| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So. Been a while.
Looking over my profile here, I basically dropped off the face of the boards when my dog died last February (I posted a couple of times since, but didn't really stick around to see if anyone read or replied to them).
I essentially missed the entire unionization saga (and don't even really know how that ended up beyond some basic good news from November). I missed Kobold Catgirl coming out. I missed the Directorsaur stepping from the forums by eighteen days.
So.
Let's just say I've missed a lot, and leave it at that.
Anyone care to talk about anything that's come up recently that they think might be interesting, lay it on me.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, I know you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo has changed Human Resources (a horrible name) position to 'People and Culture' position and has filled it.
Radio silence from both the Union (which has been recognized by Paizo) and the execs (given circumstances no news is okay news?)
A bunch of folks who thought they could be cute and trash people by going about it sideways either had accounts permanently suspended or banned.
Paizo has released some really neat books this past year, The Mwangi Expanse being an impressive piece of work for a new/old setting.
Can't think of much else at the moment have to scoot to ye olde essentiale workeplace.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I got a promotion at work, I'm now in charge of art projects.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also got a new job!!!
I am very excited about it.
I lost my dog in February of last year, as well. It's been tough. I'm glad to see you back.
I lost my dog in February of last year, as well. It's been tough.
Yup.
I'm glad to see you back.
Back atcha
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Good to see you, Cole. Sorry to hear about your dog.
I've been here and I missed or was seriously late to half that stuff because I mostly hang out in TV and PBPs these days. Maybe we need a summary of the week thread for those of us who stay safely hidden under our rocks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, this week those rocks aren't exactly safe as the boss (and cabin fever) has me carving fountains into boulders all week.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
About the only "interesting" news from my end is:
(1) I've managed to reduce my GMing duties to only one session a week. I suddenly have something called "free time" again!
(2) In demonstrating that #1 isn't necessarily a "good thing", I found Rotten Tomatoes' post on "How to Watch All 27 Marvel Movies in Chronological Order" so that's been my project for the year. Unfortunately, it means doing horrible things like watching "Guardians of the Galaxy Part 2" a second time.
(3) Finally playing in a D&D 5e campaign. I love the simplification and the curve-flattening in most places, but for a roleplay-heavy group there's FAR too much, "OK, what skill would that be?" or just plain, "Welcome to the swingy world of the d20 system!" for my tastes. There's such a thing as oversimplification, and when you can get your skills to +20 or above fairly quickly, rolling under a 10 nearly half the time isn't bad. When you're typically at +5-6 even in your best skills, you come across as a moron nearly half the time, which isn't fun.
(3) Finally playing in a D&D 5e campaign. I love the simplification and the curve-flattening in most places, but for a roleplay-heavy group there's FAR too much, "OK, what skill would that be?" or just plain, "Welcome to the swingy world of the d20 system!" for my tastes. There's such a thing as oversimplification, and when you can get your skills to +20 or above fairly quickly, rolling under a 10 nearly half the time isn't bad. When you're typically at +5-6 even in your best skills, you come across as a moron nearly half the time, which isn't fun.
Been working on ways to improve that from the 3.XX days, need to get around to testing it out more.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only 5E group I ever got a toe dipped in (over the last winter, actually) was one I left after two sessions because I could see where it was going.
I don't think the GM was necessarily a bad GM, but I think he was a bad GM for me.
When the entire first two sessions feature being told no every time you come up with a way to use your class abilities, there's really little sense in hanging around. It's just going to turn into the duel of the GM and the up and coming rules lawyer. And there's no need to subject everyone else in the group to that.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, GothBard just joined a campaign where the GM said, "Some of you are going to die. If I don't kill you, then I'm not doing my job."
I would've walked.
Your job is to create an interesting, challenging world for the PCs to interact with. Whether they live or die is their decision, not yours.
I'm proud of the job I did as a GM because:
(1) The fight was beyond the abilities of the party if they hadn't prepared.
(2) I gave them the choice as to whether to fight or back off.
(3) Once they prepped, the fight was easy.
It's not my job to kill players. It's my job to set up the encounters so that if the players are dumb, they die, and if they're smart, they win handily. That's a MUCH higher bar to set for yourself.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've always agreed with the philosophy that the GM's job is to let the players win while making them think the opposite (I am poorly paraphrasing someone else whose name I have forgotten, for the record). The challenges should be real, and they should feel like they accomplished something, but to me the a GM's job is to be the lead writer in a story about heroes doing heroic things and, hopefully, by the end having a heroic victory. You might perform the role of the villain as part of that, but you're not supposed to actually be the villain.
Heck, usually when the players come close to dying I've done everything I reasonably can to stop them without actually hand-holding or stopping the game, but they are determined to go about the adventure in the absolutely most upside down and backwards way possible. And in the end, if that's the story they want to tell, I will help them do that. But I will always aim for fairness and reward creativity where possible, and I will always be utterly delighted when the party somehow miraculously survives the death trap they completely volunteered to throw themselves into.
People who want to compete and watch things burn shouldn't be GMs, they should stick to first person shooters or head-to-head strategy games or something. Of course if there's players who like that sort of GM, more power to them. Takes all kinds I guess. (And I suppose some rules lawyers and creative players actually enjoy that kind of GM because they can break them.) But yeah, me personally, I'd walk too.
ETA:
When the entire first two sessions feature being told no every time you come up with a way to use your class abilities, there's really little sense in hanging around. It's just going to turn into the duel of the GM and the up and coming rules lawyer. And there's no need to subject everyone else in the group to that.
Weirdly that reminds me of a game of Dungeon World I played. I went into the game understanding the system was supposed to be very flexible and rules light, but every time I tried to get creative and try something new the GM was like, "Uh, that's not how that should work." Or "there's no system for that, so you can't do that." So, I fell back on "I attack it with my weapon" because that's all I seemed to be allowed to do. Then the GM got mad at me for not being creative enough and flexing with the system the way we were supposed to. To this day I have no idea if I was playing the game wrong or the GM was running it wrong; I expect it was a bit of both, but the GM constantly finding reasons to say no wasn't making it any easier.
Which leads me to another aphorism I heard a gamer say whose name I have also forgotten... a GM should never default to saying no; rather the GM should stop and consider if there are any reasons to not say yes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with everything you said, especially that last sentence. I've only had one TPK in all my years of GMing and I've actually had very few individual PC deaths over the years. I simply don't understand why some GMs get this power trip in their heads that makes them want to kill players just because they can. I don't see how that is fun at all, especially from the player's point of view. When I was first learning to play D&D I played under one DM who did that and I just got up and walked out of his apartment without saying a word. When he later asked me what I thought of the game and not why I walked out I flat out said it sucked. And his DMing sucked. I ended up poaching a couple of players from him after that (Tiny, if you're still on this planet and see this post, I'm willing to bet your games still suck).
The GM is a guide, a narrator, an author - not an executioner.
Weirdly that reminds me of a game of Dungeon World I played.
I've had a similar experience with Monster of the Week, which is another PbtA game, so I assume it's similar to Dungeon World. I've also had (and am still having) a great experience with a different Monster of the Week game.
In the negative experience, the issue was similar to what you described, and the GM seemed to very well-versed in the rules, but this seemed off because a "flexible" game system shouldn't have all of these restrictions and caveats that seem to spring up if a player is only basically familiar with the rules. (Which isn't a statement I wouldn't apply to all games, to be honest, but I do to this one because it's billed as a game with simple resolutions of actions.)
On the other hand, the MotW game I'm in now is much more enjoyable, and I think that it's because instead of saying "no, that's not in the rules," the GM makes the effort to adjust a Move's outcomes to the situation.