Help me build up a good game

[Wallwalker]

Ah. that's supposed to be thank you. And it seems I somehow failed at using the quote feature, can a moderator fix this?

And yes, yes, i'm supposed to use the preview *ashamed*

[Bankuei]

Hi,

Totally cool, just trying to get a better idea of where you're coming from in order to get a better idea of how to help you.   

With regards to the "challenge issue", it's not so much about your character dying, as much as it is for the GM to best be able to figure out what an appropriate challenge is.  If you lose a tough challenge, that's just a possibility, but if you lose to an impossible (or near impossible) challenge, that's no fun for anybody.  On the flip side- inexperience can also create a lack of challenge, so it's important for the GM to have that as well.  I agree that play is the best way for both of you to get that experience, though it might be best to figure on a shorter "test run" to get that experience before highly investing effort or emotions on either side with the expectation of long term play.

I think a very important statement is this:

Very discouraging. every GM I've had or asked to be a GM for me has either had very different ideas of what kind of game we should play...

Which is pretty much the root basis for a great deal of theory here.  Fact is- there's lots of different ways to do this thing "roleplaying", like different sports, and simply saying, "We're going to play sports" doesn't say much, which is generally how most people go about getting a game group together and actually playing...  Since you've got a good handle on what you want, and hopefully have communicated this with the GM, and he or she is also interested in the same thing, I think mostly its going to be about keeping an open communcation about what you as players, really enjoy.

In terms of "challenges" and GURPS, are you going to be using the hex maps and such for tactical movement?   

Chris

[Wallwalker]

Hi,

Totally cool, just trying to get a better idea of where you're coming from in order to get a better idea of how to help you.   

With regards to the "challenge issue", it's not so much about your character dying, as much as it is for the GM to best be able to figure out what an appropriate challenge is.  If you lose a tough challenge, that's just a possibility, but if you lose to an impossible (or near impossible) challenge, that's no fun for anybody.  On the flip side- inexperience can also create a lack of challenge, so it's important for the GM to have that as well.  I agree that play is the best way for both of you to get that experience, though it might be best to figure on a shorter "test run" to get that experience before highly investing effort or emotions on either side with the expectation of long term play.

That is true and I agree with you that it is unfair to start the game from the assumption that "all your characters will die" but to me, the game doesn't start when I enter the cave complex, instead it starts the very moment when I get the challenge to do something, to decide whether I'll face the legion of doom in their fortress or not. And as such, the existance of practically unbeatable dungeon isn't a problem as long as I don't have to go there. If I wish to fight to fight the ruler of that dungeon I can, after all, utilize different methods. I can ambush his troops that leave the fortress, destroy his supply routes, harass his allies, help his enemies and so on. I can even flee, after all, discretion is the better part of valor. To me, 'the dungeon' starts the very second first in game word is uttered, not the moment we actually enter the physical dungeon. I believe we agree on this?

In terms of "challenges" and GURPS, are you going to be using the hex maps and such for tactical movement?   

Chris

Maps propably, at least for the beginning. But hex maps in themselves add quite a bit of complexity (or so I've understood, can someone with actual experience on using them comment on that?) so we won't use them, at least not untill we've both got some experience... but that's something that isn't going to become topical very soon.

[Kerstin Schmidt]

And as such, the existance of practically unbeatable dungeon isn't a problem as long as I don't have to go there.

Hi Wallwalker,

Got a real name we can call you by? :-)

I think what Chris was driving at was that unbeatable (or far-too-easy) dungeons may become a problem if the GM creates them without realising just how deadly/easy they are. 

If the GM is running a fair game, he or she will try to give you warning of how dangerous an encounter is likely to be (like having burn marks and huge clawprints show up outside the dragon cave, as you said above) - but the GM can do that correctly only if he knows how dangerous the he has created really is.  If he overestimates the danger he'll give you "scratch marks" that'll make you go into convoluted tactics to avoid a head-on encounter - only to realise in the end that the challenge was easily beatable for you.  If he underestimates the danger he'll let you run into it without special warning - and you may get your character killed without having had much of a chance to deal with the dangerous situation in a smarter way.  Neither of these situations are fun for you or for the GM if they happen by accident, rather than as the outcome of smart or dumb tactics. 

Because of that it might be worth considering playing a few sessions as some kind of training run for both of you:  make up a character, have the GM set up tactical situations and throw them at you, and play through them. Agree to do, oh, say, half a dozen sessions, with the understanding that once you've both found your feet with how to get fun challenges out of GURPS and out of playing together, then to start a "proper game" that's aimed at being a long-standing campaign. Those half a dozen sessions could be one scenario, or six smaller dungeons, or whatever you two find most fun. Just agree that you're not playing "forever" yet.  I know you want a long-term game -but doing a short practice run first and then adapting what needs to be adapted before you embark on the long voyage may be the best way to set up a long-term game that's really going to be fun for you two.

And btw if you haven't already pointed your GM to this thread, you might do so so he or she can join the discussion. Might gain things out of it, too.



Kerstin

[Rob Carriere]

Caveat: I've never hex-mapped GURPS. I have played quite a bit of hex and square-mapped (A)D&Dvx.y, as well as some hex-based war games.

Short answer: If you have a combat that is at all complex (more than a very few partcipants and/or tactical terrain) you want a map. You really want that map. It avoids so many silly arguments of the form "But I thought he'd be behind the pillar" or "I didn't know I could get to the chair in time". You can, quite literally, see what you're doing. Far from making the game more complex to run, it makes it easier. All that brain power that you were devoting to keeping a map in your head is suddenly freed to do fun things like find that amazing maneuver that makes everybody else's jaw drop.

Yes, you do have to learn the mapping rules, but
- in comparison to the rest of the combat rules, that's peanuts
- if you're not using the mapping rules, you'll be improvising all that stuff in the actual combat, which is a lot harder than following the mapping rules.

SR
--

[Ria]

Dear Wallwalker;

I see you know that you want to play one-on-one. That is an excellent step. As far as actual play goes, in my experience, there is only so much preparation you can do before a game. It's just like swimming; you don't learn how to swim unless you get wet.

That being said, playing one-on-one is excellent because problems can be solved immediately (you don't have to wait until your turn or rush) and you are the star. NPCs, as long as they add something, are useful. Try not to have too many NPCs or it turns into a mess. KEY NPCs are excellent, or fodder, etc.

Make sure your GM is cool with taking time-outs if you run into an issue, so you guys can figure something out during a game, as opposed to just before the campaign. Make this part of the process of role-playing rather than something to be frowned on. This makes your experience exceptionally customized and rewarding. Again, since you aren't sharing the GM, this is easy to do. In a time-out it is understood that you are out of character until the game resumes.

Tell the GM you like to (a) come at things different ways, this is the challenge and enjoyment to you; (b) that you might go off path and would like things to be open (or what you would like). See what the GM says, and hash out an agreement that lets him do some prep and gives you some initiative.

You need to say if you want the GM to have a well thought-out continuing story or one-offs. THIS IS CRITICAL - if the GM thinks you want a story, you might not be able to change it much without it screwing up the GM's plans - if you want to have it open-ended, it should be understood that you can effect the story or even leave without finishing the story, or whatever combination you guys hash out.

As far as difficulty levels, being one PC, you can't really take on hoardes of monsters. The GM needs to make sure that battles are fair - more like in the manner of a video game first person shooter for instance, with things like stealth to contact, hide-and-seek, and cover, sneak attacks and the like. Due to the fact there is only one of you, you can take advantage of combat rules for PCs and NPCs. This can really enhance your enjoyment of the game. Make sure you and the GM are both familiar with the rules, and make it permissible to help each other out with the rules, in order to blossom in combat.

Major opposition should be about equal to your average skill level or below. It may be very difficult to take out opposition that is more than 2 points higher than your level, though not impossible. Make sure your GM knows how often you want a lethal challenge like that - i.e., once a week, once a month, etc. It will be helpful for the GM to know how much danger you are willing to take. Like in karate practice, you need to say if it's too much, but the GM will have to learn how to lay it on without it being too thick.

Remember, in a one-on-one GM-PC situation, you guys are really partners. Take advantage of this unique partnership and prepare for some hard fast play. You can really get into to cool strategies and life-and-death situations with the heat turned all the way up because you have no one to rescue you.

I'm not sure what your other questions may be, perhaps you can ask something in specific?

[Callan S.]

Hi Wallwalker,

I developed this in a recent thread. What would you do with it in play?

Danger Point System

1. The GM can add a Danger Point cost to any piece of loot or goody in the game, by clearly stating it has that cost. If the players take or use that item, the GM earns a Danger Point (DP). If the players decide not to take the item, they themselves invent the reason why.

For example:
GM "You enter the cave and on the floor is a rotted corpse, with an ammo clip next to it (and I get a danger point if you take it)
If the players didn't take it, they would have to invent some reason why, like saying the clip is rusted and would damage their weapons.

2. During normal play, if players think a situation/encounter/trap/whatever is too unbalanced/deadly, they can call a Danger Rating (DR). The DR can be any number, but players who call large numbers all the time are probably being wimpy.

The GM has to beat the DR or otherwise he has to withdraw the stated situation/encounter/trap/whatever. Each Danger Point the GM has is worth 1D6. The GM chooses how many points he'll use, if any (he might decide to just withdraw the situation). Sixes are exploding, in that each six rolled means you keep that and roll again. Dice that come up with a one remove one Danger Point from the GM's total (he can't have a negative total though).

If the GM's total roll beats the Danger Rating the player called, the situation/whatever stays. If the roll equals the DR or fails, the situation/whatever is removed.

For example: A player decides to call a Danger Rating of 15 on falling down a rather deep pit because of the damage of the fall. The GM decides to use two Danger Points and rolls 2D6. He only gets a total of four and one of them rolled a one, so the GM loses one Danger Point. The damage is removed, but the GM could still say the PC has fallen down it (a previous, dead victim broke his fall and removed the damage). Then again, the player could still call a Danger Rating on that.