GM Questionnaire

Repost and answer. Or, if you don't have a blog, answer in the comments. Or be a big rebel and do neither.

1. If you had to pick a single invention in a game you were most proud of what would it be?

2. When was the last time you GMed?

3. When was the last time you played?

4. Give us a one-sentence pitch for an adventure you haven't run but would like to.

5. What do you do while you wait for players to do things?

6. What, if anything, do you eat while you play?

7. Do you find GMing physically exhausting?

8. What was the last interesting (to you, anyway) thing you remember a PC you were running doing?

9. Do your players take your serious setting and make it unserious? Vice versa? Neither?

10. What do you do with goblins?

11. What was the last non-RPG thing you saw that you converted into game material (background, setting, trap, etc.)?

12. What's the funniest table moment you can remember right now?

13. What was the last game book you looked at--aside from things you referenced in a game--why were you looking at it?

14. Who's your idea of the perfect RPG illustrator?

15. Does your game ever make your players genuinely afraid?

16. What was the best time you ever had running an adventure you didn't write? (If ever)

17. What would be the ideal physical set up to run a game in?

18. If you had to think of the two most disparate games or game products that you like what would they be?

19. If you had to think of the most disparate influences overall on your game, what would they be?

20. As a GM, what kind of player do you want at your table?

21. What's a real life experience you've translated into game terms?

22. Is there an RPG product that you wish existed but doesn't?

23. Is there anyone you know who you talk about RPGs with who doesn't play? How do those conversations go?

What's In The Flippin' Castle?

What's in this room? (somewhat crowdsourced from G+)

1-king
2-queen
3-prince
4-princess
5-advisor/vizier
6-castellan
7-wizard
8-prisoners
9-guards
10-moat monster
11-majordomo (domestic boss)
12-captain (military boss)
13-servants
14-kitchen servants
15-cook

16-stable guy
17-tutor
18-cleric

19-sycophant

20-little kid

21-diplomatic guest

22-minstrel

23-jester

24-doctor

25-messenger

26-herald

27-torturer

28-nurse

29-astronomer

30-astrologer

31-actor

32-courtesan

32-page

33-squire

34-knight

35-merchant

36-falconer

37-sheriff/reeve/johnny law

38-spy (roll again for cover)

39-midwife

40-old relative of queen or king

41-smith

42-ostler

43-porter

44-gaoler

45-chamberlain

46-keeper of the keys (awwww yeah)

47-tailor

48-embroiderer

49-food taster

50-clerk, accountant, or other math-related jamoke

51-painter

52-noble child of vassal kingdom

53-idiot son

54-librarian

55-poet

56-sculptor

57-architect

58-engineer

59-carpenter

60-tapestry-making type people

61-castle brewer

62-70 Roll twice

71-80-Useless fancy junk

81-90-Not much but you can hear some conversation because these morons are all "I, Claudius" and forget to close doors

91-Armory

92-Treasure room

93-Winch room or other device room

94-00 Oooh, something special and weird and unguarded

Assume nearest guards are d4 rounds away.

Assume locks are omnipresent.

Assume room layouts are boring.

Exterior profile of fortress can match this.

Additional castle shenanigans.

Some Things Someone Should Point Out About A Possible New Edition

Note: none of this shit will make much sense unless you read this and maybe this and are aware that the company that currently makes D&D has announced it will be releasing a new edition which will theoretically make everybody happy.

If this is all greek to you, just assume this is one of those "inside baseball" posts and move on.

Anyway, just to prove it could be done, in the posts linked above, I wrote up some rules that should approach making players interested in any previous edition basically happy (or at least able to talk to each other) possible.

-Grumpy Grognards:

Even if you never intend to buy a 5th edition written the way I outlined, the beautiful thing is, if one of your players does and then makes a character in 5e--you can run that brand new PC through any classic TSR module and s/he'll still fit. It scales fine. Bone Hill, Castle Amber, whatever.

-Here's a key concept I encoded in these rules:

People who want 4th edition-style powers and 3.5-style feats get them not by making their PC more badass than an Old School simple no-customization PC, but by trading away the default advantages of leveling up as a basic PC.

Like in order to get Whirling Blade Of Knives once per day upon reaching level 4, you have to trade away something a fighter would expect to get upon reaching level 4, like a +1 to fortitude save or to hit.

This combined with the principle that "monsters don't get bonuses to shit they aren't actually good at just for being high level" (giants don't get a reflex bonus) as sketched out here should result in a balanced game. Or at least a balanceable version of the game. No sweat.

-The differences between the kinds of adventures people expect in old editions and in 4th ed differ wildly, but these differences actually stem from very minor changes in the actual rules. Like I said before: you change the numbers----> changing the numbers makes the game more predictable---->making the game more predictable changes the playstyle.

-Therefore, the actual points of friction between the games are probably less than most people think.

-Example: Old School PCs can fight Type IV monsters easy. Given enough hit points, you can totally run a battle of an Old School PC against a 4th edition monster and it makes perfect sense. It'd be like a 5th level PC vs. a 1st level monster but still. Once per battle, the monster can do something scary, it can shove the PC around the battlefield, it can do another scary thing once per day, etc. etc. This is, in essence not too different from how monsters already worked in D&D--remember the Fog Sloth may Cause Darkness 2/day etc. The difference between "saves" and "defenses" is basically cosmetic.

-Good question: If Classic players aren't using powers, where do we put the powers? I think it should be a boxed set: Player's book, GM book, Powers & Spells book. Many superhero games back in the boxed set era were sold like that. Having powers & spells in their own book also just sorta makes sense at the table, that way at the end of the session when the thief and the wizard both level up, the thief can look in the PHB to buy new stuff while the wizard's looking up spells.

Also, the core books would only have a basic array of powers. There would be a ton more powers in a Tournament Players Supplement. PLUS there should be a simple math algorithm to convert existing 4e powers to Tournament 5e powers. At least until Wizards publishes new versions of them.

-Another thing: clever use of different fonts and graphic design should make it so it's really easy to tell which parts of a page are relevant to you.

There is a surprisingly vocal Oh No There Might Be Something On The Page Not Relevant To My Own Personal Game brigade. These people are kind of the mirror image of the people who complained that although I provided optional 4e stats in Vornheim I didn't put in monster "roles", and they get the same smack down: If you can't tell a flailceratops is a "brute" you should not be DMing, likewise if it distracts you that the word "(brute)" appears next to the word "flailceratops" in a monster description, you shouldn't be DMing. How the hell did you manage to ignore "Psionics: Nil" and "Treasure Type" and "No. Appearing" all those years in the AD&D Monster Manual?

-Healing surges:

I like this Wolverine alternative for Heroic and Tournament modes--instead of just having a bank of healing surges, basically in these modes, do this:

*When you first take more damage than you have hp, you are considered to be just "out of the fight" for a bit and no matter how much damage you took (unless you were like disintegrated) you're just at 0 hp. Not negative yet. You can, however be killed if folks keep whaling on you down to negative level (Heroic) or negative level + con (Tournament)

*Each round you can make a Con check. Success indicates you got 1 hp back.

*You have a choice then--spring up with your 1 hp and attack, or play possum, keep rolling, and pop up Wolverine-style after everyone's forgotten about you.

*However, as long as you play possum, you are still vulnerable to a death blow.

This makes healing a little easier to narrate plus adds a level of tactical complexity to using healing.

-Minions. In 4e you have dudes called "minions" who can be killed with one hit. Just change that to a rule that Tournament PCs can kill anything with one HD with one hit. Problem solved.

-If Tournament PCs start at 3rd level and Classic PCs start at 1st, how do tournament PCs fight goblins? Easy: 4e already constantly uses multiple versions of monsters--it already supports wimpy minion and dangerous levelled versions of the same monster.

-How will monster HD look in the Manual? Do this:

Ogre

4hd/38 hp

(Classic gamers use the first number, Heroic and Tournament use the second. 3.5 manuals already look like that).

(That 40 hp figure, by the way is derived from: 9hp per every 2 dice plus a +5 con bonus per die. Though you could do it however.)

-Saving throws are cake. Using an old product with a different saving throw regime than what you're using is pretty easy. Old editions reference a save table, you can just ignore that and use the new numbers whenever a monster appears. No matter what edition you are using, you can get a plausible Save DC for a spell by doing 10+caster level+caster int bonus. i.e. you can take a wizard or demon from a TSR module and have him cast a spell on a 3.5 style PC and the chance to avoid the spell would still make sense.

-What would a Monster Manual statblock look like?

Ogre (Brute)

AC: 16 (15 flat footed)

Hit points: 4hd/38 hp (bloodied 19)

Atk: +4 (to hit) 1d10+4 damage

________

(An experienced DM in any edition could stop here, and this is the amount of detail I recommend for passing references in modules--the rest of this info would go at the back of a module or in the margin)...

________

Fort: + 6

Reflex: - 2

Will: - 5

Level: 3

_________

(That's all the Classic DM needs)(at most)(there would be a line or a color change in the text at this point to signify that the basics are over)

_________

Dupe:-3

Notice: -1

_________

(Classic DMs might want to use Dupe (charisma and wisdom based) and Notice (wisdom and int based) modifiers even though they have no direct equivalent in older D&D. I know I would, but that's probably because I kinda invented them.

_________

Intiative: -2

Speed: 60'/round/6 squares

S: 19 D: 7 C:19 I: 6 W: 6 Ch: 4

+1 track +2 climb (any other skills an ogre might have)

(plus all the other crunch in a 3.5 statblock here)

_________

(That's all a Heroic DM needs, unless s/he wants to use powers)

_________

Then here is a pair of powers that can be traded out for a -1 to hit or damage minus each:

*Grab And Bite: 1/encounter. Successful hit on adjacent size M or smaller opponent inflicts d4 damage for a grab, then d10 for a bite and the opponent is considered grappled the next round.

*Toss: at-will. Successful hit knocks Size M opponent up to 40 feet/4squares doing 3d6 damage.

-Giving levels to a monster is easy under the system I've sketched out, by the way, a 9th level fighter bugbear could just add +9 to hit and +9 to damage and bam, there you go.

-4e's Action Points (which do mix things up a bit) can stay for Tournament PCs. And go for everybody else. In a Tournament fight you get them, in a different fight you don't

-"Classic PCs can, on a successful check, execute a combat maneuver, however, it should be noted that doing the same trick over and over is considered bad form."

-How does this benefit Classic edition players? Two ways:

*WOTC should be able to start publishing materials useful to them (and modules that are useful to more than one playstyle simultaneously) and

*by establishing a common language, DMs of different styles will be able to talk to each other more easily. Oh I run Heroic and I find... etc etc

-XP scheme the same as i wrote before:

Classic: XP is given for monsters and treasure. Treasure usually nets about 4 times as much xp as monsters required to get to said treasure.

Heroic: XP is given for monsters plus each PC picks what kind of thing they want to get xp for based on their PCs' individual motives. Like: "My wizard wants knowledge,""My paladin wants to help the weak" etc. The GM can award these as s/he sees fit but the total can still be divided equally if the PCs roll that way--so if everybody helps one PC achieve a goal, they all benefit

Tournament: XP for monsters at x5 normal.

-Switching styles: if the DM (or PCs) in a Tournament game would like to do a "quick combat" (initiative by side, no action points) then vote.

An Excerpt From the Imaginary Type V Player's Handbook In My Head

indicates Classic Play Options.

Classic Play Options make the game work like the earliest versions of Dungeons and Dragons. These games are about players relying on luck and outside-the-box thinking to survive situations that range from challenging to downright unfair. The high possibility of character death and of the players coming up with unusual solutions to problems means the dungeon master has to be constantly prepared to improvise and can't be wedded to one

idea of how the story of the campaign will progress. These games emphasize randomness and require an experienced or fairly ambitious dungeon master. Since the rules are relatively simple, these options are preferred by dungeon masters who like to alter or "hack" the rules and by players who trust their DMs' judgment.

Classic play options are for players who are all right with the challenge of starting out playing (for example) a cleric with 4 hit points and only one spell or dying because a door opens in rather than out and for dungeon masters who are willing to improvise an entirely new scenario because the players cleverly used a magic item to tunnel their way out of a carefully-constructed pit trap.

indicates Tournament Play Options.

Tournament Play Options make the game work like the most recent versions of Dungeons and Dragons. These games are about fast-paced, cinematic action, tactical thinking, and teamwork. The wide variety of well-defined powers gives each player a "role" in the group, ensuring that no single player dominates combat and allows dungeon masters to tell exactly how they will measure up against prospective opponents. This reliability also gives the dungeon master the power to plan a story with specific events without the mechanics of the game getting in the way. As the name

implies,* the Tournament Play options are favored for RPGA competitions because it's fairly easy to measure how powerful a character is versus an opponent.

Tournament play options are for players who'd like to make a character capable of confidently doing a backflip over an opponent and stabbing him in the neck once a day and for dungeon masters who'll be disappointed if the game doesn't climax with that character fighting a stone golem on a tightrope over a pit of boiling lava.

indicates Heroic Play Options.

Heroic play options are based on the versions of Dungeons and Dragons published between 2000 and 2008. These games are about customization and rules clarity. They allow players to build any kind of character they want, regardless of dice rolls--while giving them a decent chance of surviving, too. Heroic rules emphasize modularity and flexibility for the DM, too, and allow a DM to define every

aspect of the game world using clear rules. If you're not wedded to the anything-goes possibilities of Classic play or the reliability of Tournament play--or if your group is just starting out and you're not sure which way they want go, Heroic play may be for you.

Heroic play options are for players who know they definitely want to play an elven druid with a raccoon animal companion who specializes in climbing trees and for DMs who would like time to find out what kind of adventure is best suited to an elven druid with a raccoon animal companion who specializes in climbing trees.

Example:

Classes

Fighter

Hit points
d10**

d10 + Con modifier

d10 + Con modifier

Pick two of the following to start plus two more per level thereafter:

(Note: All Tournament PCs Begin at level 3)

+1 missile to hit

+1 melee to hit (may be chosen twice at same level)
+1 melee/thrown damage

+1 to fortitude save/defense

(Tournament)(Optional for Heroic) Add a new Combat Ability (Classic PCs and Heroic PCs not using this option may attempt to imitate the effects of Combat Abilities--or may invent new ones. In this case, the DM should think of a suitably modified ability check to test whether the PC is able to do this--one that balances the risk of possibly losing an action with the reward of possibly being able to perform an action more powerful than an ordinary attack. Both PC native ability and experience level should be considered as factors.)***
(Classic & Heroic Option) +1 to know stuff about foe (ac, hp, damage/attack, etc.) (Obviously the company should find a more elegant way to say this than I just did)

Skills

Fighters are assumed to be capable and have +1 to checks involving activities typical of medieval military activity.

Heroic and Tournament DMs should note that these, specifically, are: Climb (Str), Craft weapon (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Ride (Dex), and Swim (Str)

Fighters may trade bonuses in any area for a bonus in another (i.e. +2 total to swim in exchange for +0 in jump)

At each level, fighters can:

-automatically gain +2 by specializing in a narrower subskill of any skill s/he already has. For example, s/he could have +2 to climbing rocks if s/he already has +1 to climb, or...

-a fighter may make an Int check****, success indicates s/he can add one new skill (that is, +1 to something new) of any kind

Combat abilities

(This would be a list of "powers"--some look like 3e feats (though only situational ones--not the ones that just buff an existing ability), some look like 4e powers. Some are marked (Tournament only)--and there will also be (Tournament only) abilities or versions of abilities marked in the monster manual under certain monsters. A scale that says things like "2 squares/20 feet" will be used.

EDIT:

I forgot Starting Money/Equipment:

Classic fighters get d6x10 gp

Tournament fighters get the standard dungeon gear plus a long range weapon of choice, a short range weapon of choice, and chainmail or leather armor plus d10 gp. (Remember they start at 3rd level anyway.)

Heroic fighters get a weapon of choice plus d6x10 gp

_____

Anyway, point is, this isn't that hard. Further reading.

_

* being located entirely in my head, the new PHB naturally has a few weird misprints like this

**this may seem a little cruel to Classic PCs with a high Con (or a little kind to those with a low Con) but there's a hidden bonus: to turn a PC or monster into a Classic version of the same creature all you have to do is strip away the Con mod per level. And to do the opposite, vice versa. The module writers will thank this rule.

***Some may object that 4e-style combat is based on having a plethora of powers to choose from, not just one or 2--but remember, Tournament PCs start at 3rd level, so they've already got several powers from day one. (Trading the whole complement of powers out for new ones at a new level seems like an acceptable idea for Tournament PCs--depending on how the actual individual powers are written.)

****this preserves the 3.5e principle that higher int gives you more skill without having to count skill points each level.

(Oh and what kind of Int check? I suppose a DC 15 Int check since adding in roll-under mechanics would needlessly complicate things.)

Serpentor v. Hargrave

"Sorry guys, I just woke up."

"No kidding."

"No I mean my character just woke up."

"Anyway, you're all fighting purple people and one has a raygun."

"Oh, man..."

(this turns out to be cake, actually, so we slay them, collect the raygun and then we keep looking around until...)

"Gilgamesh the Macho, a giant tick falls on you from the ceiling and rolls...very well actually...I'm using the Arduin crit tables for these and..."

"We attack and do stuff!"

(stuff is being done)

"So Gilgamesh the Macho you have a very serious wound coming from your neck"

"I'm torn between keeping on fighting--which would be the most macho--and tending to my gushing tick wound..."

"You should heat up something metal and then press it to your neck to cauterize it, then you'd be macho and medical."

"Well the Arduin crit I rolled on you just says 'You die in 3 rounds'"

"I saw Serpentor do that in GI Joe #50 and it worked."

"Well you can't ask for a better authority than Serpentor, I'll give you a saving throw to survive"

"Ok..............(roll roll)..................YES!"

"ALL HAIL SERPENTOR!"

("Who's Serpentor?")

"Ok, so Cobra Commander knew this dentist named Dr Mindbender and....

And that's how it was revealed that Serpentor is a deity of Wessex.

The 'Other Planet And Don't Know It' Phenomenon

The Other Planet phenomenon...

I know people who are not like me exist.

I also know it's not because they aren't all lunatics who just don't know what I know.

Do they?

One of the strange things to me about the latest spasm of WellHere'sWhatIIIIIIThinkAbout D&D going around is how many Type IV players who are used to the newest edition of D&D do not seem to even be aware that not everybody rolls like them--like as if they think other people don't appreciate the features of the game because they didn't notice they exist.

Somebody on G+ linked to one of these folks and we had an interesting discussion about the nature of this gap...

I said:

This is one of those "we live in a different world" things. describing encounter balance as if it's always a good thing and describing changes to the game as "advances" just suggests this person's from a different planet. I know he's on a different planet--does he know how many gamers aren't on his planet?4:23 PM - Edit

Guy Who Posted The Link- Encounter "balance" is a good thing to me, because IMO it's easy to make an encounter easy or hard, but it's quite difficult to make one that's challenging mechanically without fudging the dice.

I do think that some of the "advances" of 3 and 4e brought up their own issues, hopefully this D&D NExt thing can reconcile some of that.4:50 PM

Zak S - See, that's totally alien to me. I find it really easy to make a challenging encounter and I never fudge dice. This is what I mean. I can't even figure out how it would be hard. Give the monster a high "to hit" and lots of hit dice. next problem...4:54 PM - Edit

Guy Who Posted The Link-So you're telling me you've never had a party either steamroll an encounter or get TPK'd unexpectedly in O,1 or 2e that you thought was going to be a challenge? I can't imagine that. Then again, maybe I just sucked at making encounters in those systems.

Zak S - Sure they sometimes steamroll or get TPK'd (maybe 10% of the time) but I do not see how that's a problem. Those things are vital parts of the game for me.
I think seeing a TPK or instasuccess as a disaster to be avoided is a hallmark of the "different world" syndrome. 5:11 PM - Edit

Guy Who Posted The Link-OK. I can see that. THe way I see it is, I want to have maximum control over the encounter difficulty so that when my party fights a BBEG or other major battle, I can be reasonably sure that they're not going to end up steamrolling it or being TPK'd unexpectedly. In my experience that's not really fun for the players or the DM. To me a lot of the drama from combat is sometimes coming down to the wire. Who is going to win? I want to be able to play my NPCs and monsters to their fullest without either wiping the party or being slaughtered, unless of course that's the purpose of the encounter.

The difference here that we're having right now is the biggest wall that WotC faces with D&D Next. Unless they come up with some great modular ways to give us both what we want. 5:18 PM

Zak S - Exactly! I want to be able to play my monsters and NPCs to the fullest knowing It MIGHT lead to a TPK! That way my players are genuinely scared and therefore genuinely, desperately inventive. Although that carries the risk of TPK, it also carries the reward of them maybe surviving knowing there was no "safety net".

I just feel like what's weird to me is it seems like half the 4e peeps posting don't even know this playstyle exists or is considered fun.5:23 PM - Edit

Guy Who Posted The Link-I agree, I'm not saying there should never be TPK's, I'm just saying I want to be able to better gauge the results. For my past groups, 2e was pretty swingy,which I think what 3e and 4e designers were trying to get away from. However, in the process they sometimes make it too safe. The 4e Healing Surges is an "advance" that I'm not a fan of because of this. Additionally when you're healed up to full every day my brain rebels as "unrealistic!

___________
It's surprising how much of it is all down to a few numbers really:

Adjusting the numbers increases or decreases the chance of Unexpected Immediate Party Success or Unexpected Total Party Kill.

Unexpected Total Party Kills and Unexpected Immediate Party Successes both lead to the GM having to improvise to fill up the rest of that 2-hour session.

And being ok with improvising is the difference between a GM who has a story to tell and a GM with no planned story.

And the difference between a GM who likes a planned story and a GM who is ok without one is pretty much all the difference in the world.

Ooh ooh ooh My Turn!

I regret that I cannot jump on the post Type V D&D Announcement Telling Game Designers How To Do Their Job bandwagon since I already did last month. However, let it never be said a week went by without me bringing in some solution-to-a-problem-nobody-had from left field

If Wizards doesn't want it, someone else can take it. Free:

Strike a blow for social justice and for keeping RPGs totally metal by creating rules for damage resulting in permanent handicaps and badass ways to overcome them: weaponized prosthetic limbs, seeing-eye jaguars, sword-tipped peg-legs, steampunk gnome ocular thingies that only work for a few rounds at a time, etc.

And, naturally, art directors--keep it sexy. Actually, expand the sexy. Give us hot maimed people and dyslexic people but also hot fat people and hot dead people and whatever else you've got (still have Brom's number?). America lags far behind the rest of the western world in non-neurotic thinking about sexy, give it a kick.

This here proof-of-concept is one of the pictures I did for my all-female cyborg space pirate version of Blood Meridian (that's the Judge on the right with the cigar). If it were up to me, there would be no pictures of men in anything ever, but more than half the population likes men so maybe put one or two hot, mute, deaf, blind, hebephrenic guys in there too. I guess. Worked for Michael Moorcock.

Oh and remember, even Tieflings don't have to be skinny goth chicks...