Well, it seems that I am in a pickle, as Shakespeare quipped once upon a time. I recently GMed my second session as a "test" encounter for my 3 sibling group with a fairly simple dungeon crawl. The results were... unsatisfactory, at least for myself and one of my players, whom I will refer to as "B" from now on. There is much that I could detail about the encounter, but I will try to be concise.
To begin, though, here are the details of the group at that time:
1st player: Dwarf Fighter
2nd player: Goblin Summoner with spidery eidolon
3rd player (B): Gnome Sorcerer with Elemental(Fire) Bloodline
All are at 11th level.
So, after entering a cave to find a puppy who led them there (yes, I did that...), investigating a random side path with crevice, and escaping a moving-wall-death-trap-of-doom (or was it?), the party walked into a large cavern that had a strong magical aura (as detected) that was ringed with lava. Soon afterwards, they were jumped by 6 Large Magma Elementals, and then proceeded to slaughter them over the course of an hour to an hour and a half. I expected this, as this was purposefully an APL encounter. After they slayed the last Elemental, they met a lovely Ancient Magma Dragon, who proceeded to belittle them and bite the eidolon on the leg "to see what it tastes like." This was also done to show the experienced player (the summoner/eldest brother) and others that this beast was not to be trifled with in combat (player's face for the summoner physically changed when I said "does a 49 hit your eidolon's AC?") After this he told them to destroy a chest further down the dungeon that he couldn't for unexplained reasons.
However, the encounter abruptly stopped when, after B had taken a 15-minute break to get lunch in the middle of combat earlier in the session, I asked him if he actually wanted to play anymore. He said no, so we stopped right there. He claimed that he was bored, and that he had stuff to do, and when I asked for what he found boring he would not say. He basically stated that he found nothing entertaining. I tried to convince him that we still had more to do, and that it would get better as we went on, but to no avail. It was probably a bad call on my part, and I practically gave up on GMing or doing any PF at all right there. This is the only way I would be able to do any PF, so it really downed me.
However, all was not lost, at least I think so. After discussion with the other two players, who seemed to enjoy the encounter overall but had other issues (detailed later perhaps), I think B can still be brought back around with the proper application of awesome setting/fights and comedic characters. He has always tried to do silly, crazy stuff like cast Scorching Ray on the puppy when it first went up to him, probably because he does not treat the game with even a smidgen of seriousness when RPing. He really doesn't get into his character at all during sessions, and I really don't know if he ever will. On the other hand, he has somewhat enjoyed very challenging encounters in the past (example: 3 person party against adult brine dragon, characters fairly poorly made combat wise plus almost constant use of obscuring mist, took some coercing to make B admit this). Basically, I need to create an encounter that is a home run with B, or I am afraid that he will turn his back on it for good (if he has not already). So, here is my idea thus far (and, for this session, to heck with rules in creating characters for now):
My dungeon setting where we left it, with the Magma Dragon, but with an abrupt and gloriously comedic entrance (busting through a cave wall in a flashing cloud of... butterflies?) of Sir Clocksalot the Mighty Clockworkian of Duremnagarnia and his trusty, albeit whiny, intelligent Greatsword named Amaeus and his buddy, the serene, very monk-ish intelligent Nunchuk named Noni. Immediately upon his arrival he unleashes upon the marauding dragon of ole' a diatribe of stuttering proclamations and threats and promises and so on, with his stuttering moments to be cleared by his ever-sighing sword. After this attempt at chivalrous glory (he says he is doing it for the gnome, and for all other fairness/handsomeness in the world), he charges the dragon, who flies into an insane rage. Backstory here; Dragon is trapped in this cave by the sword perpetually casting a powerful version of planar binding, among other things, and it was his destiny to be slain by the sword, who knows this, and has been in that chest mentioned earlier for a long time at the other side of one of the cave walls. Epic combat hopefully ensues, and this is as far as I have gotten.
So, thoughts, tips, advice, encouragement, support, and all of forms of engagement, including criticism, are encouraged. If you have any questions about any of what I have said, feel free to ask. I look forward to your input, and when giving any ideas for the planning of this next session please keep in mind the feeling I am trying to put across to B, the other players have already been alerted and agree to some possible silliness and such with this session.
If we can, let's try to blow his perception of Pathfinder and how entertaining it can be out of the metaphorical water. If possible, I don't want him to want to leave the table to do anything except maybe some character sheets to start whole new ideas, and a notebook and pencil to start writing his own adventure. In other words, let's get nuts!
EDIT: Forgot to mention that the summoner decided to change to a druid after he severely outclassed the fighter with his eidolon. Like, one-shotting the Elementals versus the fighter's 3-4 hits kind of outclassing. He kinda likes to powergame (played under a crazy hard DM for a while now, don't really blame him) and the fighter is the youngest brother that has to be constantly reminded of how to calculate things like skill checks, attack rolls, damage rolls, etc. even when they are unchanged from his sheet. When the summoner did enlarge person to try to bring him to somewhere near his eidolon's power (still didn't cut it), he got very lost of how much the size increase gave him to attacks, damage, etc. But he is a whole other issue that I am also trying to remedy, and feel free to comment on that as well.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
1) I personally don't like deliberate silliness in games, I find it breaks immersion and people don't take the game seriously (as you implied in your post). A game can be lighthearted and silly sometimes but that arises organically from the situation. Players sometimes need encouragement to take the game seriously and stay on task so the GM needs to set the example.
2) Am I reading you correctly that it's your second session as a new GM and the characters are 11th level?
3) What are the ages of these people?
Have you considered adding dinosaurs?
@Sarcasmancer: You are correct in that, for the most part, silliness breaks immersion, but I do not think that B wants to immerse in this. The other two do somewhat, but they also would enjoy some funniness just as much as B would. As I stated before, I don't know if ever will take the game seriously, regardless of what I try to put across in the short term. In the long term it could be a different story, but that is just too far from now to estimate.
As for your other comments, we started at this level since we tried to do lower level characters, but it was not entertaining enough, so we moved to upper levels for now. I can't imagine that B would ever want to trudge through many levels to get where he is now with his character, again, he is not that engaged. The ages are 24 for druid, B is 16, and the youngest is 14.
@Matthew Trent: That is a good idea! Perhaps they run into a troop of them after exiting the cave. Better yet, make them intelligent (awakened) with distinct personalities!
EDIT: Btw, this is a standalone world so far for this session I am planning, so don't worry about making things inconsistent. Think of it as an intro/training world for people to get excited about the real homebrew campaign I am creating after we are ready.
Obviously it's your campaign Poink and if everybody's on board with the level of seriousness or silliness, my preferences don't enter into it.
From the way you describe I would be worried about first-time players getting confused by all the options at higher levels; also it kinda sounds like your "B" is being a bit of a prima donna about some things and maybe other players are losing interest and tuning out for that reason.
Just my two coppers :-)
[edited to eliminate redundancy]
Sarcasmancer wrote: Obviously it's your campaign Poink and if everybody's on board with the level of seriousness or silliness, my preferences don't enter into it.
From the way you describe I would be worried about first-time players getting confused by all the options at higher levels; also it kinda sounds like your "B" is being a bit of a prima donna about some things and maybe other players are losing interest and tuning out for that reason.
Just my two coppers :-)
[edited to eliminate redundancy]
Thank you for the comment! Having immersion in a RPG seems to be very important to really get people engaged, so I am hoping that an encounter to draw B in will maybe open him up a little to the idea of being more immersed in his character. While I would also prefer to shy away from much silliness in the sessions, especially over multiple sessions, I can't really think of another way to get him engaged. I have looked for advice on that topic on these boards, and what most seem to recommend is to make a session or two a bit lax and adjusted to the problem player's preferences. I can't say from experience that it works, but I will try it.
There was confusion with all the options when we first started earlier this year in a different, short, and doomed-to-fail homebrew where we made 11th level characters. I have almost completely created the character for the younger brother, but I really tried to make sure he understood everything that was going into his character. He likes working on backstory for characters, not so much the technical side. The fact that he hasn't worked into the technical side of his character very much may explain his deficiency when it comes to mechanics, but if I let him make even a level 1 from scratch I would probably have to rework it just to get him roughly up to par with the other two.
As for "B," he is fairly busy with other things that are probably more interesting to him (mostly talking and working with his friends on debate prep) than PF is up front, so he doesn't come at it with the best attitude. The other players are disappointed/frustrated with that because they want to play, and without him I don't know if we could.
Your problem is the lack of a proper engagement curve, the lack of an overall goal (E.G. to stop big bad, to resolve the mystery of something, to resolve a quest, .etc), and the lack of PC engagement. (To explain this: Stories are told with a Scene/Sequel/Scene/ setup. Scenes are your fights, you dramatic monologues, your points where the heroes and villains are being bad-ass and awesome. Sequels are the in-between bits such as sleeping, cooking, and being boring. Scenes MUST BE INTENSE AND AWESOME because that is what makes your players keep coming back--if you have the choice of sending one enemy at them or 4/8/12/16 enemies then go with the higher number, have them attack from every angle, have them attack from every angle. If the PCs lose then they are CAPTURED NOT KILLED, and now they must try to escape before they are put to death.
Sequels are boring.)
Also, don't have enemies bite or attack PCs just to "find out how they taste." This is just going to make said PCs angry.
Examples of how to help your campaign:
Have each of the players tell you about their characters. Have each of them come up with three or four possible endings when the PC ends its own personal story arc.
The easy ones are:
If the character proceeds on its goals, and meets them then the character remains as it is. The character pursues this goal wholeheartedly.
If the character is turned away from goals to pick up Law/Chaos aligned ones then it is dissenting from its previous goals. It has picked up new goals in place of old ones. The character stops leaning or being one alignment and starts leaning towards or being the opposed alignment or is transitioning towards that alignment.
Inverted is harder to say in general terms. The character inverts on the good/evil scale, it started as good/evil or neutral with a lean towards either, and instead transitions towards the opposite. This typically includes a descent into darkness or a redemption plot-line depending on if good(neutral lean towards good) or evil(neutral lean towards evil). A heroic character becomes villainous, and a villainous character becomes heroic.
So with each of these (Dissenting/inverted) have an NPC who is attempting to bring the PC to that viewpoint, but, and this is a very important but, you, as the DM, do not have control as to if the character walks down the dissenting or inverted paths, instead you should leave that to the PC to decide.
These NPCs always escape if the PCs fight them, they cannot be killed, and are always reoccurring. If the PCs find some sort of way to kill them then then they are resurrected at some point, but instead gain 2 levels over the PCs each time they are killed. We don't want these guys to die, they are driving the PCs personal character stories.
As for encounter design I always have found that including multiple enemies per encounter are better ideas than including only a few. The larger the level VS CR gap is the more dependent the monsters need to be on grapples, and attacking Touch AC.
More is almost always better, because it means that the heroes tend to all feel useful in some way, and it makes feats that rely on killing enemies viable.
Taku Ooka Nin wrote: I tend to use this for building encounters these days. The players never run into an encounter with a single monster in it unless it is a boss monster, and even then I have found throwing a single CR+3 monster at a party of 4 people is easier than 4 CR (APL-1) monsters. These are set for each individual player, so things are just additive per player. You can also mix and match the below so long as it is within the same parameter (If there are 4 players you can have 1 (APL-1), 2 (APL-3), 3 (APL-4), and 4 (APL-5) monsters to form one encounter, but NOTE: the lower the CR of the monster the more it needs to focus on using its CMB for everything, so pick monsters with high CMBs [The undead Owl-bears, CR2, have around +12 to grapple] or monsters who focus on using magic for everything so long as it is effective [Magic Missle always hits unless the target has the Shield Spell, CL 1 Magic Missle averages 3.5 due to the +1, in multiplicity this becomes 4[14], 8[28], 12[42], and 16[56] average damage in 1 round, so never underestimate the power of 16 level 1 wizards/sorcs. It doesn't matter if they die in 1 hit, NPCs should be damage focused not suitability focused anyway.
The real power of the 4x[(APL-8) to (APL-5)] elements are when they are used as traps--possibly compound traps that activate EVERYTHING. Pit traps that are set to not fall for the first 3 on the way down a dungeon and then all of them activate when the last trap activates tends to hit the entire party if they are in line formation. Anyone who fell in is now stuck fighting up against the enemies who were watching the party and now are attacking them from outside the pit.
Be aware that you should always mix things up, send neither continual commando squads 4x(APL-1), nor hordes 16x(APL-8), nor mix and matches, but mix it up by using all of them so the party cannot adapt to just that one thing. Also, do use compound traps such as rope bridges that dump the party into bear traps, rooms that have one or two pillars of 1,000 arrows, but are also filled with hidden beartraps that are pinned to the ground.
4 monsters per player (4 players = 16 monsters)
CR (APL-8), CR (APL-7), CR (APL-6), or CR (APL-5) monsters (Standard), (Difficult), (Hard), (Epic)
3 monsters per player (4 players = 12 monsters)
CR (APL-7), CR (APL-6), CR (APL-5), or CR (APL-4) monsters (Standard), (Difficult), (Hard), (Epic)
2 monsters per player (4 players = 8 monsters)
CR (APL-6), CR (APL-5), CR (APL-4), or CR (APL-3) monsters (Standard), (Difficult), (Hard), (Epic)
1 monster per player (4 players = 4 monsters)
CR (APL-4), CR (APL-3), CR (APL-2), or CR (APL-1) monsters (Standard), (Difficult), (Hard), (Epic)
On a side note: Whenever people are getting bored it is because there isn't enough flair for the dramatic in the story. You NEED the players to feel as though their actions matter, and that they are on a grand quest or something meaningful.
The cynics here will tell you that this is not needed, and that going through their characters boring mundane lives is "fun" to them, but for me, speeches, vows, and basically forcing the story to lean towards that of a Roman is what makes it all worth playing for me.
It is fun to be over the top, but just avoid being melodramatic.
@Taku: Thank you for the plentiful and wonderful advice! I am having a little trouble in figuring out your CR measures for the different player-to-monster ratios, but I think I get the general idea.
As I said, your advice is very much appreciated, but I am afraid that it primarily applies to a player who is somewhat engaged in their character as, well, a character. My attempts to get him to become engaged in his character have fallen flat, such as when I asked all of the players to pick background traits and all that from Ultimate Campaign, but with B, no luck, not interested. I did require the players to have some kind of backstory for their character before we moved into the real campaign, but all he has so far is that he lived in a society of lava gnomes that was conquered/pillaged/plundered/massacred by the evil human empire that I created for the homebrew, and that he pretty much hates the guts of humans because of it. Simple, and it could work, but again, he almost never RP's his character in a session unless you sort of coerce him to do it. I don't think this is out of shame or anything like that, but mostly disinterest.
Your encounter creation guidelines are very interesting, but one of the biggest drawbacks to that combat encounter that I ran last time was that it took a long time to run through all of the actions of the players and the monsters. This seems to really kill any enthusiasm the group has during combat, and turns it into a fairly ho-hum sequence of events. Is there any recommendations for keeping the encounter fairly short despite having many monsters?
EDIT: Haha, yeah, the biting the eidolon thing I may very well never repeat, but I read that Magma Dragons were prone to "violent outbursts," so I thought "Hey, this really old dragon may not have ever seen an eidolon like this before, and maybe he has this thing about eating his enemies/intimidating them into service, so I'll have him..." You know how it ends. XD
My CR system deconstructs the CR system down to being built for individual PCs.
Basically a CR for a single PC is -4 since the CR system is built with the idea of having 4 PCs in a party. You could say that is an advanced tactic to keep things interesting on my end as well as the end of the PCs.
so for your group:
your APL is 11 ([11+11+11]/3)
So we can just plug 11 into the above to give us
Taku Ooka Nin wrote: 4 monsters per player (4 players = 16 monsters)
CR 3 (11-8), CR 4 (11-7), CR 5 (11-6), or CR 6 (11-5) monsters (Standard), (Difficult), (Hard), (Epic)
3 monsters per player (4 players = 12 monsters)
CR 4 (11-7), CR 5 (11-6), CR 6 (11-5), or CR 7 (11-4) monsters (Standard), (Difficult), (Hard), (Epic)
2 monsters per player (4 players = 8 monsters)
CR 5 (11-6), CR 6 (11-5), CR 7 (11-4), or CR 8 (11-3) monsters (Standard), (Difficult), (Hard), (Epic)
1 monster per player (4 players = 4 monsters)
CR 7 (11-4), CR 8 (11-3), CR 9 (11-2), or CR 10 (11-1) monsters (Standard), (Difficult), (Hard), (Epic)
Remember the lower CR the enemies are the more reliance they must put on combat maneuvers since it is hard to increase that defense. Alternatively, they can focus on hitting touch AC, which is even easier.
This means there are at least as many enemies as there are PCs (3), or mutliples there of (6, 9, or 12).
The more enemies there are the more meaningful the encounter feels, but the less enemies there are the more powerful the enemies can be.
Also, just keep in mind that you can mix and match, so long as the difficulty of the encounter is all the same.
E.G. you could send 1 CR 7 monster, 2 CR 5 monsters, and 4 CR 3 monsters to form one standard encounter and you get 7 monsters out of it.
Here are some common tactics I have done, even if it is cheap:
Roll 1d20, apply all of the initiative modifiers as if they ALL rolled that number on the d20.
or
have them all take 10 on their initiative. So, whatever the initiative is add 10 and boom, done
or
all enemies of the same monster have them roll 1d20 and all take that number as their initiative.
It speeds things up a lot.
Tell B that hi is welcome to rejoin you guys( or girls) when ever he want. And play on with out him.
I dont know your siblings but when one is 16 "Hormones is the order of the Day":)
And keep up the gaming it sounds great.
It sounds like "B" just isn't interested in the game at all if he isn't interested in doing any RP and finds combat boring. I understand that large fights can get tedious, but they can also be a lot more dramatic.
Maybe, rather than throwing a bunch of the same thing at them, you throw a couple varied monsters. Say, instead of 5 Large Fire Elementals, you throw a Large Fire Elemental, a Fire Drake, 2 Magma Mephits, and 4 or 5 Burning Skeletons at them. You end up with a similar CR and keep the fire theme, but there's more enemies to hit, enemies should die faster overall, and the battle becomes much more intense and varied. Instead of having 5 elementals all doing their slam attacks over and over, you've got a drake breathing out actual fireballs, mephits flying around breathing cones of fire and summons more mephits, and skeletons that are easy to kill but explode when they die. Then you end up making the players think about positioning, target priority(stop those summons!), etc, which helps get them more involved than "I stand here and attack."
@ Cap. Darling: I have seriously considered trying to go forward with just the other two, but from what I understand it would be quite difficult to go through a campaign with just two people, especially if we wanted to try an AP at some point. We may have no choice in the matter, though, if we want to play. Thanks for the advice!
@ Unruly: Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with your idea for more varied encounters. I really should have done that in the first place, even though it would have made it more complex and possibly slower. I have to find a way to keep combat dynamic through whatever means, and having different monsters would definitely do that. What is hard about the situation with B is that I feel he really did enjoy it when we went up against an adult brine dragon and all but one of us died, but don't want to always have near TPKs every session. That would get tiresome for everyone, so I just need to find his "sweet spots," so to speak. Thanks for the idea!
@ Taku: Thanks for the clarification! If I have it right, your system focuses one giving a certain level of CR per person versus for the whole party, which should allow for more varied and hopefully interesting encounters. Also, thanks a bunch for the ideas with initiative, that really did slow down the play in the session, so I will definitely try to use at least one of those methods in the future.
Please guys, keep the comments coming, I need all of the advice with this I can get! :)
You don't even always need to have different monsters, really. Just play them differently from each other and don't be afraid to change things up.
Next time they go up against a group of Orcs, make it a real warband rather than a bunch of cookie-cutter Orcs thrown together. Have a couple be the normal Orc Warrior that you find in the bestiary by default then stat one up as having a couple cleric levels(Use the Heroic stat array and give him some NPC gear to match his level). Maybe have the Orc cleric be riding a Worg and shouting orders. Give a couple Orcs bows, switch Weapon Focus(Falchion) for Point Blank Shot, give them the Ranged NPC stats, and have them back up as the players start trying to close in on them. And then the cleric can channel heals, which might actually heal the players if they're in range, but will definitely heal a bunch of orcs and keep the fight going.
If they start attacking the cleric, that Worg mount of his has a nice trip(with a decent CMB, too!) attached to his bite attacks. If the cleric dies, half of the orcs might run away from the fight because their morale broke. Then you treat it just as though they had killed everything in terms of experience rewards.
4 level 1 Orc Warriors(what's in the Bestiary), 4 Orc Bowmen(easy stat switch), a level 3 Orc Cleric(built from scratch, mostly), and his Worg(in the Bestiary) mount should make for a nice level 5 encounter for a party of 4. There's potential for it to be deadly if it's an ambush, but an open fight should also be kinda tough.
@ Unruly: Thanks for the good advice, I will definitely try to implement it in the future. On a specific note, I would like to ask you something; What would the makeup of an encounter with orcs for an APL of 10 look like to you? I have tried to think up ways of using low CR creatures in specific circumstances to create a challenge for my players without just sending a bajillion of them. Since you can somewhat easily go with classes with orcs that might be the key, but I still can't picture what a whole party might look like.
Give the Orcs player class levels and the Heroic NPC stats rather than NPC Class levels and standard NPC stats.
Have a couple Orc Barbarians instead of Orc Warriors, Orc Rangers for the bowmen, an Orc Sorcerer, and an Orc Cleric. If you wanted to make a CR 10 encounter(same as the APL, so not a very tough fight) you could have one of each and make all 4 of them Level 7(CR 6 each, 4 CR 6's = CR 10).
Or you could do the same composition as before, except get rid of the Worg mount and replace him with an Orc Sorcerer. Do 4 Barbarians at level 4(CR 7), 4 Rangers at level 4(CR 7 and they get pets!) two Clerics at level 8(CR 9), and a Sorcerer at level 9(CR 8). By experience rewards, you're looking at a level 11 fight, though it's on the high end. Considering that, and considering that the players are going to be on the receiving end of a lot of enemy attacks each round, I'd say you could probably rate that as close to a level 13 fight, which would make it a pretty hard encounter.
But how much it challenges your party really depends on how well they handle themselves and what the party makeup is. I've seen parties roll through fights that should have decimated them time after time because they knew how to play their class really well, and I've seen parties that should have had an easy time of a fight all die because they weren't prepared for it. Remember, CR is supposed to be a guideline, not a hard rule. If you throw Incorporeal creatures against a party that has no magic, it's going to make that fight way harder than it should be regardless of the CR.
IMO the best way to introduce people to Pathfinder is by given them one of the iconics, at 1st level.
First session is pure roleplay -- the dice and the character sheets don't even come out. And you play, too: every NPC in character. Animal companions yip and neigh and give their owners minor grief, town guards are real people, etc. No dungeon crawls in the first five sessions.
-- That kid with the sorc found it boring because he couldn't identify with it. It wasn't "him".
The best way to introduce someone to Pathfinder is to have them play a big 2-handed character, paladin/fighter/barbarian/ranger, and have them just run around killing everything in 1 hit since 10+weapon damage is going to 1 shot a lot of things.
The above allows them to know what it feels like to be powerful. It lets them have fun while not really thinking about the system too much since their options boil down to kill it.
Also, be open to let them play "cool" things, but only if you are the one building the character for them, otherwise New-Blood should be playing core races for the most part.
If you are showcasing the mechanics of battle and such then try this:
Send some sort of outsider that can be perpetually invisible with the party, if someone dies the outsider casts raise dead on them--they still get the -2 per neg lvl to con at lvl 1--but overall add potions of Restoration to remove the -2 con effects--You ARE The DM, you can do whatever you want, you know--to help the party along.
This gives them the experience of fighting things and that it can be dangerous. This "Scene" also leads into a "sequel" where now they are in town, just having acquired their rewards for their efforts. Now, they spend the next session trying to figure out what they want to do.
I also like to include a lot of overland movement during the first few sessions, such as traveling from Absalom to the Crypt of Everflame--a 3 month endeavor.
How many of B's spells are fire-based? I noticed you only had enemies that were immune to fire. Perhaps he felt like THE thing his character did was pointless? That can quickly make people bored. He either needs a way to use his fire powers on fire guys or a lot more non-fire guys. The game does have a problem handling the idea of a fire-guy in a fire-campaign. Thematically it fits well, but mechanically it is awful.
Varied enemies can help here, especially if some of them are much easier to defeat than others. A dozen or more orcs die quickly to a fireball, but it is satisfying.
I kind of like the Eidolon being bitten. If only because that is a clear and evocative way to tell the players they are outclassed. A lot of times players have trouble realizing this. A lot of DMs, in my experience, have a great deal of reluctance about giving players any direct information like this. I've found that this reluctance can easily lead to problems.
I'd be wary of having someone show up and save the day. That can be de-protagonizing too. If you do that, you need to make sure that there are important things for the players to do, that they MUST do or the fight will end. Otherwise...what's the point in them trying to do much? If the PCs are really outclassed by the dragon, then have the dragon unleash something to attack the Clocksalot with that would kill him. Some sort of anti-construct enemies that the players can handle, but Clocksalot wouldn't be able to survive. I'm sure the dragon has known he'd have to face Clocksalot at some point, so some preparation makes sense.
My guidelines/rules when DMing...
1. What the players do has to MATTER.
2. Player decisions have to MATTER.
3. Enable player character concepts.
To elaborate on #3: You might well have to house rule at times. Someone wants to be a pyro? Well, the rules suck at supporting that (fire resistance is the most common of them all), so adjustments of some sort are needed. Balance matters, but the key point is to make sure the players can have fun playing the core concept of their characters.
It sounds a bit like B is the short attention span type. The guy who loves a good hack and slash that lets him feel bad ass, but tends to pass on things that require slowing down a bit.
The problem is that PF is by it's nature sort of slow paced. Back just after high school I had a group that I constantly tried to get going. Problem was that we had 3 players on the best of days. Two of the players put some time into their players, had fun, got into the story. The other one played a dwarf that used "I hit it with my axe" as his answer to everything. He was disruptive, and honestly? He really didn't want to play.
In the end, we went our separate ways.
The biggest bit of advice I would give? Get some more people in your group. Go to nearest gaming store, put up an ad. Try to get friends into it. Put up a flier at a nearby college or at school. If you have a solid group of 4 or 5 people who are really having fun? Then B can leave and join as he wants, and you aren't reliant on catering your entire game to him at the cost of your other players. It sounds like you really want B to play, but he isn't as interested. You might have the best luck in just playing without him and let him get into it on his own time.
@ Unruly: That looks like a great setup, and a challenging encounter as well. Definitely what I was looking for, so thank you!
@ Sir Thugsalot: The problem is that I know at times he can identify, but it is inconsistent, like a glimmer here or there. The first session he ever did (not while I was DMing) he went looking for a pet to buy and he got a riding dog which gave him fits, but I think he enjoyed that.
@ Taku: You say let them play cool things, but only if you are making the character... Is it ok to make a character for a PC? I really am not sure if it is. One thing that concerned me when I practically made the character for the youngest brother is that he didn't get the ability to think through all the things that went into his character, so he didn't get as much into how to play his character or how the mechanics work.
@ Drachasor: He is very fire-based, with enhancements to them with his racial archetype, and an elemental(fire) bloodline sorcerer. I put fire immune enemies in the first encounter to test what he had prepared in case he encountered a fire-resistant enemy, and he dealt fairly well with them with his Frigid touch spell or something like that.
The idea of adding different enemies for the PCs to fight is a great idea! I will probably go with some anti-construct/item enemies who will try to focus on the clockwork warrior, and he will have to be defended from those, and the PCs will also have to help kill the dragon since it is desperately trying to either defeat them or escape by destroying the sword. Thanks a bunch!
@ HowFortuitous: That is definitely a possibility, but I hope that is not the case. If it is, we may have to go with a 2 player group, which I am not sure how to manage if we ever want to do an AP or anything "official." And getting more people in my group is really not an option for me, unfortunately, since I kinda live out in the country, and for other reasons. It may be possible, though, for me to get with the group that my older brother plays with in the future, or arrange to bring them in by having the session somewhere in town. Anyways, it would be difficult.
EDIT: A question for all; Is there a way to make fire-damage spells still do damage despite resistances/immunities? I doubt that there is a way without going into 3rd-party material, which I would like to avoid, but I may be able to conjure up a homebrew feat or something that could accomplish that. I don't really have to worry about powergaming from B, but I also don't want to establish an unfair standard. Thoughts?
Poink wrote: @ Taku: You say let them play cool things, but only if you are making the character... Is it ok to make a character for a PC? I really am not sure if it is. One thing that concerned me when I practically made the character for the youngest brother is that he didn't get the ability to think through all the things that went into his character, so he didn't get as much into how to play his character or how the mechanics work. I've made characters for players, this usually comes in when they are table top virgins, or when their latest character was so unoptimial that they just felt useless.
More often than not I help people make builds, explain things, explain how the more optimal setups work, and so forth.
For instance, there was a guy named Jake who was an EMT, firefighter now, who had the dream of playing table top games. So I brought him into my game to make his dreams come true.
He didn't really know how it all worked, so I just asked what he wants to do and offered some ideas. He picked "easy to play, able to kill things in 1 or 2 hits, be able to heal, and be able to be on the front lines."
So I made him a paladin, 20 point buy, strength based with 2-handed weapon (earth breaker) and that took rich parents so I could get him pretty much everything he needed to shine.
He loved it. A simple character is often times a very good character, mostly because it is focused. They were also level 1 so +6 to hit at 2d6+10 damage was fantastic.
He sees an enemy, he talks about Abadon, the name I misspoke when thinking of Abadar, and proceeds to beat the crap out of them.
Simple and focused characters are fantastic for new players. If you build them for a person, explain how to use them, and allow them to use them to the best of their ability then you are only making the experience better.
That said I often times found players would play this first character, enjoy it immensely, and then dive into the core rules book and others to learn everything they can about it. One played with us last semester and is now the DM this semester. He loves it.
The point is that you want to allow new players to become as immersed as possible while also being able to blow over the mechanics as easily as possible. On their first character while they are learning YOU the DM are the CRB for them, you are the rules, and you explain it all to them as they need it. Empathize with them, and convey knowledge while ensuring they have fun.
All this said: The simplest characters are often times the most fun. The less opportunities you have to screw up the better you are until you really know what you are doing as a player.
Taku Ooka Nin wrote: Sir Thugsalot wrote: IMO the best way to introduce people to Pathfinder is by given them one of the iconics, at 1st level.
First session is pure roleplay -- the dice and the character sheets don't even come out. And you play, too: every NPC in character. Animal companions yip and neigh and give their owners minor grief, town guards are real people, etc. No dungeon crawls in the first five sessions.
The best way to introduce someone to Pathfinder is to have them play a big 2-handed character, paladin/fighter/barbarian/ranger, and have them just run around killing everything in 1 hit since 10+weapon damage is going to 1 shot a lot of things.
-- Taku?
Before you can teach someone to play Pathfinder, you have to teach them to roleplay period. If they never get their head around that concept, then it'll never be more than a really slow-moving version of a videogame dungeon-crawl.
Player 'B' bugged out because he didn't have any "connect" with his character -- and wasn't given any reason to have such an attachment in the first place. It might as well have been the Shoe in a game of Monopoly for all the investment he had in it.
Sir Thugsalot wrote: Taku Ooka Nin wrote: Sir Thugsalot wrote: IMO the best way to introduce people to Pathfinder is by given them one of the iconics, at 1st level.
First session is pure roleplay -- the dice and the character sheets don't even come out. And you play, too: every NPC in character. Animal companions yip and neigh and give their owners minor grief, town guards are real people, etc. No dungeon crawls in the first five sessions.
The best way to introduce someone to Pathfinder is to have them play a big 2-handed character, paladin/fighter/barbarian/ranger, and have them just run around killing everything in 1 hit since 10+weapon damage is going to 1 shot a lot of things.
-- Taku?
Before you can teach someone to play Pathfinder, you have to teach them to roleplay period. If they never get their head around that concept, then it'll never be more than a really slow-moving version of a videogame dungeon-crawl.
Player 'B' bugged out because he didn't have any "connect" with his character -- and wasn't given any reason to have such an attachment in the first place. It might as well have been the Shoe in a game of Monopoly for all the investment he had in it.
For some players a slow dungeon crawl is all they need at first. Afterwards they realize that it is much more than that.
My rules are always the same:
Learn to play with a simple character, and make the most one-sided character ever.
Then, make extremely over-the-top-fun-to-play characters.
Then, make characters that are driven to some major personal story goal, but are able to exist within the world they are in, and are capable of well rounded emotions.
Most people tend to stick with the last of the above, but some decide that going a bit further could be fun.
For them I suggest the cynical character, the jaded character who sees only the bad in the world while struggling to see the good. This guy is the eternal lancer, the deadpan snarker, and, more often than not, the voice of reason in a group dead-set on making the world a better place or beating the crap out of big-bad or just sprinting the plot forward.
Albeit it can be fun to play the latter most, it is more often than not kind of boring at times unless character development has lead to that end.
I like having writers in my campaigns because it means they at least understand character development, and that seeing atrocities either reinforces or deconstructs personality but only rarely has not effect what so ever.
|
