The Best Goblin!'s page

You need to have played at least once. That's my take on it. To DM and have never ever played is too strange, for one thing you may not know how to make characters.

Well, where did the first DM come from?

It is true, though, player experience helps when you first begin DMing. On the other hand, I had plenty of player experience when I started, and I still felt like I didn't know what I was doing.

In the end, you just have to dive in. And when you start thinking "but none of this is working the way I thought it would!" remember that most of us who have DMed for years (or even decades) still have that thought on occasion. If the rules don't do it to you, the players will. Here is a very brief guide to DMing skills:

Traits you need (In order of importance):
1. Amateurism: You love stories, and love to tell them. Number one. Despite its negative connotations, amateur comes from the French "amour", meaning "love". An amateur does something because he or she loves it. Be an amateur.
2. Humility: While your vision for the game takes primacy, because it holds together the story, the aesthetic, and the action, remember to not be so rigid that you can't make room for the player's vision as well. That doesn't mean you have to let them have a Raptor animal companion when you don't want dinosaurs in your game, but you do need to find things you are willing to compromise on.
3. Patience: With all the work that comes from DMing, you will improve your skills in the game faster than your players (rules lawyers and other DMs excluded). You need more game knowledge than they do, so don't get upset when they regularly try to do things they can't do, or ask you a whole lot of questions about very basic things.
4. Preparation: You need to make sure you set aside time to prepare your game. I have enough experience to wing a session and still have a good game, but I always regret it if I do.
5. A love of surprise: Players will ruin all your plans. Embrace it. Don't respond by railroading them, unless you are absolutely sure that the game will be better that way. This rarely is the case.
6. Rules improvisation: If flipping pages is taking too long to find a specific rule in the middle of action, be good at making something up and telling your players that when you find the right rule, you will use it next time.
7. Rules knowledge: You don't need to be an encyclopedia, but at least try to know all the rules that are used regularly. I still don't know the rules for very hot environments, and that's because I personally have only sent players into one once.
8. Rules innovation: No rules to explain what you want? Make them up ahead of time! You're not just the storyteller and arbiter, you are the group's system developer if you must be.

Notice that all the rules stuff is last and rules improvisation is above rules knowledge. Technically, you can run a game without using a single rule. Make your story good, and make the action fast. It won't always be fast, and sometimes the players will take much longer than you, but try. Don't treat the core rules as unimportant, because they've been tested more than whatever you make up, but don't get hung up on them, either. If a player of mine has misbuilt a character, or made a flaming longsword without first giving it a +1, or misuses an ability, I still correct them, but I'll drop a rule that doesn't work in a heartbeat. Do what works for your group. I know more experienced gamers can be intimidating, but they've all been there, too. Tell them to go easy on you, and if they are real friends, it won't be a problem. There's also an upside: you won't have to worry about #3, hopefully. Just remember, running a game takes four easy steps:

1. Trial
2. Error
3. Correction
4. Move on

Now find a story you love (or make one), outline it in detail, make your NPCs, detail your maps and traps, get your players, buy potato chips and soda/beer, and go get 'em!

I thought that would be much shorter.

The alignment of the NPC should be based on the alignment philosophy of the DM.

Seeing that you're the DM, there is no way anyone here can give a fully thought-out moral doctrine in a small enough post that you can use it and then be informed enough to apply it consistently in your game.

This is an old, smelly can of worms and, as could be predicted, gets everyone pontificating as if they are the authority on a question that has never been definitively answered by the greatest minds ever, whether it be real-life morality or RPG morality, which should definitely be treated as different things.

For example, most here agree that sacrificing your child because God told you to is evil. Now, while I'd agree that anyone who does so today is almost certainly insane, I don't agree that the action is evil. If there is a God, such a being would define morality (we've correlated the two for most of recorded civilization, albeit with different gods and different codes), so if God really told someone to sacrifice their child, it wouldn't be evil. Nobody has to agree with me, and more importantly, if you wanted to say such an action isn't evil in your game, it doesn't matter what's true, or what anyone argues.

A better solution is to give you three simple ideas, let you pick one, and apply it in the way you see best in all situations, so as not to confuse your players, since the rules of alignment that you apply to your NPC should be the same ones you apply to them.

These three views broadly cover most, but not all, ethical systems:

Deontology (best known form: religious morals) - The morality of an action is defined by the characteristics of the action.

Consequentialism (best known form: utilitarianism) - The morality of an action is defined by its results. Long term results are usually only included in this if they are foreseeable.

Teleology - The morality of an action is defined by its intended purpose and/or the virtues (or lack thereof) that motivate the action.

The next question you need to answer is if you will use objective morality, where you apply alignment according to your view (or adopted view), allowing characters to easily believe they are one alignment, while they are assigned another alignment, or will you use subjective morality, where characters are the alignment they believe themselves to be, unless that's just unreasonable.

As an example, if you use objective morality:

Deontological - Your NPC is evil, because murder and torture are evil. Does he have rules for when he commits these acts? Lawful. No? Chaotic. Between? Neutral.

Consequentialist - Your NPC's actions have good results (I'm assuming this), so he is good. Rules? Lawful, etc.

Teleologist - Let's say your NPC is torturing someone because they did something very bad. Is your character more concerned with avenging a victim? Good. Is your NPC concerned with slaking his own desire for revenge? Evil. Rules? etc...

Of course any ambiguity makes the NPC a candidate for neutrality.
With objective morality, you can do things as you see fit. For example, you mostly like consequentialism, but you have a problem with the fact that can consequentialism can justify letting a few innocents die to save many innocents, or even allowing children to die to save many people. So say that there are still a few universal no-nos, such as killing children or the innocent.

Now, if you use subjective morality:

Is your NPC doing evil for good results (consequentialism; chaotic good)? You said yes.
Are his intentions good and virtuous (teleology; neutral good)? You said yes.
Is he doing thing within a rigid moral structure (deontology; lawful good)? You said no.

Your NPC is either NG or CG. Based on the theme of his moral problem, CG seems more appropriate. You can still use universal no-nos, but if morality is largely subjective, your players will have a harder time guessing what those universal no-nos are, so you shouldn't have a lot.

My advise is to answer these questions as you see fit, whether or not you agree with my examples. Then you will know what your NPC's alignment is.

I only switched to Pathfinder in the last year, so my perspective is pretty fresh. Because most experienced gamers I know are primarily concerned with their stats and builds, and power gaming in general, I don't really talk with my local gaming community, as I'm a story and role playing guy. Most other experienced players I do talk with have left the gaming scene at large, and still use D&D 2.0 or earlier. I keep a group of less dedicated gamers I GM for, because I like their laid back attitude, and their lack of experience means less clashing over some idea about how gaming "should be". At the same time, they don't really search out their own material, I bring the books and they say, "I'll do that".

The point is that I don't talk to other up-to-date gamers often, so I somehow missed out on Pathfinder until last year. Like many, I never moved on to D&D 4.0, because it was neither involved or versatile enough for my taste.

A year ago I was running an epic (not epic level) 3.5 game, and was working on my own system for kingdom building and mass combat, and running into problems. Relevant 3.5 3pp material sucked, and my opinions on 3pp material in general were still in the 3.5 "undependable, improperly powered in one direction or the other" realm. The other experienced gamer in my group brought in a player in his own game, who told me about Pathfinder. I took a quick look, and switched immediately. Although I couldn't switch the then-current game to Pathfinder because I didn't want to bother converting already unbalanced classes into a new system with a slightly higher power level (lots of non-core D&D classes, too much work for the payoff), since it is cross-compatible, I wanted to see what Pathfinder had to support kingdom building. Nothing core, but I saw there were 3pp books, and I cautiously peeked. Slamming into 2011 from the 1995 gaming world, I can say 3pp material is very different.

I found Jon Brazer Enterprises' Book of the River Nations, and I found it very satisfying. However, I wanted something more involved for mass combat, so I picked up Adamant Entertainment's Warpath, and was also greatly satisfied. So, I needed to think how I'd use BotRN rules for army production to create Warpath armies. In 3.5 3pp materials, this would be an enormous headache. But both publishers created something so together that their systems can mesh almost seamlessly. With very little legwork, I had exactly what I needed. Now, I'm buying 3pp blind, but still confident, from the aforementioned publishers, as well as Tricky Owl, Rite Publishing, Frog God, and the list is growing. With all things, there is good and not-so-good, but I think there's only two purchases out of dozens that I'd really label "disappointment". I'm getting happy just typing this.

We were playing in my friend's comedic setting, and a new girl joined as a halfling sorcerer. The GM was using the random encounter table, and he had a knack for rolling a vampire encounter during the day. He doesn't ever reroll encounters if they aren't too high of a CR for the party, he goes with it and accepts the natural consequences. The first time, he said a vampire jumps from the bushes... and immediately explodes because it's daytime, end of encounter. We all laughed hard. The second time, we got a chuckle, but the third time, he states a vampire jumps from the bushes, and we said, "yeah yeah, and he explodes." He corrects us, "no, make fort saves, those who fail are blinded for 1d4 rounds by his radiant sparkling caused by the sun." He points to the nearest girl, a fighter, "he professes his love for you, but says you must stay away from him because he is a horrible monster. Pass a will save or become angsty!"

A Twilight vampire.

So the new girl looks through her spell list, checks the Core Rulebook, grins, and says, "I cast erase!"

The GM says, "OK. Why?"

She points to the rulebook and says,"It says here that it removes mundane writing!"

We all roflmao'ed and the GM ruled in her favor, killing the vampire.

I just wanted to say, Darkholme ftw on this playtest! His "What is a feat worth?" thread shed a whole lot of light on RP pricing. I think if the designers can get the right price for a fixed feat, they have a great gauge now on how they should price everything else.

I am, of course, leaving out dozens that also put in amazing work. I'd encourage anyone who thinks someone else did a great job, say it now.