|
|
Post by Random on Aug 5, 2009 23:39:26 GMT -6
FWIW, I totally understand skipping "not fun" bits (overland travel, etc.) in a PBP game. I don't usually want to spend two weeks real time having a "time-waster" bandit encounter or two when I'd rather be in the dungeon where the loot and weird dangers are (although right now my AD&D players are in just such an encounter, but it's against frost giants). However, tracking "not fun" stuff like torch durations, encumbrance and the like, is essential for my games (though I prefer players track encumbrance). I also understand not role playing out the town business between delves if the town has already been visited and would probably make for an uneventful stop.
|
|
|
|
Post by chronoplasm on Aug 6, 2009 0:00:11 GMT -6
However, tracking "not fun"; stuff like torch durations, encumbrance and the like, is essential for my games (though I prefer players track encumbrance). I can agree with this even with 4E. I think, to an extent, that this sort of resource management helps to make magic feel more magical. I mean, if you can carry any weight and any bulk, then what's the point of casting Tenser's Floating Disc or finding a Bag of Holding? These sorts of mundane quibbles are what truly give magic a chance to shine, especially in a game like 4E where a Magic Missile is slightly less effective than an ordinary crossbow bolt. |
|
|
|
Post by Random on Aug 6, 2009 0:15:38 GMT -6
Yeah, I meant in general terms (not just for OD&D and the like), that even a 4E game should probably count a few beans, but I can forgive a little time-pushing for the sake of not spending outrageous amounts of real time getting to the dungeon, tower, island, etc. when using the play-by-post format.
Consider that (although there has been some extended break time, and we could probably move twice as fast if more committed) my OD&D PBP probably makes it through about a session's worth of stuff every couple of months, you can understand where I'd feel this way about skipping things. I've already found myself skipping travel a bit. I've also been guilty of erasing monsters to keep from bogging down the game with combat. I'd rather the players get to explore the place and run into more of the weird stuff than to get hung up on a zillion gnoll fights.
(And yes, I run two PBP games. Call me crazy! Actually, the AD&D game kinda fell into my lap. I was a player and didn't want to see the game die.)
|
|
|
|
Post by chronoplasm on Aug 6, 2009 0:50:09 GMT -6
I feel 'ya.
I'm playing a PBP game right now. We've spent a couple of weeks about just dancing around in a ball-room and learning that something strange is going on.
Now we know that strange something involves zombies, but the fight has been at a standstill for a couple of days as we are waiting for a guy to hurry up and take his turn.
I can certainly relate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Random on Aug 6, 2009 9:15:09 GMT -6
* 4e DMG, p.105: "Fun is one element you shouldn't vary. Every encounter in an adventure should be fun. As much as possible, fast-forward through parts of an adventure that aren't fun. An encounter with two guards at the city gate isn't fun. Tell the players they get through the gate without much trouble and move on to the fun. Niggling details of food supplies and encumbrance usually aren't fun, so don't sweat them, and let the players get to the adventure and on to the fun. Long treks through endless corridors in the ancient dwarven stronghold beneath the mountains aren't fun. Move the PCs quickly from encounter to encounter, and on to the fun." I'm going to have to disagree and say that this is total horse crap. While I'm defending (see above) skipping over a few boring bits sometimes, I generally mean boring bits in the OSRIC afterword sense of boring bits. The DM's job is not to ensure that the players have fun at all costs. He's there to provide an opportunity for the players to have a ridiculous amount of fun, but then they have to actually attempt to have it. My gosh, what a concept! For example, if the players have their characters sit in the bar the entire session and don't adventure, the DM is not obligated to make sure the bar is as outrageously fun as possible (although role playing a few NPCs would be appropriate). It's supposed to be a tad boring, so that they will want to go out and adventure! If the characters kick in every dungeon door and fly in swords-a-slashing, and they all die horrible deaths over and over again, and their players not having fun because of it, it's not the DM's fault. The campaign is not necessarily too hard! People seem to have this idea that characters shouldn't die unless their players are having them do something stupid. News flash... adventuring is stupid!!! It's the most dangerous thing a character can possibly do!!! It's really dangerous! You just might die! Apologies for the exclamation marks, it's an excitable subject. |
|
|
|
Post by chronoplasm on Aug 6, 2009 10:03:35 GMT -6
I can understand keeping a character alive if there is a narrative purpose for it. If the PC has an interesting little story going on, I'll let the character live to resolve it. That's my reward for good role playing. If the character is one-dimensional and built for pure munchkinnery, then yeah, it can die at the drop of the hat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Random on Aug 6, 2009 10:49:42 GMT -6
That seems like it should be a nice thing to do, but I feel a bit uncomfortable going out of my way to extend a character's life.
Weird, I just thought of a campaign-ending session we had a few years ago (with 3E). The party's thief was secretly allied with an evil wizard who desired the artifact for which they were questing. After causing a big fuss with the rest of the group, he presented the artifact to the wizard, who promptly killed him! (Take that, players of evil characters!) In the end, only the bard survived, becoming famous for writing a fictional idealized account of the group's exploits.
|
|
|
|
Post by chronoplasm on Aug 6, 2009 13:15:00 GMT -6
When you throw a gaggle of goblins or a cult of kobolds or any myriad of minions at the party, that's like having an appetizer at your favorite restaurant. It's just a little nibble you eat while you wait for the main course. You want to leave room for the good stuff.
I don't like to kill my players with nameless mooks because I want to kill them with The Chained Coffin or whatever nightmare I've prepared for the evening.
So by letting PCs live, and move from point A to point B, I get the chance to really kill them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Random on Aug 6, 2009 14:50:06 GMT -6
Then it sounds like 4th Edition D&D is a great game to have on your shelf!
It's just not my bag, I guess. I'd still play it though, if I didn't have to buy a hardcover (at least not soon).
I would recommend, if you're going to run OD&D, to take a different approach to it. Avoid appetizer "minions" and "showcase encounters" (these nightmares you refer to). Just draw up about three dungeon levels, insert fun encounters into about a third of the rooms, leave another third empty (other than maybe decor), and fill the rest from random tables (re-rolling inappropriate results). Change proportions afterward (after you play it) to suit your tastes better.
|
|
|
|
Post by chronoplasm on Aug 6, 2009 15:35:27 GMT -6
Then it sounds like 4th Edition D&D is a great game to have on your shelf! It's just not my bag, I guess. I'd still play it though, if I didn't have to buy a hardcover (at least not soon). You could try the quick start rules. www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4dnd/dndtestdriveI'll be sure to give it a try! If I can't find an OD&D pbp to play in, I might have to start my own. |
|
|
|
Post by Random on Aug 6, 2009 15:51:36 GMT -6
I meant literally your shelf, but thanks for the link. At least I'd know the gist of how the game works in case it comes up (and I'm sure it will if I go looking for gamers in the area).
|
|
