Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

/vt/ is now archived.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 165 KB, 500x645, pathfinder.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23658085 No.23658085 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Can you give a longtime player who wants to DM his very first campaign some tips?

I'm going to be running Pathfinder.

>> No.23658105

Be magnificent.

>> No.23658107

Run something better.

>> No.23658114

There's already a Pathfinder help thread up bro

>>>/tg/catalog

>> No.23658140

just my opinion as a player

1: come up with a story but be flexible. if your party doesn't give two shits about your storyline and wants to go fight bandits and slay dragons instead, don't be offended, maybe it's your story's fault. be a grown up, take it on the chin, and come up with something they like

2: seriously, i can't stress this enough, be flexible. you know nothing is as bad as a DM who forces you to do things

3: reward individual players for outstanding playing. storytime: i was playing with three other players, and we were ambushed by bandits. my monk single-handedly killed literally every last one of them and chased their archers into the forest. what was my party doing the whole time? looting, buffing each other, and hiding behind some wagons. not even shooting arrows. end of the session, we all received the exact same amount of XP for that encounter, and that's just lazy IMO

4: be fair. if you're wrong admit it.

5: you're all there to have fun.

i guess the best advice i could give is: you know everything a DM's ever done to upset you? don't do that. don't be that DM.

have fun man, tell us about the story if you want

>> No.23658222

Rookie DM who finally came up with the boss fight he has to run in twelve hours here.

1. Make sure your players AND YOU are having fun. Them not having fun is the only way you can really do this wrong.

2. Whatever you plan will go to shit. You will plan, you will probably over plan, and when it's go time have to throw half of it out. You will learn to bullshit, you will learn to bullshit QUICK.

3.You will do things wrong. You will do a LOT wrong. You will learn. Failure is the best teacher, do not fear it.

4. The rules? Those are for the players. For a DM, they are guidelines at best.

5. If your players give an idea that is better then yours, like a better explanation for what is going on or a villain's motivations. Steal it. Pretend it was your idea all along.

>> No.23658250

>>23658140
>>23658222
Thanks guys, these are good tips. Any more?

>> No.23658343

>>23658250
Don't be a dick.

Don't be passive aggressive.

Don't let players be passive aggressive.

Kick players who shit on your game.

Do not fear mistakes, for they happen to everyone.

Organization is what keeps games going, not the story or fun. You must set up a very specific date, and always play then. (Eg. Saturday Night).

Shamelessly stolen links:

http://www.roleplayingtips.com/
http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/creations.html
http://angrydm.com/2010/08/schrodinger-chekhov-samus/

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?517294-The-Lazy-Man-s-Guide-to-Gamemastering
I like this one.

http://bensrpgpile.com/
http://dungeonsmaster.com
http://www.gnomestew.com/top-30-game-mastering-articles/

>> No.23658374

ugh 3.x gives you brain damage, save yourself the trouble and run it in 4e

>> No.23658383

>>23658374
not op, but i know i'd rather not play world of warcraft: pen and paper edition

>> No.23658400

>>23658383
Yeah because system mastery the game is so great.

I don't know about you but I like playing a game where the rules make sense.

Also, confirmed for never playing 4e, it's nothing like WoW

>> No.23658445

>>23658400
>>23658383
>>23658374

Generic Storyteller/DM tips please, regardless of system.

A great generic DM tip is to make sure your players are having fun, and more importantly, make sure you're having fun with them.

If possible, choose players that share your preferences in gaming. Maybe you really love hacking & slashing. Find axehead players. If you try to force hacking and slashing in a Court game, or a game that's more suited to mystery, your players might hate you.

If, on the other hand, you introduce complex social connections and mystery in a "Kick door, kill monster, grab loot" game, your players will also hate your guts.


Make a paper, and write down what every player loves most, and what his player character loves most.
Then, see what you can give him.
Jake loves fightin, Ace loves Ancient Romans, Jenny loves unicorns.

How about fighting alongside Ancient Romans against Orcs to protect an Unicorn groove?
(I'm too autistical to convey what I wanted. Sometimes, stroke your players dick a bit. Give em what they want.)

>> No.23658469

If possible, play something else.

>4e is good for your first time being a DM
The rules act as a cushion between player and DM. As long as you follow the rules you can create a balanced, technically satisfying game. However, you and your players will outgrow the system as you get better at dungeon mastering.

>Pathfinder is good if you are a player, awful if you're the DM
The amount of feats and rules and sourcebooks makes it a huge pile of indigestible sludge. Making monsters takes forever. Your players will have wild and crazy abilities and you'll just run out of headspace to keep everything cohesive.
It also breeds rules lawyers like nothing else I've ever played.

>Retroclones and other rules-lite offerings
This is for when you are good. There is no rules barrier between you and your players, so an amazing DM will have an amazing game and a mediocre DM will have a mediocre one.
The rules are for you, not for the players. Plus bonus, a newbie can jump in and be playing without you telling them a single thing beyond "you can do whatever you can do irl".
Infinite capacity to houserule means the system can be anything you want.

>One last thing
Pre-planned stories and plots are an exercise in futility. Do so, and you will waste your effort.
However, as a newbie DM with a newbie group, they will need a story to latch onto. Your first campaign can be a plotline, but make sure to open it up as soon as the edges start to tear.

>And the fundamental rule
Don't fudge the dice.
Some people will tell you that a good DM knows when to fudge the dice".
They are wrong.
A good DM knows when not to roll.

>> No.23658481

>>23658445
Sorry if the guide sounds like the ramblings of a schizophrenic. It can be salvaged.

Also, use Combat Manager if you opt to do Pathfinder.
Google it.

Free, fast and a load of fun shit you can use.

>> No.23658489

>>23658469
>Don't fudge the dice.
>Some people will tell you that a good DM knows when to fudge the dice".
>They are wrong.
>A good DM knows when not to roll.

I want to kiss you.

>> No.23658517

>>23658489
It really is the best advice I can give!

>> No.23658528

>>23658469
>Don't fudge the dice.
>Some people will tell you that a good DM knows when to fudge the dice".
>They are wrong.
>A good DM knows when not to roll.

Mah nigga

>> No.23658547

>>23658528
>>23658489
You're fools if you believe this.

>>23658469
>>And the fundamental rule
>Don't fudge the dice.
>Some people will tell you that a good DM knows when to fudge the dice".
>They are wrong.
>A good DM knows when not to roll.

I fudge almost all the time. The trick is not letting the players know. Beat them within an inch of their life slowly, missing crits here and there. Complain that they always kill the monsters too easily. Bemoan the dice, but don't pull every punch

>> No.23658558
File: 557 KB, 1014x3387, StorytiemsCommandments.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23658558

Oh another one of these threads? Hold on, lemme just...

There you go. Pic related.

>> No.23658726

>>23658558
Saved. I'm going to be running a PF game soon and this thread is a godsend.

>> No.23658763

>>23658726
go to bed eric

>> No.23658766

>>23658726
no the DM just fudged the die so you can see it

>> No.23658776

>>23658547
This is exactly what I fear the DM is doing whenever I play, just always keeping the dial one notch below the players. Which is the least satisfying thing I can think of. No matter how strong or weak my character is, no matter how dumb or smart I try to be as a player, the bar will raise or lower itself equally. What's even the point of trying then? I would much rather have a solid difficulty setting of Easy Mode than an auto-adjusting just barely doable challenge.

>> No.23658781

>>23658763
Not Eric, but good try.

>> No.23658819

Biggest tip?

Relax bro, you'll do fine.

That's the one that would have helped me most on my first day, but you actually will. That's all.

>> No.23658916
File: 23 KB, 425x440, punch.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23658916

>>23658547
Sorry bro, but you're doing it wrong.

I can live with people who love a story DM leading them down the daisy chain.
I can live with people who love minmaxing their characters.
I can live with people who think creative, open-ended gameplay is Mother May I.

But what I cannot abide. What I CANNOT abide. Is people who legitimately think that railroading the only random element in the game is a good decision.

If you fudge the dice, you are NOT a good dm. A system with dice is NOT the system for you.
If you've decided the outcome before you roll the dice, don't roll the fucking dice.

Fuck you.

>> No.23658977

On the subject of fudging the dice. I found a very easy way to get around this and to show the players that you aren't bullshitting them.

Roll in the open.

It's what I do on maptool. None of that /rsec nonsense. The monsters roll, the modifiers are there plain as day, and the PCs know instantly just how challenging this shit is going to be and plan accordingly. Sometimes the dice ain't in my favor and the boss dies instantly, in which case I sigh that little GM sigh and move on hoping the next boss will go much better. Other times I'm mopping the floor with the party, at which point I reign it back and start having said boss use its weaker attacks or switch targets, if possible.

And the players love it.

>> No.23659059

>>23658977
I did this, and my players adapted by avoiding as many die rolls as possible.

Cue 4-5 hours of near-constant roleplaying.
It was quite the experience.

They haven't actually fought anything in the last three sessions, and they can't stop telling me how much they're enjoying the campaign.

Here's a tip:
Make the campaign, to you, be about the growth and evolution of your campaign setting, not character plot.
Trying to predict what a player finds fun or work on their character arc is futile, they know that better than you, and your head is filled with charts and numbers, not deep character motivations for 3-8 people.
Let them lead the way, and generate whatever's in front of them.

>> No.23659097

>>23659059
Yeah, the end result of the "open dice" policy is generally the players avoiding fights to begin with. But that is the logical conclusion to a "think harder" policy to the game. My party still wants to see some action from time to time, but not nearly as much as they used to starting out.

>> No.23659254

>>23659097
Introducing the old value looted=exp gained standard helped with this too.

I also adapted some carousing rules from Jrients at Telecanter's Receding Rules.
I also used Zak S's blog post on the same topic.
Unfortunately I can link neither due to spam but google "jrients carousing" or "dnd with porn stars carousing" to find stuff,

Carousing is real neat, and generates a ton of plot points by its very nature. Last session the thief woke up in jail and had a fun-filled The Hangover style session in the city.

>> No.23659325

>>23658916

I agree with this guy.
When I DM...any roll the players are aware of (like an enemy attack or enemy save) is rolled in the open.
I can't fudge.

When I play...I MUCH prefer the DM to roll in the open too.

Hiding combat rolls is for pussies who don't want a real game. The ENTIRE POINT of using dice is that they add a random element. To ignore them is stupidity of the highest order.

>> No.23659693
File: 7 KB, 93x100, shit.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23659693

>>23659325
Plus, the power you can put into a roll is fucking incredible.

Showing the player the die. Saying "If this thing rolls a 13 or over... you're in the negatives".
The way the players, and you, watch the die bounce and bounce and roll to a stop.
The amount of tension present in that one single, completely random roll of the dice.

It is an incredible feeling.

>> No.23660006
File: 1.23 MB, 2560x1920, Mexican_Standoff_Con_Style_by_cpi[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23660006

Listen to little things the players say. If they suggest that the NPC who you've had helping them might be plotting against them, consider taking that and running with it. It will make them feel smart.

Find a good balance between winning and losing. Players who always succeed (because you're using GM fiat, or encounters are too easy) won't have fun. Drama comes from failure. It's alright for things to go wrong. If they're starting to lose an encounter, give them a chance to surrender and throw them in a jail. Just make sure not to stall the plot. Maybe they get the location of the maguffin via a guy who used to work for the BBEG who's locked up in the next cell. Fail Forward. Their time at the table is valuable, don't throw away 2 hours and leave them with nothing to show for it.

If you've got serious roleplayers at the table, don't shy away from intra-party drama. If all the players are mature enough, and really want to get something out of the roleplaying, then you should give them hooks that could potentially cause a rift between their characters. That way it's up to them whether they take it or not. The most fun I've ever had GMing was watching my players pacing back and forth and wringing their hands as we played out a mexican standoff scene where their characters had opposing goals. Everyone went home talking excitedly about the session we'd just had even after one PC shot another.

>> No.23660349

>>23658085
After a while you'll begin to suspect it anyway, so here it is for you to start digesting now: CR, as a system, does not work. It's fucking broken and meaningless by later levels. What this means for you is that you'll have to pay attention to how your players handle combats with various enemies and eventually your instincts on what they can handle will be *far* more relevant to planning encounters than the CR system.

>> No.23660414

>>23660349
It works if you use the point buy system in the front of the book.

Higher stats bend the CR system, but it usually solves itself if you max out the monster's hitpoints. The saves against the monster abilities usually only skewed badly for rogues since they have the only saving throw that isn't backed by a desperately needed stat - reflex - in comparison to casters and melee characters).

If you have your players roll for stats, or if they start off with anything like than two 16s and a 15, the combat probabilities are immediately skewed in the PC's favor.

>> No.23660464

>>23659693
>>23659325
>>23659097
I roll dice randomly sometimes. No explanation, no words of suggestion, no comments, just, "Hmn." or "Okay." Soemtimes they mean something - a perception check on a player's behalf, a saving throw for disease, or sometimes they may mean nothing at all. It keeps the players guessing, which is never a bad thing. It increases tension for those close-to-the-end fights. I make about 3-5 rolls like this every session....in the open...and my players never know what they mean.

>> No.23661340

>>23660464
So on a different topic: perception checks are bad and should make you feel bad.
If you're running a system with perception checks, remove them.

>> No.23661415
File: 154 KB, 498x383, marisa palmchin_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23661415

>>23661340

I like the idea of making perception checks something the players can't see so as to immerse them more in the characters, but am trying to reconcile it with the fact that I think dice need to be rolled in the open

The only two things resembling a satisfactory conclusion I've found so far are A: find the average roll of your preferred dice system, add it to the player's modifier, and do a flat check to see if they notice something, and B: have the players roll perception in advance, write down what they roll, and then check off the results as perception checks are called for

I'm not entirely sure I'm satisfied with either of these solutions

>> No.23662166

>>23658776
>>23658916
>>23658977

I play 2e and start players at level 1.

If I don't fudge it's TPK end of story.

So you can tell me that I'm the devil for fudging, but you're wrong.

>> No.23662229

>>23662166
I run 1st edition rules as written and that's not true at all unless you're running four person parties.

AD&D is meant to be a 6-12 person party. If you're wiping everyone at first level it's because of stupidity, most likely on your part.

>> No.23662386

>>23662229
>Place monsters that make sense, not balanced to party level
>Make encounter tables with monsters that make sense, amounts that make sense and rarity % that makes sense

No it's more like in combat if you get hit once you're probably dead.

>> No.23662498

>>23662166

Well this kind of points to your system being kind of shit, now does it?

>> No.23662524

>>23662386
It's actually get hit twice and you're dead unless you're a wizard on the receiving end of an orc, but generally my players are better equipped to deal with those terrifying goblins with heir 1d6 damage with no bonuses.

By no means has AD&D ever really been a steady stream of low level TPKs unless your DM or party or both are colossal retards.

If you're going to get butthurt about the play something else, but stop screaming "It's broken!" because you've clearly never really played 2e.

>> No.23662534

>>23662498
No, it points to him being a retard.

>> No.23662539

>>23661415
>I like the idea of making perception checks something the players can't see so as to immerse them more in the characters, but am trying to reconcile it with the fact that I think dice need to be rolled in the open
I tend to ask for perception checks if the players are going to be ambushed, or if they're actively looking around; if not, I roll perception in secret.

Then tell them things in secret when they pass in secret.

Players often tell everyone else in a second anyway, though.

>> No.23662557

>>23662539
You're under no obligation to show the dice. Only to be fair and truthful.

Originally only DMs rolled dice.

>> No.23662662
File: 121 KB, 1600x1200, 1257376082506.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23662662

>>23662557
>You're under no obligation to show the dice.

Yeah, no. Roll open or go home

>Only to be fair and truthful.

How do you determine if a GM is fair and truthful and not just making up whatever the fuck he wants to ensure the plot goes as *he* wants?

Oh, right, because he's fair and truthful. Otherwise he wouldn't be the GM

>> No.23662763

>>23662662
If the players are not having fun, then the DM is shit.

>> No.23662818

>>23662763

That's cool, but that's not what you said, so yeah

>> No.23662833

>>23662662
If the players (and the DM) are having fun, the DM could be fucking the players in the ass as a mechanism for deciding who wins in a fight; there's no rule saying "you must roll in the open" apart from what the players decide is fun or not.

>> No.23662878

>>23662662

>Oh, right, because he's fair and truthful. Otherwise he wouldn't be the GM

That's the idea! Or are you constantly playing with groups of people you don't like? Why would you do that??

>> No.23662914

>>23662662
If my player said this to me, I'd look him in the eye and say....

"You honestly believe that makes one bit of difference? What makes you think the numbers I'm using are the same as in the books you memorized? I'm not here to be fair. I'm here to let you have fun with your friends. If you think me rolling dice in the open means one bit of difference when I can modify the bonuses and penalties of a monster before you ever fight it, what difference is looking at a die roll going to really be?"

If he tries to argue that point, he's not worth my time because he's not playign for fun, he's playign to win, and that's the worst sort of playign in any RPG - even worse than THAT GUY.

>> No.23662960

>>23662662
>Oh, right, because he's fair and truthful. Otherwise he wouldn't be the GM
The GM isn't there to be fair and truthful; he's there to make the game fun for the players and himself.

If the players find it more enjoyable for the GM to roll the dice in the open, then it would be expedient for the GM to roll dice in the open.

If the players would not wish to have their immersion in the game spoiled and prefer the GM roll perception and sense motive and such in private, then it would behoove the GM to roll in secret so as to make the game more fun for the players.

If the players all decide that playing out the the gangbang rape in real life on the girl who has those rape-fantasys, and the GM and she agrees, then so be it, if it's fun.

>> No.23662978

>>23662833

Ah yes, the fabled "b-but muh players are having fun" argument.

Look. Nearly every argument that is spun as a positive for fiddling with dice is the byproduct of players using shitty systems. D&D, for example, where low levels are more like a casino where the loser is fed into a meat grinder. When you discover *good* systems, IE any one with someone who actually has a rudimentary grasp of mathematics and/or a fate point style system, these "b-but muh players are dying to random kobolds" problems disappear. And then? All you're left with is some guy who can, at any point *he* feels like it, can strongarm the plot to where *he* wants it to go.

You can try to diffuse this fact with as many "BUT *GOOD* GMS-" arguments as you want, the fact remains that it's pointless to roll dice if some faggot has the power to decide the results before they're even rolled.

>>23662878

I just feel like rolling dice should actually, you know, involve the possibility of the story *not* going exactly as the GM thinks it should. Why do you like railroading your players, Anon?

>>23662914
>what difference is looking at a die roll going to really be?

Because, thrash against the reality as you may want to, I'd rather know that that clutch victory against the BBEG was because the dice fell where they did. Not because the GM decided we should win before we even rolled initiative. Sorry if you can't deal with that

>> No.23663068

>>23662978
>dice are the only way to maintain the reality of the players having an effect on the game
The fact that you think this tells me the only GMs you've ever had are shit GMs. If all the dice rolls are in the open and the GM tells you what every single roll means and when you need to make them, you're no longer playing an RPG, you're playing a boardgame, with all the number crunching minmaxing that leads to.

>> No.23663100

>>23663068
>If all the dice rolls are in the open and the GM tells you what every single roll means and when you need to make them

And that's when you went maximum faggot, Anon. Never go maximum faggot.

All I said is a GM should actually say "Roll (insert stat here)," and do it in the open. Why are you so afraid of letting the dice manipulate your special snowflake plot?

>> No.23663120

>>23662978
>All you're left with is some guy who can, at any point *he* feels like it, can strongarm the plot to where *he* wants it to go.
Bitch, the GM can do that all the while rolling dice right in the open. A good GM can do so effortlessly without being caught out while the players are having fun in the meantime.

>> No.23663161

>>23662978
This whole argument is pointless. We were arguing about the GM rolling in secret or not, not whether the GM is fudging the dice rolls.


Would you never ever accept the GM rolling dice in secret for perception rolls, even if the GM has a guy standing behind him ready to ritually disembowl him if he lies about the die results? If he was doing the perception and sense motive rolls in secret so you don't know if there is anything important to see unless you pass the test?

>> No.23663164

>>23663120
>A good GM

Stop that. A "good player" can just as easily tell when your "good GM" is shoving the die around with his dick until he gets the result he wants. I should know, I've seen through it a dozen times, and every single solitary time I ask myself why we even bothered rolling the dice.

I'll reiterate what a few other posters said, whom I agree with

>>23658916

Like, the entire post

>>23659325
>Hiding combat rolls is for pussies who don't want a real game. The ENTIRE POINT of using dice is that they add a random element.

So if you want your freeform, that's cool buddy. But I signed up for a game, not your fanfic.

>> No.23663190

>>23663164
>fudging dice = no rules

Full autism right here folks

>> No.23663204

>>23663100
Why should a GM be forced to inform you of any secret passages, hidden treasure, or other things that your characters wouldn't necessarily realize were there? Why is it unacceptable for a GM to reveal the enemy is palming a grenade using slight of hand in a skill vrs skill system? And if he doesn't feel that your character should die because of a luck crit because you'd be forced to sit out the BBEG fight that you haven't reached yet, why is that unacceptable to you?

Every single system ever written says the GM should occasionally cheat in the favor of fun. If you can't handle that, you're in the wrong hobby.

>> No.23663206

You make the story around your players actions, they are not actors playing parts in your story, they are characters with their own free will, treat them as such. If your barbarian wants to kill your quest giver wizard NPC because he deeply distrusts magic users, and thinks he is cursing them then go for it, let him do it, don't get pissy and have a shitfit because he killed your special little Elminster 2.0, give him some realistic consequences instead, do the guards find out? Maybe he was part of a mage's tower, and his fellows are now hounding the party every step they try to take.

Maybe all these things only affect the barbarian, maybe the whole party gets implicated. Are they going to sell him out? Are they going to band together and help him?

Don't get pissy at your players when they don't do what you want, roll with it, it is a great chance for you to become a better DM, just try to make sure they're doing things like that for IN-CHARACTER reasons, like aforementioned Barbarian has a very good reason to kill men in dresses with pointy hats etc, but a Paladin of Pelor has little reason to harm anyone without serious proof of their evils, so him going on a killing rampage because his player is bored is unacceptable and you should talk to him out of the game.

>> No.23663233

>>23663190
He does have a point, D&D/PF are systems steeped in libraries full of rules, if you're just going to ignore most of them and make up the results you should use a simpler system, although I guess that won't give your players the false sense of rng as much.

>> No.23663242

>>23658085
>DM his very first campaign some tips?
Talk to your players ALL AS A GROUP TOGETHER BEFOREHAND AND WORK OUT WHAT YOU WANT TO PLAY AS A GROUP AND MAKE LINKED BACKSTORIES.

Or at least backstories that might be good together. And see what they might like in the game.

>> No.23663255

>>23662818
You're not very smart, are you?

>> No.23663269

>>23658916
Yes, because you like sitting their waiting for the other players to resurrect your ass because an unlucky shot killed your character at the beginning of the session.

Stupid GMs railroad. Smart GMs let their players play.

>> No.23663296

>>23663233
And one of the first rules in the GM section is "cheat if you need to to make sure your players are having fun."

It's in the rules.

>> No.23663320

>this die fudge arguing


Why do you ever need to hide dice in PF, just don't tell your players exactly what you're rolling all the time unless it's appropriate. They don't need to know that Harkas the Mage is using insight or what his bonuses are, you just roleplay his reaction depending on the roll. They should be there to roleplay not rollplay really.

The same applies if there's an ogre trying to grab you, you just say the Ogre makes a grab for you with it's meaty hand and roll your d20, and ask the players CMD, then just say whether it grasps you in it's pudgy digits if it hits, whether it narrowly misses and the ogres hand passes over their head as they duck, or if they they spring completely out of the way or wrestle it off etc.

If you want to fudge it just change the outcome.. you don't need to tell them the fucking +s on his grab for gods sake.

>> No.23663375
File: 33 KB, 302x300, 1278879128792.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23663375

All this talk on fudging dice, geez.
Here's the way I see it. I roll my dice behind my screen most of the time, mainly because there's no reason for the party to see it. It's all inner calculations to see what happens next while their walking down the forest path talking to each other. I'll roll out in the open when it's a really intense roll, like if someone is about to die because he fucked with poison and got shit on. That shit goes out in the open and the silence and tension is amazing as the die bounces and rolls.
And then, every once in awhile, I'll push the dice.
Not often, not to make it easy-modo. I'll push it if the player has had a shitty session so far and he's not enjoying anything. Let's say the monster rolls to hit and get's just over his AC, again. I'll roll it back a few numbers.

Now again, i don't abuse that. It wouldn't be fun if I did that for every fucking thing. Just once in awhile. And the players never know.

>> No.23663408

>>23663161
>Would you never ever accept the GM rolling dice in secret for perception rolls

I wouldn't, actually. I'm >>23661415

I am trying to determine if it's better to simply not roll on the basis that rolling is pointless if a player isn't directly involved, or roll but in such a way that the players are on some level aware of what's up. If you just flat check whatever your system's awareness stat is to see if they notice something, then that is fair because people with good awareness will notice things while people without it won't notice things, and the players will feel that their character's traits matter even if dice aren't being rolled. If you roll but do it in advance and "check off" rolls as they are "used," all in secret mind, then the players at least know they rolled a die and can know that hey, the next thing that's coming, they're gunna fucking notice it! Or maybe they won't. That sort of thing

>>23663255
>"You're under no obligation to show the dice."
>'I think you are.'
>"If your players aren't having fun, then your GM is shit."
>'That isn't relevant to whether or not a GM has an obligation to show the dice, but okay.'

Apparently smarter than you, chucklefuck

>> No.23663498

>>23663375
If you listen to the anons here then you're worse than hitler and you ruin the game entirely.

>> No.23663507

>>23663408
>Has full autism
>Thinks he comes out better than another anon

You're both slapping your dicks against each other and you're both retarded

>> No.23663517
File: 15 KB, 233x241, well the important thing is you've found a way to feel superior to both_1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23663517

>>23663507

>> No.23663583

>>23663517
Or he could just think everyone on the board is retarded, as it should be. You, I, that other guy who posts all the reaction images. We're all retarded and ready to sperg it up at a moment's notice.

>> No.23663610

>>23663583

Fair enough

>> No.23663635

>>23663517
>Posting XKCD

AHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAAHAHAH

OOOOH OOOOOOOOOOOOH OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH

>> No.23663652

>>23663408
Why not? Is it because you don't trust your GM?
Why do you need the dice to be rolled in the open if you trust your GM?

If, for example, he would show you your rolls for the session after finishes, but not in public before?

>> No.23663728

Die fudging stuff is entirely dependent on your group and your DMing ability.

Can you roleplay well enough that your group can take hints and react accordingly? Are they aware enough of the setting and the quirks of various abilities that they might notice some hooks you're dangling in front of them when you do this roleplaying?

If the answer is yes, you can show rolls and be as honest as you want. Your group has enough skill to challenge the system and beat it fairly.

If the answer is no, delicious fudge awaits. Your group doesn't have enough knowledge of the system to play it without at least a slight handicap.

>> No.23663757

>>23663728
Yeah no.

Your entire argument is only shit people fudge but it's more like you fudge to make sure lelrandom doesn't ruin a game

>> No.23663810

>>23663635
>Mad because it's accurate

>>23663652
>Why don't you submit to this warrentless search, citizen? If you didn't have something to hide, you wouldn't resist!

Stop trying to make this into a "y u no trust" issue. If players have to show their rolls, so does the GM. You can trust someone all you want, but they're still human, and prone to the same biases everyone else is. The dice exist to free us from those biases. If you're rolling them, but not paying any attention to what was rolled, why the *fuck* are you even rolling?

>>23663757
>but it's more like you fudge to make sure lelrandom doesn't ruin a game

>>23662978
>Look. Nearly every argument that is spun as a positive for fiddling with dice is the byproduct of players using shitty systems. D&D, for example, where low levels are more like a casino where the loser is fed into a meat grinder. When you discover *good* systems, IE any one with someone who actually has a rudimentary grasp of mathematics and/or a fate point style system, these "b-but muh players are dying to random kobolds" problems disappear. And then? All you're left with is some guy who can, at any point *he* feels like it, can strongarm the plot to where *he* wants it to go.


TLDR: No, fudging dice isn't okay because you play a shitty system. It's a half-assed slapped together bandaid on an ailing cancer patient

>> No.23663823

>>23663757
My entire argument is that if you're talented and know the system well that you'd anticipate the possibility for shit rolls and prepare yourself for them! Granted there's only so much you can do, but the odds of getting THAT fucked are extremely slim - and if it happens, it's legendary. (IE "kill self and on adjacent creature")

>> No.23663866

>>23663810
>Stop trying to make this into a "y u no trust" issue. If players have to show their rolls, so does the GM. You can trust someone all you want, but they're still human, and prone to the same biases everyone else is. The dice exist to free us from those biases. If you're rolling them, but not paying any attention to what was rolled, why the *fuck* are you even rolling?

Because the GM may have had issues with the players metagaming when they fail perception rolls in the past.

"Roll perception" "I got a 1, +5 bonus gets 6."

"The forest seems rather cheerful today, the sun's shining happily."

"I take out my bow and start calling for my wolf familiar to scout around us."

"...Why? You can't see anything wrong."

"Exactly, things always go wrong when you least expect it. Everyone, up into battle formation!"

>> No.23663883

>>23663866

Sounds like you should stop playing with shit players then

Or consider my solutions as detailed in >>23661415

>> No.23663910

>>23663810
>If you're rolling them, but not paying any attention to what was rolled, why the *fuck* are you even rolling?
And after rereading what YOU said, you're not getting my point.

The GM has stated that he's paying attention to what he's rolling on behalf of the players, and is not fudging the dice. What's wrong with him rolling in secret to see whether you notice the spy tracking you on behalf of the ambush or not?

>> No.23663944

>>23663883
Rolling in advance will just have the players saying "Well, we're fucked for the next ambush, better stay wearing our armour all the time so we can be prepared for the time we get ambushed!" or "Hey GM why didn't we see that *thing that occured*, we rolled really well!" and then get pissed when you say "that allowed you to notice the way through the maze, you wasted your good roll on that".

>> No.23664035

>>23663866
The old way to handle those problems was to make rolls ahead of time.

Have each player make say ten d20 rolls, then start at a random point on the list and use those for those secret checks. You can do the same for NPC's.

>> No.23664085

>>23664035
At that point if your GM wants to fudge, it's just as easy to fudge stuff and say "yeah, you used up your nat20 on spotting the giant spider, and got your 1 on the trap" or vice versa. And rolling in the open becomes just as pointless if the rolls aren't attached to a particular action/skill.

At some point a level of trust would be required between GM and player.

>> No.23664148

>>23663810
>Mad because it's accurate


Nope, amazed that someone on /tg/ wastes their time with such drivel as XKCD.

Amazed that someone would be stupid enough to admit that.

>> No.23664170

>>23663910
BECAUSE FUCK I DESERVE TO ROLLL MY SUPER SPECIAL D20 THAT I ONLY ROLL FOR PERCEPTION CHECKS ITS SUPER LUCKY FUCK YOU RAILROAD BAD DM

GOD DAMN I MUST WIN RPGS

>> No.23664287
File: 69 KB, 323x832, 1305041931972.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
23664287

>>23664170

Oh, hey, we've gone full strawman? Kickass

FUCKING PLAYERS EXPECTING TO PLAY A GAME. WHY CAN'T THEY JUST APPRECIATE MY STORYTELLING GENIUS AND SIT BACK AS I TELL THEM EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS?

>>23664148
>Someone posted a screencap of something. He must be a huge fan of its source material!

Yeah, okay guy

>> No.23665246

Most of my players have terrible attention spans.
They lose interest too quickly.
Middle of battle (6 rounds in) they start getting up to get food, smoke cigarettes or go to the bathroom.
I'll kill either them or my creature on the spot.
Most of the time it's my creature.
Thing is they make one another bored.
They carefully plan out how to tiptoe into the room and kill everything as efficiently ass possible. All that caution makes combat take forever.

I've tried introducing different techniques to just get them through it.
Had more enemies close in from behind in waves.
Had a countdown to total destruction of the dungeon.
Gave them incentive to get the last hits on creatures with magical amulets that reward them.
They just put one another to sleep.

I thought maybe it was me. They assured me I wasn't the problem. I played a game as a PC (only once) and the same shit. The setting was described eerily the monsters were walking in and out of walls. Great fun. Until combat started.

>> No.23665379

>>23665246
>They assured me I wasn't the problem.

They're lying

>I played a game as a PC (only once) and the same shit.

That GM suffered from the same problem

Sounds like a case of combat not being colorful or emotionally gripping enough for them. Which I can relate to, because I've seen a lot of GMs turn combat into some kind of Bingo night shitfest where you're just wondering how many whacks it's going to take before the bad guy dies and you can continue with the story

Try to work on your presentation. Use a grid if you're not already doing so to help them visualize what's going on. Work on making things more descriptive. Do NOT, DOOO NOOOOT get too caught up with any one person's round time. If needbe, make a house rule; announce what you're doing in a minute or less or you forfeit your turn. It depends, but this often prompts players to pay the fuck attention to what's going on so they can plan things out *before* they actually take their turn, so they know what they're going to do before their turn even comes up

Basically, think of ways to make combat actually feel as intense and exciting as it's supposed to be

>> No.23667407

>>23665379

Thanks.
I need people to tell me I'm doing it wrong when I am. Everyone who plays is so opposed to the idea of ever once being GM in my group that there are no games without me making them.

Come to think of it I could add more descriptions. I started using flashcards to keep track of everyone's turn in combat, because they never know. Maybe I'll put their card in their hands and treat it like a delay. to give it back to me when they are ready to jump back in.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action