|
Sorry, if this doesn't fit here, but I need to get off some steam!
It happened again - I can't tell you all how I hate the concept of the D&D sourcebooks! Don't get me wrong, I'll explain it!
The stuff inside the books, let it be HEROES OF HORROR, BOOK OF VILE DARKNESS, THE EBERRON CAMPAIGN SETTING, or what not, is very cool and helps so much in enhancing my campaign!
However, last night it happened again:
A careful plan (incorporated the background of my players characters) made go up like a bomb. Why, on earth, can't WotC not split the books into a PLAYER PART and a DM PART????
On the backside of the books one can always read its as well for players, so you think just normal info, no special notes on npc's or places or anything important.
But than, they give away one of Khorvaires "best kept secrets" for every Eberron player on this earth without a warning for their DM!
It's all about, that the father of my players found out what and who KAIUS III realy is (don't worry, I will not give away any spoilers here, even if I am sure anybody knows by now) and that he died because of this knowledge. Now the players are up for some espionge in Karnath to find out about their father... And gues what, every player at my tabel (ok, they are only two ;) knows this secret already, because they've read FIVE NATIONS.
Man, I am so p.....!
It's not that my players can't distinguish between player knowledge and character knowledge, it's just that the, well, I don't know the right word, POWER is gone from the campaign...
Anyway, don't get me wrong! As I said I just had to let off some steam!
Maybe it has been my fault, and maybe nobody knows what I am talking about anyway...
Great gaming to you all!
That's why I always change things around, a lot...even when I know for sure that the players haven't read the material.
If it's in a sourcebook, I assume that someone in my campaign may read it or may potentially find out about it.
Having skimmed through Eberron, I think that is one of its pitfalls--many cool details are openly described for everyone to read.
For example, I purposely started my Greyhawk campaign in CY 576. The Greyhawk Wars have not happened, and may never happen. I can guarantee that they will not happen exactly the way they are described in the LGG.
...ahem...actually I'm making mead...not meat....that one letter makes your sentence a little uncomfortable. I'm not a serial killer...I'm a homebrewing gamer!
Dryder...I'm assuming your players are all German...how could you not assume that they would read every single Eberron book out there? It's the efficient thing to do; they're probably already planning on invading neighboring kingdoms and trying to ask you how much of an armor bonus "Lederhosen" give you...
Just kidding, my friend!!! Take care!
This makes me mad too. Alot.
WaterdhavianFlapjack
So what would happen if they were DMing their own Eberron campaign while playing in yours? You couldn't forbid them from reading the DM section.
Yeah, most of my players DM other campaigns.
Player's Guide to Eberron comes out soon, full of player-friendly only material, so that DMs can direct players to the appropriate sections for PC research without spoiling sourcebook secrets.
-Amber S.
I have to say that my players have been great about this sort of stuff. One of my players in my FR campaign knew what was going to happen to Tilverton, but he continued to act as if he had no idea. He even started talking about some business deals that he was going to start up, even though he knew he would lose his gold when the town disappeared.
Another of my player's DMed the Realms himself a while back, and he has been pretty good about not blurting out what he knows, or acting on information he wouldn't have, although once in a while he lets out a squeak when he thinks he has picked up on a plot thread that he can't discuss.
Then again, the Realms are pretty big, and a lot of times even people that have just read through something aren't going to remember all the little plot threads running through everything.
Why, on earth, can't WotC not split the books into a PLAYER PART and a DM PART?
I'm with you there. If making two books would break the budget too much, at least having the DM only material separate from the player appropriate material would be nice.
(offtopic) Wouldn't an Eberron boxed set be just great? The ECS, updated to include the current errata (and with all the DM secrets split off either in another book or the back of the ECS), Sharn, a big cloth map, special Eberron dice, and a listing of all other Eberron material currently out and stuff that's slated to come out within the next year.... I'd pay... lesse, $100 easy... maybe as much as $140 depending on the quality of the map. (/offtopic)
That's one of the reasons I NEVER use published settings. I make my own maps, my own kingdoms, and my own histories. Mind you, I still buy the sourcebooks (Greyhawk, Oriental...), but I only use some parts I find interesting and integrate them in my campaign.
When I start a campaign, I usually make a small map and write a brief history of the surroundings (after all, the players are level 1 and don't know much). Then I build from there, making more maps as needed and adding to the history as I see fit. The players are never aware of what will happen.
And, please, don't give WoC any ideas about making more books than we need. It's bad enough as it is. Just my opinion.
Ultradan
|
Contributor
|
While I too miss the days of the box set where the GM got one book and the player got another, I don't think WotC's formating in particular gives away secrets. I think its more due to the fact that the answers to the secrets exist. That's one of the things I really dug about S&S's Scarred Lands Setting. They don't tell the answers to most of their secrets, but instead present information from the persepective of a character travelling in the lands and specifically leave the answers to those secrets up to the GM. While this makes the setting far less useful for RPGA tournament style playing, it helps maintain a high level of mystery and intrigue.
Personally, I don't like to know all the answers to all the secrets.
|
|
That's one of the reasons I NEVER use published settings. I make my own maps, my own kingdoms, and my own histories. Mind you, I still buy the sourcebooks (Greyhawk, Oriental...), but I only use some parts I find interesting and integrate them in my campaign.
When I start a campaign, I usually make a small map and write a brief history of the surroundings (after all, the players are level 1 and don't know much). Then I build from there, making more maps as needed and adding to the history as I see fit. The players are never aware of what will happen.
And, please, don't give WoC any ideas about making more books than we need. It's bad enough as it is. Just my opinion. Ultradan
Yes, if you are that lucky having the time doing this, that's the best way to do it! Unfortunately I don't have the time and using pre-made material is a god-send!
Oh, and I don't want to give them any ideas about making more books, just to organize them better...
Personally, I don't like to know all the answers to all the secrets.
I second that.
GGG
The answer is 42...dugh.
...ahem...actually I'm making mead...not meat....that one letter makes your sentence a little uncomfortable. I'm not a serial killer...I'm a homebrewing gamer!
Woo-hoo!! I'm not the only one!
Uh, homebrewing gamer, that is. ;-)
We should swap some recipes! Email me at lilith (at) darkmoongallery.com - I love swapping recipes!
The answer is 42...dugh.
What was the question again?
GGG
|
And, please, don't give WoC any ideas about making more books than we need. It's bad enough as it is. Just my opinion.
Amen to that. Although it is too late now. We've put the idea in their collective heads. I expect that within the next few months we will see an announcment from WotC that,
"due to numerous customer requests, WotC will now be separating every book into separate Player and Dungeon Master books. In addition, these new format books will be priced at $100 dollars each, due to the high quality of the maps."
Thanks a lot Thanis.
I have a couple players like that. They buy the books or borrow them and read everything between covers like a sponge. Unfortunately, they sometimes have difficulty separating game knowledge from player knowledge. Often, I change a few critical details from the published version, just enough to get these "uber-readers" into very hot water if their characters know too much.
For example, a character who knows too much about the daelkyr, or the quor, would attract a lot of unwanted and dangerous attention. People might start assuming that character is corrupted or possessed, or a minion.
For those players who just must read everything (and the Kaius example is a very good one), the DM sometimes needs to find a way to advance the campaign and the story along at the expense of the peeping player...knowledge can be dangerous.
I sometimes fondly think back to 1st edition days when the DMG and Monster Manual were hands-off for players!
The answer is 42...dugh.What was the question again?
GGG
Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy, anyone? :) I've only seen the old British version, but it was still funny (partly bacause it was SOOO low budget). As far as a player catching on to a suspected plot hook but not being able to tell, that's a lot of fun- I've got one player who pays a lot of attention to world histories that often encounters this, and I've experienced it as a player a few times. It is fun.
A friend of mine once called me on the phone: "How much do you know about the Forgotten Realms?"
"A little, why?"
"Do you know most of the place names?"
"A good deal of them, yes."
Due to DM's block, he couldn't come up with any names for his homebrew, so he started grabbing them directly from FR. At least the Anauroch was still a desert...
So, they figured out the secrets of Kaius? Change them. THAT will throw them for a loop. "Yes, yes, we know th- WHAT?"
|
|
"So, they figured out the secrets of Kaius? Change them. THAT will throw them for a loop. "Yes, yes, we know th- WHAT?"
I TOTALLY agree. Even when I run a game in an established setting, the first page of my player intro packet always says this: "BEWARE: Anything you think you know about this setting may prove to be false at any time."
I echo what everyone says. You have the discretion to changhe anything you want at any time. He can be alive, undead, whatever.
Another thing you can do is just avoid him in the game altogether.
Just remember that when you do change things to suit your campaign, remember what you changed. Warlock McNasty may be king of Pringles in the published setting, but if you change it to the Duchy of Ruffles, just make sure to keep it consistent throughout your campaign.
Hey, shouldn't you be off to make some meat? ;)
Just kidding!
And, yes you're right. Normally I do the same thing, but Eberron seemed so...NEW... that I never thought one of players could have read it...
Possibly you should have quizzed your players or asked them to stay away from it. You could even give out players packets made by you for the players at the start of the campaign.
Thats whats been done in an Arcana Evolved Campaign I'm a player in. We were told to stay away from the book and we have been provided emails detailing classes, races, equipment and spells. Otherwise I don't know jack about Arcana Evolved except that Monte Cook made it - to the point that we have not been allowed to preview the Presitige Classes. Still if you want to adventure in a world thats fresh this sure works well.
It may frustrate you, but it is a necessary evil. If WotC wants to sell items, they have to put good info in. If they deny players entrance into books they cost themselves sales. They have to assume you can handle it.
Frustrating? maybe. But necessary.
perhaps you just need better players... players who have the ability to play in character and who do not use metagame knowledge to "cheat".
perhaps you just need better players... players who have the ability to play in character and who do not use metagame knowledge to "cheat".
Exactly. In fact, the best players can use metagame knowledge to roleplay their characters more accurately. I have several players who do that. They take the metagame knowledge and are able to analyze how their characters would react to discovering the "unkown" since they have a better understanding of it as players.
Just remember that when you do change things to suit your campaign, remember what you changed. Warlock McNasty may be king of Pringles in the published setting, but if you change it to the Duchy of Ruffles, just make sure to keep it consistent throughout your campaign.
Mmmmm. How I hunger for conquest.
Archduke McNasty,
Lord of Ruffles and soon-to-be-lord of the kindom of Pringles, the emirate of Cheetos and boundless sausedoms of Onion and Sour Cream.
I've always thought Queen Aurala looked pale!
|
Exactly. In fact, the best players can use metagame knowledge to roleplay their characters more accurately. I have several players who do that. They take the metagame knowledge and are able to analyze how their characters would react to discovering the "unkown" since they have a better understanding of it as players.
Aye. While I wouldn't describe myself as the "best player" (too much DM Emeritus in me ;)), I've been enjoying playing in an Eberron camapign involving the Dreaming Dark as a wizard-type w/o Knowledge (the planes)- I'm well aware of exactly what they are, but it's enjoyable to try and fit them into the pidgeonholes of a character w/ only history, geography, and arcana knowledge skills.
Contributor
|
I have to say, I agree in general that the books should keep secret information seperate from player information. Some players will find out, but not all. I have never read any Call of Cthulhu secret stuff because I have been waiting to play it for about 20 years.
In addition, I believe that the biggest problem with the ECS (which I love) is that it brutally mixes up player and SM info. Also the secret of King Kaius is the worst example of this, being revealed in several different places, sometimes mixed into paragraphs intended for players. I let one of my players read the ECS, and he tried to not find out any secrets, but couldn't help himself.
I have also noticed that both the rules and the novels for Eberron are unclear or contradictory in places as to what is supposed to be common knowledge and what is not. Like the secret of the thirteenth mark, which one source says is supposed to be all but unknown, but another portrays every hick farmer as knowing it. Dividing these things in the ECS would have at least established what characters should and shouldn't know, even if it didn't prevent players from learning secrets that their characters shouldn't know.
|
|
...In addition, I believe that the biggest problem with the ECS (which I love) is that it brutally mixes up player and SM info. Also the secret of King Kaius is the worst example of this, being revealed in several different places, sometimes mixed into paragraphs intended for players. I let one of my players read the ECS, and he tried to not find out any secrets, but couldn't help himself.
I have also noticed that both the rules and the novels for Eberron are unclear or contradictory in places as to what is supposed to be common knowledge and what is not. Like the secret of the thirteenth mark, which one source says is supposed to be all but unknown, but another portrays every hick farmer as knowing it. Dividing these things in the ECS would have at least established what characters should and shouldn't know, even if it didn't prevent players from learning secrets that their characters shouldn't know.
Finally, someone understands me! ;)
perhaps you just need better players... players who have the ability to play in character and who do not use metagame knowledge to "cheat".
Thats a partial solution at best...even if your players are willing to pretend they don't know the great secret its still pretty anti-climatic gaming. Kind of like reading Agatha Christie and pretending I don't know who-dun-it. It can still be good but its rarely great.
|
|
My players are actually pretty good in distinguishing between character-knowledge and player-knowledge, but this doesn't help here and is not what I intended to hear with this thread.
As I said before, it's not that I have a problem with changing things or making something up, it's just that I find it totally unneccesary that such knowledge is written in parts where players are also allowed to read (according to WotC) and that there's not even a spoiler warning.
DM and PLAYER infos should not be mixed in any text!
Experienced players can be pretty good at distinguishing between character knowledge and player knowledge. When you've been from level 1 to level 20 twice, played on both sides of the DM's screen and read all the 3.5 core rulebooks cover-to-cover to help justify spending the money on them, it's a lot more difficult to be surprised.
A bodak isn't "what's that odd creature?", it's "Oh crap, those things killed our party in 2003!" They know you can't "baleful polymorph" a lich, they have a mental list of everything the tarrasque is immune to and they know Kaius III's secret.
However, there's a way to combat this! As a DM in such an experienced group you will have an equally good grasp of the rules, and can make new things up from time to time. They've fought a gargoyle, but not a demon-posessed gargoyle with a soul trapping ability. They know that a red dragon is immune to fire, but what's a grey dragon immune to? They know Kaius III's secret, but they don't know the truth about where Kurt Kar'Aashta's allegiances really lie, or what happened to Aaren d'Cannith, or which of Sharn's councillors are secretly members of the Chamber...
Just remember that when you do change things to suit your campaign, remember what you changed. Warlock McNasty may be king of Pringles in the published setting, but if you change it to the Duchy of Ruffles, just make sure to keep it consistent throughout your campaign.Mmmmm. How I hunger for conquest.
Archduke McNasty,
Lord of Ruffles and soon-to-be-lord of the kindom of Pringles, the emirate of Cheetos and boundless sausedoms of Onion and Sour Cream.
Dang, now I'm hungry for conquest. I must now consult with my trusted generals, Fork and Knife, to lead an assault on the Lands of Leftovers, who have recently celebrated their fall harvest.
|
|
It may frustrate you, but it is a necessary evil. If WotC wants to sell items, they have to put good info in. If they deny players entrance into books they cost themselves sales. They have to assume you can handle it.
Frustrating? maybe. But necessary.
I disagree that this is always necessary. As a counter-example, I offer the White Wolf World of Darkness (the first one, not the new one).
While I never enjoyed playing vampires for several reasons, I read most of the material for the background and had many conversations as to what the secret history was really like as anything that wasn't a game statistic or mechanism could possible be a lie, half-truth, or spun for propaganda purposes by the vampire elders.
It was possible to piece some of the truth together from the published material, but not all of it and some of it could appear contradictory if you didn't know why something was being presented in a certain way.
So any game publishing company could do something similar and Eberron strikes me as an environment that would be perfect for this. Releasing sourcebooks that have to be interpreted through a conspiracy filter would actually promote more sales as people who want the whole story will purchase the books that give different perspectives on common material plus some source specific items that might or might not be entire true.
This gives the DM the ability to choose what is true in his game world and what isn't, automatically tripping up players who read everything put out and do not keep player vs PC knowledge separate.
Why am I not playing White Wolf games? I don't like their game system.
But their method of releasing campaign background is dynamite.
I disagree that this is always necessary. As a counter-example, I offer the White Wolf World of Darkness (the first one, not the new one).
While I never enjoyed playing vampires for several reasons, I read most of the material for the background and had many conversations as to what the secret history was really like as anything that wasn't a game statistic or mechanism could possible be a lie, half-truth, or spun for propaganda purposes by the vampire elders.
It was possible to piece some of the truth together from the published material, but not all of it and some of it could appear contradictory if you didn't know why something was being presented in a certain way.
So any game publishing company could do something similar and Eberron strikes me as an environment that would be perfect for this. Releasing sourcebooks that have to be interpreted through a conspiracy filter would actually promote more sales as people who want the whole story will purchase the books that give different perspectives on common material plus some source specific items that might or might not be entire true.
This gives the DM the ability to choose what is true in his game world and what isn't, automatically tripping up players who read everything put out and do not keep player vs PC knowledge separate.
...their method of releasing campaign background is dynamite.
Vampire the Masquerade and Chicago by Night (Second Edition - both) should be required reading for every GM everywhere.
Prince McNasty
Officially tragically hip Prince of Flint, and Chronicler of "Page XX".
::Puts back of hand against forehead, tilts chin up::
Alas, a beast I am lest a beast I become.
"Yes, if you are that lucky having the time doing this, that's the best way to do it! Unfortunately I don't have the time and using pre-made material is a god-send!"
okay, if you have the time to read a published campaign setting, then you obviously have the time to design your own world. all it takes is a few hours, a map, a few high level NPCs, and a reasonably well thought out history for the local setting your players want to explore. The easiest way to use a published setting is to borrow a few things from it and use it in your own world. also, i have a really easy way to discourage meta gaming. if a player in my game does that, i just don't award any XP for the night. easy. it only takes one time for the player to see i don't f#@k around with that sort of playing. if he complains, just show him where the door is and ask him politely not to let it hit him in the @$$ on the way out. easy. usually this stops the player from using out of player knowledge.
going back to the original task of this post, however, is that while it takes an hour to read a portion of a published campaign, that hour can be spent designing your own. just start with a town, a forest, some mountains, a sea coast, and a few adventure sites scattered around and let the players go have fun on a few dungeon crawls. that is how my current campaign started out and it has grown to a huge continent with multiple countires, 5 separate human races, and 7000 years of world history. baby steps soon lead up to a long distance given time.
anyway, hope this helps.
The hour it takes me to read a campaign sourcebook gives me, not only maps and NPCs, but adventure hooks (in some case pre-made adventures), setting-specific feats and prestige classes, and hundreds of years of history. I can't do that myself in an hour.
Plus, I just really like some settings. I'm a Forgotten Realms junkie, and I also love Eberron.
-Amber S.
|
|
I love using 'official information' to confuse players and start false rumors. Trolls afraid of fire? That's what the oldsters down at the tavern say, but have any of them ever seen one? The players confront Kaius and accuse him of being a vampire, at which point he steps onto a sunlit balcony and says, "I've heard those rumors myself. The truth is much more complicated."
|
Contributor
|
going back to the original task of this post, however, is that while it takes an hour to read a portion of a published campaign, that hour can be spent designing your own.
Okay, that's true, but I can read a lot more in an hour than I can write, as can anyone (even ignoring additional time and effort for thinking it out, assuming the writer is creative enough to do this). Also, with a pregenerated campaign world, you can read what you need, and hopefully assume that the rest of the world is consistant enough. For example, in Eberron, you can read some of the general information about the Five Nations, a bit more about Sharn, and then the Forgotten Forge, and you are ready to go. If you need to find out more information, you can look it up as you go and gradually learn more.
And here is a further bonus of a well-organized pregenrated game setting: You can loan your book to your player and say "Your character is from Karrnath, read the player's info on Karrnath." rather than generating a handout of your own or spending time explaining it to them. Oh, except wait, you can't, because if they read the Karrnath section they will learn King Kaius' secret, even if they intentionally skip the boxed text itled "King Kaius' Secret."
This is the point. It's great that you prefer generating your own setting, but you cannot deny that there are advantages to using a pregenrated one, even if those advantages apply more to some people than to others. The problem is that the ECS has effectively negated a few of those advantages by not sorting the information into player information and DM information.
|
|
...This is the point. It's great that you prefer generating your own setting, but you cannot deny that there are advantages to using a pregenrated one, even if those advantages apply more to some people than to others. The problem is that the ECS has effectively negated a few of those advantages by not sorting the information into player information and DM information.
And here we got back to my original intent of this thread!
Everything you said (and Medesha as well) is correct (for me!). And the fact that WotC is not sorting info was the point I am angry about!One of my players asked me, if he could borrow my MAGIC OF EBERRON book, and had to told him, that I first have to check which pages he is not allowed to read (he won't, if I tell him!).
And yes, "reading/preparing" is so much easier and faster then "thinking/preparing"!
I can't believe this discussion is still going.
You are complaining about somethign that cannot be fixed. What about players who are also DMs? What if one of them reads the Dm stuff for his own campaign? Same problem. So what do you separate now?
Or what if he just goes and buys/looks at the DM section anyways? Same problem. Or if another player read the book and told him? Same problem. Or if someone discusses it on a forum? Same problem. How are they supposed to stop that?
You are complaining that WotC is not doing enough to keep players out of the DM's info, but they really can't do anything about it. Get better players, or get over it. No matter how they separate it, or split it up, if a Player wants to read all the background info, he'll get it all. I fail to see how that is WotC's problem.
And still, WotC is a business. If they put in some secrets, and it sells more books, they'll do it. Deal with it.
|
|
I can't believe this discussion is still going.
You are complaining about somethign that cannot be fixed. What about players who are also DMs? What if one of them reads the Dm stuff for his own campaign? Same problem. So what do you separate now?
Or what if he just goes and buys/looks at the DM section anyways? Same problem. Or if another player read the book and told him? Same problem. Or if someone discusses it on a forum? Same problem. How are they supposed to stop that?
You are complaining that WotC is not doing enough to keep players out of the DM's info, but they really can't do anything about it. Get better players, or get over it. No matter how they separate it, or split it up, if a Player wants to read all the background info, he'll get it all. I fail to see how that is WotC's problem.
And still, WotC is a business. If they put in some secrets, and it sells more books, they'll do it. Deal with it.
I think Dryder has a good point. TSR used to have separate books for the DM and the Players in their boxed sets, so it's not a new concept. However, when they place a major campaign spoiler in the middle of flavor text with no warning it can ruin the magic of the setting. It wouldn't be so hard to put some of the DM only stuff in a separate section in the book. Sure it wouldn't prevent determined player's from reading that section, but it wouldn't give secrets away in the middle of general flavor text and it would give readers a choice whether or not to read the secrets.
I also disagree with the statement that something cannot be fixed. How many things has Paizo changed in its magazines in response to reader feedback? Maybe WoTC will change, maybe it won't but that doesn't mean that someone shouldn't express their opinions. What would the world be like if we all just "Dealt with it?"
Just my opinion, for what it's worth :)
Actually, a "good" player can't help but read DM-only info when it's mixed up with the player info. The example given was Karrnath; it's difficult for the DM to say, "Here, read this section, but skip paragraphs 2, 7, 8, and the last sentence of paragraph 10."
A good player can, however, be trusted to keep to the "player" section of the book.
It's not a terrible idea, and as I've pointed out, WotC's already responding (with a "player-only" Eberron Player's Guide). So obviously WotC's listening, and thinks they can sell books without "secrets."
Why the hostility?
-Amber S.
|
|
Again (and with no bad feelings against any poster, really!!!), my players are good! The one player realized, that he had read DM info, and he plays his PC as if he didn't (his father became a vampire through the Fiendish Foot and knows about Kaius secret, thats why the father is tracked by a Karnnathi Bone Knight).
However, the player KNOWS it, and that's what I don't like. Not only for my person, but for my players person, who strictly NOT READS any section I tell him about and who was brought about so much fun!
It's not about good or bad players, it's about giving those players who don't want to spoil anything themselves and don't read DM-Info a chance to not accidently stumple over such infos...
At least, in MAGIC OF EBERRON I can say:"Don't read chapters 1 and 6!" and most of the damage will be prevented.
Of course, the ultimate solution will be when DM's all start running homebrews because their players all read the WotC stuff and/or get spoiler info off the internet.
I trust my players-only because I know they're all too lazy to read D&D stuff (they'll admit it--it's not an insult) and because when they're online the last thing they want to do is read about more D&D stuff.
If I had to run a game for gamers whom I suspected might try to get an advantage in the game or ruin the campaign plot by reading the official campaign setting or adventures, I would change them around so much to be virtually unrecognizable.....
...or finally put my own homebrewed campaign world into full operation.
Until that revolution happens and hurts Wizards' bottom line, we'll just have to make do, I guess.