Tuesday, June 30, 2020

How I Roll - The Monty Hall GM

In a way this relates to last week's post about how fast PCs level. It's about the GM who hands out a heck of a lot of toys and treasures during the game. Suddenly the PCs have access to all kinds of toys.

Mind you, I'm going to talk about 3.5 type games. I'm looking at 5e and there's less of a chance of this happening due to the restriction on magic items but it can still be done. Any game where there's loot given out it can be done. And it's far too easy to slide into that problem.

I consider it a problem. Having been on the receiving end I've got the perspective of seeing what happens in the game when PCs have access to really powerful stuff. And I've seen what happens when the GM simply can't keep track of what they've given out.

I'll give examples.

My PC acquired a sentient weapon that also had several magical abilities. We were of a high enough level that it wasn't completely inappropriate. But the weapon didn't have what I consider to be necessary limits on it. That meant every morning everyone in the party could use it to get four different magical effects for the day and we did. By getting those effects (I can't find the card with all of them) we got the benefits of a lot of higher level spells being cast on us in a way that we couldn't have done if we didn't have that shiny toy. It might not seem game breaking but when you have +10 resistance to something and +2 to an attribute and so on and so on it's going to make it so the PCs are more overconfident of their abilities. And it means taking options away from the GM.

My PC also had masterwork armor and enough money was given to us that I could have multiple magic effects put on it. That armor almost didn't need my PC to function at the end. It was impossible to catch me unarmored as my PC had the ability to summon it and be fully armed as a fast action if my PC was within some distance of it. It turned spells. It did all kinds of things. My PC was not just a tank but also some other kinds of offensive and defensive weapon.

Finally I'll get to one of my best stories. It has to do with careful bookkeeping, judicious GM management, excellent dice rolling, and good players. As the party accountant my PC was very careful (that meant I was as the player) to note what we got, how we got it, where we got it, and when we got it. The GM had one of her pet NPCs (who was like 35th level or something) give the party 3 bags of dispelling dust she made so we could accomplish a quest for her. I noted that down. We used 2 of them in the quest. I noted their usage. We never gave back the last one.

In a different encounter a couple of years later we were up against a wizard who polymorphed himself into an adult dragon. This is where it gets fun. I had that dispelling dust and threw it at him. Since it was created by her pet NPC it easily defeated his save and he went back to being a squishy wizard. The warlock turned him into a greasy smear. What was supposed to be a huge boss fight was over in one round.

The GM was upset and asked where we got that. When I pulled out the paperwork and told her exactly what happened she had to accept it. She gave it to us, she didn't remember to ask for it back, we used it in an appropriate situation. It was really her own fault since without that magic item it would have been the big boss fight she prepped.

Side note - she later tried using Mordenkainen's Disjunction on us in another encounter that wasn't going her way. If you're not familiar with this spell it's a nasty one to cast on your players. The short version is that any magic item you're not carrying has to make a saving throw or lose its magical ability. It's kind of the equivalent of trying to take away all the magical loot the PCs have acquired.

The group rebelled and said if she was going to do that then we all quit. We were at pretty high levels so we had a lot of high level magic we'd found or bought. This was seen as the cheap trick it was and we called her on it. She backed down in the face of unanimous group opinion and realized that she couldn't give out stuff and take it back because she got played.

Anyway. To summarize the point of this. Be careful about how much loot you hand out. It's fun to give the PCs stuff they can use. It's fun to give them treasure. But it's also a way to unbalance your game and set expectations that every treasure pile is going to have magic items and piles of gold. Judge it carefully so the loot is appropriate to the encounter. Just don't go the other way and make the players perpetually poor. That's another blog post too.

Tuesday, June 23, 2020

How I Roll - The Level Race

I've played in games where the GM seems to be in a rush to get PCs to higher levels. I can understand that. Lower levels mean lower challenges. Or they have a story they want to get to but the PCs aren't ready yet.

I don't like it.

It's part of my Session Zero to tell the potential players that I level slowly. I want them to be able to explore their new abilities and learn more about their characters before moving up the ladder of levels. I find it kind of sad when someone gains a new feat or skill only to get to use it as their premier shiny thing for a few games before they get a new shiny thing.

I also like challenges suited to the character levels. Yes, kobolds are boring after a while but that's a challenge on me to make encounters that are level suitable but still interesting. It also lets me learn about the players and what they want out of their characters, out of me, and out of the game in general.

I start very low level. Depending on the game and players I'll either start at level 1 or level 3. I want those characters to develop. I want them to learn how best to use the character builds they made. I want them to have time to adjust things that seemed like a good idea at creation but aren't working out in the game.

If we're doing more of a "kill the monster, get the treasure" game then character development isn't very much of a concern to the players. In those cases I'm fine with starting at a bit of a higher level and letting them advance faster. But I end my games at level 20 so the faster you get there, the shorter the game. There's always a trade-off.

Players like to level. It's a milestone. It's a visible show of accomplishment that they've done stuff. I can fully understand that and accept it. It's why I use a combination of XP and milestones (more on that in a future post) to level up the characters.

Another thought to bring into the discussion is that the higher the characters advance the more it takes to get them to the next level anyway. Lower levels means learning the basics. Once you get into higher levels there's more options and more things to do before you move up. At least I like to think so.

I also dislike having characters level in the middle of an encounter. It throws everything off when we're in a multi session encounter and in the middle one or more of the PCs levels. It kind of breaks the scene for me. Suddenly they figured out how to Cleave while they're sneaking through the sewers to find the lair of the offshoot of the assassins' guild? It doesn't make sense. So holding off on it until they've got some in-game down time is my goal.

Other GMs like the race to the top. That's fine. If the players want it too then that's the game. It's yet another reason why Session Zero is important. You need to find out what the players expect in terms of character advancement, which is something not typically discussed. While my preference is for slow leveling if the group wants to go faster I can go faster. It means the encounters will be more difficult to compensate for their faster grasp of skills and feats. As I said, it's a trade-off. And it's completely up to the group as to how to handle it.

Tuesday, June 16, 2020

How I Roll - Cool Points

I like to reward players who come up with really cool ideas and actions. However the dice may not agree with what they want to do. That's where 'cool points' come into play.

Yes. I know many game systems allow for some form of this as part of the rules. If that applies to your game then you're already set.

Cool points are different than inspiration points or bennies. Here's what I do when someone attempts something that is impressive.

Unless they miss the roll by a good chunk of what's necessary to stick the landing I give it to them. That's the reward for coming up with the cool idea. They get to do it. Pretty simple, right?

It means deviating from the strict target number ideas that are embedded in many game systems. It may not be possible if you're playing online. I still need to research that one. But the basic idea is to encourage players to try new things. They may fail, they may not. But they tried.

Honestly I find this applies more to rogues than anyone else. The players who make the fancy rogues tend to want to do the cool things. So I'll use a rogue as an example.

Say the rogue wants to run the length of the table, jump on to the creature's back, stick their dagger into it, then ride down the side of it to the floor while carving a gouge out of its flesh. Pretty darn cool, right?

That's a lot of checks to make if you're going by the book. Off the top of my head that's a jump/acrobatics to get onto the table, a charge (is it 10 feet?), another jump/acrobatics to land on the creature, an attack roll to see if they can get the dagger into it, then yet another acrobatics roll to get to the floor as they intended. That's four or five different rolls and four or five different places to fail.

However it's a darn cool move if they can pull it off.

So. My ruling on this one would be one acrobatics to land on the creature and one attack. That covers getting to where they want to go and sticking in the dagger. If they succeed in both then they're going to do the damage. I'd have them do two damage rolls - the initial hit and then another one for the slice down the side. If I were feeling cheeky or if the player had been overconfident I may have them roll one more time to find out what state they're in when they land but that's situation dependent.

I've reduced the failure points significantly and in my own head I'll adjust the target numbers as I see fit. I want them to succeed on cool things but not if they're way off the mark. If they don't make the leap then of course they're not getting the attack. If they don't make the attack they're not getting the damage. If they don't stick the landing they're going to be prone, if I choose to add that one.

But in all the rolls I take into account the fact that the player came up with a really cool idea and image that they want their character to do. If I don't reward that kind of imaginative play then it's going to discourage them from trying cool things. Which I feel would diminish the player, the character, and the game. Not to mention the example it sets to the other players.

If your game allows for it let your players do cool things. Don't throw the rules out the window but pretend you don't see them if it's going to help the story along and make the player feel like they're made of awesome.

Final note here. Don't forget to reward the player with praise. Bring it up in the game if NPCs saw it. Have a bard put it into song in the next town. Let the character brag about it until the other party members want to smother them with a pillow. But one thing I don't recommend is rewarding them with experience. Not every player can or will try the cool stuff. By rewarding the ones who do with extra experience you're punishing the players who don't. Balance is the name of the game here. They tried something cool in character, reward the character.

And if they roll a 1? See my previous blog entry and be just as explicit about how badly they failed.

Tuesday, June 9, 2020

How I Roll - Critical Fails

I like critical fails, both for my NPCs and for the PCs. I like critical successes as well but that's another post. Note that my games are role play intensive so I have a lot more leeway in the results of a critical fail. If your games are more action focused then by all means keep doing what you're doing.

Critical fails are really just another 5% chance on the dice. In theory there's nothing special about them. In practice it's a chance to have some fun.

Yes. I said critical fails can be fun. Let me explain.

I don't use critical fail charts or any of that nonsense. I don't have a PC shoot one of their party members on a critical fail. I don't have the weapon break. Instead I embarrass them.

Yes. I also consider rolling a 1 on anything to be a critical fail, even when there is no such thing. You cannot critically fail a save or a skill check. Those are all additive results. But again, I like to have fun with them. Because there's always a chance that not only will the PC fail but they will fail in a spectacular fashion.

Mind you this is my opinion and my play style. If you like the charts and PCs getting an unexpected arrow in the kidney then have at. Some of those charts are really creative. It's my personal choice not to use them.

I also don't like the idea that one bad roll is going to take a PC out of the encounter. A broken bow string may not sound bad but that's at least one if not more round out of combat and if there's no cover then they're gonna get hammered. A broken sword has much longer lasting consequences. Yes I know both happen in real life. But this isn't real life unless my real life is very very dull.

Where I find this especially fun is where a character literally cannot fail a check. Sometimes the modifiers are so high that even when rolling a 1 they're going to succeed. That doesn't mean they do it well, which is where the embarrassment comes into play.

The oh-so-confident rogue can easily climb the knotted rope without a skill check but I have them roll anyway and tell them "just don't roll a 1". Which of course encourages their dice to try to do it. If so they still climb the rope but they aren't nearly as cool looking as they want to be, people notice, and/or they end up with visible rope burns from a mishap while climbing. Nothing changes the result - they climbed the rope - but the circumstances around it change the action.

Another example is when someone using a bow rolls a 1. There's plenty of options here. They drop the arrow before they can let go of the string. They snap the inside of their wrist with the string when they release (which hurts like a mofo and is why archers have those protective arm guards). The string snaps back and leaves a visible red line down their face for a day or so. None of them mean that the PC is out of the action or has done anything really bad. But they sure didn't succeed at shooting the baddies.

Let's face it. We as regular old people make mistakes. We trip over nothing then look around to see who noticed. We try to use the car remote to unlock the front door. We drip red sauce on white shirts. We critical fail in real life quite a bit more than we want to admit. And for the most part it's harmless but embarrassing. Bring that into your game - if appropriate - and you'll let the players relate to the PCs more. They can imagine a minor mishap very easily. Let them.

Tuesday, June 2, 2020

How I Roll - The Value of Dice

As you may or may not be aware I collect dice. However this isn't about the monetary value of dice. Because I don't want to disappoint if that's what you were expecting here's a pretty d20:

Chessex Aurora Borealis Confetti d20

This is a Chessex Aurora Boralis Confetti d20. The value of this is approximately $300 to $500 if not more, depending on the sale. Yes. That's for this single die. The last selling price of the set was over $2,000. Needless to say this is a very high end collector set and yes I have the whole set as well as the extra d20. No I did not pay that much for either of them. No I don't bring them to the table.

Now that we have that out of the way let's talk about GM styles and dice.

There's open roll, hidden roll, and what I call pretend roll.
  • Open roll is where the GM rolls in the open and what the dice roll is what happens.
  • Hidden roll is where the GM rolls where the players can't see but still uses the results more often than not
  • Pretend roll is where the GM rolls and may or may not use the results.
Every GM has their own opinions and styles. None of these is more or less valid than the others. I won't get into that argument but I will give my opinions on them. Which is far different than making pronouncements. In my opinion.

Open Roll

I'd say this is more useful for modules when there isn't much in the way of ability to deviate from what's been laid out as the story. Honestly the only thing that can happen that isn't already considered is that the PCs can die. Otherwise they're going to do what the module says and end up where it says. So the dice are only there to find out if they make it or not.

In a less structured game this is a bit of a harsh way to play. It takes a lot of storytelling options away from the GM. By depending on the dice rolls the PCs may not be able to defeat the minions to get to the BBEG and die on the doorstep. They don't see the hidden door.

Some say this is the most honest way to roll dice. I don't disagree with that, if your intention is to have your game driven by random events.

Hidden Roll

To me this means rolling the dice and fudging here and there to make sure that the game progresses in a fun and semi-coherent fashion. The GM may roll a crit but just call it a regular hit to minimize damage. They can use opposed rolls in whatever fashion they like. Or they can use the rolls as-is to keep things more honest.

This combines the random aspect of dice with GM discretion as to when they should take precedence over the story and the table. By relying on them more often than not there is a randomness that makes the game chaotic like open rolling but not as deadly, unless the GM wants it that way.

Pretend Roll

The GM rolls dice, does whatever the heck they were going to do in the first place. The dice rolling is all for show (sound?) so that the players think there's randomness. The GM may even accept some of the dice rolls as part of the game.

This one has me conflicted. On one hand it means the dice don't run the game. On the other hand it means that there is no chance of something wonky but interesting happening. The GM is pure storyteller in this mode.

Summary

I had to make a break so this didn't seem like part of the roll type descriptions.

Personally I go with the Hidden Roll method. I don't let the dice decide my game but I want to give the players the same randomness they have to deal with on their side of the screen. I fully admit I fudge like crazy, especially damage rolls. My dice want to kill the PCs. I won't let them.

I can honestly react to the dice rolls as well which is a very underrated action. The GM is always on stage. The players are looking for non-verbal clues in how you react to what is happening behind the screen. So rolling dice and seeing what they want can give you ideas and even more important a few minutes to think about where the situation is going.

Yes. Dice rolls can also be used to gain precious thinking time.

As I said I don't leave my story up to the whims of shiny math rocks. I use them as tools to help me figure out what I want to happen in the near and mid term encounters. Maybe a dice roll can have long term implications. But I'm always the one who decides that.

As the GM it's ultimately your decision on how you want to use dice in your game. I will repeat that none of these is more valid than the others. It's very much a personal decision on what method to use, unless you're using a rule set that requires a certain method for the GM to roll. If not then figure out which one suits your style, your game, and your players. Then use it. There's no reason you can't use a different style in a different game. Or even change to a different style in the same game.

Do what works for you. The mantra of most of the advice you get when asking how to GM.