|
Post by SavageCheerleader on Dec 15, 2013 10:22:53 GMT -8
I am currently GMing a Pathfinder game, mostly out of desire to actually play. In my area, 99% of gamers are in the "d20 or bust!" camp, so I conceded to run PF. So up front, no I am not overly enjoying myself, but the game is not suffering. They get 100% of me as a GM, but in my heart I know it could more fun (maybe just to me) in a different rules set. Anyway, enough about me.
We are not using XP, we are using level up when it seems good, which is every other session now. I put them on the accelerated track for PF advancement, but that will still mean it will be...July until they hit 9th level.
And that is another thing, I do not like running high level adventures, or adventures after 9th or 10th level. They are just...I don't know, un-interesting and get super high fantasy weird. So, the story concept does not go beyond 9th/10th level.
I really do not know if I can make it with my sanity intact to July/August for the campaign finale. Yes we are having fun in general, however...
BASIC: I need to end the damn campaign in a couple of months without it seeming like it went too fast. And keep it fun.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Dec 15, 2013 10:55:00 GMT -8
First question: does the Campaign finale require they be at the 9th/10th level cap? If yes then you could plausibly 'level up' off camera and between sessions ie: during an appropriatly protracted intermission between adventures- "it's been several months since your encounter with the dreaded toe sucking cult of Cheezijam, in that time you have all been busy studying, training and perfecting those skills that make you famous . . . gain two levels' Aaron
|
|
|
Post by SavageCheerleader on Dec 15, 2013 11:37:41 GMT -8
First question: does the Campaign finale require they be at the 9th/10th level cap? If yes then you could plausibly 'level up' off camera and between sessions ie: during an appropriatly protracted intermission between adventures- "it's been several months since your encounter with the dreaded toe sucking cult of Cheezijam, in that time you have all been busy studying, training and perfecting those skills that make you famous . . . gain two levels' Aaron Thanks for ideas. It does not require they reach that cap, it is really just an arbitrary point at which the players normally feel they accomplished something (completed a quest and made significant advancement), are recognized heroes everywhere, and begin to seriously influence the world. It is in my psyche from the old 'Name Level' of OD&D. They could, in theory, figure out what is going on and kill the BBEG now. Or at least try to, and then spend the rest of the game hunting him. I did think of the one or two times off camera level jump...time spent on a journey from A to B. Use the Savage Worlds dramatic interlude idea and have the tale told be the adventure which took place during that time. Not a bad idea man...as a player, would you feel cheated/hurried?
|
|
oldnemrod
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 92
Preferred Game Systems: WOD (old and new), 4E DnD, Shadowrun, 5E DND,
Currently Playing: Star Wars Saga Edition( I'M A MANDALORIAN!)
Currently Running: 5E Hoard of the Dragon Queen
|
Post by oldnemrod on Dec 15, 2013 19:09:04 GMT -8
If you want to get them involved in other systems, why not try incorporating mechanics from other games into it. Pathfinder characters with Fate points and one Aspect? Bennies and exploding die? Could pique their interest into asking about the systems.
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Dec 16, 2013 0:03:41 GMT -8
If you want to get them involved in other systems, why not try incorporating mechanics from other games into it. Pathfinder characters with Fate points and one Aspect? Bennies and exploding die? Could pique their interest into asking about the systems. THIS! I've been sneaking my d20 addicted crew bits of SW, Apocalypse World, advantage/disads...not a perfect fix but yeah helps these Luddites try something new.
|
|
|
Post by SavageCheerleader on Dec 16, 2013 13:44:54 GMT -8
I actually do use elements from Savage Worlds, Dungeon World, and well, run the game as I always run games: fast and loose with a yes and attitude. I do fear that they will see nothing special about any other system however if they have the experience, more or less, in PF. Maybe I need to go RAW...
|
|
|
Post by Arcona on Dec 17, 2013 1:51:08 GMT -8
It is always easier to transition a group that likes you, your style and your GMing.
So in the past our old DM had run AD&D 2nd for us, then 3.X and then we moved onto WoD that was his true passion. If he came to us when we were 16 and said 'hey lets do Vampire' most likely it wouldnt have worked as we were too much into AD&D at that point.
So that is my first advice. Stick with Pathfinder and although its not your thing, put the effort in until the group wants you as their GM so much that they stick with you in another theme.
As for your issue I would advice that instead of just hand waving a period of time you actually do downtimes. Meaning since your players become higher and higher in level and influence do some non-combat non plot line sessions where they put that influence to work.
Taking an interest in helping support a small community (someone becomes Mayor of the town or Sheriff or patron or something) or get invited to court to advise the king/duke/whatever and get into some politics/intrigue.
Then after the PCs have made those ties you ask them to do downtime for a few months (as the trail has gone cold, things are quiet or whatever fits). At the end of the few months (game time few months, this all could be a session or two) you can level them if you want to.
As for leveling every 2 sessions... why did you implement this? I also usually just tell players 'and now you level' but there is no set time (2 sessions, 2 combats or whatever). Just when I feel they would have learned something extra AND they need more power to take on the next challenges (without making them a cakewalk) they level.
I dont understand the dislike for high level but I guess its just your thing but consider also going out of your own comfort zone and running something like that. It doesnt have to be epic levels but it still can be high level and high level challenges. I realise high level campaigns require MUCH more effort from the DM (making a 15th level NPC wizard for example takes hours) but they are also more rewarding some times due to the freedom you have in trying things (classes, monsters, ideas) that would be impossible for lower level PCs to survive/solve.
|
|
|
Post by SavageCheerleader on Dec 17, 2013 8:57:08 GMT -8
It is always easier to transition a group that likes you, your style and your GMing. So in the past our old DM had run AD&D 2nd for us, then 3.X and then we moved onto WoD that was his true passion. If he came to us when we were 16 and said 'hey lets do Vampire' most likely it wouldnt have worked as we were too much into AD&D at that point. So that is my first advice. Stick with Pathfinder and although its not your thing, put the effort in until the group wants you as their GM so much that they stick with you in another theme. As for your issue I would advice that instead of just hand waving a period of time you actually do downtimes. Meaning since your players become higher and higher in level and influence do some non-combat non plot line sessions where they put that influence to work. Taking an interest in helping support a small community (someone becomes Mayor of the town or Sheriff or patron or something) or get invited to court to advise the king/duke/whatever and get into some politics/intrigue. Then after the PCs have made those ties you ask them to do downtime for a few months (as the trail has gone cold, things are quiet or whatever fits). At the end of the few months (game time few months, this all could be a session or two) you can level them if you want to. As for leveling every 2 sessions... why did you implement this? I also usually just tell players 'and now you level' but there is no set time (2 sessions, 2 combats or whatever). Just when I feel they would have learned something extra AND they need more power to take on the next challenges (without making them a cakewalk) they level. <> It fits with the accelerated track of advancement in Pathfinder for one, and for another, it shortens how long I have to endure PF. We only play twice a month, if lucky, and I won't run PF for the year or more it would take to "actually" level up (i.e., around four sessions per level as advised by the core 3E/3.5).I dont understand the dislike for high level but I guess its just your thing but consider also going out of your own comfort zone and running something like that. It doesnt have to be epic levels but it still can be high level and high level challenges. I realise high level campaigns require MUCH more effort from the DM (making a 15th level NPC wizard for example takes hours) but they are also more rewarding some times due to the freedom you have in trying things (classes, monsters, ideas) that would be impossible for lower level PCs to survive/solve. <> I simply do not find them interesting. Combat becomes unbearably long and the PCs are basically broken and super-heroey at this point. This attitude is not unique, hence the Epic 6 movement was born. Me, I like the idea of Epic 9. That gets the PCs to Name Level and they can still dig into those higher CR foes.
<> The things you mention about GM time is one of the reasons I dislike d20, especially at higher levels. Too much crap jammed in there now. Feats, almost all combat focused, Skills, many combat focused, Spells to the absurd, etc. i cannot wait for this PF game to end.
|
|
|
Post by guitarspider on Dec 17, 2013 12:31:14 GMT -8
I'd say drive the story, hard. You don't want high levels, so why make them get up there even faster? Level nine is just an arbitrary excuse to stop the story, but if the story's done earlier, it's done.
Also, you really don't sound like you're having fun with Pathfinder. Which means you should talk to your group about that. It may not be easy, but ultimately you'll need to convince your players to play something else, or you'll just find yourself in the same situation again.
If your players enjoy your fast and loose/yes and style, you can surely make an argument that this other system really allows you to work with that part of the game that they enjoyed and it'll be even more fun that way. It's really easy to run two or three Dungeon World/FATE/whatever sessions and then reevaluate as a group as well, so it's not like you need to tie them down for months.
|
|
|
Post by SavageCheerleader on Dec 17, 2013 12:49:29 GMT -8
I'd say drive the story, hard. You don't want high levels, so why make them get up there even faster? Level nine is just an arbitrary excuse to stop the story, but if the story's done earlier, it's done. Also, you really don't sound like you're having fun with Pathfinder. Which means you should talk to your group about that. It may not be easy, but ultimately you'll need to convince your players to play something else, or you'll just find yourself in the same situation again. If your players enjoy your fast and loose/yes and style, you can surely make an argument that this other system really allows you to work with that part of the game that they enjoyed and it'll be even more fun that way. It's really easy to run two or three Dungeon World/FATE/whatever sessions and then reevaluate as a group as well, so it's not like you need to tie them down for months. Yep, the story arc is the meat of the game. it should be wrapped up no later than that level, so it is just a rough gestimate. d20 demands discussing things by level, given the power structure of the rules and action economy. And nope, I loathe d20. I am all smiles and catering to the players just as I would any other game I enjoy. I have not made the approach of let me show you your PCs in X system...let's try this for a session or two. It might work, but then again, we could lose players. Sort of a shitty spot. We are only coming up on our third session. Yep, that early into it. Maybe I will build some PCs today...
|
|
|
Post by guitarspider on Dec 17, 2013 13:20:03 GMT -8
It's a tough spot to be in, admittedly. But ultimately, as I said, you'll need to talk to them if you want to get out of this situation. I'd probably try to finish the PF game, seeing as the group seems to be fairly new, and in the meanwhile sow some seeds for a game change. If you're afraid your players might feel pressured and/or drop out, maybe just bring up whatever system you'd like to run in conversation and see how they react. Best of luck.
|
|
|
Post by Arcona on Dec 17, 2013 13:42:52 GMT -8
Just one comment... in my experience combat in higher levels and especially when you reach Epic is anything BUT slow. Its actually rare for it to take more than 2-3 rounds exactly because of the high power of the spells, attacks and abilities.
I find low level combat the most boring because you generally have 1 (or maybe 2 if you are a fighty type) a round and if you miss... well thats it. Given an group of enemies with a dozen hit points require 2-3 hits each and given that you hit 1 every 2-3 hits the result is a combat that lasts for ever.
As opposed to a high level combat where the wizard can say ' I cast empowered maximised enervation and then I use my rod of quickern to cast it a second time ' (for those not well versed in 3.5 that means -12 levels as per level drain with no save) and then the rogue says 'now that he is -12 levels I just sneak attack spit on him. Does he die?'
|
|
|
Post by SavageCheerleader on Dec 18, 2013 1:49:47 GMT -8
Just one comment... in my experience combat in higher levels and especially when you reach Epic is anything BUT slow. Its actually rare for it to take more than 2-3 rounds exactly because of the high power of the spells, attacks and abilities. I find low level combat the most boring because you generally have 1 (or maybe 2 if you are a fighty type) a round and if you miss... well thats it. Given an group of enemies with a dozen hit points require 2-3 hits each and given that you hit 1 every 2-3 hits the result is a combat that lasts for ever. As opposed to a high level combat where the wizard can say ' I cast empowered maximised enervation and then I use my rod of quickern to cast it a second time ' (for those not well versed in 3.5 that means -12 levels as per level drain with no save) and then the rogue says 'now that he is -12 levels I just sneak attack spit on him. Does he die?' Not so sure about that. I am a DM and player since 1982, and it remains much the same at high levels today as it did back then. The PC party may possess lots and lots of neat little tricks, but the enemy also possesses them: hundreds of hit points, spell immunity, spell resistance, spells and spell like powers, etc. that is the point, it all scales together. And, yes, very low level can be very boring. The sweet spot really is right around 6th-9th level. Hell...I would not mind running an Epic 6 game wherein the PCs start at 6th, but only advance as per E6 or Sean Reynolds Step Advancements.
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
Post by maxinstuff on Dec 18, 2013 14:50:58 GMT -8
Doesn't Pathfinder have optional point buy rules for character gen? Could this be adapted to level advancement.
A more incremental advancement might help with giving your players the feeling of progress.
Level based advancement always kind of bothered me. It is a challenge in my current game I am running because the players aren't going to level before the current arc ends but I really wish I could give them something to show them they are progressing (apart from XP which they are getting).
I will be running either Shadowrun or GURPS as my next campaign for this reason (among others).
As an aside - my players have only ever played Pathfinder and d&d4e prior to my DCC game. I guess it was an easy sell being fundamentally similar, but I have found that they really like the change of tone. When 3 characters got killed by a trap that triggered a room to collapse it was like the most dramatic thing ever.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Dec 18, 2013 16:40:31 GMT -8
Doesn't Pathfinder have optional point buy rules for character gen? Could this be adapted to level advancement. A more incremental advancement might help with giving your players the feeling of progress. Level based advancement always kind of bothered me. It is a challenge in my current game I am running because the players aren't going to level before the current arc ends but I really wish I could give them something to show them they are progressing (apart from XP which they are getting). I will be running either Shadowrun or GURPS as my next campaign for this reason (among others). As an aside - my players have only ever played Pathfinder and d&d4e prior to my DCC game. I guess it was an easy sell being fundamentally similar, but I have found that they really like the change of tone. When 3 characters got killed by a trap that triggered a room to collapse it was like the most dramatic thing ever. 'Save or Die' that's the piece they left out of later iterations of D&D that made it tense and exciting. The key to replacing level advances is to include roleplaying stuff . . . increases in wealth and, most of all, INFLUENCE - once humble adventurers they now become Nation builders and Kingmakers. The investment is in being able to affect the game world on a grander scale without having to rely on GM caveat etc to keep the pieces moving in the background ie: the PC's are now moving the pieces for the GM . . . Aaron
|
|