Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

++++This is written with a clear understanding it is my own opinons and views, and not meant to deride or attack anyone elses++++

I, like most of us I'm sure, have realized at one point or another that there are a few different "styles" or "approaches" to RPing. You've got you Kick-in-the-door-kill-the-monsters/baddies-take-loot-Repeat people, on the other hand there's the more in-depth RPers who like to act out every single NPC encounter, down to haggling over every last copper on every purchase when resupplying in town, and the various degrees in between. I understand that cetain games may lend themselves more toward one particluar approach than another, and this can play a part in whether or not a person decides to try (or continue playing) a specific game.
While I have long viewed myself as a more middle of the road type (as I do really enjoy creating characters and their backgrounds, as well as kicking monster-@ss and taking their shiny stuff), lately I've come to realize I prefer a game with a more defined combat system, like lets say, DnD 4th ed. I know a lot of old-school gamers who deride it as a board game, or so stripped down and combat-centric that theres not much RPing to it. (Which is a point I disagree on - the amount of "character" you bring to the game is something established by the players and the DM/GM/Storyteller.) I have simply found that many games (and or the GMs running them) are a little too "loose" with the combat rules.

Point 1: Combat is central to many RPGs. Its the "meat-and-potatoes" if you will. It's where most of your character progress (XP, etc.) is derived from. I think its important enough to approach practically. I'm not a big fan of having to ask for constant clarification during a battle because distances/ obsticles/ terrain are never clearly defined. And no, a rough sketch won't always do it.

Point 2: Character matters. If it didn't, we'd just be making stat lines. (Which, as I write this, I realize that's essentially what many players do. Hmmmm...) I don't really care for games/ campaigns that are essentially one fight after another, punctuated only by dividing up party loot and re-stockng/ upgrading. I like feeling that the character I made has a personality that drives him (or her, or whatever) to do what he does, and I mean more than just what catchphrases he shouts during combat.

So what to do? I've been thinking about a game (or maybe just a way to run an existing system) that has the best of both worlds. I mean, one where your characters backstory has an actual effect on the compaign/ storyline, perhaps as a springboard for adventure starting points, or perhaps involving NPCs from the characters past? I don't mean that every adventure/ session/ etc. need be specifically about the characters, but hell, SOMETHING that personally involves them in a story more the "Lord So-and-so will pay you X amount of gold to rid his lands of the dragon". I know that what we do in-game can affect later adventures, and many (if not most GMs do this already, but I guess I'm just after something that gives a little more depth to the character, something that shows that they "existed" before the first game they were used, and didn't spontaneously pop into being once the game began.

I realize that my personal RPG experinces color (or pehaps flat-out define) my views here. Any thoughts or views on this?

Good History from player will do that, Aurelia has amazed me with some of hers, like the Werewolf with about five pages of key diary entries to mark out important moments of her life.

Of course if you are talking about some sort of system, the Storyteller Merits and Flaws system is a good place to start. I heavily modified it for my own fantasy setting, even allows classes to start with things they shouldn't, like say Magic for a Rogue.

As to combat, oddly I've barely rolled any combat dice in the past five years, I let the characters roll and then react based on that. I find the games much more fluid that way.

My current thought is to focus on setting player expectations. Don't demand deep backstories, as that will just offend people. Make it known that what they provide will be used and, specifically,t hat it will be used in a positive way.

By that last part, many RPG gamers are used to backgrounds being used to screw over their character. have a brother or sister? Expect them to be kidnapped or killed to move the plot along. The players need to know that if they give the GM a plot-hook like that, it will be a positive thing: even if the sibling is kidnapped, the player will be 'compensated' by getting some cools tuff as a reward for rescuing them.

For at least some campaign ideas, I have fiddled with ideas of specific questions. These tend to be somewhat campaign specific, but to use 40k RP as a theoretical example, if I was running Deathwatch I'd want to know what would cause each player to break orders.

Again, these need to be used such that they aren't to screw the player over, but to make things more interesting. Saying, "Oh, you could've accomplished your mission but you went off to rescue that puppy since you said your Space Wolf had a soft spot for digs" isn't fair. "You took on the extra risk of running through that Tyranid hive with three Shih Tzus and a Dachshund on your back even though it made things much more difficult. That's worth some extra renown, and you've got a favor from their owner. "

To quote (paraphrase) a certain site.

There a two types of RPGers. Roleplayers and Rollplayers.

Aye, oddly I've never encountered the later, although as the focused DM/ST for the past twenty-two years thats probably as I can count the number of chronicles where I got to play on one hand.

So probably guided most folks down the other path.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:oddly I've never encountered the later

Then consider yourself lucky.

Point 1: Get a dry erase board and some minis. You will be glad you did. It has a way of clarifying everything about combat, from who is where to why X cant see Y and who steps on the floor glyph........

Point 2: I often give the characters their backgrounds rather than have them generate something random that may not fit the story. Of course if someone creates their own I will look at it and use it if possible. I find its a nice way to explain any special skills they may have and to drop some seeds for a story hook.

I have dealt with both types of players and found that it usually only takes a small push to get them twoard that illusive middle ground. Some of the Roll- people really liked the NPC interaction, mainly because they had never had the opportunity to do it before.

Then again there was one player who just attacked everyone and everything.
I took him aside and explained to him that his character was acting like a homicidial maniac and not a lawful good dwarf. He was quiet for awhile but next game he really changed his tune and became one of the best players I have ever had in my games.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Good History from player will do that, Aurelia has amazed me with some of hers, like the Werewolf with about five pages of key diary entries to mark out important moments of her life.

That's a little... awesome. actually. At first, it sounded like a bit much, but really, that's a creative, effective way to describe the character.

As to combat, oddly I've barely rolled any combat dice in the past five years, I let the characters roll and then react based on that. I find the games much more fluid that way.

I'm curious to hear more about how that works, on your end, at any rate.

Balance wrote:My current thought is to focus on setting player expectations. Don't demand deep backstories, as that will just offend people. Make it known that what they provide will be used and, specifically,t hat it will be used in a positive way.

By that last part, many RPG gamers are used to backgrounds being used to screw over their character. have a brother or sister? Expect them to be kidnapped or killed to move the plot along. The players need to know that if they give the GM a plot-hook like that, it will be a positive thing: even if the sibling is kidnapped, the player will be 'compensated' by getting some cools tuff as a reward for rescuing them.

Completely agree.

snurl wrote:Point 1: Get a dry erase board and some minis. You will be glad you did. It has a way of clarifying everything about combat, from who is where to why X cant see Y and who steps on the floor glyph........

This is why I like D&D 4th ed.s system; the grid map(I know there are some systems with a hex map or similar.), defined movement and types of movement, etc. As a player (or a DM), it gives your brain a good foundation when you’re picturing the action.

Point 2: I often give the characters their backgrounds rather than have them generate something random that may not fit the story. Of course if someone creates their own I will look at it and use it if possible. I find its a nice way to explain any special skills they may have and to drop some seeds for a story hook.

Myself, I prefer coming up with my own rather than being told. However, I know some players aren’t as comfortable or concerned with creating their own backstory. Providing a background is a practical way to approach it, and I think that a large part of the GM/DMs responsibility is to keep the game and story moving along smoothly.

Wolfpack of One wrote:
I don't mean that every adventure/ session/ etc. need be specifically about the characters, but hell, SOMETHING that personally involves them in a story more the "Lord So-and-so will pay you X amount of gold to rid his lands of the dragon". I know that what we do in-game can affect later adventures, and many (if not most GMs do this already, but I guess I'm just after something that gives a little more depth to the character, something that shows that they "existed" before the first game they were used, and didn't spontaneously pop into being once the game began.

This is a necessity. Any game I've ever played in/run that didn't get players personally involved never lasted beyond the third session. There are many easier and more rewarding games to play if you're looking for pointless hack-n-slash. Generally I find it works well to unite the party in some mysterious means, and then begin to explain why that happened later.

I agree about the history thing also. I'm finally returning to a game we put on hold for the last 4 years in 3.5E Ebberon because one of the guys who had been an integral part of the game moved back to town. I have a journal that I put nightly entries in concerning our exploits. It actually exists in game with some pretty nasty protection on it. It got to the point where I got so detailed with it that the DM actually started borrowing it to refer to specific dates particular events occurred. In celebration of the game starting back up, I have a nice leatherbound book with a quill pen that I intend on using to continue to chronicle events.

Something else I LOVE are props. I've gotten numerous complements on my games because I bust out letters either hand written (I've got a legible but shaky handwriting that looks cool coming from certain characters) or printed in a script font, then crumpled up and dyed with a teabag to look yellowed and old. For the final step I seal it with sealing wax and stamp. One of the guys in my Ravenloft game was superstitious and had an acorn necklace that he rubbed for good luck. One day he arrived to play and I had a acorn with a hole drilled through it for a necklace waiting for him. A lot of times, the little things like that help draw people more into character and give a better game overall.

Nice, sounds like we have similar thoughts on running interesting games there daedalus, props an all.

Although I must admit with the current roleplaying arrangement it hasn't been as dedicated as I have done in the past.
Just Aurelia and myself at the moment. Which is fun, but I am still yearning for a group on occasion. I'm typically running two to three group npc's atm, which is fun, but a little mind boggling at times.
Especially when they are talking to one another, and I'm also dealing with an antagonist or two.


@Wolfpack of One - Aye, she's quite dedicated at working on history, always has been. I remember one where she had log entries, Police reports and a investigator (might have been a scientist - edit think it was a Psychologist) making a study on her character, that all came together as the character history.

Oh and the diary I mentioned above, had loads of pics (she's an excellent artist) that looked like they where photo's stuck into the diary, with the character pointing out snipbits via text around the photo's.
As a DM/ST you can but marvel when someone passes you something like that and opens up plot ideas you didn't even knew you had before you saw it.

As to the combat, it runs smoother than you might think, I found a good while ago that often my games had five to seven players and combat really slowed it down.
So it started with me just ignoring rolls if it ruined the moment, as in my npc got a critical shot that would have killed a player. I've never been in it for the rules, more the story anyways. After a while I barely found myself rolling.

I know how I want the scene to go, I can react to the rolls of the player. Unless they have put themselves into a seriously stupid situation, I'm happy for combats to live on the basis that the player is usually only in deep trouble if they botch/mishap on a roll.
I will allocate damage if the combat is a bad one, trying to go three on one when they have weapons ready and such, but I just tend to wait for the roll, then narrate the combat around the rolls made.

I'm just happier that way, as the DM/ST I see my roll more about telling an interesting tale, than letting bad luck on the dice end a excellent story or character.
I admit some won't like that method, but it works for me.

daedalus wrote:....I have a journal that I put nightly entries in concerning our exploits. It actually exists in game with some pretty nasty protection on it. It got to the point where I got so detailed with it that the DM actually started borrowing it to refer to specific dates particular events occurred. In celebration of the game starting back up, I have a nice leatherbound book with a quill pen that I intend on using to continue to chronicle events.

Something else I LOVE are props. I've gotten numerous complements on my games because I bust out letters either hand written (I've got a legible but shaky handwriting that looks cool coming from certain characters) or printed in a script font, then crumpled up and dyed with a teabag to look yellowed and old. For the final step I seal it with sealing wax and stamp. One of the guys in my Ravenloft game was superstitious and had an acorn necklace that he rubbed for good luck. One day he arrived to play and I had a acorn with a hole drilled through it for a necklace waiting for him. A lot of times, the little things like that help draw people more into character and give a better game overall.

Thats awesome man! Note taking, especially in long-running campaigns is extremely helpful, if not crucial. (Not to mention the cool factor of recording your party's badassery for posterity!) Having the journal exist in-game is a great twist. As you mentioned about props in general, stuff like that serves to draw people more into character, which IMO leads to a more satisfying game. Now that you bring it up, props are one thing that I think has been missing for my gaming history. Any DMing I do in the future will most likely include some. (love the letter ideas; genius.) Of course, you don't want to go overboard with the props - then you might as well be LARPing. Not that theres anything wrong with LARPing; it's just not my thing


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:....Although I must admit with the current roleplaying arrangement it hasn't been as dedicated as I have done in the past.

Having dedicated, consistent game attendance is rather central to a great gaming experience, speaking mainly as a player. As the occasional DM it is as well, but mainly for technical or er, logistical reasons.

As to the combat, it runs smoother than you might think, I found a good while ago that often my games had five to seven players and combat really slowed it down.

So it started with me just ignoring rolls if it ruined the moment, as in my npc got a critical shot that would have killed a player. I've never been in it for the rules, more the story anyways. After a while I barely found myself rolling.

I know how I want the scene to go, I can react to the rolls of the player. Unless they have put themselves into a seriously stupid situation, I'm happy for combats to live on the basis that the player is usually only in deep trouble if they botch/mishap on a roll.

I will allocate damage if the combat is a bad one, trying to go three on one when they have weapons ready and such, but I just tend to wait for the roll, then narrate the combat around the rolls made.

I'm just happier that way, as the DM/ST I see my roll more about telling an interesting tale, than letting bad luck on the dice end a excellent story or character.

I admit some won't like that method, but it works for me.

Which is the most important thing right there: if it works for you and your group. Thats another big thing; finding the right group of people, the right chemistry/ combination of player preferences and expectations and DM/ST style. I do prefer a more structured form of combat, even as far as rolling damage and such, but I am with you 110% that running a game is more about keeping a good, engaging story moving than simply killing the PCs. The way I look at it, there has to be some element of danger, i.e. the PCs should be at real risk/ combat should have consequences or there's not much of a sense of accomplishment. However, as a DM/ST, you have a responsibilty to more than just follow printed rules. Bad dice rolls, or damage you roll from an NPC/ trap/ whatever (in most cases) should not result in a PC dying. That just sucks. So many things have to be kept in balance (mostly by the one running the game), but in these cases, I think player satisfaction trumps straight printed rules.

Wolfpack of One wrote:
Thats awesome man! Note taking, especially in long-running campaigns is extremely helpful, if not crucial. (Not to mention the cool factor of recording your party's badassery for posterity!) Having the journal exist in-game is a great twist.

The best part was the deliberate way that I skewed minor details to make it seem like I was always the hero and when something went wrong, it was due to someone else messing up. It was just a little inside joke between the DM and I. Always drove the other guys nuts too when I told them that I was sitting on the back of the wagon writing in a book, and then actually doing it at the table in front of them. Years later, the other guy who's been in the game since the beginning still has no clue what exactly I've been writing.

As you mentioned about props in general, stuff like that serves to draw people more into character, which IMO leads to a more satisfying game. Now that you bring it up, props are one thing that I think has been missing for my gaming history. Any DMing I do in the future will most likely include some. (love the letter ideas; genius.) Of course, you don't want to go overboard with the props - then you might as well be LARPing. Not that theres anything wrong with LARPing; it's just not my thing

Yeah, I'm no LARPer. As a rule, I ask myself when developing props: Does this contribute to the story or atmosphere? If the answer is yes, then I do it. If not, then I should spend time developing the game in other ways, rather than making something that just sounded cool at the time. Something I've always wanted to do, but lack the artistic talent for, was make an actual cloth map for the group.

Create factions in game. Allow the players to create "relatives" or "acquaintances" that have minor in-game effects, but also provide story and other motives. Writing tons of back story does jack I've found, because most players will glance at it then toss it down. Less than one page of text on a handout, please. Let the players help make the back story, involve them in creation of the world (to a degree, obviously) and they'll love it.

Edit: @WoO: The only negative consequence of combat doesn't have to be death. If they characters actually care about their reputation, protecting their home or land, losing their job, really any other motivating factor, it can be terribly significant. Combat in any world is just as likely to be non-lethal as lethal, and some guy coming to mess you up and make you look stupid is sometimes worse than dying.

Yeah, folks still roll botches and mishaps, and theat can make things turn sour. If I want to bring out an emotion I'll hit a trusted npc or friend of the character in game, that tends to get more interesting results anyways.
I will also admit I don't 'not roll' for ever game, I'm just so relaxed with my fantasy setting, and WoD that I've moved beyond the need to dice.

If I play something like Dark Heresy, where its a bit more fatal and I don't know the system inside out, I tend to keep up with the rolls.

Oh and regarding the group Wolfpack, its ordered, just only two of us, but that has it's advantages, we've been known to play three of four nights in a row if we are into a character.
At the moment so far this year I'd average it out at almost two nights a week. So we are having fun.

I am currently running four npc's in her group at the mo mind.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Edit: @WoO: The only negative consequence of combat doesn't have to be death. If they characters actually care about their reputation, protecting their home or land, losing their job, really any other motivating factor, it can be terribly significant. Combat in any world is just as likely to be non-lethal as lethal, and some guy coming to mess you up and make you look stupid is sometimes worse than dying.

Oh, absolutely. That, I think, has more to do with your intent as GM; why the combat is occuring/ where you intended it to lead. Of course theres always room to change your mind/ adjust direction on the fly. I was just referring mainly to situations that, as the GM/DM/ST, you know will kill the PC if the combat rules (damage, etc.) are followed to lthe letter without regard to the PCs overall experience. You're completely right though, death is not the only possible risk or "negative" outcome of a fight. Not by a longshot.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Oh and regarding the group Wolfpack, its ordered, just only two of us, but that has it's advantages, we've been known to play three of four nights in a row if we are into a character.
At the moment so far this year I'd average it out at almost two nights a week. So we are having fun.

Thats awesome. Unfortunately for me (or maybe it really is better off this way ....) my wife doesn't play I've tried...Oh, how I've tried. I have a group that I usually play with every Saturday night for the most part. I love the consistency, and the people; they've come to be some good friends of mine - I met them through gaming. I do wish They were (as a group) a little more open to other games. Mainly they stick to 2nd ed. AD&D, Paladium fantasy, and Shadowrun (4th). Historically, I've played Star Wars (D20), D&D (3.5 and 4th - what can I say? I only really started gaming like 7 yrs ago) and even a little TMNT and Other Strangeness. I've always been interested in, but never played, Dark Heresy (well, I played a one-off game. Not too bad.), Deathwatch, Werewolf: Forsaken even bought the books), Exalted, and now I just (today) found out theres a Dresden Files RPG!!!?? (Sorry. Thats a topic for like, a whole other thread. Love the Dresden Files books!)

I am currently running four npc's in her group at the mo mind.

As I believe you mentioned before, I bet thats a spot of work. Essentially you're playing 4 characters at a time, plus NPCs. Hats off to ya mate.

I think a VERY important rule to live by as a GM is that the PCs can always win. They can always beat your cool, really well thought out villain that you have wonderful plans for in two rounds of combat before he even finishes his opening monologue. The trick to being a good GM is responding to these events fluidly and realistically, while still providing a gripping story. It's a pretty fine balancing act, but most of us are GMs because we love a good story.

By the same token, if a player is continuously being a dumbass, I don't feel bad for killing him if that's what happens. Players have to feel iike the threat is in some way "real" for their characters.
Oh and definitely a big +1 on letting the players create some of the backstory. Some of the best stuff we've had has come from players inventing holidays and festivals that they celebrate "back home". Anything good like that, you store it for later use.
Lastly, community is the most important thing to get right in any urban setting. Players can gloss over a lot of stuff, but I find a proper, reall feeling community immerses them in your world like nothing else.

+1 on the community. It can blow a PC group away when they return to town and find themselves celebrated as heroes. Or when they are met by an angry mob........

Da Boss wrote:By the same token, if a player is continuously being a dumbass, I don't feel bad for killing him if that's what happens.

Amen brother
Thanks for the response everybody. You've all given me some great ideas. Plus, it's nice to just get some feedback on certain things.