collaborative setting creation = fun!

[Darren Hill]

Also, Rich, I have a question about Challenge Ratings: does the CR number assume a party of four? If so, does the XP table in the Dungeon Master's Guide give you XP values to be *split* among party members or XP for *each* party member? 

I'm not Rich (in either sense of the word, sadly), but I'll answer.
CR does assume a party of 4.
The XP table does give XP values to be split up among those participating.

With the assumption of some good experience point bonuses in there for puzzles, good roleplaying, and story goals, you could actually move a bit faster than that.

If you're 'generous' with CR+1 and above encounters, they can advance quite a bit quicker than that.  I only mention this because one of my local GMs discovered this the hard way. Giving the players lots of sub-CR encounters doesn't have anywhere near as dramatic an effect, but might not be challenging enough to be interesting.

[Tommi Brander]

Be careful with orcs. They have enormous capability to take characters out with a single hit. Same with ogres at CR 2.

Regdar's repository in the official D&D forums has some good stuff. For example, the Scene Matrix thread. Also, a poster who goes by the name of one_true_shea has done lots of work with social skills in that forum. Bluff, Gather information, Diplomacy at least. I can't find the others now, dog needs to be taken out. See if some of those are useful.

[Callan S.]

The characters are first-level; this is kind of interesting for me to handle, as a GM. I have to keep things light so as to not wipe out the characters, but I also have to figure out a way to give them fairly heroic things to do.

Is this really just your job, in a shared creation game? Surely you can ask them what threats should be involved compared to what issues. If they scramble for ideas, the traditional movie trick is that a pivotal issue to a greater conflict (like a siege on a castle) can be resolved once a smaller conflict is overcome (getting to the controls of the main gate involves some first level challenges). Also, be sure to ask them about keeping the results rather than fudging. You know the saying, if your fudging, then your using the wrong system! Something to watch out for is that if your sticking to what their characters can handle (rather than hand waving), what that prompts players to do in play.


Hi James,

Intimidate and diplomacy can really be uncool when used by NPC's on PC's. Could you give more info?

[James_Nostack]

Hi James,  Intimidate and diplomacy can really be uncool when used by NPC's on PC's. Could you give more info?

Disclaimer: I haven't played D&D 3.5, but I am intrigued by the potential of the rules. 

Social "combat" in D&D strikes me as a viable mode of challenging the players.
* It allows players to influence important people
* It helps out if the PC's are too weak to fight
* Players hate being told, "You know, you're too intimidated by this guy to fight well."  Instant Arch-enemy.
* It rewards people who put points into the social aspect
* It gives the Bard something to do
* It's one more weakness to worry about in your build

Given that Zac has few players and is wondering about modifying CR's and such, it might turn out that a game with a lot of politics and intrigue would be a better fit.

It's true that it might frustrate players who say, "But, my character would NEVER be diplomacy'd into being friendly," but if you consider the character as more of a video-game avatar, like in Nethack or something, it's just one more weakness to guard against and strategize over.

[Bob the Fighter]

So we had a quickie session on Monday night... it's been a real bear getting folks together to play, even though there's just the three of us. Things went very well once again; we had a little combat in there, a few more dice rolls than before, and a nice new Bang to finish out the session and keep everyone eager for next time!

Doug has been clamoring for a random encounter lately, so about halfway through our alloted session time, I decided the characters were attacked by four goblins, a la woodland ambush, in the middle of the daytime. Now, I didn't just say, "Four goblins burst out in front of you, weapons drawn!" It actually took a couple of Spot and Listen checks to determine there was even a threat, and then an arrow wizzing by to heighten the tension a bit.

There was some fudging of the damage rules during the combat; Amanda was disappointed that shurikens only do a single point of damage each, so she asked the group if she could throw several at a time. We agreed that was alright, and she managed to take out a couple of goblins this way.

The big Bang at the end came about from telling the missing woman's father that she was, well, missing, and then adding in that the last person to see her was the prince's son, etc. etc. Well, he leapt up, grabbed his sword, and charged off to go FIND the prince's son and kill him! So now, since Doug's character is close friends with the young man in question, they feel a bit compelled to stop the lord from taking vengeance. There's also the problem of possible repercussions for a rich commoner taking the life of the prince's son in cold blood, even if it's related to a possible murder/kidnapping. That will mean war for the elves and the half-elves, with the threat of ever-bolder goblin war parties present in the background.

So we'll see what happens when things pick up in session 3; there'll probably be a chase scene of some kind, and then we'll see if Doug will get to use the grappling rules he's been wanting to try out, seeing as they'd better not kill the rampaging merchant. Hooray for cliffhangers and roleplaying XP bonuses!

Actually, a quick last note: I gave by-the-book experience points for the goblin fight, but due to the precedent of giving a lump 400 last session, the players talked me down to giving more experience based on good roleplaying and what I decided ad-hoc was a Key Scene, and therefore worthy of experience points. Thanks to The Shadow of Yesterday for that idea!

-- Zac

[Darren Hill]

I'm not sure but I think I remember reading that you could throw multiple shuriken - something like 1d3 or 1d4. Or is that a different game?

[Tommi Brander]

In 3,0 one could throw 3 shurikens as a standard action. Or something like that.

[Bob the Fighter]

and we've hit a snag.

so. i'm the only one in my group who's ever been to or heard of the Forge. that being said, i was mighty surprised to hear a textbook definition of Gamism from doug tonight. well, that, and i was sad to hear that Gamism is pretty much the only way he's interested in playing D+D.

now, i'm a Libra and all that, so my first instinct was to cut a deal, to make some kind of compromise. but as far as i can tell, the only way to do that is to GM in a way i generally don't (i.e. much crunchier combat, visual representations of combat, etc., so basically, a lot more combat-focus in the game). There's big-time combat and dungeon-crawling and such *down the line*, but not just right this second. 

granted, it's arguable that that's playing D+D "how it's written". that's definitely the intent of the game designers to a large extent, as combat gets a big ol' chunk out of the main book, as do weapons, and let's not forget how many spells are designed with combat in mind. hoo-ray.

anyway, it's disappointing. the three of us are going to meet up and figure out what to do next; i'd really like us to at LEAST pursue this current, fairly small Bang to the next step in the plot. well, what i'd REALLY really like to do is have the freakin' game last more than 2 sessions. argh argh argh

but there's hope. there are other people who are looking to game with me, and Amanda and i definitely share some Creative Agenda preferences (we're both into Sim quite a bit, especially her [Ms. Draw-My-Character-and-the-Whole-Setting]; we both dig drama and a character-centered plot, so Narrativism seems a comment interest, too).

ya know, at one point, i had a similar event in which a player dropped off the radar quite suddenly. it's a good thing i called doug, or he might have tried to just jump ship without ever mentioning what he said tonight ("Out of 10, I'm having about a 3 or 4 in enjoyment.") that other player was somewhat similar to doug in play style, actually: he was really very combat-focused and found the scenery-chewing and plot development booooring. well, one time i asked him to join a game i was running, and he said he didn't like my GMing style. well, after i stopped taking it personally, we talked a bit, and i pried it out of the guy that he was way more into action and blowing stuff up than my games really ever presented. now, that's not inherently a Gamism thing, but i think what he was driving at was that we found different things exciting. disappointing, but there's not much one can do about that.

so i have some perspective on it, but it still frazzles me that Amanda, who's really enjoying herself, gets shafted. should i try to pull doug in more, or should he leave the game and let us find a replacement?

thanks!