of Dice and Dragons

After posting my last article Establish a Rules Policy - Part 2 a comment was left by Ooklamok which included a few questions about what do you do if the ruling you are discussing would kill a PC.

From his comments:

If the outcome of a rule “discussion” is going to effect something major (i.e. a PC might die), should you allow more time for arguments to be made? Should you err on the side of letting the PC live? What if you make a ruling that kills the PC and find out later you were wrong?

As for allowing more time for discussions of important matters, as long as the discussion is being productive and constructive I would allow it to continue for a few extra minutes. It’s still a good idea to set limits as to how long you’ll allow it to continue as you don’t want it to consume the entire session. A suggestion is to allow each person that would like to speak to the rule in question three minutes to speak and then move onto the next person (I use a three minute timer, hence that time limit).

The remainder of his comments fall within the bounds of player character death and what to do about it. The hardest part about this area is that every group is different so unfortunately there is not hard and fast rules to follow. As with many of my suggestions on how to handle issues that arise in a gaming group the key is communication and planning.

When looking at this I tend to see groups become a blending of one of two categories, those that protect the characters and those that don’t.

1. Protect the PCs

This is more often than not the default (especially with new GMs) and while your initial thought may be that there is nothing wrong with playing in this mode there are a couple of items you should keep in mind.

First, it puts a lot more responsibility on the GM. I know that it’s the GM’s responsibility to run the game but now you’re expecting them to make sure the PCs don’t die - not just from an opponent’s attack but also from the fall off the building, the missed saving throw or ability check. The bookkeeping for this type of environment is much higher than your standard game and a mistake in math will cause heartache.

The second item is a result of the first. In the course of gaming the characters will no doubt dig themselves a hole they cannot get out of without help - GM to the rescue! Whether it be a timely miss by an opponent, a critical hit that by some miracle only does the minimum amount of damage or (one that I’ve used in the past) a powerful ally shows up and saves the group the result is the same - the group knows they misstepped and had to be bailed out. For some groups this isn’t an issue but for others they don’t care for deux ex machina and know when it happens and it kills their sense of disbelief.

2. Let the dice fall where they may

This is one is far easier to manage, if the dice are going to kill the character - then the character falls. This is a bit hardcore for most groups and depending on the GM can result in a lot of characters being created. If your group is into more realism than fantasy and have a good supply of ideas for characters and can can play those characters with a bit of detach this environment may well suit your group - just be careful here as over time a lot of characters may start to resemble each other (same stats, skills, feats - you get the idea).

Now, those two categories are at the extreme ends and while a fair number of groups will fall into the first category (especially since fantasy novels seem to protect the main characters) a lot will blend the two which gives us choice number three and the best suggestion on how to handle rules that deal with PC death.

3. Let the player decide

This style of play requires a lot of communication on the part of everyone at the table. Most of us have played in groups where there’s a player (typically fairly new or who did a lot of background work) that just does not want to let the PC die. If this information is out in the open then the GM can plan for it.

The same holds true for those players that see their characters as just another part of the story and are willing to let them go. It may be that they’re just interested in playing something different or they may see that by their character dieing the story becomes a bit stronger.

So discuss how exactly the group wants to deal with things (nurish or perish) and it will make dealing with rules a bit easier.

Having said the above what do you do about the ruling?

First, if the player is ok with PC dieing you can take that factor out of the equation and decide based on your understanding rules. If you’re proved wrong after the session you can amend your house rules and continue on from there. Remember the player involved has already agreed that if a circumstance arises that would kill the character they would be ok with it.

Second, if the player is not ok with the PC dieing then rule accordingly giving the PC the benefit of the doubt. I would be surprised if anyone comes back and says, “oops, my character really should have died, here’s my new PC.” As in all cases dealing with the rules be sure to document it and put it in your house rules.

So how do you handle rulings dealing with PC death? Does your group nurture PCs or do you play it a bit more realistic?

May your dice roll well.

Comments(0)

I’ve mentioned a few different ideas on how you can use index cards to help better organize your game and wanted to pass along another quick tip, use them for treasure items.

When the party comes across an item hand them a card with just the physical description on it such as a bottle, a sword, or a silver box. This not only gives them a tangible item to show that they found something it’s also something that can be passed among party members to show who is actually carrying the item and you can take the card back should it be lost, stolen or sold.

While that alone is a great tool you can take it a step further, have the group write on the card any special characteristics or abilities as they discover them. For example, you hand them a card that says “Long sword” on it. Now as they continue their travels they discover that it’s magical, a +2 to hit and damage to be exact, it was once called the “Orc Slayer,” as it was often used to great effect during the orc wars by Sir Reginald Ashen, knighted for his valor during those same wars.

Now the party has something they can refer to not just for the mechanics part of the item but also for some of the story around it, which of course you as the GM can use for further adventure and plot hooks.

May your dice roll well!

Comments(1)

Over at Treasure Tables Martin made the following statement in his posting
PC Backgrounds: Opening and Closing Doors

If you imagine the hooks and plot elements in the PCs’ backgrounds as open doors, it’s a good idea to close those doors during play.

A very true statement which I thing all GMs should take heed of - something I was (to a point) negligent of during my last campaign.

In a number of instances I would spin part of the tale, sometimes using material from the background of the PCs, that would open up new possibilities for my players - hints of new places, strange artifacts or a new villain to deal with.

Problem was, I didn’t close nearly enough of them.

That in and of itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing but when you leave more open than you close the players begin to feel that they aren’t accomplishing anything which leads to dissatisfaction with the game - not a good things when one of the tenets of gaming is to have fun.

My suggestion is to keep a running list of those plot lines you’ve opened and ask your players to give you a list of those plot lines they think are open so that you can compare them. This way you can at least get a better idea of what everyone’s perception is and hopefully you’ll be able to “close a few doors” and give your players a bit more enjoyment at the table.

May your dice roll well.

Comments(0)

Has this happened in your campaign?

The PCs have just obtained a new level and as they head out for parts unknown they discover that their new encounters are all beefed up - almost as if they gained a level as well. I know I’m guilty of it, new opponents or the same ones as before with a level or two added to match up with the party’s new level.

I think that it’s due to two factors, the players’ desires and the systems we play.

My group plays D&D primarily and the leveling system is aimed at combat encounters - specifically combat encounters that are of an equivalent level to the PCs’ party. If you give them weaker opponents it slows down their progression which in turn makes for unhappy players as they want to advance their characters and get the “new stuff” associated with the new level (spells, feats, skills, etc.).

So what happens? The opponents continue to get tougher, combat sessions get longer and character advancement slows down as it now takes more sessions to reach the next plateau. You’ve created the same slow progression issue, you’ve only used a different method.

As a suggestion I would recommend you, as the GM, set a guideline for how often you want to level the group and then follow it. For most groups I think you’ll find that advancing a level every 4-6 sessions will be about right. That should be fast enough to make your players happy but not so fast that you can’t keep up. We took this approach and everyone seems to be happy with the results.

So that takes care of the leveling of characters but what about the encounters?

There is actually a simply solution, don’t change the opponents or at least not right away. This sounds easy but the habit a lot of GMs have (and I’m guilty of it myself) is that you want to challenge the party. We all have a sense of competition in us and even though the GM and party are not suppose to be competing, it can sneak into your game.

In most fantasy settings low level parties go up against low level creatures such as orcs or goblins - so why don’t they face them at higher levels? Think about this way for a moment, if you give your higher level party opponents that use to take them to the limit but now are more easily handled, aren’t you making a more enjoyable game? Think about it from the player’s perspective, now that level means a bit more, they can actually see the value of their increased melee ability or powers. Of course don’t go totally soft, give them a “big baddie” once in a while as well, but now those opponents will be a focal point of an adventure and not just another combat that they need to survive.

So remember, just because the party level goes up doesn’t mean that the encounters have to follow suit.

May your dice roll well.

Comments(2)

Over at Treasure Tables Martin Ralya asked the question, NPC Stats: Full, Partial or Loose? which I have to say is an excellent question.

There are benefits and drawbacks to each and a lot depends on your style as a GM.

For myself personally I find that most of my NPCs start at the “bottom” as a loose NPC. This simply means that there are few if any stats. One of the major NPCs in my last campaign started this way. I pulled together a description for him and only included the character class I wanted him to be and a rough idea of level.

The next level up is having partial stats. For most campaigns this is all you need for most reoccurring NPCs. At this level I have their primary stats (ability scores, health, and any important skills or feats) and enough additional detail that when they interact with the characters appropriate rolls can be made and if necessary a short melee (if appropriate).

Finally you have those NPC that you’ve fleshed everything out for. Every last detail is accounted for, all skills and feats are fleshed out, weaponry, spells, henchmen and a bit of history and motives. These are usually your major NPCs, the “movers and shakers” in your world, those that give the PCs heartburn and stress for sessions on end.

Now I know that others need to have the total package for every NPC in their world and that’s fine. I for one feel that “promoting” a NPC based on their place in the campaign is a better way to manage them - why put all the work into a NPC that the characters will interact with once? I’d rather spend the extra time on the plot and setting up the needed information for the encounters.

What do you think? How much detail is enough for you?

May your dice roll well.

Comments(1)