"Same problem with Star Trek Next Gen - oh well, if we use a cascading inverse tachyon pulse to interface with this previously unknown alien device we can wrap the show up in...uh...10 minutes, not counting commercials. Make it so!?"


Sorry this made me think of:

"So bounce a particle beam off the main deflector dish, thats the way we do it here, we make shit up as we wish!"

From Voltaire "SS Make Shit Up"

Above all, my preference for a GM is one that realizes that they are not playing against the players rather that they are providing a service to the players and moderating the environment.

I'm with you on this one. D&D is not a screw-your-neighbor game. Unless everyone is playing evil characters, in which case, they might as well just screw d&d and pull out Frag.

I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you guys on this. Not to say that D&D doesn't - and shouldn't - have cooperative elements between the GM and players, but an adversarial style can really push players (and PCs) to a new level, when done right. And with a balanced set of rules, it's not just an exercise in PC killing, it's a contest of wills (and skills) where the PC group and the GM try to out-think each other. Granted, it's not for everyone, and it's not the style that's popular nowadays, but it's still a perfectly valid method of gameplay.

I never said that the GM and PCs were allies or even friends, the GM is akin to the players and not even part of the PCs world, rather the GM is the sole responsible person for operating their world, both for the good and the bad.

And, for what it's worth, if I'm "just providing a service," than I should be getting paid. I come to play, not to babysit - the players aren't the only ones who should get to blow off some steam.

I never said that the GM was "just" providing a service, but rather "are providing a service to the players and moderating the environment" meaning that they are there to provide a realistic fantasy world (sounds like an oxymoron, but it is the case; I also like the motto Game Mechanics Rule, Real World Physics fill in the gaps). And no, the GM is not there to babysit the players (though sometimes it can feel like that), the GM is playing, but like a dealer at a casino; while black jack is too strict of an example, the DM has certain rules to follow (if nothing else, the role and outlook of each of the NPCs) and a responsibility to ensure a good game (regardless of the health of the PCs, Bad Roles and Dumb Decisions are not the GMs fault) over his own personal desires. With that being said, [in my opinion] the gaming table is not the place for a GM to "blow off some steam".

One of the main problems with the CR system, BTW, is GMs who won't go at the PCs with everything at their disposal. A monster group with an equal CR to a PC party, when run by a softy GM, is little more than a speedbump that spits out treasure and XP when you hit it; when played by a real screen shark, they can test the party to their limits. (Tucker's kobolds, anyone? Now THAT was a GM who was running on all cylinders!) When you don't use monsters (and NPCs) to the level best of your ability, playing them as smart and as mean as you know how, then you have to throw super high-CR stuff against a party to give them even a hint of a challenge; the artificially high CRs make for inflated XP and treasure, which means you have to throw even more absurd stuff against the party (while pulling your punches so as not to overwhelm them), and the whole thing snowballs.

I agree that GMs can be too soft and that they should play the monsters that they put forward to the best that that monster should play; I will however nerf some things if I do prevent an unfair situation like a recent adventure where two of players had to leave and their PCs were the higher level ones of the group and not available for play (taking the party down about 2 APL), I threw the same encounter at them and only took one ability away from Monster. With that being said, I am also a GM who recently threw a CR 11 and a CR 3 monster at the same time against an APL 4 party but had help coming in a predetermined number of rounds, granted this party could have actually done the majority of the damage but it was actually a plot hook mechanism and I did not need to test them fully but rather make them aware of the challenges they faced ahead (granted this also got them freaked out about every turn in the APL 1-3 area of the dungeon they entered).

With that being said, I am also a GM who recently threw a CR 11 and a CR 3 monster at the same time against an APL 4 party but had help coming in a predetermined number of rounds, granted this party could have actually done the majority of the damage but it was actually a plot hook mechanism and I did not need to test them fully but rather make them aware of the challenges they faced ahead (granted this also got them freaked out about every turn in the APL 1-3 area of the dungeon they entered).

"I didn't wanna use that up!"
"We'll say you slept for six hours after you cast it.."

Yeah...sorry about that, but at the same time, if that's what we were fighting at the supposed entrance to the dungeon, it was prudent to think there might be something harder down the line that would need to be electrocuted.

Funny, I was reading Order of the Stick - a 3.5 parody - and the litch is telling his minon where to put the monsters: put the weakest near the entrance, and then progressivly harder as you go up, and never put them all in one group - spread them out evenly.

There is something to be said for the impossible encounter - and thats teaching the players when to run away. Or, gee, maybe not such a good idea to hit the enemy dead on where they're the center, you know, the D&D equivalent of Pickett's Charge.

The one complaint I have with GMs and their monsters is that the monsters invariably fight to the death. You never hear "Hey, Grimblog, nine of our guys just got carved into about twenty pieces, except for poor Mungo, and I sure as hell not cleaning that up. Time to RTFA, doncher think?"
The one and only session I had at KK, the goblins just kept comming, despite the fact that there are dead goblins everywhere, and guys twice their size in heavy armor. Were these Viking goblins?
How many monsters snipe? The Afganistan cavalry were imfamous for hit-and-run attacks, I personally love to camp with a Scout or AWP in CounterStrike, and run like hell when I think the enemy is near.

-Don

Funny, I was reading Order of the Stick - a 3.5 parody - and the litch is telling his minon where to put the monsters: put the weakest near the entrance, and then progressivly harder as you go up, and never put them all in one group - spread them out evenly.

There is something to be said for the impossible encounter - and thats teaching the players when to run away. Or, gee, maybe not such a good idea to hit the enemy dead on where they're the center, you know, the D&D equivalent of Pickett's Charge.

This is, IMHO, absolutely essential - and you have to do it early on; the longer you wait on this, the more the overconfident the players (and PCs) are going to be, and the more confused and cheated they're gonna feel the first time it blows up in their faces. At first level, a well-placed undefeatable monster (or at least one that's not worth the body count) will, at best, teach the party a lesson, and - at worst - kill half the party, leaving the survivors smarter (and richer if they manage to recover the bodies). At mid-to-high level, it can wreck a well-planned campaign, because the PCs were so cocky from fighting chumps all the time that they don't know when to run.

The one complaint I have with GMs and their monsters is that the monsters invariably fight to the death. You never hear "Hey, Grimblog, nine of our guys just got carved into about twenty pieces, except for poor Mungo, and I sure as hell not cleaning that up. Time to RTFA, doncher think?"
The one and only session I had at KK, the goblins just kept comming, despite the fact that there are dead goblins everywhere, and guys twice their size in heavy armor. Were these Viking goblins?

Another essential rule of good GMing (in any setting). Playing HackMaster, I realized that one of the things I missed in 3.x D&D was morale checks. Not that I can't use common sense to decide when the monsters turn tail and run, but it's nice to have well-defined mechanic to make that decision for me - especially in a more "adversarial" situation as we discussed before, so I can go at the players full bore and let the dice decide when the monsters have had enough. (Keep in mind, the system does allow the GM to add in extra morale checks when he feels it's appropriate, or to forgo them for an unusually brave opponent, so this can be weighted in either direction when necessary.) What's more (and this has been discussed a million times in Dragon and other places), if every battle is a fight to the death (and a winnable one), the PCs never have any incentive to use the other options at their disposal: Avoid, Parley, Surrender, etc. Hacking and stuff-taking provides the best outcome every time, and they can always win, so why bother with anything else?

How many monsters snipe? The Afganistan cavalry were imfamous for hit-and-run attacks, I personally love to camp with a Scout or AWP in CounterStrike, and run like hell when I think the enemy is near.

I'll say it again - Tucker's Kobolds. Here's a link to the original Roger Moore editorial:

http://www.tuckerskob...

This should be required reading for any GM running a fantasy/monster bashing game.

What is your favorite frpg to play?
gotta stay with the classics... the old AD&D books

What type of character do you like to play?
i used to play the basics, human fighter, elf mage... but now i like the outrageous class/race combos... half-orc ranger, drow paladin, but what i really want to play is a dwarven fighting monk

What type of game play do you like? (hack&slash, puzzle/riddle, quest,ect..)
i like a little bit of everything on my plate... endless grinding through dungeons gets boring but i don't want my characters sitting around doing sudoku puzzles in order to find the treasure either

What kind of DM/Gamemaster do you like?
intelligent and intuitive, flexible... someone who's open to my needs (oh wait, wrong survey)

The one complaint I have with GMs and their monsters is that the monsters invariably fight to the death. You never hear "Hey, Grimblog, nine of our guys just got carved into about twenty pieces, except for poor Mungo, and I sure as hell not cleaning that up. Time to RTFA, doncher think?"
The one and only session I had at KK, the goblins just kept comming, despite the fact that there are dead goblins everywhere, and guys twice their size in heavy armor. Were these Viking goblins?
How many monsters snipe? The Afganistan cavalry were imfamous for hit-and-run attacks, I personally love to camp with a Scout or AWP in CounterStrike, and run like hell when I think the enemy is near.

-Don

They were ordered to fight to the death or return to face a much greater punishment than death by their bugbear masters. So that boosted their moral enough to not run until they were at 25%. Its not my fault that you guys had me do mob rules and you them knocked them down from 30% to 0% in one massive fighter hit. Otherwise, they would have run.

So you see.... its all your fault :P

Hello All,

I don't know if this is the right place to post this but here goes.
What is your favorite frpg to play?
What type of character do you like to play?
What type of game play do you like? (hack&slash, puzzle/riddle, quest,ect..)
What kind of DM/Gamemaster do you like?
Also, feel free to make any comments that you think could ad to the above subjects.
Just looking to see how the gamers on this site think/feel about frpg in general.
Thanks, Mike

I like what I've seen of 3.5 D&D. I liked AD&D too. I do like some aspects of Shadowrun, incl. its world; the new version is better but still overly complex for my taste. I play to relax not to study 10 volumes just to find a single rule.

I tend to play nature-oriented characters and/or thinking-oriented ones (druids, rangers, mages, bards, rogues, and multiclasses of these) as opposed to brute force ones.

Puzzle, riddle, quest with a bit of hack& slash is my preference.

I prefer non-adversarial GMing, with fairly liberal rewards from the universe (since real life doesn't provide them so often!)