Yeah, me too. But then the motivation would be 'it's an awesome way to tell stories' instead of 'if I don't, you'd be cheating all the time'. Huge difference.
I would have bailed starting at "you can't roll your own dice."
Everything past that is gravy.
I've played in "GM rolls all dice" games (play-by-email or play-by-post), and I wouldn't have a problem with that at all.
The skill point thing sounds pretty lame, though.
It really sounds like this guy wants to play an MMORPG, but without the players deciding on what they want. Skill tree? Heck no! Stat growth? NIEN! Time for FUN! nope...
Yeah, refusing to do something works out if all players do it. We once had a DM who is bad at managing players declare he wanted a low powered game where everyone had 60 points to spread amongst 6 stats. Not point buy, you started at 0 and bought up to a 10. He worked up some stats with 18s in them, things like 18, 18, 15, 3,3,3. we were like, ". . . Really?" We wanted to play heroes, not mutant... things.
Finally someone pointed out that straight 10's are weaker than a peasant. We were granted a 15 point buy. At level 1 we fought a hydra, it should have killed us but he ran it wrong.
That game fell apart quickly.
-Tundra
I would be okay surrendering my dice and character sheet if:
If all those conditions were in place, I think it would be a fun experiment. It doesn't sound like they necessarily are for you.
...To me, part of the fun is rolling dice. You have a chance to fail (or in my case, about 95% chance to fail)...
Sounds like you roll like I do.
Sounds like you roll like I do.Yeah, I roll *really* badly. I swear my dice are attuned to evil, and I am not IRL evil...pretty sure.
Er...am I?
Yes, you are.
Sounds like you roll like I do.Yeah, I roll *really* badly. I swear my dice are attuned to evil, and I am not IRL evil...pretty sure.
Er...am I?
If you have to ask...
I would be okay surrendering my dice and character sheet if:
I thought the DM could handle the logistics without slowing the game to a crawl. When the game is slowed to a crawl by players not doing their rolls in advance, not knowing the rules, hemming and hawing over what action to take, etc., at least everyone is still involved. Computer assistance (e.g., dice macros) might be a necessity.
The players had a reasonable way to know what their characters knew about their abilities; for instance, if a player can say, "Does it look like the ravine would be hard for me to jump over?", and get an answer consistent with what a person might be able to gauge for themselves. Also, when a skill check/attack roll is a success or failure, some way of knowing whether it was difficult or not, like "You make an awkward stroke and completely miss the Orc" vs. "You strike just as your master taught you, but the Orc still steps out of the way without difficulty."
I trusted that the DM could make the story interesting enough to make the game fun despite there being relatively little "game" to it.
It was going to be tried out on a short adventure first, rather than a huge campaign. If all those conditions were in place, I think it would be a fun experiment. It doesn't sound like they necessarily are for you.
I think it could be a blast under these circumstances. But from what you are describing. No, no and no.
I'm still waiting to play PbP.
At this point, why not just drop all the rules and make-belief dice rolling and just play "word-only" adventures. Or he should just write a book instead. Sheesh.
It's like going to play cards but only the dealer can see the cards, and he tells you that you won or lost at the end of the hand.
I would not play in this. (It's not even PLAYing anyways...)
Ultradan