|
Post by greatwyrm on Jan 20, 2013 14:18:30 GMT -8
Does anyone have a link or title for the Triple Ace Games product with the deconstruction of the pulp plots?
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Jan 20, 2013 15:46:00 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by greatwyrm on Jan 20, 2013 18:02:04 GMT -8
Aha! I guess it pays to listen closer. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Jan 20, 2013 19:45:23 GMT -8
Aha! I guess it pays to listen closer. Thank you. lol I'm just happy I wasn't completely out in left field with what you were looking for. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Jan 20, 2013 21:10:08 GMT -8
The Adamant title is the one I was thinking of.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 7:13:30 GMT -8
Mind you, I'm only 40 minutes into the episode ...
Re: when to roll:
I'm siding with Stu's intuition—the climbing roll wasn't necessary.
I say it wasn't necessary because it didn't get to the stakes of the action/exchange/scene, which I gathered was: Did we make a clean escape?
The perception check at the top of the tree was reasonable, although I might not have called for that either, given there wasn't anything there and also a rather routine action. Maybe the players' efforts deserved a clean escape with no complications.
The difference between the climbing example and the hacking ones is, in the latter case, the skill is clearly related to the stakes of the scene: Can I snag the intel, turn off the alarms, etc. without alerting anyone?
Further, when a player comes up with a genuinely good idea (I'll climb a tree to see if we're being followed) and that idea is negated due to die rolls, it can be frustrating (agency destroying). Not all good ideas require die validation; they can be recognized and rewarded on their own merits.
The way things actually went in Stu's game, with skill checks, might have been genuinely entertaining to the players. I hope so! Still, I think it would've been perfectly appropriate to skip the rolls—player declares actions, you describe results, and then move on.
... I'm off to listen to the rest of the episode!
|
|
freyki
Apprentice Douchebag
Posts: 86
|
Post by freyki on Jan 21, 2013 7:31:35 GMT -8
If any of the Brown coats want more Shepard Book background, including the death scene that SHOULD have been shown in Serenity, I recommend the Dark Horse graphic novel, Shepard's Tale.
All of the Firefly graphic novels are really good, but this title is hands down the best, in my opinion.
Well worth the read.
-Freyki-
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2013 8:10:00 GMT -8
I only get to listen to podcasts in 30-minute chunks as I drive to and from work, so I'm not even as far in as jonmcnally at this point. But my quick take on rolling to climb a tree is this: I'd ask for the roll, but failure in this case wouldn't mean that the character screwed up. It just means there's some external problem. Simple failure means none of the trees he climbs really afford a good view, or the ones that do are just too spindly and thin to support even a halfling's weight. Or maybe there's a strong wind blowing above the trees, and as an experienced acrobat he knows enough to not risk climbing up into that—casting a failed roll like that is a good way to alleviate a player's frustration. That way, they don't get the information they wanted to get by succeeding, but it doesn't negate the character's abilities, either.
A critical failure (the 18) would mean something happened to the halfling on the way up the tree. Since this is a wilderness environment, maybe he disturbs a bees' nest or gets bitten by a spider, and has to climb back down without accomplishing his goal. Nothing serious, since it's not a serious situation, but he's discomfited and it costs the party a little something (healing magic, a poultice, time, or whatever) to deal with it.
That's how I tend to deal with failures and rolls that aren't strictly necessary. It doesn't completely negate the player's decisions or the characters' abilities, but does depend on defining what players get out of a success.
|
|
|
Post by muntjack on Jan 21, 2013 8:50:52 GMT -8
I'm on the fence with the regards of when to roll. In the example that Stu presents, our characters were somewhat stressed out. We were not sure if anyone was following us. However, we had some time to work with before anyone would get to us. If I were running the game, I probably would have done with Stu did, but like Stu I would have thought to myself, "Why did I make him roll that? What would have come from it?"
Sure, my halfling character could have fallen. He might have broken a leg or something. But what would that add to the story? Would it add tension? Or let's say he fell but made some reflex roll and caught himself in the branches. My nimble little halfling would have probably just climbed back up anyway. And what if he fell from the botch and died? I think I honestly would have felt pretty cheated if my halfling acrobat fell from the tree and through one roll cracked his skull on the drop down.
The thing about knowing when to roll is difficult from a GM standpoint. On one hand, you always should ask yourself if the roll will really mean anything. However, you have to keep in mind that players love rolling dice. If I had to choose, I would probably fall more toward Stu's thoughts on the matter and only have them roll in case of a stressful circumstance or if the failure would actually make a major difference in the story.
Now with regards to the perception check, I'm glad he made that one. It created a humorous moment, and my halfling made some new lumberjack friends that could possibly come in handy sometime down the road. Who knows? Also, it made me want to actually create a character that's a true horse collector!
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jan 21, 2013 11:25:29 GMT -8
As a system, I engage new players with the dice mechanic as much as possible within their first in-game day. I don’t make them roll for each step but for tasks like hunting (yes, they really hunt in-game as a combat) and climbing trees. I do not ask players to read guidebooks so this is the time to engage with show and rather not immerse with tell.
As for rolling when it is not “necessary,” I like to have the players do that when I feel they are inactive and, again, I keep it to tasks. The climbing tree and perception rolls are good examples.
But as for any excuse that heralds advancing a story (Dance my puppets!) I would rather not speak of it. First, I do not and /should/ not know where the players take their story decisions in my world so it’s rather imperial of me to do something for an advancing the story reason, and, second, player agency or bust! This “advances the story” business gets under my skin the same as “GM’s PC” gets stuck in Stu’s craw.
The characters, as a party, may not have a story – for many good, solid player agency reasons including premature death. But the players, my focus as GM, all have characters to play. I look at adverse things happening to the players’ PCs as opportunities for the players to develop their PCs’ characters within the game. I prefer those bad things to happen on the road to battle, when failure represents character development through adversity, rather than in the battle itself, which represents simply the death of a player’s PC’s character. They say a good story is built on characters so I try to give players opportunities to make those decisions while they are playing together.
A thought that hit me while I was listening.
"Adversity does not build character, it reveals it." - James Lane Allen, American novelist.
|
|
|
Post by yojimbohawkins on Jan 21, 2013 14:44:23 GMT -8
"Adversity does not build character, it reveals it." - James Lane Allen, American novelist. Hmm, I thought that was Dodgeball. Anyway, back to the whole die rolling thing. To use the Halfling in the tree example, I would only have insisted on a skill roll in specific circumstances. Stork raised a point about the Halfling being preoccupied as he was climbing, therefore not paying as much attention as he should, so a skill test was required. I would only apply that if the player stated his character was concerned about it. If he was just checking for pursuit on the off chance someone was following them, then I would not apply a skill test. To do so in that case is essentially telling a player how his character is acting and feeling, which crosses a line. The player is in control of the character, not the GM. Additionally, what does it really add to the story? There's more important things to get on with, although having said that, I speak as someone who uses random encounters on a regular basis! >D
|
|
|
Post by henryhankovitch on Jan 21, 2013 16:34:50 GMT -8
I recognize that it shouldn't be done enough to be tedious, but rolling for the chance of pratfalls can add to the game through comic relief rather than drama. When the bard hits on the tavern wench, we really want an excuse to see him get slapped in the face. And who doesn't want to watch a halfling fall out of a tree, hitting the ground with a sound like an amoral, thieving, out-of-tune sack of potatoes?
|
|
|
Post by Vernicus on Jan 22, 2013 6:14:00 GMT -8
Hi Ho!
There was an actual play podcast mentioned in this episode that I cannot locate. Drunk and Dragons? Drunken Dragons? Did I mishear? Am I hallucinating? Anyone recognize what I am referencing?
Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jan 22, 2013 7:13:33 GMT -8
Hi Ho! There was an actual play podcast mentioned in this episode that I cannot locate. Drunk and Dragons? Drunken Dragons? Did I mishear? Am I hallucinating? Anyone recognize what I am referencing? Thanks! dndpodcast.com/
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jan 22, 2013 10:06:55 GMT -8
My personal opinion is that I would have not required the climb check, but had him roll the perception check. The climb check was inconsequential IMO. But, the perception check allowed for a good twist depending on the success or failure. And I think that the misdirection that Stu threw into the mix was a brilliant interpretation of the critical failure.
What I find interesting is that Stork and (I believe but may be mistaken) JiB both said that they would ignore the critical failure on the perception check.... Which would be fudging the die roll....
|
|