gamegrene.com

Im down, Ill be here with you during your quest to better be the best.

My disclaimer- Im an old fart whos grown up playing since the first box sets...I have no care for your rules system, but most DM tricks n tips dont even take rules into consideration- its more style and flair. I always happy to talk shop, and if it helps anyone be a better DM, even in the smallest way, its worth all the energy.

Ill also enjoy and get worth out of your posts detailing your adventure in creating adventure for your adventurers....whoa.

Yes, you gotta always remember to pay attention to the parts of the world that you are not always showing your players. Make effort to allow some sort of story to be happening everywhere the players are not traveling. No need to write a side novel, just small things.

Like what OT said above, a fued between to local lords over some dumb matter like land or cattle, perhaps the dwarves to the west are celibrating a year long holiday where they are not fighting this year...or there just might be a hostile group gaining new power to the south that grows each passing game that the players dont explore it...

An understanding that your world is not just a tv screen that shows direct action to the players as they come to it, but a real 3d world where even if they NEVER travel to the land across the ocean, that land still has a story that evolves along side the timeline of your game, with or without the players attention...

and yes, this sort of thing almost always leads to a landslide of open side-adventures to later explore when short on ideas for next adventures.

NOW FOR THE MOST IMPORTANT ADVICE I HAVE TO GIVE ON THIS SUBJECT!!!
(IMHFO)
The most imortant thing I think I ever learned about GMing is (im VERY serious), is that really REALLY good DMs seem to love the art of DMing, and the rest fall into a catogory filled with GMs who rather play as a player and are only running a game cus no one else wants to.

The best DMs Ive had the honor of learning from, or playing with, always agreed with me on the thought that "DMing kicks the crap outta being a PC, anyday, hands down). Alot of DMs here are prolly saying "that stupid prick! hes saying stuff that i personally think is dead wrong, again)...but guess what, those are people who seriously want to be PCs more the GMs...now picture the guys who think

"Sif, your so right...GMing is where its at."

Those guys love the craft, they prolly do a great job (or good enough job that they stay interested in GMing- no doubt due to a group of players loving his craft). Love being a GM, its not a dirty deed, or a crappy job..its the best thing about dungeons n dragons (or any RPG), and its the main reason I have spent my life playing table top games.

You need to be a control freek, but not a monster. You need to scare your players but allow them a warm DM to come to when they are in need of a DM worth his salt. You need to appear in charge, and not spinless, but never be an iron fisted nazi over the entire gig.

Its a great job.

Rich's favourite two DM secrets:

The blank hook: D&D is a creative adventure and sometimes the players can be more imaginative the the DM (Gasp!). I love to drop blank clues to which I have absolutely no idea what their relevance is ... yet.
A good blank hook piques the imaginations of the players and gets them going. For instance -- three people in the same town all have a similar scar on their right arm that they hide and won't talk about; Small figurines of animals are found in various locations; a Paladin character gets a strange sense of evil from a horseshoe but nothing else supports that conclusion. Those that resonate with them can be followed up on and lead to adventures. Players will begin to fill in the story for you and investigate in some odd places.
Inaction is the enemy of the DM and a hook, even a blank one, can precipitate action. Make sure that not all your hooks are blank, and remember that you can tie the hook to the plot much later and make it seem like your pre-planning is greater than it is. You can't ever be caught with a blank hook. Let them discover it and don't offer any explanation -- you don't need one. Don't ever use a blank hook as a riddle or something that is tied to the immediate action. They belong solely as flavour.

The treasure Pile: Plan your treasure. A lot of novice DM's use the treasure pile as a reward -- avoid this. I had been playing with the current group for six years before they got their first magic item. Use the treasure pile to lead to the next adventures. Treasure should have a story. A good story always gives the reader what they want, but does it in an unexpected way. Treasure is often stolen from other people and places, and something that may be a trinket to the PC's is immensely valuable elsewhere. The next part of the story lies in the elsewhere. Include letters in the treasure pile from some far off king pleading to have a glass key returned. Include the glass key in the treasure pile. In order to cash in on the treasure they have to find either the King -- or whatever it is that the key will open.
Twist on treasure from my campaign: Dragons sit on treasure because they take energy from magic. They don't know what is magic so they sit on valuable items (they are likely to be magic). After many years the dragon draws the magic out of the treasure and becomes more powerful, or magical, themselves. Young Dragons haven't acquire much treasure yet -- old dragons have absored the magic from their piles. The players will pull out their hair over that connundrum.

Something else I was going to add. Don't let ordinary people become unimportant, just because their stats and abilities seem unexciting. Your player characters should be heroes because they are set against a background of a more mundane existence. If your campaign is a quasi-medieval setting then most of the populace should be peasants and labourers, or maybe yeoman farmers and small land-holders. Don't allow your players to fall into the trap of thinking that these people don't matter. Every one of them has a unique personality and an interesting story to tell, and they care about their own lives and the lives of their families. Try to make sure that the players care too.

If your players want to play evil characters, and you decide to allow this (not every GM does), then make sure they (the players) are fully aware of the extent of the evils of their characters if they decide to go around taking the lives of innocents. Don't let them fall into the trap of thinking, 'They're only 3hp peasants, they don't matter'.

And while you're doing all that, could you stick a broom up your arse and sweep the floor as well?

;-)

Easy way to get some areas up and running soon as possible:

Making a random list for 5-10 local or semi-local places will make things seem more expansive and large to your PCs. The lists dont have to be complex or that fancey...just SOMETHING, anything to show that if your players choose to go west when you wanted then to go east, that they dont just hit an invisible boarder cutting off the rest of the world with a video-game-esk barrier.

What I do takes me about 1 hour oer list, sometimes longer or shorter depending on what the area's complexity and danger level is. Heres a quick one I just made for you to look at...its not one of my realm realm, but if I print it, it just might be soon.

First I take 4-20 pages and number them at the top of the page. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-ect. These are my head page numbers. I usually use a maximum of 6 when dealing with tamer lands such as these I am making now.

Now on each page, I number down the left side of the page usually no higher then 4-to-6) Ill be using a maximum of 4 just for speed's sake, but you can make as many sub-numbers on each page as you feel fit as long as it can be rolled on a single die.

Filling in the pages.
I usually save page "1" for the real bad stuff, and the last page for the good stuff players want to find or meet.

Page-1
1- 2d20 orks. These orks are crude type and carry no metal. they lack any real civilization and are simple wanders from the south mountains. the tribe has enough copper to be considered wealthy to the southern crude civilizations (1d10 cp each) and 1d6 of them are using stolen short swords taken from murdered humans.

The orcs will not allow themselvs to die at any cost. they fear death but enjoy cuasing it. They are not morally above rape, murder, etc- and they enjoy easy prey over a hard battle any day.
The leader's name is ROT-FOOT.
Random names of others- Sthang-ugh, Fhogus, spittz, blemmic, qwog. (i always note a handful of names to use incase these npcs somhow become important, or if the players start asking names...you dont ever want the players to see you think...if you have 2-5 names ready and spit them out in a heartbeat, they think you have a name for everything in the world)

2-A lone oger. His eyes are two colors, one blue one brown. He is a local crude and very uncivil. talking to the oger cuases the player to roll vs CHR to see if the oger attacks on first word (the player must roll under his own stat to calm the oger into parlay).

The oger uses a club carvewd from a branch, and has a bag of halfling heads (this also means if a ranger follows his tracks you can find the dead halflings, so note what they have)

the oger's name is Grendall Skullstomper (a real NPC in my game that has become famous due to player interaction), and he is quite found of humor and violence...but above all money.

if the players seem easy to inslave, he will force the party to fight along side him agaisnt all other crude on this random list in attempts to get all the swords, copper and armor of the area in his own possession and sell it in crude city. If the players fight, he will fight too, if they do not- the oger will try to inslave them and travel with them hunting orks, and other types of crude on this list...(this really did happen actually, the oger made the entire party clear the list of all crude, took the sheilds, swords n coin, and then simply left the party...

3- 1-4 elves. Names: Salliliqwuee, Saytar, Amrah'li'thnya, Ahloombulay...

These elves are seen as police by the elven and woodland people. They usually watch, invisibly from the woods, and rarly interact with those who are not fey... They have bows, short swords, 1d4 healing pointions each (made with local good plants) and one bottle of elven wine between them all.

sal- NG, always in debate with himself. the philospoher. never takes action, always debates the two sides of the coin instead.

saytar- CG, a rable rouser. he enjoys combat and sword play, and tends to provoke the stupid evils of the land into action so he can deal with them with his weapons. he dresses in black and finds crude hunting to be a sort of sport. he is honored as one of the best elven cops in the forest for his long record of success (cop in elf=Ormayus)

Amrah- CG- Fine soul, very close to the good gods with her morals and actions. She usually tries to talk to minor evils to try and guide them to alignment change over killing them outright. She travels only with a dagger and bow...nothing more. She is a tom boyish elf with a flat chest and dreds, but her eyes seem to define wisdom.

Ahloom- LG, by the law and by the book, Ahloombulay is a cop as well and he protects and governs the area as the highest ranking elven law offical this far from the kingdom. He will almost always never be seen and chooses to watch the party from afar if they are being criminal in any way.

All elvs are first lev fighters, and they all have the ability to chase away game, and move invisibly in the trees as long as they move silently and use cuation not to be noticed.

4-Good plant. A bush containing 1d10 berries that heal one point of damage per berry eaten. Any with herbalism can turn three berries to a healing potion if given the time.

Page 2
1- A cockatrice.
Party meets 1 cocktrice, but there is a maximum of 6 in the woods. Each one killed or removed should be removed from the maximum. if the six finally are removed, this slot is reduced to treasure- rewarding the party 1d10 gold in fallen money when rolled.

2-wolves. A local pack of wolves runs in these woods. The elves protect them as natrual creatures of the woods, and the wolves are natrual animals. (wolves rule, and are dangerous)

the pack is 8 wolves, but the party only meets 2d4 at any time. Killing the main wolf (random one, you pick it) the pack will be lost for a leader and leave the woods perminitly...or for 1d4 games.

3-Rain. Heavey. All tracking ability is reduced by -4, surprise gets +3, water can be refilled, and hearing is greatly reduced. (in winter this can be snow)

4- Crude trap 1d6, trap can be any type you wish. i usually keep in mind who makes them. ork trap, vines and sharp wood.

trap attacks with a thaco of 19, and deals damage only to one random player if attack succeeds.

Page-3

1- Humans. 1d4 human rangers. Names: Tharkus, Rob Baker, Tween, and Colby Cotterodd.

These rangers are out here hunting for a living. They are good and have what ever skills a ranger would have for such work. they are armed with bows and short swords, a dagger each and all carry 1d4 good berries in their pockets.
They all live close together and hunt every day to sapport their wives and children. They have info on the location of any crude in this l;ist (cus they see them but dont get involved) and they also can offer you direction to anything else on this list that a ranger might know of. they are all good and you might want to note any quirks of any individual one you want...

The rangers also have access to a place they located a few summers ago- a cave that leads deep into the waterfall-wall and seems to be man made...who ever carved somthing this far out here, into a mountain side, must have a reason...we didnt go down there cus there was moaning and screaming from its depths...we fear it.

(make a small map, zombies , sumthing! this is a side plot, the party just found it)

2- Bugbears, max of 6 (1d6) leader's name is Stank. (random names- Chugmuck, Swiggneck, Faygofuss, Pogsnot.

These Bugbears have metal (stolen) armor, chain, and short swords stolen from merchents they recently killed (perhaps you heard of it, or perhaps you will when your in town). These bugbears are pissed at the orcs now invaiding the area from the south...stupid orcs.

They plan to kill them, and are not in the mood for smalll talk. A CHR roll vs them attacking is needed sinc ethey are very uncivil and crude.

Merchent stuff stolen. 1d20 silver, 1d6 gold, 1d20 copper. 1d20 swords, furrs, tobbacco, and 1d10 chainmail. this is a small fortune to a race that buys n sells things with rocks, teeth and fingers...

3- A wandering dog. Its a home-breed used for hunting and house guarding. The dog can be tamed and owned by anyone with animal handling or ranger class. the dog can be named by the players. If no one is able to tame the dog, it will run away...(this dog may sumday be the party's pet)

4- Bugbear trap- 1d4+1- set for orcs and rangers. the traps are limited to 10 traps in the area. mark one off each time. All traps are reset in one week, and each trap is checked for victims by the bugbears once a week...if the party waits around they will find bugbears.

the trap is a vine/stick design and damages a max of one player. trap thaco is 19.

Page-4

1- Fairies. The party is jumped by crazy fairies. each player saves vs spell vs random effect.
1= laughing 1d6 hours, 2=sleep 1d6 hours, 3=drunk 1d6 days -4 to all rolls vs dex, attack or int ,4= Blind 1d4 days.

The fairies mean no harm and just want to party with the party. there are hundreds of them and they swarm the party laughing and sprinkling powders of all colors...

A player can escape a fairy raid if they make 3 dex rolls vs running away...any fail results in you being hit by the fairy dusts. save vs spell.

2- Fine bottle of wine, left on rock.

This is really a Kobold trap. A ranger or anyone with tracking or simular skills has a chance to notice the tracks of kobolds (but they took care to hide them). The Kobolds have poisoned the wine, and will come here to track who took the wine in 1d4 days from now.

The wine is poison vs death- and smells fine. it was simply injected with a small shot of Spike-fish venom, and will cuase any who drink it a save vs posion within one hour after consumption.

The Kobolds do this sort of thing alot. They will arrive to track the bottle's taker in 1d4 days in numbers of 2d10 kobolds. they are cowards and will leave any party of great challenge alone.

3- Peryton (giant birds with elk heads) flying above. 1d4 of them. They are from the nearby mountains to the west, and hunt for food. There is a 10% chance rolled vs each player present (one individual roll at 10% per player.) that the Perytons see and attack in search of prey. They are not interested in treasure, just food. A peryton will select a target and only attack that target until dead, then it will grab it and leave with it...

4- A horse, black, horse with full hitpoints, and a +1 to all damage it delivers with hooves (horse trained to defend itself). the horse belonged to a well known knight that dissipeared in this area (Sir Phenton Phallus "yes! I have n NPC named Sir Phallus...what?)...the horse is inteligent for a horse, and has stood by the knight for many adventures...saddly the knight is now stone (cockitrice accident) and can be found on another random list to the south. The horse has been out here for over a year, and can be claimed or tamed only by a ranger or one with animal handling...

------------------------------------------------------

Thats how I do random lists, of course I add a little more color and depth into colorful areas with alot going on. but 6 lists like this in six directions from where you begin the adventure can really make the party think there is an entire world....when you get board between games, take an hour to create one...make it 10 pages! with sub-numbering of 10! 10x10 random list can be used many many many times before a party begins to see a pattern...

To use one of these lists, you can do what you want...what I do is this.

First I roll the encounter chance-
For this forest: there is a 25% chance per day that an encounter happens. the party can reduce this number to a 5% if they are guided by a ranger. All rolls resulting in a encounter are then applied to a time of day by rolling 1d4.

1=moring 2=noon, 3=night (setting up camp 4=during watch (night)

the party can increase the chance of encounter too...somtimes players want to...weird i know. Try screaming, banging pots, smelling like blood, or just walking around at night with alot of tourches...this can bring a random encounter up.

I had a mage once who was shooting magic into the air to create fireworks, just to get attention of the local random monsters (he was searching for the orcs who killed his PC friend)...the encounter chance rose to 75% a day.

Then next- if the chance makes an encounter happen, I roll two dice. one for page, and one for sub-number. On the list above there is a max of 4 pages, so i roll 1d4...it rolls a 2. so I goto page two.

Now I roll sub-number...there is a max of 4, so I roll 1d4. It rolls 2.

thats a 2,2 for encounter.
resulting in Wolves.

I currently have been running a place called Qwom, a new realm of my design. Its first game had about 5-6 of these type lists, and few hooks to back up things in the long scope. the lists double as great notes for what truly lives in each area.

You dont need to randomly roll rangers if you need them...simply have good reason to go get them, have them show up at town, or simply make them bump into the party...the good thing is, the lists allow you randomness and a working/moving background to throw your stories inside of...and they also are a long tally of all things living in the areas of your world.

Dunno if this helped...but thats how I get a world to be big from the start.

Ps- I also want to point out...two games ago, an entire 9 hour session of play was based off the players going to hunt a stone giant in a mountain area...the game was so good, with the players swearing a blood oath to have reveng on the giant for its horrible deeds (killing locals), and they wanted his blood in return for his act of killing a ranger they were friends with (npc that just became important but started as a random list person).

9 hours to find, hike to, and kill the giant...it was amazing how they built an entire 9 hour session around something that originally was a 5 minute sub-note of page 4 in a random mountain area that i never wanted them to goto in the first place...now the giant is dead and I have the party wanting to live there.

remember, retweek, move and erase things alot between games. the lists will only keep their integrity if you keep them updated.
if they found the wine, replace it..if they kill the wolves, replace them...allow the replacment to somtimes be logical next-steps in what was removed...you killed the orcs, ok, now the rest of the tribe down south wants to know what happend...now there is double the orcs, cuasing the woods to be even MORE dangerous.....or, you killed the cokitrices, allowing you to replace them with wild turkey, bringing the forest to a tamer level.

any of this help? who knows..im just board.

The party im running now came in as evil pirates, cut-throats who wanted blood and fortune at any price...they were mad dogs, killers in the making...

4-6 levels later, they are all now dudes who feel bad about killing certain things, they consider feelings waaaaaay to much, and they only seem to do evil in a selective way to promote the good of the land...

this is cus I used all my nice NPCs to give them guilty thoughts and consideration of even small peasents n farmers through detailing their pain and suffering in day to day common life...

evil PC? HA! bring them on...good display of NPCs can turn any man into a big soft dork when faced with the chance to do unspeakable evil towards the weak...

Another mistake alot of newer DMs make, is giving favour to NPCs over the players. Its a GM's job to be the realms physics and logic, not just story teller.

No PC likes eeing a DM save a NPC from certain death or defeat just to save his/her prescious story. If an NPC made the mistake of being vunerable, then the NPC should pay whatever price that mistake earns.

Even if your story was written with the idea of one NPC being the main actor in your story, the one who is there at the last act, pushing all the PC's buttons and ruining the day of the realm's collective life- a npc shouldnt get specile favour in the face of his/her early downfall.

Ive had epic villians that were to be the Darth Vader of all times simply fail and die in the first 2 minutes of meeting the PCs...a son of a great dead NPC (the father was the worlds worst bad guy for over a hundred years) was gunna be my next big bad badass for the PCs. He was going to be my little Hitler/hanible-lector for the entire campaign....his personality was great, his entire plan for world domination was awsome...he was the COOLEST npc bad-guy I had made in a very long time.

In his introduction he had many guards and was gloating about his plans for the land he was slowly gaining control over. He was preaching his evil to the gathered people of a town the PCs were visiting...one PC attacked him, rolled a 20, and delivered a critical blow that took off his head...

I was in awe, I paniced, I lost my mind...I was so pissed! He was the first born of an NPC that kicked the entire world's ass in my last campaign...this was his SON! destined to be my end-all hated and loved bad guy...

Now i coulda ressurected him, or rushed to find a way to say it wasnt true (you killed his stun double used for public relations!), but all that wasnt true...there was no double, and ressurection has been almost entirly lost to my realm in the past 5 campaigns...

So...he stayed dead. His armies were taken over by a Sgt in his command, a man I detailed as his right-hand go-to-guy, but never really intended to be the BIG evil. But, chaos happend, and he was promoted...now he is the world's new Hitler/hanibal-lector, and my dead NPC was buried in an unmarked grave forever forgotten.

I owed the rightful death of my NPC to my party...thats why they trust me to kill them, cus I dont take sides in dishing out death...

ah-ha! glad you asked...

The lists keep a realm open and free for player interaction. yes there is story laced into them, plot, hooks, secrets, hints to other places etc...the list is limited only by your effort to make them interesting.

Most encounters on the list need nothing more then names, a few stats and a desire or motive for them being there...they would also be suffering the same encounter list that you are, since they exsist in it, so i normally keep all things on a list within a close relation in power...keeps things seemingly real.

What stops the players from running into things that keep them in a fair fight? Heres the deal...nothing.

Rumor, lore, story, warnings..these are all I will give the PCs to keep them off a random list that has major monsters that will whupp them in a fight hands down...I tell them plainly

"look, the rangers of this area have noted giant activity to the northern mountains...if you go there, they may run into you..and then...well"

this usually keeps the PCs away till they assume they can take giants, if they fail..they die, or worse...

I dont guide my parties (see my other posts about open gameing and free-form play), nor do I restrict their movment through my realms just cus they are underclassed to deal with a monster on a list...

I know for a fact that down town Harlem is filled with guns and gangsters....whats keeping me from going there with my weapons and screaming for a fight? common sence...

PCs learn quickly in my realms, just cus it is there doenst mean you are powerful enough to fight it...heck, the local king might have sent 40 soilders a month ago, with only 4 returning, telling of a horrible sluaghter...this sort of forshadowing will give PCs a good idea of wheather or not they should go sword-in-hand toe-to-toe with my northern mountains.

From game one I have many areas detailed, and my PCs are always level 1 to begin. but There are areas that have enemies or monsters that could easyly challenge any group of 5th-to-6th level PCs right from the get-go.
From first game they know that certain areas are said to be "certain death"...those who over come this become heros, those who dont -went too far too fast.

If you make an entire realm for your 1st level players with no lists or stats for monsters able to fight higher levels, then you will be adding that stuff as you go (most DMs do this, from my view) and it sorta makes an arms race...

"whole party got 2 levels last game!? oh=no, better invent a new area on the fly to challenge them"

This can be fine..but my PCs live in a realm that is known for its diversity and challenge. I never direct them one way or another. the lists run themselves, leaving me the freedom to rest my writting hand and simply play my NPCs by the notes I made.

I have been playing a new realm that started a few months ago called Qwom (wrote alot about here if your interested check it out). I have sat down maybe 4 times in the past 5 months to actually add to that realm...it has been working fine for all these months, still with many areas that my PCs still fear to go to.

The PCs have killed the stone giants to the north (much more dangerous then Morge wood to the south) but they still fear going south to the woods...Now I know that the woods to the south are nothing compaired to the mountains they have been exploring and removing evil from...but they assume morge-wood to be far more dangerous due to a single monster on that list that drain's levels. Yes draining levels is dangerous, but killing three stone giants is far worse then that...

anyway...the PCs are allowed to go anywhere, they are also allowed to dare fate into killing them by travling to places normal men avoid like the pluage. its all up to them.

This remove any blame on my behalf...thats fun...cus I can watch them fail without them ever bitching sumthing was too hard or that i threw sumthing too strong at them..they are to blame for their own actions, and they only meet monsters in places they choose to go.

make sence?

Ill end this with saying..

In the old TSR blue-book catacombs n campaign making (sumthing like that, and the best book for any DM of any game to find, no matter the system or addition) says plainly...

"A good DM never makes choices for his players. The PCs are allowed total freedom of the realm and their choices within it. Leading a party or soft-handed direction is never a good idea"

The book plainly sapports a game like mine, and poops on the types of games that id say 95% of all DMs run...When you guide or direct the PCs they prolly dont mind...but once they have hand at a game like mine, one that allows total freedom they may never play a directed game again.(wanna make a house? make one...wanna go fishing? go...wanna travel 100 mile north to hunt the she-hag? fine..you might not survive, but if you do- your a hero).

I have personally had many PCs tell me the way I run things is amazing, and that I have ruined all other games for them..im not bragging, im simply saying I have a cult of players who call me all weeks begging for the next instalment, I have a bounty of players who have quit other games to play mine..and I currently am teaching two DMs how I run my game so they can do the same type of mechanics in their own realms they rule over.

I recently played in a game that started using a system based on freedom and my advice...and man, it was the best game this kid ever ran, and every player knew it..it was llike black n white, night n day...how fast this DM went from "eh, not bad" to "wow, that was REALLY fun stuff!"

Best game I ever played a PC in..and I cant wait to play again...I never am dieing to play a PC in any game cus it lacks freedom and realism...his game now sapports that philospohy and mechanic...and I for one am addicted now...first game realm I ever was addicted to other then my own.

The style is documented in that catacombs-n-campaign source book by TSR. Its a thin blue book and in my opinion its the best peice of writting any DM could ever get his hands on to hoan his craft. Please, find it, read it, learn from it...it has done more for me then any monster manual or DMs guide. It made me a artist in DMing, not just a number crunching fool who works really hard, game to game, plotting a sure path for the feet of my players, right before we play...

I don't think you should avoid encounters which are too easy for the PCs... not every encounter will be a challenge. That can make things more realistic.

Also, it might make them a bit overconfident, which will make a later encounter that much more interesting.

I'm totally picking up what you're putting down man. Every single living thing in my setting is an NPC waiting to be interacted with. I don't even write down stats for NPCs most of the time...I've been using these rules long enough to know approximately how many HP any given creature type has (or whatever it is...not necessarily HP).

Even the animals are NPCs when it comes down to it...you never know when someones going to make a character with the ability to speak to animals. I once had a whole story line centered around the "Thumper King" and the problems he was having with his subjects. (Thumpers are what very large jack rabbits call themselves in this setting).

I am.

I commonly only use the "reply" feature when I'm going slightly off topic in my response to any individual post. I guess it does make the page kinda cluttered though sometimes...

Odd though...your new post was there, and now it's gone. My cat probably took that too.

cool. if they leave the city, will things get less magical? is this drastic mix of races in the party going to draw unwanted attention in the farthest lands away from the city?

2 openly gay men leave new york to travel to Kentucky...uh oh. People there may not embrace such a sight as two male lovers in an area as conservitive...

if the players ever leave the city, will you attempt to show them a difference of thinking between city folk (sassy, tech savey, consumers) and farm folk (hard working, self reliant, practical)?

and will they see a difference in what is available to them through markets of trade depending on city vs rural area? I bought a big mac in the city for like 5 bucks man!!!

the city may provide anything and everything, being a consumer mecca of the known world, but are all lands like that?

im interested in you city's structure of religeion, law and scholastic studies...and what its like for your players the first time they ever walk down that street...dont forget to discribe the smells, thats what makes newyork really newyork.

I'll give you immediate reactions in order.

1. What does the body have to do with anything? It doesn't sound like it had anything to do with the rest of your adventure (quest to get something from sewer).

2. Why didn't the PCs ignore the body or just leave? I wouldn't stick around a corpse:

3. You skip from interrogation with the Watch (which could provide some cool drama) to being hired by a noble. What noble would hire three guys accused of assault or murder? Even if the PCs aren't charged with the corpse, they still got into a fight immediately afterwards.

4. Wouldn't the Watch, having arrested, interrogated, and freed the PCs, still be a bit suspicious of them? After all, I highly doubt that the PCs had overwhelming evidence of their guiltless status. Having just left a tavern, I can safely assume that none of them are cold sober. It's not like they had to drive home after all.

If they Watch was keeping an eye on the PCs, wouldn't that 2nd fight land them right back in jail?

5. Why did you kill the thief? Why didn't he just run? Doesn't he have a sense of survival? In my earlier comments I advised you to think like the NPCs. If I attacked three guys with two of my buddies and I couldn't seem to do anything, I wouldn't stick around, I'd run off like Forest Gump on Speed. In fact, I'd probably run straight to the Watch to report the mugging/murder of my two friends:

He would've made a great enemy that wanted revenge on the PCs for the death of his friends. Could've popped up whenever things started to drag, foiled PC plans for spite, hired assassins later in life. Death is so final. I never kill an NPC when I don't have to.

6. You were intent of forcing your one player to go down into the sewers because that is what your adventure called for. He didn't want to without getting a magical item. He failed his role to convince the Johnson (Shadowrun term) and so turned down the contract. While I assume that the other players weren't mute of this issue (unless their characters weren't there) I'll stick with the one PC and his Johnson. A sticky situation indeed ;-) Why wouldn't the Johnson compromise? Instead of $1k Gold, he could have given the GROUP one small magical item.

It depends on how much a gold piece is worth and how common magical items are. In my world a gold piece is worth a hundred dollars. Imagine $100 bill in the 1950's.

Magical items aren't very common in my world, especially when compared to magical dumping grounds like the Forgotten Realms. So the price of magical items goes up as a result of supply and demand.

A wand of fireballs would cost would cost a thousand dollars or so per charge, 50% more if it were rechargeable. The cost goes up with how powerful the fireball is as well.

If we used an example from D&D a wand with 10 fireballs would start at $10k. If they were set by a 9th lvl mage, you can multiply the cost by at least 9, one for ech lvl for a sum of $90k. You'll want a rechargeable wand so add another $40k for a grand total of $130,000!

If you have a world where money is precious and doesn't grow on trees (again, the Forgotten Realms is a good opposite of what I am referring to) than the characters will have to work very hard indeed to get this wand. That means that the average bloke on the street won't have one either.

Your one player wanted a magical item instead of $1K. That's fine. Imagine what kind of trinket would cost $1k if the above mentioned wand cost $130k. He'd probably get a flower that changes colors or insoles that keep his feet fresh or something equally useless.

Remember when you are running games that the word "no" should be used very rarely, if ever. One of the best pieces of GMing that I ever read was called, "When in doubt, roll and shout!". I think that it was from Sifilos' fav book, but I could be wrong.

What it means is that when you are in don't or the players surprise you, instead of saying "no" or "you can't do that", just set a difficulty and have them roll. If they fail, then give them the logical result. If they succeed, give them what they want.

In this case, you could have said "Yes", and then you would have had the entire adventure comprised of at least two full sessions to come up with an appropriately lame magical item.

Hope this helps!

Ok, heres what I "think" could have been done, or what I woulda did at the drop of a hat on both subjects.

1- The job vs the pay: First off 1000 gld is a fortune in my game, I dunno, hell even a thousand bucks today aint anything to sniff at. Most of my players would jump at the chance to earn such cash, but at times, yes, the players (or one) might just refuse the pay...thats fine...when it happens I offer the job to the rest of the players, and tell the refusing ones that I cant run "two games" for you and the party who wishes to venture into the sewers, so if they want to wait while the players delv into this adventure, they can, or they can go with them...

Either way, no player wants to wait around while other's play, but this tactic is very heavey handed, and I dont use it often at all...

What I do think woulda stopped this, was never assuming you had a solid adventure with this one adventure to the sewer. Everything thing I make in my realms (in the way of missions or adventures) I never assume they will choose to do, or if they do they may not take the side that I intended them to (taking sides with the killer for instance)...The kid wanted a magic item? Id inform him such a thing is never worth more then ten times the emount they are offering the entire party to split- they are just that expensive...

"what in the world are you trying to do? retire off a trip to the sewers? surly you jest young artificer!!!"

Anyway...It almost seems that you sat down with the idea to have them goto the sewers, care if sumone got murdered and just really hoped that all your players would play along....most players do, its the crafty players and the jerks that never go along with what you intend...I never have to worry about that...cus me, as the DM never knows what direction they will choose.

I woulda used the moment to share the sewer idea with the party, then told them that the job is offered to all the city bountyhunter/\adventure seekers and that they shouldnt have to worry, if the pay is too low "real heros" will surly do it for half the price, or perhaps free...(that kind of talk makes a party think they may miss out on sumthing).

Then Id have the same guy run down a list of important things they may be able to help with...but you would have to have 4-6 more things to do other then the sewer....easy...I dont know much about Ebberon, so i cant give any ideas one what small side adventures you could have had set up before game, but a small handful of "other things" to do would give picky players or trouble makers a choice, so they dont feel like that have the ability to blackmail an NPC for magic items...if there is tons of things to do, who gives a damn if these 1st level morons do the job??? We run a fricken city! we got alot of problems!!! do you want the damn job or not? if not, get out, we are very busy!!!

2-killing the thief...
Well im sure the city will not miss one theif, but you did throw away a good chance at a reaccuring NPC. the guy shoulda attempted escape, or gave up in fear of dieing (any man surrounded by a group of armed men, after having your comrads killed by said men, left to stand alone, will NOT fight to the death unless vitally important, or the thief is a mad man). I woulda made the theif surrender without a doubt....sent him to jail, perhaps had a guild bail him out, and bring him back 3-5 games later with reveng on his mind.

Perhaps the guild gets him outta jail to insure his loyalty (look, your were a hanged man in there, now your safe on the outside...you owe us your freedom and life, and we reseve the right to cash in on that dept if you dont do what we want"...

The theif was an NPC that had value as a NPC that you never had any thought on making important...remember (its all over this thred) that every NPC, no matter how small, as the fire of life in his eyes and shouldnt ever be played as a tool or a stat sheet. He was a man, with possibly a lover or wife, a real job, and all the things that make him a living working person of the world...to just kill him wasnt a horrible mistake, but in the future Id consider having NPCs react the way you would if you were surrounded by armed men, after they killed all your friends who were backing you up, in minutes...

me and you would both surrender if it seemed the safest thing to do to escape death...if the armed men seemed the type to not take prinsoners (even when the prisoner is begging mercy of the good gods)-then perhaps running away was a good idea....either way, selling your NPC to death's door is prolly the lest exciting thing for an NPCs progression in evolution of his charicture.

Even if he was a namless stat on a random list, his interaction with the party should be a good signal to try and save his life, anyway possible, so he can return or continue to be a living person in the city...You would be shocked how many of my time-old table-favorit NPCs have started off as nameless punks who coulda died or survived a battle with a bunch of first level dudes...

any life, no matter how small or far away from your plot, should want to live, and do whatever is in his power to escape or survive...even if it means going to jail. The guy should begged for life or ran...cus he was doomed, and he knew it.

Its cool to see you say

1gld equal 100 bucks...in my game thats the one-the-dime worth of money as well.

its also cute how everything on the NPC running and becoming a returning person in the game appeared in both our posts.

Perhaps we are alot alike behind our DM screens.

But yes....anytime you act out an NPC the first thing I always do is

FORGET every aspect about the entire session and game that this individual dosnt know or care about. His mind isnt oocupied with the sewers, or murders of strange city folk, or the political problems of the mages vs the unicorn farmers, whatever...

become that NPC...if its a dirty one-handed farmer whos loosing money cus of his missing hand (bitten off by a owlbear) he ONLY cares about a few things...his farm, his family, his wound and possibly killing that owl bear...if he met a party , imagin how deranged he would seem over candle light, offering his entire savings in return for the owlbear's head...(or claw). His life has nothing to do with your epic story or plans for the partie's big adventure...he is a silly old farmer on a quest to hunt the big bad owlbear, and like Ishmale he will not stop till he or the bear are dead...and THATS his motivation....so when playing him, id forget everything else you wrote and just think about your hand, the bear, and your money problems with the farm...

I was also wondering what a murdered person would mean to a newly entered 1st level party...I would assume murder happens often enough in a city to just see it as a tragic soul...but I dont know Ebberon, and I can understand the confusion and arrest.

I also considered the post below this one, it said

perhaps an hapless adventurer had long ago had stumbled into the sewers and never returned...perhaps he had a magic item, I thought this when i read the re-cap as well, but i never got to mentioning it, and I'm glad sumone did.

fact remains, the party was being guided towards the sewers from the start...when that happens logic gets blurred or confusing...like how does a murder lead a government to hire the suspects to work for the city? Seems wrong (hence why Cal pointed it out), but to you as the DM, were just looking for a way to get the "adventure" in the sewer started...they needed to talk to the city's officals, so a murder brought them there, POOF instant reason to get hired for the sewer !!!

I dont think thats how it would normally go down...but then again, i dont know the full background on this...perhaps the city murdered this guy, and they fear the group knows too much, so they want to send them to death (like that lost adventurer so long ago) to the sewers...isnt that were governments send all their trash?

So yeah...I think you pigeion holed the party cus there was a lack of things to do OTHER then your sewer. if the guy wanted a magic item, it woulda been easy to look at my notes for a lost magic item and tell the party sumthing like

"yeah, there are zombies to the north, an old village that is now damned...the old inhabitants are all walking undead, and no one has the balls to go fix that. Our shcolors think its a magical item that producing this effect, a lost Sceptar of some sort or what not"

I usually try to make side adventures for each class of the game.
Fighter- thugs downtown are making small shops pay them to operate in the ghetto.
Theif- A guild is offering a reward for a snitch who is a master of disguise, be on the look out (then id hide that NPC in the lists sumwhere, in disquise)
Cleric- Undead to the north, a villager is over run and damned by zombies. those who die become zombies, and the problems has the chance to grow to impossible levels of danger if not handled soon.
Ranger- pouchers are taking the owlbear eggs from the local forest, and selling them to a enemy state to the west, they are hatching the eggs and training the cubs to grow into tamed guard dogs....giving this state trained owlbears as mounts and attack animals.
Mage- A lost magical item has been reported to have been lost in the sewers by a travling mage who was on a quest to find a very old book that details the entire 1st level spells of the player's handbook. the book is small (pocket size) and enchanted to hold endless pages...
Bard- A local band is making much hub-bub in the local area...(ive done this before too) and they are the cat's meow. they are getting so much attention from the youth...saddly, behind the stage, behind the act, the group is actually a bunch of evil killers who kill fans and offer them to an evil muse who returns the sacrifices with fame...only going to the show and getting back stage can ever allow the party to see this

A small side adventure for each class can often give the appearence of huge diversity...and the fighter may want to do the mage-type side adventure, the ranger may want to stop the zombies just as much as any cleric...the fact remains that the small notes i just typed above would be enough for me to freestyle 1-5 games of 4-9 hour sessions without much more work then adding names and numbers...

bare bones, that small little list of side adventures can be used to freestyle or navigate a party that wants to go a way you didnt intend.

I would have had the noble back out at that point due to the implied status of that character's intelligence. And I would have said so. It's not like the noble DOESN'T have guards. She can say anything that she wants. She can also hire anyone that she wants.

One thing that you might wanna think about doing is getting rid of your parties wealth. Even if $1k is toilet paper money in your world it'll still by a meal or three and put a roof over your head.

Pickpockets, games of chance, con artists, prostitutes, and gangs can easily remove someone's money. So could the Watch. "How'd ya get all dis money boy? I'd betta lock dis up 'till we see if'n anyone's been robbed. You c'n get it back inna week if yous tellin' us true. Now git!"

BTW it helps if you know a few games of chance as well. Dice games are best for obvious reasons, but card games, dart, daggers, runes, and drinking games can really liven up a roleplaying session.

ABTW I couldn't get g a m b l i n g or g a m b l e r s to work either. Erased my whole well thought out and written post. I was very saddened and almost shed a tear, but then I realized that I had the power of the BACK button and I am happy again.

Dont fear paying too much, too much... thats sumthing we all did and do at times. screw it. and dont worry bout your first gasme not being perfect, none of my games have ever been perfect and im going on 22 years as a DM now...

Alls you gotta do is get better every few games, grow as a performer (cus thats what a DM really is) and find new and exciting ways to shake things up. Let your style be like water, conforming the the container's shape not the other way around (players=water, container=adventure). your doing a fine job might i add.

You are seeking advice to better your craft. You are being open minded in your quest, and being polite in taking advice (sumthing I sumtimes cant do). your deisre to be an artist of the dungeon shows greatly, and i for one think your going to be a damn good story spinner if you continue to do this sort of thing.

22 years of me being a DM, I suaght out this site for one reason...more advice on DMing. I came to find DMs, see what they do, disscuss things like we are doing now...and i really could just have said "screw it" Im good enough, my players are happy, i dont need to look for new ideas or other DM's to get my creative juices bubbling.

But im here...and for the same reason you are. i am ALWAYS searching out new ways to shock, surprise, reward and punish my players...

So, dont give a damn what last game rated as on a score of 1-10 for "good vs bad game"...it was your first, right? Always look forward to the new game, and use past games as history to learn from.

Just wanted to give you a high five for caring enough about the DM's job to actually work towards building a style with true attention to the craft...Not every playing group has a DM who even tries to be new or original on any level...they dont think about finer things like economy, inter racial relations, politics, techonolgy, etc etc...they simply say

"you found orcs...get your dice ready"

So, its safe to say your on the road to becoming a DM thats rare and worth his weight in gold...

Nice post, Sif.

I agree; you're gonna take your lumps when you start out. Just keep plugging along and learn from it. The suggestions in this thread alone are plenty to feed your emotional support needs

And yes, after 20+ years (not getting specific like Sif did -- I am an old timer after all haha!) I can still make some errors. But I can say I run better games now than I did back then. You have the initiative and desire, and that's what's hard to find in a DM. Many a group/game I've played where the DM didn't really want to do the job, and believe me it showed.

If someone of nobility is offering a substantial amount of money for a task, believe me, the word would get out. Servants talk to delivery boys who talk to their employers who talk amongst themselves in the taverns, etc...

Hmm... not a bad way for rumors to get started either, huh? ;)

Another thing to consider is that:

1. The pcs are 1st level nopbodies. If they were to suddenly dissapear, no one would notice.

2. I can safely assume that the noble didn't pay the pc's upfront. Who's to say that she will when they complete their task?

3. If the noble does screw over the PCs, what can they do about it? Go to the Watch? HAHAHahahhaha!!!!

There could be more than one noble who knows of and wants this prize. If the noble in question screws the party over bad enough (prison time, floggings, etc) they might do the rest of it for free just to get even.

Just a thought...

I totally reward players for thinking outside the box. I probably would've given the druid some sort of reward just for trying. Of course, I'd have given them a bigger reward if they had succeeded.

Thanks for not taking umbrage at my soft-hearted jab

Nice hook; I like that encounter. Great idea. Good resolution, too.

Sounds more like a lack of wisdom than charisma -- d'oh!

As a DM/Player, I never cared much for psionics. However, I will try to answer the question.

If I'm the dwarf, and the attempt fails, then I am looking at a dripping wet kalashtar and wondering why he's still here making a puddle on my floor that I'm going to have to clean up when he leaves.

Now, if I'm that same dwarf and I know that he tried to use his powers to influence me, then he gets one (and only one) warning to get the hell out of my hospital before he becomes a fixture in the cellar morgue. Then, at my next opportunity, I report him to the local watch as someone who is trying to use "powers" to influence others. Who knows who else he's been ripping off?

As the dwarf I'd probably him the sap a taste of the old ultraviolence. I'd focus on his head. I probably would report the entire incident (with thouroughly beaten subject in tow) to the masters of the medical facility so that they can run experiments... I mean tests, on the subject.

Heh... well, make a note of it, and the next time the party comes to this town, the guard/watch just might remember this guy. Don't need to have them threaten the PC, but it might be hard for the group to do anything with the police following them around everywhere.

Might even be reported to the merchant's guild. "Watch out for this guy; he might use his magic to steal from you" or such. Hard to buy anything with such a bad reputation. Heck, even the innkeepers might not let him (or his associates) stay in their inns for fear of what he might do.

Actions have repercussions... although they might not always be immediately apparent. Sometimes these things take time.

On a somewhat related note, if magic is more prevalant in your world, then keep in mind that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I don't like using NPCs to manipulate PCs, but if this player abuses his skill, then a short lesson from a more powerful NPC caster might be in order.

Which is not an excuse for the PC, IMO. Please don't punish me for using my limited powers for my benefit since they're not really "magical" powers?

At the least, this PC would be highly suspicious by everyone in town; at the worst, they'd banish him on penalty of death (since they would have no other way to ensure their safety/security).

How many "common" NPCs understand magic? How many understand psionics? How many know the difference? How many care, and just want this person to not come around anymore for their own (and their familys' safety)?

Handouts are a good idea -- You can give people of different backgrounds some different materials, but have most of the core material the same.

You could do a PowerPoint presentation but that requires a lot more prep time. The thing I like about a PowerPoint presentation is that you can show it to them once and have lots of information in it. So my favourite method is a combination of PP and handout.

When giving maps I like players to have rough hand-drawn trail maps to begin with. Trail maps give them an idea of where to go and how to get there, but don't give them anything of the big picture. For those who don't know trail maps were popular in the middle ages and would follow the course of a river or road and mark signposts, villages, towns and other landmarks. These maps were rarely accurate in scale or bearing but could generally be counted on to put the landmarks in the right order. Players may be given a trail map of the Eastern Road and a trail map of the river route through the mountain pass. Both could start at the same place and end up passing through the same large town. Players would have 2 "maps" to get them to the town but may only have a vague idea of the town's direction.

Common knowledge is knowledge that helps common folk navigate the world. In my campaign everyone who has a background as a jeweler or money changer knows that all valuable items must be examined using a silver mirror. Most don't know why, but it is common knowledge. I introduce this to the player as -- your character has a jeweller's mirror that is used to examine any gemstone. Behind that common knowledge is the fact that illusions and enchanments are thwarted by reflections. In truth the mirror doesn't need to be silver, but there are many reasons why the "common" knowledge has developped to its current form -- other kinds of magic are thwarted by silver, and making an essential tool of a craft more expensive makes the profession less accessible. Wizards hide the mundane limitations of magic, because revealling their secrets is against their own interests.
Reveal common knowledge based on this utilitarian principle. What would a character need to know to survive, carry out their business, and participate in society? At a minimum they should know the laws of the land, the festival days, the major crops, the people with whom they trade, and the dominant political/religous viewpoint. They should also have a set of beliefs surrounding anything that threatens/threatened their survival.
It is also good to give players conflicting "common" knowledge at the beginning of the campaign so that right away they understand that just because their character knows something doesn't make it fact. It gives them a good starting point and allows them to see knowledge as an accomplishment in its own right.

Also, I tend to allow NPCs to possibly know of (or even know) the PC in question, if they are from the area. Allowing your PCs knowledge of the area is one thing, but the area may have knowledge of the PCs as well. think about how you no so many face from your area, even if you dont "know" the people, you reconize them on sight at the guy at the store, or the woman who always jogs downtown.

Certain PCs come in with the area knowing them for one reason or another....mages in the party will no doubt be known by the local schools of magic, if not the athorites.

Well, since the PCs screwed up the first job, the Noble in question might hold them liable for doing a second run for free. A make-up session if you will, at little to no cost. Pay would be minimal, no monetary advances. That sorta thing.

Also bear in mind that the PCs should be concerned with their reputation. If they keep screwing up jobs, or if they do not try to rectify things with former employers, who's gonna hire them?

I once had a group of Shadowrunners in a fantasy city who were so incompetent, after only three jobs, that I hired them to steal a sword from a pawnshop. The Johnson who hired them informed the City Watch that he had "heard" of the planned theft and that he may be able to identify the theives.

Their Johnson was also a pawnshop owner, a competitor to the target of the PCs, who had fallen under suspicion of robbing people, accepting stolen artifacts, murder, and forgery. This was his means of clearing his name. By working with the City Watch to protect his main competitor, he was deemed too honest by the Watch for them to investigate.

And the Johnson knew that the PCs were completely incompetant. He knew that even if they did get captured, no one would believe that he had hired them. He also knew that in their desperation to get away and escape capture, they might do something stupid like setting fire to the target's shop as a diversion, ruining his business while keeping the Johnson in the clear. It was a win-win situation for the Johnson, but the PCs got screwed.

The PCs took the job, escaped the Watch (without burning down the building) and had to find a way to clear their name. They were blamed for various other crimes as well, including the kidnapping of the Duke's youngest daughter.

That was a pretty hairy campaign!!!

I just took the basic elements of Shadowrun, i.e. Pcs are poor streetrunners trying to make a buck by doing odd jobs and threw it into a fantasy world.

I got rid of the technology of course, but I kept corporations as power players. I just renamed them to match a fantasy world. The Church, powerful nobles, merchant houses, the monarchy, all these became the power behind Shadowrunners.

For example, the PCs first mission was an extraction. The youngest family member of the most powerful merchant house in the city was the target.

The next job was to destroy a certain crate in a warehouse. The third, to steal a sword.

Shadowrun has magic and stuff already, and there are GURPS Shadowrun books online (I do not believe that these are official supplements) if you need help. GURPS allows you to mix and match elements of Shadowrun and other genres as you please.

I just liked the storytelling and Run aspect. I liked that the PCs start as nothing and have to earn a rep that will determin what kind of jobs they get.

It was cool.

Blank Hook -- never heard it called that, I don't guess, but it's something I've been doing for quite a while.

Like...I once told my player's that they were part of "The 12"...a group of heroes destined to save the world...and, at first, I had no idea who each member of "The 12" was.

Follow the money. Politics is all about power which is all about money.

Maybe a cynical view ... /me shrugs

Also, not everyone gets into a political scheming type of game, so make sure your players won't be bored with it.

One thing I do to promote politics within my game, is sit back and really think about the local groups and picture the NPCs running the markets and politics of the area.

I start by thinking about the resourses of the places around the playing area. Who has what? Who sells to or sapports who? Who has the goods and who needs the goods but dosnt have them?

I look at where the major lumber suppliers must be by judging where the major forests are. These people would be able to trade or sell the lumber needed to growing areas and usually attract hard working types.

I find the mountains that must produce the locals their iron, silver, gold etc. I usually go as far as naming individual moutains for the resources it yeilds. I always consider these places industrial or advanced, and richer then those who do not produce metals.

If there is a local area that has a market within magics, I note that too. But I tend to limit such high-end magic to demihuman civilizations.

Now I play a little history in my head. I Look at the local areas and their leaders and paint past deals. "Did Sother at one time sell lumber to the rocky lands of Grekco? Did in return- Grecko trade protection of their lowlands? Or perhaps Greenforest has made deals in the past with the northern people of Vain...Perhaps Vain, being low in resources, had to trade Greenforest 'more' then just coin to aquire the much needed healing erbs that have always been found only in Greenforest?" Perhaps they insisted those who trade for such erbs must donate space to the good gods who cuased them to grow there."

After I paint a nice connection between civilizations within contracts and deals, I picture what the effect might have had during the decades within these deals.

Did Vashmere become the richest land in the human world, due to the fact that only they produce metals in enough supplie (rivaled only by the dwarven people across the sea) to sapport the other three kingdoms of man? Yes...yes vashmere did, and this had lead them to being very powerful politically. Many lands listen when Vashmere's King speaks. If King 'Victor Von' Vashmere was to ever pull his metal trade from any one single land, it would cuase a economic movment that could cripple another country easy. So Vashmere has much pull in the lands of man.

Did Edenna take advantage of the endless plains and forests to the west? Yes they did. They have the largest collection of true rangers, and even reports of fey creatures in the deepest forests of the land. Seeing the lack of green feilds and woods within the vulcanic lands of Fulcrum, Edenna has produced most of Fulcrum's foods and lumber for over 200 years now. In return, Edenna enjoys the guard of Fulcrums huge armies, wealth, and peace. The peace has lead Edenna into a artistic and philosophical capital of the world. With more time spent spending Fulcrums money then actually working, Edenna has found the freedom to explore the finer details of art and school.

After I get a few trades going and a visual image of its effects, I now go into finding NPCs to place at the helm of these political points of interest.

Yanni Geovanni, Master Mage , is the head of magics within the large city of Wargore. The city has much to do with mining, gem work, metals, and stone. Stone workers and metal harvesters are in great demand and paid well. Recently Yanni has learned of magical evidence of a lost civilization within the eastern mountains of Ghem...Ghem is very important to dimond production, but Yanni wants to shut down many of its tunnels to isolate and study the magics hidden within. The Mage is selfish, yes, but he also fears that somthing evil lurks hidden in these mines...and it does, a sleeping geni that has no master, and no wish greater then to murder all humans in his way. Yanni has secret writings on the matter, but the land is ruled by a strong king who will not allow shutting down his mountain of dimonds for a magi's stupid superstious crap.

This has led the players to see yanni as a evil NPC trying to twart dimond production. the Dimonds are sold mostly to Lox (a land where the inhabitants actually eat dimonds...yes weird I know..but shut up). the land of Lox has been warned, by the players, that Yanni wishes them to die of starvation, that yanni is evil, that yanni should be stopped. This has cuased Lox to distrust Wargore and its guild of magics...The Mage guild has been pushed out of Wargore to appease the dimond buying Loxo and insure trade and production...Wargore was cool with the mages, and used to benifit from having them , but to insure wealth through selling dimonds to the elephant headed people of Lox, they had to dismantle the Guild of magi within wargore....And that has had huge impact on alot of things.

Calamar has alot to say about politics in past posts. he goes very deeply into studying the true workings of real world politics. A world of acient Rome can offer a million ideas on government and political details. America can be a bucket of ideas when considering a civilization that once invaded and captured a weaker civilization's land hundreds of years ago...only to become the most powerful nation in the world.

I dont even attempt to apply that sort of thing. I dont used archtypes of real world governments openly...due to the fact that i dont study them enough. But the wealth of info is there if you decided to do so. A basic understanding of the types of governemtn and what those types actually mean is a good start.

after that...just play out the last 100 years (at lest) in your head, in fast forward...and see who washes whos back and who gets stabed for the dollars in the long run...

Player attrition is really hard to deal with if you are trying to maintain a long-running campaign. Not so bad if you play a series of short-running mini-campaigns or standalone scenarios without any lengthy story arcs.

In my campaign I have multiple story arcs running in parallel with different parties involved. Sometimes I have to put one of these on hold in favour of another, as I have players who tend to go away for long periods of time and then come back again. E.g. one of my players is in Beijing at the moment, and has been for the past two months. He's due back in a couple of weeks and then the story arcs that his characters are involved in (or may get involved in) will be back on the table as possibilities.

It's more difficult to handle when the player of a major character who is deeply embedded in the campaign has to cease participating. I have had this happen in my campaign - someone moved away. His character had just embarked on a 'side-trek' adventure along with another PC when he left the group. I had to use a little Deus-Ex-Machina (Though well-reasoned and involving an established NPC not just some cheesy divine intervention!) to extract the other PC from this and bring them back into play, as basically the first character would have to be 'in stasis' until such time as his player maybe comes a-visting and we can spend a weekend running his exploits.

(Actually I am thinking of bringing him back into play using 'Skype' with webcams.)

Player addition can sometimes be handled by letting them take over the running of a character that was previously run by a departed player. It doesn't always work but there are situations where it is appropriate. The old player should give their agreement for the new player to inherit their character, and the new player should be a) happy to do so and b) able to roleplay the character in a similar vein to the previous owner.

I don't let new players bring in or generate characters that are already the same level as the best characters the established players have. This kind of depends on the psychology of your group but my players don't like a newbie suddenly muscling in with a pre-genned character without having to sweat their way up the levels like they did. (Before anyone pipes up saying that 'this is why I don't like level based games' - this would of course be equally true of a long-running GURPS campaign, where character development is measured in points rather than levels). However I don't force new players to start out at 1st level. If they are going to be hanging out with 10th level characters I usually let them start out at 4th-5th level. The toughest part is finding a reason why the party should let them join! It's often the case that new characters start out as henchmen of the established characters. So they have to help them on with their armour and run errands and so on.

As for dealing with changing motivations, relationships, etc, I guess you just deal with them the same way you do in real life. By the seat of your pants!

Debates or votes over a law -- If you want to apply dice to the interaction you could have some real fun with it. At one point the players audited the twelve (plus one) council members and found some interesting voting behaviours. Some council members would vote to the middle -- some would vote against the opinion of another specific member -- while others would vote towards a specific member (I called this their voiting pattern - a number that could not be changed). Solomon would have a voting pattern of zero. Once they had this information they knew which votes could be swung and what they needed to do. Each vote was a dice roll based on their opinion of the topic (as swayed by the players) and their voting pattern. I laid out the 13 cards on the table with the two numbers (pattern and disposition) on it and placed them in the order of the table. I let the players roll the dice (low but open ended) and each member voted in order. As they had a voting disposition -- each vote affected all subsequent votes. The players could see the changes they had affected in the dispositions and hoped that they had targeted the correct council members.
The vote had a subjective elements of roleplay, random effects, and strategy. Thus a favourable result is based on the big three in roleplaying and players could be proud of the result. Luck, strategy, and style are the essential ingredients for player reward in any situation.

I have thought that you could extrapolate that methodology to have each political figure have a set of statistics that can be used for influence. Hmmm.. I have some interesting stats in mind. I'll think on it.

Points well taken. I like what you say about the difference between a hard won character and a character as a roleplaying vehicle. Most gamers who I've sat at the table with develop a very strong attachment to their character.
Since I run a long story that revolves around a group of characters moving through the realm, adding new characters to replace ones that are lost does become necessary from time to time. Sometimes it is a new player stepping in to augment the group or replace a lost non-player character. Other times a long time player must create a new character. In both of these situations I aim for level-parity with the group.
In a campaign that plays out multiple story threads through the environment I think LG has all the pieces in place.

Just a thought -- what do you guys do for screening new prospects to the gaming group? I have a feeling that the guys I play with are pretty fussy compared to the norm. I like playing with new people and am generally tolerant of new players (must be that school teacher patience at work) wheras the rest of the group will be more reticent in considering new players. Right now we run with four players -- the most we have had is seven. What is your mix?

1) Have the players stumble on a sick but semi-important NPC. They have some kind of psychic link to the planar episode. They are having visions that give them convulsions and other problems. They are able to relate parts of the story. They describe a peculiar sign, pendant, or sybol.
Second interaction with NPC: Have that symbol re-appear with connection to any adventure that they have. As they dig they find that this person is linked with a specific individual and the NPC can provide instrumental clues in tracking down this ally/enemy and defeat/return them home.

2) Pirates have maps. Let them find a map that shows the coastline of a polar region -- not where the ice is, but the land underneath. Devise some way or magic by which the players could be able to travel as if the ice were not there to discover a lost city shown on the map.

Include some gear in the treasure that is good for polar expeditions. Include rations, fur, etc -- and then a number of items for warm climates.

Sorry for joining so late.

I was struck by a question upthread that is common in games: the player who chooses not to play, or who instead demands an unreasonable in-game motivation for playing, like a giant reward upfront or they don't go in to do the job.

In these cases, I think it's a good idea to stop the game and have a a tabletalk chat. This kind of thing happens all the time. It's a method by which players use real life motivations (ie. the desire to get on with it at the table) to cause in-game actions. It's cheating, and it's rude. Some players are of the mind that it's us vs them - DM vs players, not just in the game, but also bleeding out of it. Some players, like a heckler in a comedy club, will do anything to challenge the world a DM has tried to set up, or simply break a system. It's passive aggressive shit when it happens at the table, and it needs to be nipped in the bud.

I'm of the mind that when a group of people come to a table to play, that the players are partly responsible for their own enjoyment, and they need to work to support the world the DM creates and embellish it, rather than trying to subvert it. I don't like it at all when the interaction around the table becomes about how the game is to be played, or whether the game will be played, rather than simply engaging the scenario.

That said, in my campaigns, I generally try to do a bit of upfront work on motivation. I try to tie in some non-monetary motivation. I stick very closely to the DM Guide recommended guidelines for how much cash/resources a party should have, since that affects the game balance and therefore the intensity of the challenge they will face, and I try to avoid too much up-front talk of money.

In the past, I've tried to deal with that kind of behaviour in-game by shaming them, by having a mere child volunteer to go into danger to save the day in front of the cowardly or greedy adventurers. That worked.

I've known another DM that dealt with it in game by hiring the adventurers as dishwashers at the tavern. They roleplayed it for around 10 minutes and they really got into it. Then he called the game and gave them an epilogue, explaining their mundane existences, while other NPC heroes became the toast of the town. Not everyone is cut out for adventuring, right?

So, my "question of the moment" is: How do you GMs manage player attrition and addition and also with a changing cast of PCs, whether due to new guys or PC deaths? How to deal with changing motivations, relationships and so on (i.e. all the crap you deal with ONCE at character generation)

We introduced a clever bit of narrative gaming artifice - the adventuring "company" or "co-op". The idea is that the chartered company (for which the group pays administration dues) is actually bigger than any particular group of adventurers. So, each player rolls a stable of characters, some of which are "off camera" on any given day, training or on other adventures. The characters are known to each other, and they might receive some direction on their next mission through their admin. Like any small company though, new "business" is most often generated by the adventurers themselves. The narrative benefit is that it gives them an excuse to pool some resources including magic items - particularly passing them on to others within the same company, if it is possible. Having a stable of characters for each person allows some pre-game relationships to be created through out-of-game narratives that are traded online or via e-mail. It also takes the pressure off the DM to keep characters alive, thereby increasing the risk and the thrill.

We calculate experience carefully, according to DMG guidelines, and keep it in an Excel spreadsheet. If a character dies, and they do, another character can be introduced. The experience level of the replacement level is taken as an average of the group - and then rounded DOWN to the beginning of that level. That helps put the brakes on group leveling over time, keeps replacement characters relatively in line with group experience, without rewarding characters for dying.

A CR 2 enounter should use up roughly 20% of the resources of 4 average, by-the-book PCs of level 2. So, a CR 2 encounter wouldn't normally kill a party of 4 PCs, 2 of which are lvl 1 and two of which are lv 2. But, it can happen...and will happen again no doubt. I run a solo campaign for my fiance, and a CR that is equal to her level is a veerryy challengeing encounter for her character, but not impossible. Of course, behind the scenes all of this is based on average dice rolls...and we all know that dice are hardly average. There's always the times when the GM rolls a mess of 18-20s all in a row and the players roll an equal mess of 1s, 2s, and 3s. Or vice versa.

As replacement character levels go, it honestly doesn't mean much. Seriously. Because low level characters get more XP than high level characters from the same CR, it all eventually balances itself out. If the low level PC can live through it, they will jump ahead in levels rapidly, soon catching up to the rest of the group. Or, if you use lower CR encounters so as to not kill the replacement PC right off, then the high level PCs will get little to no reward and it has the same effect...the new guy catches up rather quickly, and things settle back down to normal. A real world equivalent? You learn more things and faster from the more experienced teachers.

I would comment on the "everyone should have the worldbook" idea as well. I don't necessarily agree. It does make the GMs job easier, as he doesn't have to teach the group about the world he is using...but it can create problems when the GM starts moving things around, changeing things, and the like. I've had more than one player tell me I was wrong about what side of a river the town should be on...and whether I was wrong or not, I ended up looking wrong as how would they know I changed it and wasn't just saying that to save face? I think that you were referring more to players being able to learn about the politics and inner goings on of such-and-such town, however. Having the worldbook is not beneficial for that either...I wouldn't want my players to know all about the inner goings on of the Senate in the capital city of the Empire...and that info would most certainly be in there, even if it was point form and brief. I firmly believe that the GM should be the lens through which the PCs see the world...not a book.

I *force* people to feign ignorance about monsters they have not encountered or haven't heard of. Just because a player has read the Monsters of Faerun does not mean that their character has, and enforceing those sorts of things firms up the suspension of disbelief. I've gone as far as denying experience points to a player that went right for their silver letter opener when they faced a lycanthrope. In the setting, lycanthropes were a new thing, and no one had ever heard of them before. There was no reason for him not to use the great axe that he had been swinging all night, so I screwed him over for being a metagamer. He whined and cried about it for about an hour, despite the rest of the group and me telling him he acted out of character, so we had a consensus vote, open and in plain view...and removed him from our gaming group. We just don't game with that type of player, and he's probably much happier in whatever group he games with now, as it should be. I'm a jerk though, and insist on realism (well...as realistic as a fight against a werewolf on an airship could have been...LOL).

I've also had some of the absolute best moments in roleplaying come from buying things at the market or meeting in odd places. I suppose a certain play style warrants "you arrive at the door of a dungeon" being the first words said...but I would get gang beaten by my group if I ever did that to them. Seriously...they would trounce me. They want to play through every tedious aspect of their characters lives, and my job as GM is to make those things exciting or skip over them when they can't be spiced up. I suppose the main reason would be my group doesn't see it as "equipping"...they see it as going to spend some loot and interact with some folks, just like you or I would in real life.

It's so interesting to see the way that different people look at this hobby, and the tactics they use as GMs as a result of that. Play style is the biggest impacting factor at the table, and on our skills as gamemasters.

Nefandus...out of curiousity; why do you place constraints on people writing epic histories for their characters? If it's all done online and not at the table anyways...what's the difference? I actually encourage long winded, exhaustive character histories tied to the world as much as possible. I find it a useful way to determine what certain PCs know and don't know about the world...relating back to a point I made earlier. I have one player that has made me a family tree of his past...and I've used that as inspiration for an advenure once. Just curious is all. As for bad accents and fantasy-speak...we don't go that far at my table. We assume that if everyone here is from such-and-such place, they all have the same accent and so basically have no accent. If a foreigner is around, the accent is just explained at the outset, compared to a real world cultures accent, and then no more is said of it after that.

In my refereeing I tend to steer a path between the two extremes of acting gig vs power game. A lot of it depends on what level the characters are and what sort of background they have, and how likely they are to know of a certain monster's vulnerabilities. For something like a lycanthrope, I would maybe give the player a roll to see if their character knows about the silver thing, with a very low DC for success. Chances are they will know about it. If their character is, say, 5th level or more I probably wouldn't even bother with the roll.

Now, if it's a Rakshasa they're up against, I would make the chance of knowing it's vulnerabilities much lower. Ot I might simply change the listed vulnerability and let them waste their bless spells. Sorry, I won't reward a player for their initiative in having purchased all the Monster Manuals I-IV against my expressed wishes. Trying to figure out the monster's vulnerabilities can be a fun part of the game - as long as it doesn't drag out too long because you've given the monster some ridiculously unlikely invulnerabilty and aren't giving them any clues.

Though I don't force people to use funny accents (they're more than happy to do that for themselves in my group, in fact just try and stop them!) I do think that acting out a character immersively and realistically is an important element of tabletop roleplay, which distinguishes it from MMO'RP'(LOL)G's. Seriously, if people just want to game rather than act they're wasting their time with dice and bits of paper. Go play WoW.

(OK, I'll admit that's a bit harsh - tabletop has tactile stimulus and RW social interaction going for it as well. Maybe not so much fun sharing a pizza with your buddies when you're all playing online.)

Actually, this leads me to wonder, if there is presently an increased tendency to emphasise the 'acting' element of tabletop roleplay, is this a reaction to the munchkinisation of MMOGs?

Thing is, at the end of the day, this is simply a comparison of different styles of play. People posting on Gamegrene tend to be referees, and all of us are quick to bristle like a porcupine when we perceive that another referee is saying their way is the 'one true way' - implying that ours isn't. Fact is that players and referees tend to evolve together as a collective organism - either that or they part ways. Any group that has stuck together for a reasonable length will consist of a referee whose style suits their players, and a group of players whose playing style suits the referee. The best thing that comes out of this kind of debate is that it lets us take a step outside our own frame of reference and see our game from another's perspective. We might simply disagree with that perspective, or we might learn from it and improve our game - not necessarily a complete overhaul of our refereeing style, but maybe a few tweaks here and there.

>>"Any group that has stuck together for a reasonable length will consist of a referee whose style suits their players, and a group of players whose playing style suits the referee. The best thing that comes out of this kind of debate is that it lets us take a step outside our own frame of reference and see our game from another's perspective. We might simply disagree with that perspective, or we might learn from it and improve our game - not necessarily a complete overhaul of our refereeing style, but maybe a few tweaks here and there."

Amen to that. I think I'd have a hard time running for anyone else but my group, to tell you the truth. I'm sure I could do it, and there are some players that would adapt if they liked it...but if I were on the hunt for players, I think the attrition rate would be high until we found people that played "like us".

Thing is, at the end of the day, this is simply a comparison of different styles of play. People posting on Gamegrene tend to be referees, and all of us are quick to bristle like a porcupine when we perceive that another referee is saying their way is the 'one true way' - implying that ours isn't.

Of course, this is correct, but after decades of gaming and discussions of gaming, I'm increasingly struck by how few players and GMs actually have tried dealing with the activity as an integrated game and RP session, acknowledging that there are gamey aspects to it, without attempting to deride them or dispose of them. Such discussions always involve some change intended to pursue "realism" - which really doesn't - and which comes at an excessive cost to other aspects of the activity.

Submitted by Scott Free:
I suppose alot of it comes from the fact that many years ago I tricked a bunch of actors into trying out roleplaying, and now most of them are still my players. LOL. It changes the way they choose to play and the way I choose to run.
Most of my fave players as well, actually. A former actor, and actor/playwrite/director, an aspiring director, among them. And as I constantly maintain – the roleplaying opportunities and experiences within the games are richer for it – richer than any other games or groups I've played with, as long as the limits of the medium were acknowledged. The biggest problems were always when people attempted to "break the game" – rather than supporting it. There are often people who deliberately try to jump the wall of the sandbox, if only to show everyone that the wall is there. I don't mean people who do unexpected things – I mean people who are deliberately trying to beat the artifice of the game – to defeat the GM at the table, rather than the scenario as it is posed to them. Those people are like hecklers at a comedy club.

Submitted by Scott Free:
All the points you make are good ones...as I said, I love seeing other GMs play style exposed on this site as it casts what the rest of us do in a new light.
Thanks. I'll qualify that my general advice is for systems that mostly work – which have some intuitive sense and balance, and which use game scenarios as a semi-objective test by which the participants challenge themselves. My advice isn't so useful for something like LARP, where the gamey aspect of the activity is intended solely as propellant for live drama, for manufacturing inter-character conflict and power reversals. That kind of activity doesn't really engage an external challenge. Nor does it work for systems that are vague or arbitrary, which require a heavy DM hand just to make the story happen.

Submitted by Scott Free:
In my setting, there aren't even tales of lycanthropes. At the time this took place there were only two of them on the entire planet as the disease had just been accidentally made by a crazy alchemist/wizard. There were no tales, hence no knowledge. Silver weapons are only sold as very expensive ornaments, and the letter opener in question was a family heirloom that the guy carried around as a memento of his dead family. I couldn't even see a reason to use it as a weapon considering why the PC carried it around. It's not like he kept it in a sheath on his belt or something. Imagine a battle between some people on a drastically listing airship about to crash into the sea...the moon comes out, the fellow directing the bad guys in thae battle begins to morph into a werewolf, and the fighter drops his axe in the middle of the fight to rummage around in his backpack for a letter opener? It was lame in the context of the situation.

Why, of all the creatures to throw at them as a "what might it be," would you choose something so common in the players' own real world folklore? I could understand your POV if it was a new monster (which is why most cool adventures often mint their own new monster, specific for that adventure), but in choosing a lycanthrope, it sets a clear expectation that this is something the player would be expected to use his tactical insight in dealing with. The trouble you'd have to go to in setting up lycanthropy with the players – explaining to them that they don't really know anything about it – instructing them accordingly on what tactics they can or cannot use or on what round someone might finally "clue in" within bounds on what tactics to use – all of that is unnecessary, counterintuitive interference, whose only apparent benefit is the opportunity of everyone at a table to act like they don't know what it is. The benefits don't outweigh the hassle.

If you want a "what might it be" then make one! That removes feigned ignorance and replaces it with genuine mystery. It also opens the sandbox up for players to use their full range of tricks, without second guessing whether or not their choice will be overruled. It puts them back as the protagonists and puts you back as a facilitator, rather than as a narrator.
The suspension of disbelief was shattered for the rest of the group when he did what he did.
There was no suspension of disbelief for the rest of the group to begin with. There was a re-enactment of it. There's a big difference. I'm curious as to why you didn't go for the more apparent and preferable alternative – which was either a more obscure monster or an entirely new one.
I would have left it alone after talking about it one time, but the rest of the group are the ones that wanted him gone. There were other issues leading up to it, but that was the straw that broke the camels back for them.
He was right. You say there were other issues – so I suspect that this was an excuse to boot him rather than a bona fide reason, and that's fine too. Why play with someone you don't like?
I don't really see it as them using the wrong tactics so much as I see it as a realistic representation of what would have happened in that situation. How would the right tactics have been known?
I understand your point, but my point is, why did you use a critter in which the tactics were obviously known, where there is an expectation of them being known, when it's just as easy as the GM to change the encounter to something that is genuinely unknown?

Your attempt to represent "reality" may have simulated some story logic, but in doing so you committed the most common blunder that every GM eventually falls into – narration rather than facilitation. It isn't playing if the players can't choose and feel the consequence within the set of reasonable, agreed, in-game parameters. The players may have gone along with it, but that doesn't mean the better, more enjoyable choice would have been for them to experience something different that they truly had to figure out, rather than pretending to figure out.
Had tales of this type of creature been prevalent, I may have looked at it differently...but this was the second guy ever to contract lycanthropy...tales hadn't spread yet.
Honestly, did you set it up this way? Did you sit down and tell the players, "Ok, this is a werewolf, but you don't know anything about werewolves so here's how you should react?"

However, we couldn't game together as for him it was more important we focus on the game; for me and my players it was more important that we use the game to tell a good story together.

If you remove their reasonable choices, or deliberately make the interface counterintuitive, then their really is no game. It's just a story. A decision to deny experience to him for the encounter probably was taken as being tyrannical. After all, XP points are generally awarded whether or not the players have insight into the best tactical way to overcome a challenge.

I would add that if you decided to part ways, it was probably best. If you could do it over, would you have appreciated having this kind of debate up front?

Zipdrive, you've asked advice in this thread. I'd say good advice is to, up front, TALK to your players about the game (if you can) and get their feelings on these kinds of issues. These are the kinds of things that constantly tear groups apart. Even with groups that stay together, it's often a stress point when players simply want to go a different direction. In this case, I think the player in question was quite reasonable in interpreting the situation - based mainly on the choice of monster. In conflicts like these, it's easy for a DM to be perceived as being imperious if they are resolved through in-game punishments rather than through discussion.

Submitted by Scott Free :
It's true that this set an expectation that the player could use his tactical insight on...but we don't deal with *player's* tactical insights in my campaigns...we deal with *character's* tactical insights. I didn't really have to go to the trouble of explaining to anyone that they don't know what a werewolf is, they already *knew* that they didn't now what a werewolf is.
You don't need to sell me on the general concept of metagaming – I'm with you there for the most part. I don't like it either, and it can certainly go both ways. Intentionally rigging an encounter so as to be counterintuitive to real life game expectations can also be a method by which the GM plays the players rather than engaging the scenario.

In this case, it seems evident that one person in the group did not know they were supposed to pretend, or what he was supposed to pretend. I see this as reasonable in most situations. In worlds of make believe, there are sacred cows which tend to be consistently "known" unless they are expressly stated otherwise. For example, vampires hate sunlight – that's reasonable, yes? If someone chooses to use a vampire, as opposed to some other critter, the GM is using a flake of the real folklore known by the players at the table to give them a shiver. Same with werewolves and other items common in our real world folklore. It's just as easy to use a different critter, but we use that one because of its familiarity to the players. While it does not necessarily mean that a character MUST know what a player knows, it is reasonable that a character could know basic things. The question is just what those basic things are.

In the same vein, you could argue that inexperienced characters may not listen at a door, or check for traps, or take any other normal precautions when engaging a hazardous scenario. I suppose I bristle at the slippery slope here, because I've experienced a GM who put a scary statue in the middle of a bare room, and then forbade us from keeping our distance from it, even though it was an obvious encounter site. He ended up NPCing me touching it. Keep in mind – this wasn't some kid – this was a 30-something role-playing purist who passionately felt that our caution was contaminating the narrative because the characters were not acting entirely in the roles he envisioned. This is where the game (and other imaginations) intruded on his narrative.

That's a bit different from your werewolf example because your player wasn't just exercising caution – he was going for a specific item, but the general point applies.
Submitted by Scott Free :
There was indeed suspension of disbelief for the rest of the group...you can't really re-enact suspension of disbelief; you either suspend disbelief or you don't. They did, the player in question didn't.
Let me define my terms here. Suspension of disbelief, as I would define it, is the tendency of people to overlook improbabilities of plot because the impact of the drama supersedes the details. For example, in Star Trek, I suspend my disbelief of warp drive because it feeds the overall story. The point of the show isn't to show how space travel is possible. I just don't think about it.

In your example though, it's obvious that a werewolf is the critter, and that rolls out a logical set of tactical associations. Pretending that I don't know what it is so I act in character, is not a suspension of disbelief – it's simply me playing dumb. I still know what it is, to the point that it is a distraction to go blundering through ways of attacking it that I know aren't going to work. At that point, I'm not engaging a scenario – I'm playing the part of a character who doesn't know what he's doing.

For me, the best RP experiences are when I'm leaning in, engaged by the scenario/ and or the other players, and totally in the character.
Submitted by Scott Free :
From a certain play-styles point of view this may look like the player feigning ignorance, but with the way we play it is actually the characters being genuinely ignorant and the players having those characters act accordingly.
If the players knew it was a werewolf, but acted like they didn't, then they are, by definition, feigning ignorance regardless of the character's perspective. You might be correct in maintaining the narrative purity of the character's POV, but that doesn't mean it is fun to play.
Submitted by Scott Free :
As for "better, more enjoyable choice"...this was the better, more enjoyable choice. My group likes to keep OOC knowledge as far from the table as possible,
If true – then keeping OOC knowledge as far from the table as possible would mean simply having no OOC knowledge – and that would still be a better choice. In other words, it would have been designed as a fresh encounter not rooted in such common "real world" folklore. Unless they get specific pleasure out of pretending they don't know things they know. At that point, they aren't really engaging the scenario. Playing characters – or rather "acting them out" according to a prescribed expectation of them – but not necessarily "playing" either.
Submitted by Scott Free :
My players are free to react however they choose, as long as it represents what their characters realistically know or don't know.
Right, and you are the arbiter of what they know and don't know. So they are free to act as they choose, as long as they choose what you think they should choose. Everybody in the group is trained to anticipate what you would choose, and so they enforce it on each other voluntarily. In essence, the players are engaging what they perceive as your expectation of them, rather than any semi-objective scenario.

The problem I'm articulating is not so much the tyrant GM as it is a poorly designed encounter – which fails to provide an interface through which the PLAYERS can engage. For at least one player, the choice of monster was counterintuitive. You wanted a complete cipher, but you chose a werewolf, out of the thousands of monsters, to play it.

Submitted by Scott Free :
I've never said "this is a such-and-such" while roleplaying. I just describe what it looks like, how it acts...etc. It's up to them to decide what to do about it and how to react. In this situation, they knew that this was a result of said alchemists experiments, and that the key to saving another NPC from the same affliction lay in this encounter. There was no reason for them to suspect that a silver letter opener would have any more effect than a big ol' axe. It wasn't so much strategy as blatant metagaming.
Not necessarily. The way it was described tends to be a puzzle in and of itself. Many players see this as a challenge, and having figured out the answer, then leap to the tactical conclusion, pleased that they've figured out the puzzle the GM posed to them. Second, it doesn't follow that the strategy is worthless simply because it was known. The choice of letter opener vs axe has consequences – lesser damage if you are wrong. A player who, in the middle of mortal combat – ditches his axe for the letter opener, is making a tactical choice that could go badly if the hunch is wrong.

Submitted by Scott Free :
I don't feel that I removed any reasonable choices from the encounter. The reasonable choice was to attack it with a letter opener?
It's reasonable if you think you are fighting a werewolf, and if you are under the impression that werewolves are common knowledge. I don't know what setting you used, but if it was regular DnD Greyhawk – silver weapons are available in the Player's Handbook as a mundane item – yes? Since they are more expensive, it would follow that they are there for a reason. No explanation is offered, so it's reasonable to conclude that certain monsters are killed by them, and that the average shopkeep, weaponsmith and certainly adventurer would know about them, just as surely as they know a holy symbol will turn undead. So, if that's the case, then there is plenty of background – in the common set of rules you all use in game – for him to believe that this is a known and reasonable tactic, from the character's pov – unless you had specifically overruled that point.

Now, that's beside the point if he was being otherwise disrespectful or disruptive in game. If you choose to play a certain way and he doesn't want to play that way – he can make his case, but it's totally wrong to knowingly force the issue in game. It sounds like he likely knew just as well as you did, the conflicts in playing style that might arise.

Cheers!

I just wanted to thank Scott Free for plumbing the depths of this discussion with me, and for your patience zipdrive, while we entertained this tangent.

Sidebar as it is, you will encounter some form of the dilemma over how to play the game at some point, as you all get more comfortable. It's often posted on this board that it's good to have these discussions up front, but it's also difficult to have them for inexperienced GMs and players, because they don't know what they like yet, or they haven't yet developed a vocabulary to talk about what they like (like someone trying to explain why they like a particular painting - an expert will have an easier time of it).

Thanks to both of you.

RPG's have many facets and through the complexity the GM typically relies on paradigms to control the action. These paradigms aren't rules but tools of perception. As both Nefandus and Scott Free have a wealth of experience these paradigms are more developed and more complex than those of less reflective and/or experienced people. I'd have fun at a gaming table with both of these guys.

That's why we lurk around these boards and ruminate on the game. We want to have more involved game table experience.
The spectrum of gamers includes: those who view the game table is an opportunity to reflect on interpersonal relationships, the nature of good and evil, and a myriad of other issues; those who seek an immersive role-playing experience; those who want to solve wrongs, issues, and problems; and, those who just want to bash nasties. Although people may find their "ideal" gaming group few people fall exclusively and consistently into one category. When being a good GM requires a lot of time and effort people feel the need to defend their style. We are probably all here to pick up a few tricks from each other and get a pat on the back for things that will help others.

That said a good joust between divergent philosophies is always entertaining, expecially when both sides come out better for it.