Contributor
|
You know, this is probably not something I would use all the time, but a) sometimes I run games for kids, and this would be a really effective tool for that and b) I have a long running campaign that we only get to play once every 1-3 months, and we can never remember what the hell is happening, partly because we all play in other more regular games as well. It would work there too.
That said, my last campaign, for a while one of the players was essentially doing this on his own. He kept track of every clue, lead, quest, or other potential adventure hook on little cue cards, and then marked connectection between them and progress made on them as we went. That player moved away, and then no one could remember what was happening,a nd no one could decipher his arcane notations. Plus he had a lot of false leads and stuff in there in the first place. I was tempted to go through all his notes and revise them and chuck the irrelevant ones. It's not that big a step from there to me handing out little quest cards as we go.
Now before people start bashing me as a railroad DM with no creativity, the notes that would remain relevant (or quest cards that I would give out) would be more numerous than the amount of stuff the players could do, leaving lots of choice in there. And I would leave in the intentional false leads. And some of their objectives are mutually exclusive and/or contradictory. Just like the article suggested.
I will admit that I am a DM that likes props. I like the combat grid and minis, I like handouts and pictures of npcs and locations, i give out coins for money and special dice for action points. I find this stuff to be immersive. One type of handout that I use is proclomations, contracts, advertisements etc. that are already like quest cards in many ways, just less systematic.
I also could see quest cards being useful for people who have limited time to play, mostly as a symbol of "this is a direction that I as a DM have prepared material for." I know a lot of people are so opposed to railroading that the idea that a DM plans an adventure is anathema, but there are players who want to cooperate with the DM so that the story happens in a timely manner. I have had to scramble once or twice to put together an adventure when my party has followed up on something that was really inteded just as background colour. Afterwards, they were surprised and apologetic that they made me work harder, but they just thought that was where the adventure was going. Likewise, I have played in campaigns where we ran around in circles for weeks, because the DM kept letting us run up blind alleys in the plot, while we completely overlooked what he wanted us to do. Frankly, I would have been happy if handed us a quest card so that we could actually accomplish something useful.
But really, this is just a suggestion being made, and is not intended to be for everyone. It isn't a new rule, it's just a new perspective on the game, or a new tool for learning how to play/run the game. Palace of the Silver Princess had a chapter that was run like a choose your own adventure, and is still hailed as one of the great old adventures from the basic rules. Not something most DMs would do all the time, but a good learning tool. Quest Cards can be like that, but the idea is simple enough that as a novice DM, you could apply it to most adventures, not just one specially constructed adventure whose format is never repeated. Take it or leave it. It's no big deal.
Wow, this was longer than I expected.
And quest cards? Do people with short term memory problems often play D&D.
As often as I can.
But my memory problems are usually caused by beer and schnapps...complicated with the fact that the last GM I had (it wasn't D&D) loved highly intricate (read "unfathomable") plots. I left it to his wife and one of their roommates to get all into that stuff...they just pointed me at the people who needed killing/roughing up.
I play an excellent thug.
My point wasn't in regards to using the cards as a prop. That's fine. I like Gamemastery products. It was in regards to the fact that they tell us these great story arc tie-ins above and the interweaving plotlines, when technically, those have always been part of the game. It's like they've had an epiphany that you really can tie-in separate adventures with one another like it's an original feature of the game when it's not.
And if that age old advice isn't written down in the books, how is a DM new to the game going to benefit from it? After years of frustration, learning his craft through trial and error? What happens if this newbie just gets fed up because D&D turned out to be too hard? I'd rather it be there for people to take advantage of from the start.
Not everyone is playing that way out of the box. Not everyone has the advantage of being 'apprenticed' to a skilled DM for years before they handle their own adventures. And not everyone has the time or patience for trial by fire. Kudos, I say. About time they spelled it out to reach and embrace even MORE new players more readily.
Gah this is awful.
Awful awful awful.
Talk about taking the part of role-playing that actually simulates reality better than a MMORPG and eliminating it. Why does the story of the game need a freaking "rules wrapper!?!?"
Sure, XP story awards are a good thing. But they don't need to be some kind of "contract" with the players. Legalistically spelling out the victory conditions, rewards, etc. will lead to more and more behavior that's not realistic or heroic.
This sucks. I liked the Saga/Nine Swords basis of 4e and was ok with it, but the devil's in the details and these details we have been hearing are just Godawful.
Personally, I hate using miniatures; I think D&D is better when all the action is visualized in your head and acted out through conversation--it has that magic of the old radio dramas. Miniatures take away from the thrill of pure imaginationI think I'm going to cry. You're my hero man. Can I hug you?
I third that!!! I've seen just as much harmful to the game come out of the rampant minis use as good to the game. We somehow played D&D for 20 years with only the occassional use of minis for specific set-piece battles.
Sure, XP story awards are a good thing. But they don't need to be some kind of "contract" with the players. Legalistically spelling out the victory conditions, rewards, etc. will lead to more and more behavior that's not realistic or heroic.
Anybody who has played Shadowrun can tell you that anytime you're undertaking a job from somebody, you want to be crystal clear on your payment before you accept.
If the players don't haggle for payment up front, they shouldn't be surprised to be paid nothing when they're done.
For example, I once played a game in which the party was the staff of a private detective firm in Sharn. Problem is, for a long time we never really defined our rates, so we accepted a job at one rate, and three (real) weeks later came back with a job well done; the NPC who had hired us asked us how much he owed us, and we misremembered our agreed-upon rate as being rather lower. He, of course, eagerly agreed (having remembered full well what the agreed rate had been.)
Seen as a help for young and/or inexperienced DMs and/or players, I can accept that idea and think I see its merits. And I applaud WotCs efforts to draw younger people towards the game with ideas like these.
So far, it seems that 4e aims at teenagers (with cool powers and cool gizmos and whatnot). That implies that I am no longer their target audience (I´m 37, just for the record). If that impression gets verified once the books are available, I guess I will not buy any wizards stuff any more, as they are no longer made trying to appeal to my tastes (and, possibly, those of other gamers older than, say, 25 - just to have a number). If I see other stuff made for teenagers these days, I get a headache(and could sometimes rival Vomit Guy). I strongly suspect that this would be the case with RPGs written for that target audience.
Disclaimer: I don´t want to say that teenagers are stupid or tasteless or something like that, I just know that things catering to teenagers tastes are normally not catering to my tastes. It is not about better or worse, just about different.
I know I´m generalizing here, so don´t be mad at me.
Stefan
So far, it seems that 4e aims at teenagers (with cool powers and cool gizmos and whatnot). That implies that I am no longer their target audience (I´m 37, just for the record).
I'd encourage you not to get discouraged just because something is or seems targeted at teenagers.
I'm 34. Over the years, I've come to learn that I really don't like DMing. Part of that is because I want to /play/ my cool concepts and throw them into the fiery baptism of a campaign, and really get into the meat of the character. Being DM robs me of that because I play /so many/ other characters that I can't immerse myself in a single character like I want to.
Another part of that is I just don't feel I'm very good at it. There's a lot of stuff to remember. Rules that need looked up, both in the core book and in the suppliments that come out. And honestly, I don't have the patience to really fully familiarize myself with all of it. As a player, all I need to know is what's pertinent to my character. As a DM, I need to know SO MUCH MORE. It's a CHORE, a JOB. I come to the table to play, not to work.
So the 'dumbing down', the target audience of teenagers, the streamlining and focus on fast and easy play... That stuff gives me hope that DMing, for me, won't be a chore. It'll be fast, streamlined, easy (easier, or easy enough) to handle so I don't get frustrated with having to spend hours on hours of prep time to have a good session, or wing it and run the good chance of having a crappy session.
The engaging stories? The interactive tapestry of exploring a fantasy world with my friends? The fond memories that'll last a lifetime? You bring that to the table. D&D just brings a set of rules (and advice) to add the game to the stories you tell.
Even if it's tailored to teenagers, you might find the DM's job is made easier. There's quite possibly stuff (and I hope /plenty of stuff) in there you can use anyway to bring a better game. And that, I think, means everyone wins.
And, you know. It's a /game/. It's /play/. If it's aimed at a younger audience, and we like it, doesn't that just make us young at heart? :)
I know I´m generalizing here, so don´t be mad at me.
I get upset when someone makes an insulting comment ala "This stuff is for stupid/forgetful/lame n00bs." because that implies that if I like it, I'm a stupid/forgetful/lame n00b. I get and respect that not everyone likes every/many/any of the changes being made. But there's been a lot of hostility toward WotC, and that's bled over into people making a lot of remarks that backhandedly say "This sucks, and if you like it you suck too." I don't accuse anyone of doing it intentionally, but it's a huge turnoff (to me anyway) and it's hostile and alienating (IMO) to folks who /do/ like the changes.
EDIT: And a lot of my house rules and proposals I've posted here, have been in the spirit of making D&D less complicated for me and I hope for others.
It's an idea I'll probably adopt in one form or another. Sometimes my players take notes, sometimes not. They often forget the names of important NPCs and things like that, so having the outline of what the quest-giver (if an NPC) tells them or what their objectives are to refresh their memories after a week of not playing will be handy. Maybe they don't have very good memories, maybe I'm just not that scintillating a DM but I think it would be a handy thing to implement so that they know when they're on task or when they are consciously making a decision to veer off course.
So far, it seems that 4e aims at teenagers (with cool powers and cool gizmos and whatnot). That implies that I am no longer their target audience (I´m 37, just for the record).
I'd encourage you not to get discouraged just because something is or seems targeted at teenagers.
The engaging stories? The interactive tapestry of exploring a fantasy world with my friends? The fond memories that'll last a lifetime? You bring that to the table. D&D just brings a set of rules (and advice) to add the game to the stories you tell.
Even if it's tailored to teenagers, you might find the DM's job is made easier. There's quite possibly stuff (and I hope /plenty of stuff) in there you can use anyway to bring a better game. And that, I think, means everyone wins.
Here, here!
Maybe I am missing something, but nothing besides the labeling seems to have changed.
I mean isn't the confluence of multiple adventure threads (quests if you will) already an established presence in most 'quality' games?
So besides giving this concept an actual name and rewards (which many DM's do -- story awards) has anything changed?
And if that age old advice isn't written down in the books, how is a DM new to the game going to benefit from it? After years of frustration, learning his craft through trial and error? What happens if this newbie just gets fed up because D&D turned out to be too hard? I'd rather it be there for people to take advantage of from the start.
Not everyone is playing that way out of the box. Not everyone has the advantage of being 'apprenticed' to a skilled DM for years before they handle their own adventures. And not everyone has the time or patience for trial by fire. Kudos, I say. About time they spelled it out to reach and embrace even MORE new players more readily.
If using key cards is going to be one of the new age methods for reaching out to new DMs in order to make their job easier, fine, but I just want to point out that every DM that's come before hasn't needed them, and we turned out just fine. This concern of yours that new DMs will get fed up and quit because of the game's complexity is going to happen anyway. It's happened before; it'll happen again. DMing isn't for everyone. It takes trial and error, and raw experience behind the screen, to become a good DM. If young DMs are lucky (like I was), they'll try and attend conventions and any other games they can before they start out. I was completely clueless to this game back in 1980, and if it weren't for a kind DM that didn't mind if I watched this curious game they were playing, my life would have been completely different. The intrigue, excitement, and pure indirect DMing experience he passed on to me without even knowing it I'll never forget. It was one of those games, that when it was over, I was like, "Damn! I want to be a DM like that!" After it was over, I was so wishing I could have played! Heh.
Anyway, I digress, but the point is, young DMs starting out need to be proactive themselves, and seek out games to play in before they decide to DM and/or to watch and learn from games in action. No better experience can be given imo, and certainly not by something as artificial as a quest card.
...I'm not sure why they aren't bringing out a compilation 'Advice & ideas for New DMs book', instead of putting it in the 4.0 DMG.
It seems to me that advice and ideas for GMs, old and new, is 100% on target for what the DMG should contain. That was the big innovation in the 3e DMG - it moved much more solidly into having DMing advice above and beyond the magic item tables, environmental rules, XP awards, etc.
It's a suggestion, and quite an interesting one - I do have short-term memory lapses... and long-term ones as well, so for me as both a DM and player it would be a very interesting idea. It's just slightly offensive to be told that I'm some kind of lame-o because of my poor memory. Some of us aren't all that innovative/clever/brilliant and need little prods and gems like this to get a kick-start.
Everything was new for someone once.
|
Doubtless the cards will be good for some people, and not for others. For a lot of people, the notion of "quests" feels a bit like WoW, a game I like as it happens. But the adventuring/roleplaying aspects of it are simplistic - kill 40 of these, bring back so-and-so's head, and so on.
On the other hand, the cards might help some people, especially where play is infrequent. And if it brings people into the game from computer games, all to the good. But for those who actually have a memory problem, writing stuff down has presumably already occured to most of them?
Fine, let me play devil's advocate:
Does anyone seriously believe that this particular suggestion is so lacking in merit that it /shouldn't/ be in the book? Will it not in any way be helpful to enough new and old DMs that it's just a waste of print?
|
As I've already said, the quest cards are not really revolutionary.
Handouts and props have been a part of the game since a long time. A suggestion on how to keep inexperienced players (or short-memory ones, or people who can play only once in a while) focused on the main themes of the adventure is not a bad thing per se.
Obviously, if the concept is taken to the videogame-interface extreme where the players can only get quests from NPCs who are scheduled to deal out quest cards, and then they have to adhere to the narrative line laid out in the same quest card, it is an awful step backward for the freedom of play and richness of the game itself, but this is a really wild speculation - fueled by the embarassing lack of details and hard data provided so far, I must stress.
The thing that really freaks me out, is the hint at quest rules. It seems to me that the whole concept of ruling out what can be in an adventure and what is not to be considered worth of being played is terrifying.
"No, you can't stray out of this quest cause it's not in the card and not contemplated in the rules - wait till next DMG when we'll see the addendum for side treks."
"No, this NPC is not important for the quest, so I really shouldn't reward you for the hour of excellent roleplay you just provided for the whole group."
Well, it is just a suggestion; not a hard and fast rule.
Methinks we are overreacting. But that is 1/2 the fun I guess.
Fine, let me play devil's advocate:
Does anyone seriously believe that this particular suggestion is so lacking in merit that it /shouldn't/ be in the book? Will it not in any way be helpful to enough new and old DMs that it's just a waste of print?
I guess it will be helpful to someone. If someone else´s game will be better because of it, more power to him or her. Still, it does not appeal to me. To me and my gaming needs and desires, it sounds like a waste of space. *shrug*
And, yes, we are overreacting. Try taking away the toy from a toddler, and present him with a new one - he will just hate it for the sake of it, for no real reason.
Stefan
Fine, let me play devil's advocate:
Does anyone seriously believe that this particular suggestion is so lacking in merit that it /shouldn't/ be in the book? Will it not in any way be helpful to enough new and old DMs that it's just a waste of print?
I think it is a wasted effort. If the players are that bad at remembering would the DM be necessarily better? Shouldn't the DM keep a copy to remember to place the target item in the dungeon?
"Ok, DM. We have been to every room and took 20 on all our searches while wearing a robe of eyes. Where is the item we need for our quest?""What quest?"
"This one."
"Oh, I gave you guys the wrong card. Here you go."
"Aw, man! We're in the wrong dungeon ... again!"
I suppose we need little colored game pieces to represent hit points since people will forget those and not write down the damage they take doing their quests.
"How many hit points do you have?"
"I havn't hit anything yet, but the DM gave me a card for ten points to hit the goblin dudes."
"Oops, wrong card again. You need the kobold one in this dungeon."
Story xp isn't a new concept. Writing down notes for your game isn't new. And getting xp for character driven goals is used conceptually as well. (Look at Chronicles of Ramlar. It was mandatory to make personal goals and fill them to "level up".)
Fine, let me play devil's advocate:
Does anyone seriously believe that this particular suggestion is so lacking in merit that it /shouldn't/ be in the book? Will it not in any way be helpful to enough new and old DMs that it's just a waste of print?
No. I'm sure someone would get use out of them. What's funny is, do any of you remember those 3x5 Encounter Deck cards from AD&D that were sold in small boxes? I love those, but only because they're random encounters. If that's where they're taking these particular cards, then that's cool. Who can't use random encounters, right? Of course, we don't know enough about them yet to determine what they'll be like, so this is just so much idle conversation.
|
I hope so. I got the impression from this and several similar articles that there's much more intervention in the 4e books trying to get DMs to run their games in a much more standardized way.Not to sound like too much of an ass, but of course there is.
For years that is what the regular posters on the WotC forums demanded. I don't mean in the sense that they wanted in their game... But in the sense that if you weren't running things their way, you were doing it wrong. (And, more often than not, were welcome to get the hell out of "their" boards.)
And, I get the strong feeling that their message boards are a large part of their "market research." It would explain a lot.
I have a horrible suspicion that you're right
Yeah, they listen to the minority who are most vocal. They don't realize that 90% (guesstimate) of people don't want those changes.
D&D 4E, The NEW COKE of RPGs!!
|
|
Yeah, they listen to the minority who are most vocal. They don't realize that 90% (guesstimate) of people don't want those changes.
D&D 4E, The NEW COKE of RPGs!!
Hyperbole and counter hyperbole. WotC either did or did not study its market. They either did or did not do their homework.
Regardless - the only way to know how welcome the changes will be is to see how well the books sell.
We will know that soon enough.
Until then any claim of what people want will be just wild speculation.
Regardless - the only way to know how welcome the changes will be is to see how well the books sell.We will know that soon enough.
I think a better thing to look at is how the further books sell. I think most gamers will buy 4e core books, at least the players handbook to see if they like the system. Curiosity will get most.
However, how many people play and buy further 4e products will be more telling.
Fine, let me play devil's advocate:
Does anyone seriously believe that this particular suggestion is so lacking in merit that it /shouldn't/ be in the book? Will it not in any way be helpful to enough new and old DMs that it's just a waste of print?
I think the idea of experience rewards for achievements above and beyond the mindless slaying of monsters or 'defeating' of tactical encounters is a great idea and firmly belongs in the new edition. If it is implemented properly, with 'quests' forwarding the plot of the story and adding to the complexity of adventure, I think it's a definite move in the right direction as far as encouraging more than just mindless hack and slash.
Personally, I would like to see a larger percentage of the experience awards given out for reaching plot milestones or achieving closure to subplots. It's something I'm toying around with in my current 3.5 campaign, but it'll be a few weeks at least before I can see how successful it is.
I don't see these as mindless collect X quests like you would find in an MMO. I think of them more as 'story rewards' as they appeared in earlier editions of the game. By having such rewards built into the experience formulas of the game, it allows the DM or adventure writer to figure these rewards in when calculating how much experience an adventure should award characters to keep level advancement on pace.
Now, if the first WOTC published adventures come out with a bunch of 'find the lock that this key fits and gain 500 xp' and 'bring me 8 gnoll ears for 200xp and 50gp', I'll retract all of the above. However, I think that in the right hands, a system of quests will encourage deeper and more intricate plots in adventures.
Personally, I'm not too keen on the idea of cards handed out any time players begin a 'quest'. I'd rather let my players figure out what's important and run with it themselves. Giving out experience because they found a key in a dungeon, and later found the door it opened is kind of silly. However, the earlier example quests in the article, where several different factions are after the same item or have competing goals is intriguing.
I worry that as presented it could cause too much interparty conflict, especially when the completion of a quest would provide a tangible reward for one player and exclude the others. To me, anything that gives to one player's character at the expense of others is a rather poor design decision for a game which is supposed to promote group problem solving. Still, with the right players and the right kind of campaign, it could make for some interesting roleplaying.
I'd have to say that (to me) this seems to be a nice idea, presented in a not-so-nice way. (Funnily enough, this seems to be a theme among a lot of the recent 4E details coming out.)
I do think that having a quick reference of the facts would be useful - it could contain who gave the party their information, some basic leads, and the general goals of the adventure. Having all that for easy reference would make things easier while the party is gathering information, keeping track of sub-goals/etc.
But at the same time it really does feel very video game-like. Folks have referred to the cards higher up in the thread as a "contract," which is what it seems like to me. The party does [insert task here] and they will receive a defined amount of experience and treasure. What especially bothers me is that it seems the players would immediately be told exactly what they'll get as a reward, down to the last experience point. And including experience points might tip off players to an adventure that will get more complicated (and so longer and harder). Seems too meta-gamey to me.
It doesn't help that this the cards sound like they'll use the format for WoW quests - what you need to do to complete the quest, who you need to report back to, and what you'll get afterwards.
But at the same time it really does feel very video game-like. Folks have referred to the cards higher up in the thread as a "contract," which is what it seems like to me. The party does [insert task here] and they will receive a defined amount of experience and treasure. What especially bothers me is that it seems the players would immediately be told exactly what they'll get as a reward, down to the last experience point. And including experience points might tip off players to an adventure that will get more complicated (and so longer and harder). Seems too meta-gamey to me.
It doesn't help that this the cards sound like they'll use the format for WoW quests - what you need to do to complete the quest, who you need to report back to, and what you'll get afterwards.
I honestly don't know what the 'Quest Rules' are comprised of, since they really only gave some vague examples.
As for the cards, only details knowable to the PCs would or should be on them. Stuff like: The goal, what the IC reward is (wealth, land, titles), who's offering it, and maybe the major complications that they've been told about.
A sample Quest Card:
===================
Goal: Retrieve the Sword of Winter and use it to kill the Fire King.
Reward: Lands and Title for each character.
Contact: King Terel or Chancellor Malachai
Location: Said to be in the Tomb of Jormungand the Terrible.
Complications: The tomb may have undead, and Jormungand's advisor was known for summoning fiends to his service.
===================
Other pertinent details could be included, of course, depending on space. And, DMs could give out quest cards each time the PCs run into something, allowing them to reference back to it later if they're already in the middle of something. Having such a thing, assuming it isn't lost, means that it's less likely to be forgotten, and enables the party to pick up on hooks when they're ready, rather than bypassing them and (often, in my experience) forgetting all about the opportunity.
|
|
...I'm not sure why they aren't bringing out a compilation 'Advice & ideas for New DMs book', instead of putting it in the 4.0 DMG.It seems to me that advice and ideas for GMs, old and new, is 100% on target for what the DMG should contain. That was the big innovation in the 3e DMG - it moved much more solidly into having DMing advice above and beyond the magic item tables, environmental rules, XP awards, etc.I'm getting the impression that some DMs (experienced and confident in the way that they already run their games) would just skip over it and consider it a 'waste of pages'. I'm trying to propose a solution that, by printing such material in a separate 'companion DMG', would mean that it was out there in circulation for DM's who wanted to find such advice to look it up whilst not being 'in the face' of those DMs who do like their DMG to be magic item tabes, environmental rules, XP awards, and such forth.
I'm not saying that there won't be DMs out there who would find such ideas such as quest cards or other such advice useful, but just that it's not going to be everyone's cup of tea (or substitute metaphor of your choice).
To paraphrase that awful old adage, though, it's difficult to please all the people all the time.
Oh or how about this, since they're charging for DDI...put that information in a Dungeon Masters Codex. All the extra information for the inexperienced DM!
A sample Quest Card:
===================
Goal: Retrieve the Sword of Winter and use it to kill the Fire King.
Reward: Lands and Title for each character.
Contact: King Terel or Chancellor Malachai
Location: Said to be in the Tomb of Jormungand the Terrible.
Complications: The tomb may have undead, and Jormungand's advisor was known for summoning fiends to his service.
===================
This is something that should be in the Dungeon Masters notebook, not a hand-out card, it should be the player's responsibility to write down information, and Role-play it, if that's what they are saying...wow, taking D&D player IQ down a few notches.
|
|
Regardless - the only way to know how welcome the changes will be is to see how well the books sell.We will know that soon enough.
I think a better thing to look at is how the further books sell. I think most gamers will buy 4e core books, at least the players handbook to see if they like the system. Curiosity will get most.
However, how many people play and buy further 4e products will be more telling.
Kind of telling. 3E PHB, MM, and DMG far outsold all of the other follow on works. But on the whole I agree with your suggested benchmark.
This is something that should be in the Dungeon Masters notebook, not a hand-out card, it should be the player's responsibility to write down information, and Role-play it, if that's what they are saying...wow, taking D&D player IQ down a few notches.
My PC has an 18 wisdom and has been on his noble quest for the past two months. I have a 12 wisdom at best, and haven't even thought about this quest for the past two weeks. Excuse me for not having eidetic memory.
Also: player's responsibility, my ass. Don't make me cite GURPS at you. Taking notes is a miserable enough process when I do it for class; you can't expect me to do it as part of my leisure, too!
player's responsibility, my ass. Don't make me cite GURPS at you. Taking notes is a miserable enough process when I do it for class; you can't expect me to do it as part of my leisure, too!
This is going to sound mean and nasty, but I can't readily think of a way to "tone it down" without making a long, flowery, and therefor false, paragraph. So...
If you aren't willing to take notes to keep a game from slowing down, and doing your part to not step all over the other players fun, then maybe you need to find something else to do in you leisure. Probably something that doesn't involve interacting with other humans.
As a player or GM, we all have a certain amount of duties when it comes to the game. If you can't handle those duties, you can't expect someone else to handle them for you.
And I think that is enough of a rant.
Hiya
player's responsibility, my ass. Don't make me cite GURPS at you. Taking notes is a miserable enough process when I do it for class; you can't expect me to do it as part of my leisure, too!This is going to sound mean and nasty, but I can't readily think of a way to "tone it down" without making a long, flowery, and therefor false, paragraph. So...
If you aren't willing to take notes to keep a game from slowing down, and doing your part to not step all over the other players fun, then maybe you need to find something else to do in you leisure. Probably something that doesn't involve interacting with other humans.
As a player or GM, we all have a certain amount of duties when it comes to the game. If you can't handle those duties, you can't expect someone else to handle them for you.
And I think that is enough of a rant.
I'm gonna have to go with Disenchanter here. Honestly, Burrito, if you find writing down stuff on paper to be "too much of a pain", then maybe rpg's aren't for you. Mainly because, oddly enough, 99% of the game involves taking notes and writing it down on paper...like, oh, spells, potions used, coins found and spent, hit points lost, that kind of thing. ;)
For me, as a player, one of the biggest kicks I get out of RPG's is having a file folder full of pages and pages of notes from adventures, maps, artwork, etc. for a single character. After the character retiers or dies, I can look back at it all and say.."Man, that was so cool! I loved playing this guy...Look at this! I was only 3rd level when we went here...oh, an here..." etc.
I'll stop there. End of Rant.
|
|
Quoting myself from this dicussion on OYT:
I do not believe that someone not taking notes out of sheer ignorance or lack of methodology is "bad behavior". That expression should be right out the window for me.
I do not consider, however, that taking notes at a game table is hard.
A bulleted list of "to do" stuff is NOT hard to write. Nor does it take any time. One thing the core rules (should) could do is to explain the necessity to take notes for the players and explain how to do so without writing novels or wasting play-time on it. Basic methodology for those who need it. An actual sample of game notes could be included. Heck, I would write the advice myself, because I DID in my "How to start Role-playing games" column I wrote in French (which I really need to translate to English, I know).
Y'know, being influenced by computer games is one thing; emulating them is another all together. Yikes.
-The Gneech
In regards to having a quest/story award exp mechanic:
While I agree that quest/rp experience isn't anything new, I like the idea that they are trying to provide a better mechanic for it. Hopefully this mechanic/tool will allow a DM to better balance the exp awards for encounters and quest/story awards so that the risk of accidentally advancing too quickly or too slowly is minimized and the need for estimating is eliminated. This could have some good potential as long as it is flexible.
In regards to the suggestion to using quest cards:
As for the cards, I wouldn't use them, instead I would encourage my players to take notes. This way, if need be, I can look through their notes (or have them read them to me) and get a feel for what elements of the game are/aren't working or what pieces of the story might have gotten lost or miscommunicated. Doing this allows me to get an idea of what kind of things they pick up on or respond to best and what things they tend to miss. That way, if I know they tend to ignore information coming from certain types of NPCs or sources I can make adjustments or changes to my plan and hopefully improve the game.
Foremost, I am feeling pretty excited about 4th edition D&D. I came to this conclusion last night after looking at a *lot* of what we've heard. On the subject of Quest Cards... I think that this is the type of mechanic which has been presented poorly, but which isn't fundamentally bad.
For example - one of my favorite things in past gaming sessions has been offering up Handouts to the players. For knowledge of my personal background as a DM, I've been doing it for many years now and have run Savage Tide, Shackled City and for the longest time The Night Below (a second edition super module boxed set). There've been plenty of my own campaigns as well, but those are some of the major pre-mades. One of my favorite things about those games were the handouts - pieces of paper with the image of what the characters saw or a facsimile copy of the note the players were presented with.
I can't think of any DM who would gripe and b#@+% if a supplement suggested making a copy of the King's proclamation that he will grant them landed titles if they can rescue his kidnapped daughter. Is that really so different from a quest card? It's fancier, it looks nicer, it has the terms coached within the actual text and can make the player work a bit to find it, but is that really so different? If your players have an ancient and musty tome which details how to locate said princess after failing to recover her from a dungeon, give them a book with an index card taped inside the cover detailing what they must do.
Also, earlier in the thread someone asked about a quest card for a dungeon which doesn't actually contain the quest item and the entire purpose is to lead the players astray while their patron rigs a town election. I say yes! Let the players think it's totally legitimate! Once they have scoured that dungeon every which way they'll eventually have to give up and come back to town for more information, only to discover the guards at the city gate won't let them in. If your players view the game as an MMO (and don't get me wrong, I can definitely get that feeling as well) how surprised will they be to find that the quest didn't work out like it should in an MMO?
I think with a little creativity, the quest card idea could be a great one, and I wouldn't mind a standardized system for quest XP. In previous editions it's something I simply eye-balled, I'd guess or use whatever was enough to push the PCs who were close over to the next level. Having an in-game mechanic for how much quest XP is appropriate is just fine with me, and while the ideas of index cards alone might not be appealing, with a little panache they can be a very cool tool for the gaming table.