition to decent casting, a bunch of defensive abilities gained through evolution points, possibly constant flight, and those high ability scores. They're not the problem so much as they are salt in the wound. Sleep or the slumber hex will get rid of the Eidolon, but other than that, one has to chop through its HP (at which point the encounter becomes a lot more of a liability for the summoner's buddies), throw down an anti-magic field, or start giving the enemies scrolls of dismissal. By higher levels, a full caster is going to run circles around a Synthesist summoner without too much difficulty, but they can really seem to overshadow the party at lower levels, and there aren't many ways for a DM to deal with them that aren't a little heavy-handed.
While that was largely tangential, I guess my point was to keep sleep and slumber (or, generally, anything that will put the summoner to sleep or knock him unconscious) handy if you ever do end up having/wanting to go against the DMPCs.

Emmerask
2013-04-05, 07:32 AM
I've never had a game involving co-GMs go well, especially one with GMs alternating as PCs but I've known other groups where this worked.


It works well with story light modular adventures, we currently play d&d 4e with a everyone can dm if he/she wants to approach (the dms character is played by the group).
Mainly we play it when not everyone can be there for the "real" game which is a completely different system^^.

I wouldn´t recommend it for a story heavy campaign because there are a lot of issues with continuity and ooc knowledge but for a game that pretty much plays out like a board game (descent or similar) it works well.

Earthwalker
2013-04-10, 07:23 AM
Well we have had the first session.

It started with an introduction to the world (we have already talked over some things but we had more to cover) then we had a meeting with our mother who put us to work, to earn our keep. We need to get the iron mines at a local village working again. We were told not to mess up and dismissed. (This involved a lot of description of our mother and then her bodyguard.)

From here we met with one of our mothers advisors, (More descriptions) one of the men that had been training us for the last 16 years. He told us that the mine workers in this evil empire are all grumpy about pay and conditions. A ring leader seems to be stirring them up. We get the ring leaders name but he has gone into hiding. So sort the problem out and don’t mess up. We will leave the next day, before we go we will get a chance to speak to our mothers spy master.

We meet with the spy master (more description and history) then he tells us we will be going in disguise. So we get an item that changes our faces and then we are done. (I think all the players were hoping this guy would have more information on what is expected of us) We ask a few questions but don’t really get any more information.

(Now this whole section of getting the mission took about 2 and a half hours. Only a very small amount of this time was it spent on players role playing, mainly it was just getting description and history. It might have been better having some hand outs before the game to give us an idea. But I don’t think this is going to keep happening)

So the next day we load up into a coach with driver, briefly discuss what we plan to do, and come to the conclusion we have no idea so we will see what things are like in the mining town.

As we are trundling along the coach stops as a tree has fallen over the road. We leave the driver to start clearing it, but surprisingly we are attacked by bandits. Now the coach contains,

The driver
My Character (A crossbow rogue)
Albert’s DMPC (A Magus)
Bobs character (A synthesis summoner) and his 2 pet wolves.
Carls character (A Witch)
NPC our sister (A Cleric)

In the fight Bob leaves his wolves in the coach but does control and roll for, The Cleric, The Magus and his own Summoner. Leaving me and Carl to play our characters.

This has caused me some concern. The three Characters controlled by Albert worked together, The Cleric buffing the Summoner, and keeping near the Magus and Summoner to keep them healed. In future fights we may get Albert controlling 5 out of the 7 characters on our side. 2 Wolves, His Summoner, the Cleric and the Magus.

Again we will see going forward.

Morbis Meh
2013-04-10, 09:26 AM
Doesn't sound like you or the other person are getting much playtime in... maybe talk to the GM's? If one person is controlling 2/3's of the party and the villains you may as well tell them OoC to stop it because they are really just playing by themselves.

NikitaDarkstar
2013-04-10, 10:03 AM
Well the excessive descriptions can be somewhat forgiven due to it being a new DM, but if it keeps coming up ask him to tone it down, and remind him that people really can't process to much "pointless"/secondary information at once. So no matter how cool his descriptions are they really won't stick all that way because that's just how humans are. Break it down to smaller chunks when it becomes relevant, and don't go into to much description on how npc's looks, a couple of major traits are enough.
But it IS perfectly understandable if a new DM has this problem, it's one of the more common problems for novice writers to and it simply takes experience to get through it.

The amount of characters controlled by one person is troubling. "Ideally" the DM should only control his own PC (if he should have one at all), Albert should only control his character and two wolves (since this essentially adds up to 3 characters rounds it still takes up a lot of time), and at least in combat the cleric should either be controlled by the players or by the DM.

I'd give it another session or two to see how things go, but do start to make notes on problems, and how they can be solved and if things continue to be problematic, talk to him about it. It will help both the group and the DM in the long run.

Lord Torath
2013-04-10, 10:14 AM
I would ask if the "non-DM" players (ie not Albert or Bob) can take turns controlling the cleric-sister. And if the DM is not controlling his DMPC (it seemed like Albert was doing it?) whichever non-DM player is not controlling the sister should control the DMPC.

Albert already has his two wolf friends, plus he's sort of a co-DM, right?

Hyena
2013-05-09, 03:35 AM
So... How's the game? You've suddenly stopped describing it, which must mean something truly unspeakably horrible happened/

Earthwalker
2013-05-09, 05:40 AM
I did, we have played one more session and the game certainly has not turned horrible in the way I imagined. It has been very odd and I am feeling a little down about the whole deal. So here is what has happened.
We arrived in the small mining town, and found ourselves an Inn to stay in. The owner of the place came over to talk to us as we were served an evening meal. Between him hitting on our sister (the NPC cleric) we also got to ask him questions about the town. The mine workers were a separate race of people call Leta, the information we got from the Inn keeper was a string of racist abuse towards the workers, calling them lazy and good for nothing. The GM explained that this was normal within our Evil empire this was the lower race and everyone thought of them as no more than animals.

The leta people kept to themselves mainly, but one area of town had both normal humans and the leta. So two of the group Bob and Carl go to gather some information in a bar near the Leta area. I decide to go and scout out the mining area as well as get to know my way around town. I tell the GM I am going to explore the town to get the lay out and look over the Leta area from cover to see if normal humans do go in to the area. My request is resolved quickly. I explore the town and I am told no normal humans go near the mines.

The other two players take longer. We have a nice section of the GM playing a drunk asleep at the table the two players wanted to sit at. Then we had some gather information checks that both did well at, which got them over hearing a conversation at the bar about the miners strike. Unfortuntly the conversation after just got a repeat of the information we knew.

We head back to our Inn and rest up to come up with a new plan in the morning. With no information we decide that we will talk to the guy in charge, I say I will head to the town hall or what ever building the guy in charge would be in. My scouting the town of 30 house I didn’t seem to scout the town hall as I had no idea where it was, so Bob asked a few people till we could find it.

Bob suggested I do the talking (I think Bob could see that so far I had done nothing in the session, this was mainly because I had no social skills so was leaving the social stuff to the others) So I go in and start playing a rude arrogant guy demanding to see the guy in charge and generaly being a pain (hopfully playing up the no social skills thing). What this got me was instant respect from the people in the hall, I managed to get to the town leaders office (appointed by the government back in the capital, my mother in fact. Not that I could say that as we had to be in disguise)

He let us look over the books and told us that the miners were demanding more money. Looking at the books the money was there, its just the various government officals were skimming off the top. So we leave the town hall and head to the Leta area. (All this and fortunatly no roll on any social skill)
Bob does the talking here and demands to speak to the leader of the miners. After a while we get a message he will speak to us in the evening, we wait. The evening comes and 40 guys walk into the bar where we are and before we can talk to the miners leader we need to hand over our weapons, which we do. Bob then brokers are a deal for the miners to get 2 more gp a week each, and gets them back to work. (Again all with no social skill rolls)
We head to the town hall and the guy in charge is missing. This is where the session ends.

Carl points out that we did all that dealing and had people doing as we say, without offical papaers and looking like 16 year olds (we are all 16) He was impressed it worked. Carl also points out to the GM (Albert) that all that we have done so far could have been done by a good group.

So far the issues I thought were going to happen have not been so bad. There is a lot of handwaving and ignoring rules (mainly in terms of skills) as a mind set from AD&D. So far the biggest disapointment has been advertised as a dungeon crashing, sneaky adventure seems to have turned into

Labour Dispute: The Roleplaying Game

Hyena
2013-05-09, 07:19 AM
Well, that was certainly unexpectedly better than I have thought.

Mr Beer
2013-05-10, 04:46 PM
To me the character restrictions are a lot less concerning than one guy playing 5 out of 7 characters. Coherent PC backgrounds can make for a good game but watching someone do all the combat while you twiddle your thumbs isn't fun for anyone.

EDIT

I question not using the social skills at all, is it because you don't have any slots there?

The "you can't identify your ring" sounds a little annoying as well, there needs to be a good explanation behind what seems like pointless secrecy over this issue.

Rodimal
2013-05-11, 05:54 PM
My response

Lawful Evil huh....interesting...I don't play evil characters and even if I did, not getting to chose my name or age or any o that....
Game breaker

I'll be sitting this one out thanks.