Well. It's probably not completely new as someone's probably done it before, I have just never seen it mentioned anywhere ever.
This is a rather unique approach to puzzles, as long as the puzzle isn't overly complicated or convoluted. What you want is a simple situation which requires creativity from the players to solve.
For maximum effect I will demonstrate with a quick anecdote from the latest two gaming sessions. Their cleric had just died. They were in the middle of a huge jungle. They heard of a legendary "temple of ressurection" in the area to which they headed with their drow guide (Xendrik, Eberron campaign setting). This summary was ultra cheesy, but that's the way I roll :P
Greatly abridged:
GM: The temple looks like a pyramid with much of the actual point missing.
GM: Where the point should be there's just a flat surface
GM: You can see something in the middle of this
Wiz: I climb up
Fgt: Me too
GM: You can see that the thing in the middle is a black column about seven feet tall.
Wiz: I approach it carefully. Do I see anything?
GM: It's completely smooth.
Wiz: Janis, lift me up so I can see the top! (Janis is the fighter)
Fgt: Sure.
Wiz: Can I see something?
GM: No. The top is completely flat.
Wiz: I get back down again. I look at the floor. What does it look like?
GM: It looks like lines have been carved into the stone in a chaotic pattern. You're unable to make out anything from what you see, however.
Wiz: Hmmm...
Fgt: Maybe if we have to place the body on top of the column?
Wiz: That might be dangerous... We don't know what will happen.
Wiz: Maybe if we try touching the column with the body?
Fgt: Why not?
Fgt: I bring out the cleric's body and touch the stone with his hand.
GM: With a loud bang, the body instantly disappears! All that remains is his clothes.
Wiz: What!?
Fgt: Wtf?!
GM: Suddenly the ground begins to shake...
*etc etc. the ressurection succeeds*
Now what was the point in quoting all that?
Very simple: I made basically everything up on the spot. Of course, every gm has at some point improvised. Improvisation is necessary. What I did, however, was different from how I normally improvise. I didn't improvise a puzzle with a solution. I improvised a puzzle, but I HAD ABSOLUTELY NO SOLUTION IN MIND.
I let the players themselves try things out, and if they got some great idea I just ran with it. I had no plan whatsoever. When the wizard suggested touching the column with the body I just thought it was a cool idea and ran with it.
I wouldn't use this method on any more complicated puzzles, but I found it a great way to resolve a minor obstacle like this.
This is called "Free Form GMing" and pretty much how I do it. My most complex adventures usually run about a sentence in length. The rest of it is just improvisation. To each there own. My wife has everything all laid out..each encounter and everything. I just keep a timeline in my head and let the players write their story in my world, as opposed to "leading the party by the nose".
Each GM is different, and many styles work well. I am glad you had a lot of fun with it! :)
This is called "Free Form GMing" and pretty much how I do it. My most complex adventures usually run about a sentence in length. The rest of it is just improvisation. To each there own. My wife has everything all laid out..each encounter and everything. I just keep a timeline in my head and let the players write their story in my world, as opposed to "leading the party by the nose".
Each GM is different, and many styles work well. I am glad you had a lot of fun with it! :)
I think you might be misunderstanding me, though.
The thing I found "new" isn't the improvisational aspect specifically (i've done that before), the thing was instead improvising even the actual solution to the puzzle as it was suggested. Instead I used player feedback to create the solution.
Of course that might be how you meant it too, so :P
It's not new, but I laud you for your discovery.
There is a game, Over the edge, that basically advocates whole campiagns doing just that, even to the point that PC's are generating whole plot arcs just from randomly blurted things.
It's a new trick, and It's fun, but be carefull.
Batts
For many years I ran, and played in, an ongoing Amber campaign.
"Free form" or "on the fly" GMing is all you can do.
I usually had a major plot (what was happening in the background) and allowed the players to interact with it as they saw fit.
It is challenging to do in 3.5 / Pathfinder because it is a numbers/stats heavy game (unlike Amber).
Good luck to you... it can be very enjoyable once you get the hang of it.
Yeah...that is free form, constantly change the situations to match player input and repercussions of player's solutions, because...hey...sometimes they have a better/neater solution than you do :)
For many years I ran, and played in, an ongoing Amber campaign.
"Free form" or "on the fly" GMing is all you can do.
I usually had a major plot (what was happening in the background) and allowed the players to interact with it as they saw fit.
It is challenging to do in 3.5 / Pathfinder because it is a numbers/stats heavy game (unlike Amber).
Good luck to you... it can be very enjoyable once you get the hang of it.
Amber is a great way to teach yourself "on the fly" GMing. Well worth it if for only one night. Or 2 years strait.
|
@JudasKilled: The only bad GM is the one that isn't providing fun for his players. If free-forming works for his group then more power to them.
Right now I'm running a Kingmaker game, and it is absolutely perfect for my style of GMing. Random encounters can be malignant or peaceful. I can throw in a dungeon or encounter area if the mood or inspiration strikes me (I created a wolf/undead themed dungeon my players absolutely loved in an empty Hex).
The next campaign I run is going to have a very similar philosophy, but I'm going to cannibalise my mountains of Dungeon Magazines and yet to be run adventure paths (I'm looking at you Second Darkness and Shackled City) - to make a Pirate themed Sandbox campaign (although maybe with all that ocean it should be called a Beachbox campaign?). But that's a future thing and there's plenty of time...
I HAD ABSOLUTELY NO SOLUTION IN MIND
I think you owe your players and apology. I've played under this before and let me state that it is the worst idea ever. As in if I knew you were doing this I'd get up and leave bad.
Not for free form running mind you, but when you sit down to a puzzle it should have a answer. Period. And the idea that the person who gets it right is the one who has the idea you happen to like the best? Just crap.
And the idea that the person who gets it right is the one who has the idea you happen to like the best? Just crap.
If the DM is half decent at pulling this trick off, you'll never know that's what is happening.
I've had to do this twice now simply because my players did something I wasn't expecting. And it worked spectacularly! I had forgotten that the players all learned to speak elven, and they were escorting a merchant with a cart to a small town. He happened to have a strong dislike of elves (something I just threw into his character for no reason). He offered the glove up as a magic item but he claimed he didn't know what it did. Later when one of the players bought the glove and it whispered the command word to them (in Elven), the player shouted "OH! He didn't know because he probably doesn't know elven! He hates elves!" Naturally, I just went along with it. It covered up my lack of an explanation as to why this merchant who had an extensive knowledge of magic (where most human NPCs in my world do not) wouldn't know anything about this glove.
Of course, my g/f later pointed out (in private) that she could tell I hadn't planned that, but no one else caught on, so it worked out.
Fact was, I just wanted the item's effect to be a surprise while they were being told everything about the rest of the merchant's stock in detail, and when it came to it, I said he just didn't know. I hadn't thought about why because it never occurred to me to question it. I got lucky, but it worked really well.
Also, I find that if I DON'T free form everything, the stuff I have written out goes completely unused. Players trash everything I write, so I have stopped. I write up stats for encounters and get a general idea of the location - that's it.
Clarifications for some people who think this might've been too easy:
This was reincarnation, not resurrection. Secondly their souls will now belong to the abyss until they manage to do something about it. This was not in any way for "free" :P
No offense but I call this garbage GMING, as in absolute crap. Before you take offense let me explain why. When someones jut free forming, i can tell, ive dmd a long time. I know every dm has to wing s!#~ and make up npcs on the spot. But to have crazy s!#~ out in the middle of nowhere all the time is just well unrealistic. It reminds me of games i ran when i was 12 years old for my friends.
Now I have paghes of notes stat blocks, encounter tables, map keys with major relics and creatures listed for the wqhole area the pcs are in. Then if the pcs get f#!&ed hard and are like WTF ill just show um my notes that I made a long time ago and they alll feal like they havent been cheated.
Ultimetly winging it is fine a little bit, but i personally believe winging it too much is just bad dming.
They're on a quest to Xendrik. The cleric died. Immediately following the death of this character I had two options.
A: Make the cleric player roll up a new character.
B: Have the character revived somehow but not for free.
I could've gone with A, but that would be idiotic. Look at the situation realistically. You're out in some huge effing jungle out in the effing nowhere and suddenly you
1: Run into some other person who is
1a: Willing to team up with you,
1b: Is willing to go in the same direction you're going and
1c: Is a healer
2: Find a mysterious temple which coincidentally is
Which one is most interesting? Option 1 was idiotic. We've had to do it that way once already during this quest (a guest player) and doing it again would just be silly.
The wizard player basically expressed his opinion that there's been a considerable lack of temples so far and I ran with it.
I HAD ABSOLUTELY NO SOLUTION IN MINDI think you owe your players and apology. I've played under this before and let me state that it is the worst idea ever. As in if I knew you were doing this I'd get up and leave bad.
Not for free form running mind you, but when you sit down to a puzzle it should have a answer. Period. And the idea that the person who gets it right is the one who has the idea you happen to like the best? Just crap.
I owe nobody any apologies.
It was a bit of an experiment. I usually have most stuff planned, but this was an exception that I had to do because of what happened.
I would never have this kind of solution to a detailed puzzle, but this WASN'T detailed. This was just a minor obstacle. They weren't supposed to stand there trying every freaking method to succeed.
Proper free-form GMing requires preparation. But it's a very different kind of preparation from mechanical GMing.
yes and despite some complaining it does in fact take some skill and planning for it to work right. Especially if you are doing more then one NPC in the room at the same time having a conversation all at once.
Well, if that works for you Judas, that is fantastic. But you have to release that its different strokes for different folks. I mean, I love cinnamin in my applesauce, but my wife will throw it out, since she hates it.
But look, just because you had a bad experience, doesn't mean free forming sucks. It just means that you didn't like the GM who used it for you. It is a bit like saying "Well, this doctor is mean, therefore all doctors are mean, and I'll never go to a doctor again."
If you like to run games in that fashion great. But what if your players want to go to Albuquerque instead of doing the adventure you just spent 10 hours laying out? Is it a "do this or go home" thing, or do you find a way to "adjust" it in.
Lyrax is completely correct in saying that free forming takes a different kind of preparation because it is an entirely different kind of game. You have to have a good solid grasp of not only the rules, but the world the PCs are traveling around in. I just happen to have a head that works that way, other GMs don't..like a different group I play in. That GM only uses modules...as written...no modification...do this or go home... and you know what, its fun! My players are constantly telling me that my game is fun.
And that is what really matters...are you and the players having fun. On the GM spectrum of "free form" to "leading by the nose" as long as people are enjoying themselves, no one owes anybody else an apology for play/GM style.
I actually love this approach to puzzles/traps. I don't design the traps with a loophole in mind, as that's not what the trapmaker would do- but if a player outsmarts my trap (they eventually will, it will get messy, but they'll find a way) I let him and he has his victory. I do my best to know how a device works, what DC's should be what and all, but I don't pre-solve these things. I find that when I do pre-solve obstacles for my players I'm less open to different solutions. And they always have different solutions, maybe it's just everyone I've ever played with, but when someone is in the gaming mindset, all normal logic flies out the window and I get a series of the strangest thought processes I've ever experienced. And it's a blast.
That said, I do prep things, I prepare npc names, I can't do that on the fly, I give my villains plots, I create a narrative. But I mentally prepare myself to change things at the last minute to better fit the vibe the session gives. Most writers will tell you that at a certain point characters, and even plots will write themselves. And it's true for gaming. More so, if anything.
|
And for my money it's the very best in GMing you can find. Pretty much a staple for the most successful Iron GMs.
I think it's safe to say that no GM is great without the ability to GM free-form. Some great GM's prefer it, while others do not, but the ability to make an 'off-the rails' jaunt just as good as (or better than!) the rest of the game will serve even the strictest GM's.
And personally, I do prefer it. Both as a player, and as a GM.
|
No offense but I call this garbage GMING, as in absolute crap. Before you take offense let me explain why. When someones jut free forming, i can tell, ive dmd a long time. I know every dm has to wing s%%! and make up npcs on the spot. But to have crazy s%%! out in the middle of nowhere all the time is just well unrealistic. It reminds me of games i ran when i was 12 years old for my friends.
Now I have paghes of notes stat blocks, encounter tables, map keys with major relics and creatures listed for the wqhole area the pcs are in. Then if the pcs get f%&&ed hard and are like WTF ill just show um my notes that I made a long time ago and they alll feal like they havent been cheated.
Ultimetly winging it is fine a little bit, but i personally believe winging it too much is just bad dming.
You obviously never played with the killer-DM of Rotterdam.
Please don't take this as me being patronising but well done Ganryu. Your players had fun and you had fun. You moved the story along and you were able to shape the world in a way that allowed your players to have input.
When that happens the game moves beyond a mechanics fest and into shared story.
Don't overly focus on the improv but mix it in and find the balance. Then you will have games that people will talk about years later.
RPG Superstar 2013
|
I assure everyone who reds this, in contravention of the post above, there are a lot of great GMs out there winging it every single week, and they are so good at their craft you won't know. Or if you get the idea, you won't care.
Iron GMs like Ninja Barista will run a flawless game and you'll feel like you're in a fully realized campaign world the whole time.
I've seen Nick Logue and Tim Hitchcock play with almost no notes or references of any kind and the game was seemless, even for seasoned palyers with high expectations.
It takes practice, and a little humility to learn from other GMs, and alertness in term of how to keep your palyers involved, and feeling they are in a limitless environment, even if they are surrounded by a fog of war, and nothing outside of them has been developed.
Go to NeonCon next week and play in the Iron GM event there. You'll see it. Or check out Iron GM on FB.
I think people put too much emphasis on whether to free-form or not, and whether it is the right way to DM or not (as if such a thing existed!). The most important thing for any role-playing game, regardless of genre, mechanics or people is - is everyone having fun? If the group (including the DM) are, then you are doing it right, however that might be. If the group isn't, then mix it up and find a better way.
|
Because Pathfinder is a very numbers heavy game, I like to plan enough ahead that I have enemies reasonably well statted out. But as I get more comfortable with DMing I try to free form things more and more. Sometimes I let things unfold naturally without any plan, sometimes I have a plan in mind and end up going another direction because a new idea or a player idea strikes me as the more interesting choice at the time.
I'm glad you and your players had a lot of fun - because that's what really matters. :)
I'm not a big fan of "make stuff up as I go along" GMing. Even when it's fun, I still find it a bit disorienting, as if the laws of the universe could change at any time without notice. (I make an exception for "Toon", however!)
Having said that, I like the idea of taking the best bits out of the players' idle speculations and adding them to the plot.
Anyone who tells you that you 'owe your players an apology' or 'that your a bad dm', well obviously your not playing the same game type they are. I would ignore them.
Your a good GM if your being fair, creative, friendly and are keeping your players chalenged and engaged in an adventure they and you are enjoying. Some folks reaquire copious numbers and preparation to do that and some folks don't.
The absolutely best GM I ever played with had a general story outline for the campaign, a few regular NPC's statted up that we ran into or went to on a regular basis and made liberal use of the 'rule of three'.
Basically you free form most things and on puzzles or mysterys you let the players discuss amongst themselves what they think it is. Whatever the third guess is is the right answer. The story basically writes itself and the players get the feeling that they are working on something big and when their guess turns out right they get great ejoyment out of BEING right and having 'figured it out'.
Obviously you don't TELL them your using the rule of three, and ideally you don't use it constantly, but it can make for great side adventures and can help shore up plot points that you did not foresee.
I have long ago decided I couldnt plan for every eventuality with my group. There are after all more of them thinking of ideas then me and my one brain, so they are bound to come up with stuff i didnt think of. So the rough outline and improvisation is usually the way i go. I'll usually plan a few encounters but where and how they happen depends on what the PC's do, and how they are resolved is totally up to them. So I think the free form method is a good one, the more you can say yes the better in my book. I dont like giving flat no's to my players at least not at the gaming table that is.
Ignore the haters, do what you must to keep the game going and the players happy (within reason of course).
In my game I make everyone create 2 PCs. Why? Because the PCs end up doing something that involves them getting killed due to one reason or another. Sometimes the player said to me "I'm just going to recreate this PC with another one that's just like him!" Sometimes I allow it, sometimes I don't.
So in order to move the story along without having to come up with another plausible reason why some random person is wandering in the wilderness (town replacement is easy) I've done the following:
*Fighter was dragged off by a shambling mound to be killed and eaten but ended up spitting him out. Novice cleric they were escorting from one town to another started casting mumbo jumbo spells. Touched the side of head and shocked him back to life. PCs were astounded and asked how he did it to which he responded back that he stayed a Holiday Inne the night before they left.
*Barbarian torn to pieces by a bullette so they decided to throw his body and gear in a chest to deal with when they got to town. In the middle of the night they heard something rocking in the wagon. They drew weapons and saw the chest rocking around to which they unlocked it and out popped the barbarian demanding why he was stuck in the chest and where was that bullette.
*Cleric bitten by a phase spider, dropped from 50' and splattered with broken bones. Artifact that he was holding said "No, I need to get home". Cleric mumbles a Optimus Prime decibel "No." and stands up as smoke and light shoot out from his body and he's left terminator style hugging his staff with 3 Con points.
All of these are based on the player telling me that they wanted to continue playing their PC again and me finding unique and creative ways to letting them live once again. Does it happen all the time? No of course not. Sometimes it's worth bringing that PC back sometimes I just veto it and say "Do Betterer next time"