I know you touched on giving out loot a tiny bit in Deus ex Machina but could you do a post on that and getting players to role-play?
I think I'll be able to make BLPs out of Loot and Encouraging Role Playing. Thanks for the suggestions.
Your welcome and thank you.
I'll start with loot. I wanna try and have it up by Thursday and Encouraging Role Playing up by next monday. This way, I'll have time to pour some more helpful info into the posts.
Until then, I encourage my readers to post and suggest topics for future BLPs. Cheers!
-Canis
Ah thanks for your posts, I'm a DM for... eh 25 years... I love DMing and now I'm back to school to be a future IT... so I have not play with my 2 group for at least full year.... I'm to finish in 12 week... then work... then DMing!!!!
Peace to you, I go...
Update: I've changed the URL of my blog to canisconfessions.blogspot.com.
My next BLP will be up within the day. Thanks for the replies folks.
-Canis
Hello again folks. Today’s post will be the start of my normal posting schedule of Mondays and Thursdays. In this way, I’ll be able to pour a little more help into my posts and maybe reach a few more DMs and players. Anyways, to the post.
Today is all about wealth by level, loot, and the pesky problem of characters being equipped with overly powerful gear. So why does it matter if your PCs are, by game standards, poor or rich? The ability, or inability, to buy the gear they need can lead to negative consequences within a game. Let’s look at the two extremes of character wealth before we continue.
Characters who are too rich:
In order to really drive home this point, let’s take this example to its extreme. Imagine, if you will, a level 2 fighter with a +2 Flaming longsword. This longsword’s enhancement and enchantment cost 18,000 (CRB 468, Table 15-8). A second level character’s wealth should be at or around 1000 gp (CRB 399, Table 12-4). This can lead to a character being able to hit the AC of a creature whose challenge rating exceeds the norm for his level (CRB 397, Designing Encounters). Why is this a problem? This will lead to higher level monster encounters for lower level PCs. Yes your PCs may be able to hit said monsters but since the monster in question is a higher challenge rating than normal, he will deal more damage to weaker PCs, dramatically increasing the odds of a party wipe.
Characters who are too poor:
This isn't as big a problem as PCs who have too much wealth. Sure your players who focus their characters around gear may be a little upset, but in terms of game balance, this has few negative consequences. As a matter of fact, this can, if used moderately, be beneficial to your group. For instance: your PCs need that one vital piece of information. They don't have the money to pay a bribe, so instead the PCs must use intimidation, flattery, or even torture to get what they need. If used correctly, lack of wealth can encourage your players to role play more.
To keep it simple for you as the DM as well as your players, just stay within the Wealth by Level guidelines. Often, however, you will find that your PCs have more gold than what the WBL advises. This is where loot comes in to the equation.
Loot is often the motivating factor for many players. Finding or taking the best loot possible is one of the best parts of playing DnD, but loot can cause a dramatic spike or drop in PC wealth. So what do you do if a PC has too much wealth? Simple, a few encounters without loot can fix the problem. If instead a PC doesn't meet the WBL, a few encounters with above average treasure should fix the problem.
As an aside, loot need not always be "standard." Spice up what your players find by having them create "wishlists." Wishlists are lists of items that players either want to find or buy. Throwing in a couple items from your player's wishlists can make a normal encounter into a memorable encounter.
Lastly, before I give my customary example, what to do about high powered weapons in the hands of lower level PCs. There are two methods to go about this: 1) Deal with the problem in game. Purposely strip the item from the PC, by force, trickery, or deus ex machina. This can lead to feelings of being "picked on" by the DM. I suggest avoiding this if at all possible. 2) Deal with the problem out of game. Talk to the player whose character possesses the item. Tell him/her that the item is disrupting the balance of the game and that the adventure is suffering because of it. For instance: your player has that +2 flaming longsword, "oh no I meant a masterwork longsword." If the player refuses to cooperate, use method 1.
Alright, even though it may be shorter than usual, it is example time. Keep in mind, as in my last post, I will be using "points of advice" rather than "mistakes."
"My players were running through a dungeon, looking for a dragon (A1). Sounds difficult I know, note the sarcasm. (Seriously, how hard is it to find a colossal creature?) The PCs were all level 2. After a dungeon full of encounters (A2), my players find a chest containing two swords. The swords were a +1 longsword and a +2 shortsword (A3). The fighter took both and began using the longsword as his primary weapon. It was hardly noticeable, but the fighter's prowess did increase(A4). The remainder of the dungeon was easier accordingly."
Breakdown:
A1- When using dragons in a game, keep in mind the very real possibility of player stupidity. Also remember that dragons are, by their nature, extremely powerful. If a PC attacks a dragon, the dragon will retaliate. Dragons are best saved for higher level PCs.
A2- Concerning creatures living in or around a dragon's lair: most don't. The mere presence of a dragon will drive away any random creatures that may try to inhabit the upper, and smaller, levels of a dragons keep.
A3- This is a clear example of giving a player an item well beyond the WBL guidelines. Just remember to keep an eye on it.
A4- Remember: don't give a powerful weapon to a PC and not expect him to use it. It can disrupt your game so try and keep your treasure hordes within WBL guidelines.
Well, that's it for today folks. The best advice I can give about today's topic is this: keep what you kill, within reason, and always remember to loot the bodies of your fallen enemies, and companions.
Thoughts and comments are welcome.
-Canis
I'd like to add in a few things regarding Dragons, in hopes of injecting some additional creativity for encounter design, and adventure site design in general.
Whenever I include a dragon in a game, I consider each dragon to be a "leader" among monsters. They're wealthy, charismatic, powerful, and often times very knowledgeable and experienced. This sounds like the kind of creature that attracts followers, wouldn't you think?
Further, I find it hard to believe that dragons can get wealth by sitting in their cave, hoping for tasty, easily killed visitors with backpacks full of coins and gem-encrusted swords to wander aimlessly in. So how do they get so stinking rich? Why, by going out and adventuring of course! And by adventuring, I mean flying around, looking for easy prey to kill and rob, whether that prey be individuals, low level adventurers, townships that don't have sufficient resistance to weather a dragon attack and so on. They also can operate as "draconic mafia", demanding ongoing periodic tribute from generation after generation of weaker creatures in village X, under threat of eating all their kids and churches.
All this points to a common concept - Dragons either have to be social creatures (extortion, gathering info on happenings to find opportunity), and/or they have to leave their lairs (to follow the career path of a glorified mugger). This demands some security measure, to protect their oversized hot-rock made of gold & magic items, while the dragon's out-of-office.
I'm leading up to an implication ... Dragons have minions. These minions would have to be devoted to their draconic master, be it from love or fear (to use Machiavellian terms). There would definitely be some who keep their eye on the treasure, and probably some who keep their eye on any entrances or exits to the lair. Then, of course, they may want families and/or friends and/or pets of their own, resulting in a sort of living society built around the dragon.
Whenever I choose a dragon's sentry, I like to select by climate, terrain, or some other factor which helps define the dragon. The dragon lets them live, they protect the dragon's lair. It's a good deal, since fewer people are dumb enough to assault a dragon's lair, than to raid a goblin village. Again, this means that the Goblins probably seeked out the Dragon in hopes of an easier life.
For example, Red dragons live in volcanoes or deep caverns with geothermal heating. So they prefer minions like Fire Giants, Fire or Earth Elementals, Azers, or humanoids with Darkvision... so long as these minions can be easily dominated, or hunted down, eaten and replaced if they prove themselves unsatisfactory. They have to be weak (mentally and/or physically, compared to a Red Dragon), and/or passive (such as Elementals, who have no worldly desires such as wealth or friendship).
The other thing which I see as common in Dragon's Lairs is traps. Not traps like Indiana Jones stuff, but simple things which are easy to make, require little or no maintenance, and won't make the Dragon's home life more difficult. Our Red Dragon would, for example, have plenty of lava pools, some of which have a very thin rocky crust (kept so by a natural draft of cooler air) - enough to cover it, but not enough to bear weight. To a Red Dragon (or Azer, or Fire Giant), this is about as threatening as a puddle. To many infiltrators, it's red-hot gooey death, starting at the ankles. Other traps would be to set up cave-ins in the side tunnels, which Red Dragons also laugh at, since their fire breath is hot enough to turn a few inches (or feet!) of rock into liquid - just by virtue of massive strength and fire breath, a cave-in is merely an inconvenience.
The end result is that a dragon's lair can be a very interesting, dangerous dungeon setting, complete with thematic badguys (dragon-minions) of various types, traps, and so on. The lesson to learn here is: Don't mess with dragons.
I hope this wasn't too boring, and that it helps you come up with some great ideas for designing your own dungeons and other encounter sites. Remember - everything happens for a reason. Make it so in your game, and you'll create a world that's rich and engaging with little effort.
Contrary to my post above, I can agree with pretty much everything you pointed out Malignor. I guess I'm still stuck on the "Smaug" mold of dragons. No friends, no allies, only meals. lol
I may, if you don't mind, incorporate some of your ideas into my dragon encounters if eer my PCs are foolish enough to tangle with dragons.
What about a post on alignment?
I shall add it to the list of topics
Rule 1 for Gamemasters...Read the Pathfinder Gamemaster Guide. It's not a book of sensless knowledge, it explains everything and then some about how to properly GM a Pathfinder game.
I agree, my GMG is invaluable
mplindustries wrote: Mark Hoover wrote: For instance: the very opening will be goblins trapping folks in a flaming guildhouse as the party happens to be in the area. There's a fight with some goblins in an alley and then...freeze screen: 2 decision paths appear - follow the one on the roof back to a nearby sewer lair or help the guard and citizens free the guildmembers. Each decision will lead to a 5-room type dungeon scenario and involve fights, skill challenges and such but in 2 radically different styles. So, let's say you enter a dungeon and arrive at a T intersection. You have decided that, down the left path, is a very dangerous Golem. Down the right path is the den of a goblin tribe that has been raiding nearby caravans for months (so there's lots of treasure).
As far as the players can see, the dungeon is essentially featureless--nothing special indicates what might be in either direction. They arbitrarily decide to go left, and they get the crap kicked out of them by a Golem.
The PCs decided to go left, but did they actually have any choice? As far as they were aware, the decision was arbitrary--they had no way to know what was down either corridor and you could have easily switched what they encountered without them realizing it.
There's no purpose to a decision branch that offers no clues or hints as to what might be behind door #1, and there's even less point to preparing two different possibilities for an arbitrary decision when it's not even actually possible to go back and try the other decision.
I guess my point is two-layered:
1) Don't give your players blind choices
2) If you do give your players blind choices, don't waste your time planning multiple outcomes. In the decision tree of mine you note above, the indicators of where to go are very personal but not featureless. The party can get after the fleeing goblin because; maybe they have a vendetta against the things or as players they're very action-oriented with a need for the instant gratification of taking out more goblins. Or they can aid the guards because; there's a paladin and a bleeding heart cleric in the party or they have a personal goal to become real heroes in the eyes of society at large.
As for your dungeon scenario its a simple fix: goblins one direction, horrifyingly powerful golem in the other...either a: add some very obvious goblin tracks down the one hallway and the words "Beware: Iron Statue that Murders" down the other or b: no matter which way they go make the room they find be the goblins' den.
One GM blog I read said there will always be railroading but whenever possible give the party a choice, even if its the ILLUSION of choice. I don't know that I enjoy being sneaky with my players but they made a good point: If you as the GM want the party to eventually kill a bunch of goblins then its your job to make the party choose that option. Its like you're a salesperson and the party is your customer; you need to get them to buy your product or you won't get paid but the only way to seal the deal is to make them WANT to buy.
Now, you can be a railroader "The goblins have killed everyone for a 30' radius and completely surround the tiny village outpost; the only way out is through them" or you can give them a straight up choice "there are 2 adventure sites in the area: a spooky cave said to be where goblins lair (the same goblins that attacked your caravan) but the other is a ruined abbey which has been sanctioned as haunted and forbidden by the Church of Erastil (known source of undead creatures)". The third option is that "illusion of choice" thing.
Like I said; you as the GM WANT them to get to the goblins right? The players are a random selection of personalities and classes so you give them a common goal to unite them as a party: find a warrior's tomb and survive its dangers to retrieve his magic blade and other treasure. Its too railroady to put the goblins right in the tomb so instead you have a random goblin attack in the first scene. If this doesn't motivate them to go after the beasties then by ignoring them to go for the tomb then upon returning the little toads have poisoned the village well, or maybe they've hired themselves out to a local warlord making a bid for control.
Feel out your players and know what motivates them. If they crave loot and crunchy bits make the goblins an obstacle in the way (but just one of many). If they want fame make a rival claim he defeated the clan (turns out to be a ruse or misunderstanding). If they want to be heroes make the goblins part of what imperils a village. Done subtly the party gets what they want and you finish out your goblin fetish so you can move on to that Vampire Spawn you had planned for the second act...
Wellmet,
Dungeon master for dummies is one of those book that give you a lots of good experiences from older master’s of the game... and yes the Pathfinder Gamemaster Guide is very good. = )
For me IMG (in my game) Dragons love to go where the gold’s and magic is... Nobility, ships at sea and large caravans..., young Dragons raid caravans, meddle age raid ships and yes they use slaves, oups I mean hired monsters or mercenaries, small villain, thief guilds etc...
The old ones raid the kings, and nobility and large kingdoms, with the help of nobility blinded by there lies, and wars or fear... but that is a secret... I best go... Dragons don’t like the chant, that’s the dark of it...
Peace, I go hide !
i just ran an adeventure where the party was on a ship from Qadira to Rahadoum and the greasy chef with the black dragon tatoo (in theaters now!) poisoned the food and signaled a juvinile black dragon and some frog-men to attack the ship. It was pretty cool, the dragon almost got away it...if it wasn't for a meddling fireball
Thanks for all the good advice!
I think I will do an in-between post all about alignment. It will most likely be complete and up by this evening. Let the moral debate/defacement of the alignment system commence. Cheers.
-Canis
My short stories blog.
Show some love, or hate. That can be useful as well.
My next BLP will be about alignment since I couldn't post about it yesterday. I took ill, I apologize. Cheers.
-Canis
Today's post will cover one of the more confusing, and probably most debated, subjects within DnD: Alignment. This system has created more problems within a group dynamic than any other that springs to mind. Certainly, as a DM, I've had my fair share of problems with it, but why does it matter? Barring spells and abilities that function off of alignment, what is the big deal with alignment? Beats the hell out of me, but I'll take a stab at answering that very question.
So what exactly is alignment? Is it a moral designation, firmly tying your character to a set of ideals? Or is it a framework of perspectives in which your character can exist, completely unalike to another with the same alignment? Truth be told, there is no "right" answer when it comes to alignment. It all falls on you, the DM, to determine when an action is good, evil, lawful, or chaotic.
What makes one alignment different from another? Is there a noticeable difference from Neutral and Chaotic Neutral? The simple answer? Yes and no. The differences between alignments are often undefined and hard to understand. Do only good people save others? Do only evil people torture? Are there shades of gray? Once again, it is for the DM to decide.
Perhaps a closer look at what makes up alignments, i.e. law, chaos, good, and evil, would help in determining whether that CN rogue would torture you for information. I'll list the major traits of the law-chaos and good-evil axes first, as well as neutrality in relation to the four.
Lawful:
Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties.-Positive Traits: honor, obedience to authority, reliable, and trustworthy.
-Negative traits: close-minded, lack of adaptability, over adherence to tradition, and judgmental.
Chaotic:
Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.-Traits: freedom, adaptability, and flexibility.
-Negative traits: recklessness, resentment towards legitimate authority, irresponsibility, and acting rashly.
Neutral:
Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has some respect for authority and feels neither a compulsion to obey nor a compulsion to rebel. She is generally honest, but can be tempted into lying or deceiving others.
Good:
Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Good characters make personal sacrifices for in order to benefit others.
-Traits: respect for life, concern for sentient beings, and the defense of the innocent.
Evil:
Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit. Evil characters are egocentric, only concerned with their own welfare. Evil characters kill often, whether for the sake of convenience, the simple act of killing, or in service to a dark master.
-Traits: hurting others, killing others, manipulation, lack of genuine respect (i.e. respect to an evil person often means fear of one stronger than yourself).
Neutral:
People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent, but may lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others.
What does this mean for the combinations of the above descriptions? If a trait isn't listed in a given alignment description does that mean a character won't do it? Of course not. Two characters may be lawful evil but that doesn't mean they act exactly the same. However, there actions won't be as different as that of a LE character and CG character.
Let's return to my above questions. First off: do only good characters save others? Not necessarily. An evil person may save someone if it benefits them. Do only evil characters kill? No, Paladins are renowned for killing evil people. Are there shades of grey? Realistically, of course. Within the game, for simplicity's sake, absolutely not. Though you and I may express chaotic good in different ways, neither of us would purposefully kill the innocent. Would that chaotic neutral rogue torture someone? If it helps that character then yes. This situation toes the line between neutral and evil, but a skilled player knows how to peer over the edge of the endless abyss that is evil and step back.
Is the difference between alignments all relative. Yes, relative to the DMs perspective only. As the referee of the game, you have final say on what breaks alignment. Realistically, those we call Patriots as American were nothing but terrorists to the British, but in game, keep it simple. Evil is evil, good is good, etc.
What does this mean for in game situations? Let your players push the bounds of their alignment and don't worry so much about it. If a supposed LG knight kills a room of younglings, tell him he either atones for his actions or his alignment shifts to LE. Also, if you say no evil in a game and someone purposely commits evil acts to become evil, make him/her roll a new character and explain your reasoning to the player.
This is one of the most debated subjects within the reaches of the DnD community with questions like "Does this break alignment," or "would my character do this," appearing on forum boards across the net. I think, in 9 cases out of 10, if a DM is having problems with his group acting out of alignment, it speaks to a deeper problem. Your players are most likely acting out of boredom. Talk to your players. Ask them if they enjoy that storyline heavy quest you're running or whether they would prefer to slaughter a few hungry wolves instead. In short, as has been said time and again, listen to your players, whether they say it aloud or not.
Lastly, unless it is having a direct impact on the game, just don't worry about it. Of course don't let your Paladin act like the Joker or the Druid act like a Paladin. Alignment restrictions come with the class and shouldn't be ignored. Mostly, just roll with it. Let there be reactions to PC actions if need be but just stop worrying about a subsystem and just play DnD and have some damn fun. Cheers
-Canis
Alignments are very relative, this is true. I see two approaches to handling the inevitable clash of 2+ perspectives of moral and ethical categorizations:
(1) Hammer it out. This means a DM and players should work together to define how the PCs fit into the alignment framework of the campaign, before playing anything. This is especially so for divine characters like Paladins and (some) Clerics. If everyone knows where they stand, there's less arguing later.
(2) Pull a Barbosa. In Pirates of the Carribean, Barbosa breaks the "pirate code" and is called on it, to which he replies "they're just a set of guidelines, really." Do what Barbosa did when grey areas or occasional transgressions rear their ugly heads: Shrug and continue. This is a game, after all. If you didn't use approach #1, you had better use this, because otherwise you're being dumb, "guess what number I'm thinking of or I'll hit you with a stick" kind of dumb.
I like #1 and #2 together.
#1 because you get your player talking about their PC's personality, which helps RP for both you and them. You know what to expect, and players get to dig a little deeper into their PC's mind. This can also develop player/PC enthusiasm for RP.
#2 because PCs are people too. People make mistakes, or have exceptions to the rule, or what have you. Plus, things like love and hate and pride do not make an alignment - mass-murderers can love and protect their families too.
Folks aren't always born how they are... things happen which make them change. When you're suddenly facing deadly monsters and seeing people die, or given power you never had before, or are thrust into a situation with hard choices, it can really change you.
I've been super busy with real life stuff, but I will try my hardest to get a big post up tonight. Cheers.
-Canis
I know I'm a little behind on posting but, just as with gaming, real life takes precedence. Things have prevented me from posting, from family problems to sickness, and for the lack of posting, I apologize. Alright, now to the post.
Today is all about role playing. This is the cornerstone of RPGs, it's the RP for God's sake. However, role playing often takes a back seat to combat within a game. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. If your group prefers a story-light-campaign, that's your business. What do you do, however, if you have a brand new player who doesn't know how to role play, or is shy, or simply doesn't like to role play? Is there a way to teach someone how to role play or do you just "have to do it" to really understand? Also, how do you encourage a group to role play when you, as the DM, want a more story-heavy-campaign without having to find a new group? Lastly, how do you balance a group that contains both those who enjoy role playing and those who prefer roll playing? Let's take a closer look at some of the questions above
Q. What do you do if you have a new player?
A. The best approach when it comes to new players is to, like everything, take it slow. First, help the player make his/her character, taking time to explain the essential parts of the character sheet (AC, saves, attack bonuses, etc.). Start off the night in a setting that will allow for both roll playing and role playing, such as a bar, cliche but it works. Take the lead to initiate a conversation in-game with an older player so the new player can see "how it's done." Do not initiate the conversation with the new player as this can make a new player feel like she/he is "on the spot" and can lead to embarrassment on the part of the new player. As you talk in-character to your older player, subtly begin to draw in your other seasoned players so your new player can see that it is ok to try their hand at role playing. If the new player joins in the conversation, good job, now just let him/her get accustomed to role playing. If the new player doesn't join in, there are a number of ways to speed up the acclamation period. I will give one and allow you to find your own. The method I use, which nearly always works, is glancing over the new player's character sheet, finding the one skill they're best at, that the rest of the group might not all have, and stack the odds in the new player's favor so he/she is one of the few, or the only, who beats the DC. Take the player(s) aside and reveal the information that was uncovered and do it in-character, possibly with an NPC. A smaller audience is often less embarrassing for a new player, should he/she "mess up."
Q. Is there a way to teach someone how to role play?
A. I'm about to lay some primo knowledge on you. You ready for it? You sure you're ready? You want the truth? You can't handle the truth?! But seriously, of course there is. I've found that many people are, at first, uncomfortable with role playing. It is a bit odd to pretend to be someone else for fun, but it is something we all did as children and we had a blast then, why not now? The best way to approach this problem is to allow a potential player to audit a session or two before he/she agrees to actually play. This allows someone who is new to role playing to see how others role play. Another good way to introduce a new player to the game in general is to allow him/her to play an NPC for a few sessions. Watching others role play is an easy way to learn but nothing beats first hand experience. Just remember, be patient with padawans. They are weak in the ways of the force.
Q. How do you encourage a group of roll players to role play more?
A. This is a difficult problem for many story-heavy DMs who find themselves among power gamers. Short of saying, "Hey guys, role play more," there aren't many effective ways to tackle this problem. I have, however, found a few tricks to help in this situation. Power gamers often want as much loot as earthly possible. The loot must be sold so that gold can be made so what do you do? Don't allow the players to sell in the next town they come to of course! At least make it difficult for your players. Intimidation would help, as would diplomacy but simply rolling won't cut it. The players must role play before you as the DM acknowledge the results of their roll. I've used this method and I've turned a few roll players into role players, after a while.
Q. How do I balance a game in a group of role players and roll players?
A. This has always been a problem with my group. When I first started DMing, I was, and still remain, a very story-heavy DM. I learned very quickly that my players, most of them, weren't having as much fun as was. I had to stop, pull my head out of my ass, and actually listen to my players. They said that more combat would make the game more interesting. Finally, I had to concede. I forgot the most important rule of DMing, "It's not about your campaign setting, it's about your players."
What does this long boring paragraph have to do with the question above? It's a lead in of course. Some of my players wanted heavy combat/light RP, others wanted a balance, and at least one wanted me to continue a light combat/heavy RP syle. In the end, we reached a compromise. Try to balance between the two extremes of heavy combat and heavy RP. Should a night occur with one of the extremes being the predominant play style, the following session would be more of the opposite extreme. Yes, it's a slightly odd style, but it's worked thus far.
In closing, role playing is literally the name of the game. Sure many people love role playing more than any other part of DnD, but just as many feel the same about combat. The trick is to either get on board with your players expectations, find a new group, or just do the adult thing and compromise. DnD may be a role playing game, but if no one's having fun, what's the point of even playing? Cheers.
-Canis
P.S. These two questions occurred to me as I was finishing up: What if I, a seasoned DM, have a group of people completely new to role playing? What if I, the DM, and all of my players are new? I thought to answer these questions but I decided it would be more enjoyable to allow you, the readers, to answer these questions with some of your own ideas, hints, or tricks. Thoughts?
Roll Players + Cinematic Descriptions of Combat Actions = Role Player, phase 1 (RP1).
RP1 + Talking About Background (how your PC learned to become awesome) = RP2
Once they're at RP2, it's easy to fall into roleplaying.
A post on making fair CL encounters, I know the basics in the book but their are many variables such as tuckers kobolds.
|
