Great GM: Splitting the party? Is your RPG group trying to die? (Game Master Tips)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ส.ค. 2024
- Today's episode explores splitting the party in your role playing game. Should you do it? Seems like a good idea. This video looks at the hows, the whys and well they are going to do it anyway how do I help them and save them from themselves?
UPLOAD SCHEDULE:
Wednesday there is a new How To Be A Great GM.
I also upload a series called How to Be a Great PC on the channel where all the Roleplaying happens with the Bacon Battalion which you can find here: / @greatgmlive
I use questions and comments from my subscribers to create the campaign that will be played on this channel , so check it out.
To Stalk the Roleplaying group and myself go here:
Website: www.greatgamemaster.com
Facebook: / bacon-battalion-rpg-43...
Twitter: / baconrpg - บันเทิง
I'd say that the appropriate response to any player scratching their heads and questioning what you're telling them is to respond with "Yes, your right...that IS strange, isn't it?" Let them get paranoid.
As a GM, I love it when the party splits. I get to be quentin tarantino, and I often send players on break while I run individual encounters for each group. This makes for some amazing game moments if I can keep the players as in the dark as the characters when things come back together, sometimes under duress. It's also fun when it starts to feel like the original Star Wars trilogy.
That's super cool. Yes the whole cut back and forth thing helps really build tension. The idea of sending them out the room is super cool!
Daniel Brooks
not really many people are able to effectively manage this, specially pulling off things similar to Tarantino, that guy's a genius
I can not imagine the "fun" the other group members have sitting in the other room. Depending on the place we play they could fire up the PS4 if it takes longer than 10 minutes.
Im currently making a dnd game with the shin megami tensei 4 world, i wish the party splits up at the middle of the game, in thinking in the possibility of making them fight each other according to their choices through the game '^'
"But we were on the other side of the castle and it would take 40 turns to get there!!"
"Yes, that is true. As such, your characters are confused as to why the rest of the party is right there. However, they are dying, so they would probably appreciate if you asked those questions AFTER you save their lives."
amazing
You know, when you ignore space and time too much, you'll get something like Game of Thrones Season 7... A lot of stuff in your story stops making sense and the plot holes might ruin the story as a whole.
I have essentially 2 campaigns, 1 good, 1 evil. They directly effect each other and it gets interesting.
I don't agree with you on the "Real World" part. If real world doens't matter then gravity might as well be inverted, balloons be nukes, lava be cold, etc. One of the most important parts of a fantasy world for me is the connection it has to the real world, the sense that you can relate to this universe. Also when you don't care about real world mechanics you often fall in metagaming, someone wants to do something that should work but it doesn't sit too well with your scenario and you refuse it, but sometimes later you realise an NPC does the same thing and it works for him.
Refusing Real World mechanics based arguments is going the easy way and it only leads to incoherence in the universe.
Of course there are cases were for the greater good it's justifiable. I wouldn't blame my PCs for quitting if they all died because of me being too nit-picky
Best example of making great use of a split party that I can think of is the episode of the 2012 version of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles where Leo and Raph take on the mousers and Donnie and Mikey try to track down April's phone and then they all come together in the end to defeat Baxter Stockman
yet another great video. one of the things we do when its time to split the party is use the "down" group to make a snax run. they have a short time away from the active group and the gm to plan their actions when it gets to be their turn and enjoy the suspense of not knowing what's happened to the "up" group untill they get back. plus it makes shorter lines for bathroom breaks.
during the snax break they get filled in on whats been happening with only as much info as their characters would reasonably know in game.
now the guys that ran out for snax get their turns while the guys that played get their turn at the bathroom and tidy up the leftover snax. at the right time both parties meet up and exchange news and the game goes on with a now reunited party and all cross table socializing and snacking satisfied without too much disruption to the game.
this is also a great way to pass on specific knowledge to some players without giving it to the ones whose characters wouldn't know it any way. when the "secret" knowledge is revealed, the players who already knew revel in the joy of the reveal while the ones who didn't know get to revel in the joy of the discovery.
this also helps encourage good roleplaying as the pc's have to inter act to get all the information together.
if something gets missed, this is where the friendly and helpful DM steps in and fills in the blancs.
As a GM I bend space and time when dimensions are indefinite, but if I've defined something I keep it definite regardless. If I didn't define the castle then yeah, they can be there. If I did define the castle... I'm the one saying in a whiny voice there's no way you can get there in time. If I'm giving my players definite travel distances and definite time constraints that's an invitation to them to think their actions through and plan ahead. If they fail in that regard they might die.
Charles Lathrop
yeah, you can't ignore already defined spaces and times, just evidentiate that their act of splitting apart is either gonna be an irrelevant or significant decision, I don't think a team would split if the door they're standing in front of brings to the gates of hell, but the others have to pee
I find the wonderful thing about splitting a party is finding out your players are pretty good at _not_ metagaming.
don't you knooooooooooooooow!
you never spilt the party!
clerics in the back to keep us fighters hail and hearty!
the wizard's in the middle,
so he can spread some light
and you never let that damn thief out of sight...
on another note where do you gm and where should I be looking for groups near me?
or, if you're my group..
Don't you know you never split the party
theives in the back keep those theives fit and Hardy
thieves in the middle where they can steal some stuff
and you never let the one paliden make a fuss!!!
One of the best GM experiences I had was when our warlock desided he was too great for the party and, well, went his own way. I strive to be a good GM at times, so I've let him do that (hey, it's his character and his story). The thing he pretty much didn't put into consideration - was that a group of assassins were hired by one of the major towns to track those bastards down for messing with their patrols (they sold a burned, headless, naked body of one of the guard captains to one of the caravans... yeah, that happens). So he got to play his own game for as long as 25-30 minutes, until... the sun went down. Pretty much immideatly he was attacked by assassins and, well, died, but they were ordered to keep him alive and throw into prison, without the whole other party knowing that (we did this during a break). So when the party went into a forest tavern - the owner, whom they have a formed relationship with, was very happy to share the great news, that he overheard. And we have started a prison-break, FAILED miserably and were hired by the guard commander to work for them: they had 3 quests they needed to complete in 7 days; otherwise, planned execution of warlock was going to happen.
The whole panic and trying to do tonns of things in this limited time - was simply priceless. In the end, they wasted 9 days (since they missed several npc's that could've lead them to their final encounter - a druid-witch, who was sending her werebears to massacre villages), but... I forgave them and told them, that they did it with 4 hours left :). Surprisingly, they liked the idea of being hired blades and I had to change the story a bit, since they were later taken into a mercenary order, but that's a whole other story :D.
Except some parties actually look for and enjoy verisimilitude.
That is true, and for them role-playing must frequently end in death, or be very specific, planned, and calculated on their behalf. As long as the whole table is happy with that kind of approach, then that is awesome and must be a hugely intense experience!
Cant help but feel that whole 'ignore geography' thing is more of a problem then a benefit, as like everything else, it feels like the DM is stepping in and it removes tension. Oh, we can make mistakes, he will bend over to make sure we dont lose!
Smeagol the Vile just make the ones in combat to roll for a successful run to their party allies, our you could build for an event just as the party's about to regroup
My gm once went "Don't split the party" Straight to me when I went off to town with a cursed teammate. forcing me to turn back to the group, only to then be affected by a massive spell putting the entire group to sleep and transitioning us a boss fight with boss mechanics we were never told about (Not in character or in person) which meant only one person survived.
You GM needs to watch some videos methinks. I have that kind of railroading. If one isn't allowed to do what one wants, then it might as well be a boardgame.
Lavender Fruit your dm needs to be more versatile
I actually used splitting the party up to my advantage when dealing with a ridiculously large group (12 players, I know its a horrible idea). I found that when I would split them up it would help the game to not get too bogged down between turns, and it helped that while the players were basically all in a different encounter the elements of those encounters spilled into each other, keeping people on there toes and entertained even when it wasn't their groups turn.
encounters*
Not a bad plan at all! Yeah big groups man, big groups!
A GM I had used this, if he had story to do with one group and combat with another (generally he'd have groups of 4), he'd tell the inactive group to run the opposition for the combat group while he roleplayed for the third group. Kept everyone entertained.
Thanks for all your great videos! They are reeeaaaly interesting and useful!
Glad to hear it! Thank you
I played in a game recently where our party split up from the start, causing us to have two completely different goals from each other. Our GM handled it by swapping between us every 10 minutes or so depending on the situation where it came down to both groups working against one another. It was kinda fun, though we had a player who constantly badgered to have the spotlight.
I solved this particular problem of the party being split in a few creative ways: scenario. the cleric had an amulet placed on them that pulled them physically through a stone obelisk into a mirror realm. the rest of the party was outside trying to figure out how to get in. the cleric won his solo battle against his cursed self, and the rest of the party was having difficulty solving the actual riddle to get in the *main* way i had setup. after a few moments of them fiddling with it, i had them all roll spot checks and those that succeeded found an exact replica of the amulet in a pouch or other article of their person. not only did it freak them out to the level of power of the enemies they were about to face, it created mystique and intrigue and also gave them a rapid way to rejoin the cleric and; in their minds save his ass... even if he was doing just fine and they were the ones truly in danger.
Very solid points and all, good vid!
Thank you :)
Great advices! Thanks!
This is an excellent array of tips -- especially the parts about disregard differences in (game) time and space and to align the tone and style of play between the split parties.
Glad to hear it! Thank you for your feedback :)
Video is looking great and the stubble look works!
Many thanks for this! Stubble today hair tomorrow... I hope!!
As a group of three (plus GM) we're a couple of sessions into Classic Traveller. We naturally started splitting up but our GM seemed cool with it. I enjoy it as, with it being futuristic, we have communication with each other anyway so can share information with each other without gaming the system. We often end up back together at points anyway and our GM uses those points to move the story on well. The main set pieces have come about when we're together but we've split to solve the different puzzles and investigations.
For example last time we had to dock with a military ship to carry out an investigation for our mission-giver. As a former military officer one guy went to the officer's mess, our other colleague started staking out areas and I, as the talky one who always tries to get on with the common man, went off to the general mess. It just seemed to make sense as that is what you would do in such a setting and our GM handled it really well.
It allowed other players to think about their next step and we kept our personal "mini chapters" to 5 minutes or so each before "pausing" it there to cut across to the next person, as in a book or movie. Our GM kept it all together well and, as you said, was loose enough in that timing and didn't sweat it, so timings always worked out when we came together again at the right time. Also one of our guys would cut in from time to time to check if anyone had entered the room he was staking out. A couple of times the GM said no but one time said yes, so we cut to that.
Really enjoy the freedom we're given, but also with overall control from the GM.
Extremely useful information, and a great video to boot.
So glad I can help and thanks for commenting.
I was a bit weary when you said ignore Geography. For stealthy or ranged characters geography is paramount in combat
But your example makes great sense. Lol 42 turns XD
super. very good and straight information as usual, thanks m8.
Only a pleasure!
I'm sorry, but I really have to strenously disagree with you on the point about Unite the Party. If a player points out that you've bent time and space to make it so half the party doesn't die, they're not being petulant; rather, they're saying to you, as the GM, that your obvious bending of geography is taking them out of the experience.
And if, in that case, your respose is to spit venom at them and declare half the party dead (as you did in the video) is not only petulant, it is textbook Vindictive GM Dick as you described in and earlier video! In fact the general gist of your videos lately seems to be punishing players who happen to know the rules better than you (or at least, better than your theoretical GM). Honestly, if a GM did that to a group I was playing with, I would leave that group *immediately*.
If a player points out that that time and space seem to have been modified in their favour, the answer isn't to get upset. Here, you take a page from Noah Antweiller (ie. Spoony): agree with them, and act mysterious "Yeah, the castle *is* five miles long. Your character finds it very odd that they managed to traverse the building so rapidly..."
Suddenly, your players are going to thing "Oh. Maybe there's something more to this place than we thought. We'd better be on the lookout..." Now they're engaged in your story again.
Though to be fair, when I've been in that situation as a player, usually the guy that says 'but the castle is so big we'd never make it' isn't doing it to nitpick rules or argue space/time, but doing it because he wants someone's character(s) dead so one of the other players will either make something he thinks is a better 'fit' to his ideals, or hoping the player themselves leaves. I mean my first reaction is those situations, one was quite humorous, was we opened the door, the other party was running to it from a young Green dragon...adn my character slammed the door in thier faces before casually backing off and pouring out his canteen cause he was sure he was hallucinating.
"usually the guy that says 'but the castle is so big we'd never make it' isn't doing it to nitpick rules or argue space/time, but doing it because he wants someone's character(s) dead so one of the other players will either make something he thinks is a better 'fit' to his ideals, or hoping the player themselves leaves."
The problem I have with this statement is the word "usually". I have yet to encounter, or even hear of a case where a player wanted another player's character dead, as even annoying characters are still vital to the party's success. I suspect your experience is the exception, not the rule.
But regardless of one's motives, the DM's reaction is still being a vindictive dick. He's not even punishing the nitpicking player in your theoretical situation, but the rest of the party. That doesn't make sense. If the DM is sick of the player's nitpicking that badly, he has the courage to take him aside and tell him as much, and depending on that conversation, boot him from the game.
It's not really being a vindictive dick GM. The player is the one calling for the death of players, the GM is simply making sure the blame is properly placed. The GM fudged things in order to keep the game going for the benefit of the players and it was called out, thus giving the players two logical outcomes, A) they allow the GM to fudge and live or B) allow the rule lawyer to have his way and end the game.
DietrichvonSachsen I'd say that player is getting in the way of the narrative
I can think of another solution that can make the time and distance issue consistent with the rules and the narrative, at least for something using the typical DnD plane structure: Sigil.
See, Sigil is this weird city in the outer planes that has unknown but absurdly large numbers of portals that are opened by keys (which can be anything from an item or type of item to a way you hold your arms as you step through to a thought in your mind, and they are not necessarily persistent, lasting for seconds or centuries). It makes for an utterly bizarre setting, so it's probably not wise for GMs who still feel they need advice to even try setting a campaign IN Sigil, but if you're using a world that fits with that planar structure - and a lot of them do, for ease of reference at the very least - it's possible that there's 2 gates to Sigil open at that moment keyed to "I need to help my friends" or whatever else the character who made this miraculously long sprint was thinking at the time, and that they're only open for a few seconds.
I'm not recommending this as your primary explanation for traveling long distances, just as a retcon you use when that rules lawyer pipes up.
According to how Sigil works, it's far more likely you'd wander into one portal, then wind up having a couple of sessions of trying to get home (or winding up stuck there until you manage to find someone who can target their plane shifting deliberately). But it's technically possible according to the rules of the DnD universes.
I’m starting a game of my own in the Edge of the empire game.
Two characters are bounty hunters (or at least have bounties on their heads) and they dislike each other.
The other player is a character who wants to climb up the imperial ranks and rule the galaxy.
I need a way to get them to work together and set them up to be a ragtag group of scoundrels. This is what I’ve thought of so far:
I’ll start the two with bounties in a jail cell to push them into the action and give them a common goal to follow. At the same time, the other player will start as someone working at the same place (possibly a low-ranking guard)
When the two break out, they’ll need someone with access to a ship. (or whatever other reason they might have for taking him with them.) That’s when their paths will meet.
I know my players but I never know what they’ll do. They know what the end goal of this is (to get them to become the same crew and go on adventures.) but what’s keeping them from just shooting each other or trying to break into the ships themselves?
the time thing is the biggest issue for me, but not as often for my players. I'll easily forget everything after some intense combat, i love throwing around flowery speech to give my PC's the flying kicks and impalings they intend for, but that's not good for the game. I reference movies to myself a lot in these moments, considering the pacing of the story I'm telling one group or the other, and trying to find out when everyone's bored of being split up. It can also be intimidating to pull out the whole Player/Character knowledge problem on your players after a split, if everyone loves their roles maybe spending 15 minutes in character repeating the last 20-30 minutes could be great, but it's not always that simple. Engaging your players with their characters seems more effective during split-ups than after, in my humble experience. The paths taken apart mysteriously leading back together seems like a necessary and common enough trope and device that I couldn't imagine players really dissenting it too harshly.
I personally love to tie the events provoked by my players as they split the party. I had a group in which the players started to work almost against each other every time they split. It was lots of fun for all of us just to see the schemes they came up with backfires at them in result of other party members independent actions (that particular party was 100% evil so they really tried hard to scheme).
Good video, thanks for the upload! I've been wanting to make my own game and I've been turning to these videos for tips as i take notes. I have a question: What do you do when the party splits but party B actively chooses to do nothing or is doing something mundane?
Another tip, and this works best if you have a big gaming table: if the party splits, have the players change seats, so that one group is on one side of the table, and the other half of the split is on the other side of the table.
If they split into more than 2 groups, then it's probably best to kill one of the group's.
I like how the tittle summs it up: Is the party trying to split up? Are they suicidal? :D
Also, love the videos, please keep it up ;)
Yeah! Two of my players walked alone into a very serious Ambush, the good news was my players manage to RP it and came to their aid in a acceptable manner! Still almost had a PC death.
RP always saves the day in my books - always!
I'm going to force split my party. We're playing CoS and thankfully my players HAVE gotten a bit paranoid. Sadly they've gotten so paranoid of things that go bump in the night they refuse to split up.
Partially that's good I'm very much proud of them to have understood: this is high lethality horror in a shadowy realm. Partially that's bad as I need to do extra work but I love it. I mean for gods sake they ran from a fog of cold air not knowing what it was, I have 5 players 2lv7 3lv6 and it was only 1 revenant, an easy encounter but they ran, not knowing what was coming with the cold air they experienced...even though one of them can when downed turn into a loup garou (don't ask lol).
I had a small party splitting situation where one player (a dwarven warrior) chose to go outside and keep a watch on workers trying to clear the tracks of the train the party was traveling on. The other two party members (a halfing mage and a human rogue) opted to remain on the train instead of going outside. After a perception test the warrior sees an arrow being shot at one of the workers and manages to get that person out of the way. The other two see the dwarf tackle a worker for no apparent reason and go outside to see what the hell he did that for.
(system being used is fantasy age)
It's a good example of letting things be seen to bring back the party together.
The title of this made me laugh because that's almost what happened at the last session I was in when I suggested splitting the party and ended up all on my own staring at an adult dragon. We weren't too far apart and I knew in character where they were at (waiting on my dumbass to tell them what was up ahead), so I managed to get the dragon to chase me to a place where the rest of the party could intervene without meta gaming, and then hid from the dragon. Then rest of the party did such a fantastic job of not meta gaming ("wow, look at that dragon! But where's the rogue? She hid so well! Well, the dragon isn't breathing fire at anything so she must be ok!") that I was pretty convinced I was gonna die because they were melee heavy characters, 3 turns of movement away, and the dragon had a terrifyingly high passive perception.
Splitting the party (other than minor stuff in town "Mom. I'm going to Toys R Us while you go shoe shopping, see you at food court in an hour") imposes such an added load on the DM that most will just kill one or both parts of the party.
The encounters were designed for the whole party Now each half meets a full encounter. Let it happen.
DM: "Damn the bad luck... hate it when that happens. If the party hadn't split you'd have easily won that. Sorry that you need to roll new characters."
I don't agree with any of these contrivances, but I do think it is important to keep all the players involved.
Whether the party splits or not, always use initiative order, or just go around the table clockwise and let each player take one or two actions - set time limits (in-game time and playing time) - and pass the turn.
I can't recognize you without your beard. I shaved off my mustache once and didn't recognize myself in the mirror.
As the GM I'm using physics and geography all the time... although I do use GURPS... so there's that, and I grant it helps a lot that my players know what to expect.
Brilliant advice. I'll never forget my party splitting five players five ways in Bogenhafen :)
Did any survive? :)
+How to be a Great Game Master Actually, they all did. Early in the adventure and it did make sense for them to split - no point in the illiterates hanging around a library. Next time though, next time...
Say it with me... MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I always seem to have the opposite problem. My party attempt to move through every adventure in phalanx style formation. "Don't split the Party" is so ingrained I can't ever get them to split up unless it feels very forced (there are two levers in two corridors that open one door...). I would love to hear thoughts on best techniques for encouraging the party to split...
Expand the concept of "two levers". Make it so there are multiple aspects which need to come together for successful completion.
"You need to go and obtain sacred oil with which to sanctify the death knight's accursed armour before he can be destroyed, but at the same time his floods and floods of minions are trying to break through these big stone doors. If they overrun his crypt you'll never be able to fight your way back inside again! So who will get the oil and who will hold back the undead?"
Alternatively there's something inherently harmful in doing something, but not everyone is required for it. "If you call out the nefarious orator to debate you on the forum and win public sympathy, he will find out who you are and make plans to foil your plans. But the rogue was not there at the debate, so he won't have prepared for her when you put your plan in motion!" or something similar "There are two mummies, and everyone who is present for a mummy's death with be cursed with a different curse." two teams => one curse each. One team => two curses for everyone.
Hey, could you possibly do a video on pre-game preparation? I often find myself having a hard time finding a good balance between what I should have written down and ready beforehand, and what I can or should come up with on the fly. It'd be great to hear about your note-taking and preparation methods for your game because I either end up having too many notes, which creates a tendency for me to have a more rigid game, or too few notes in which everything ends up going off the rails because I don't have very much that has been solidly set aside.
I'll add it to the list - no problem! There are a few things I've learned over time, and this is a great idea for a video. You're also not the first one to ask it!
Oh, okay. Cool! Thank you.
A pleasure!
My last DM started out group actually pre-split into 3 groups, without ever knowing who each other were, and even started my character in shackles being led by another player (I Color Sprayed him turn one and ran off, what else was i gonna do). One of our players is very aggressive, so when our characters crossed paths for the first time in-game, we actually immediately got off on the wrong foot and became enemies. So we had 2 2-man parties who were actively feuding, and a 5th member just kinda switching sides willy nilly. Then he started forcing the parties to work together by telling us out of game knowledge and then dropping certain characters through rifts in space to randomly appear next to the others, who are now being forced to be nice to one another. So for the past 2 months, our party literally has never been whole even once, and the players are getting fairly sick of it. He has a habit of forcing us to move on from quests mid-way simply because he keeps forgetting what he's doing. The campaign is ending soon, the say the least. Ill be taking over as DM next. He, the current DM, said hes planning another campaign for after me (mines gonna take quite awhile), but openly warned me, though no other players but 1, that he has full intention to throw out all rules and make a random campaign with inconsistent rules and facts. Which he claims is on purpose to make things interesting. Well see how that goes.
Mmmm... I'd be interest to see how that plays out.
This is what I generally do if it's 2 party combat.
Have both groups battle's happen at the same time. But the focus is 5 - 7 rounds before switching perspective.
GMs, just make sure that your players know what they are getting into when alone. Played a patrolling Gaurd character last week (Dwarf Barbarian)...the character had a Badge that allowed him to patrol at night without the Golem Gaurds attacking him, he can even order them around a bit.
So, i was out information gathering alone on Patrol at night, when this unknown flying golem spots me and starts an alarm. My only warning as my own patrol bots come running to me is, "are you sure you don't want to Stealth away?" I look at my character sheet that reads Dwarf Barbarian Level 5 with a +0 in Stealth, and reply, "Fuck no, i face my problems head on!"
Well, as it happened, my problems that night were that the flying machine could basically cast Dominate Construct at will, and my own friendly golems were CR 14 creatures. All 8 of them....after i yelled at the DM for a good 10 minutes, we Retcon'd the entire situation back to the Stealth check, where i rolled a 9 total and died anyway.
Yay for taking Profession (Night Gaurd) and getting killed off like i was some common NPC.
I mean. You can always say "you go through the castle, searching for your other party members" and then sum it all up then have them open the door.
My DM intentionally split the party once, in two narrowly fenced-off passages. We wasted good time breaking through the fence, and almost wound up with a TPK
7-8 players...
GM is considering splitting the party for a major plot quest, and just running separate sessions for each group. It WOULD let us do more RP stuff without tripping all over each other.
No, no no no no. .. I *must* disagree with your take on players calling 'real world' as a negative thing. If your players were paying 'that' much attention to your descriptions, and taking notes like that- then slamming them and punishing them for committing to your story so attentively and in such a contributing manner is being a GM DICK. This 'is' a collective game, and perhaps your player enjoys the thrill of land based tactics, and has plans for time and space and physics. This is absolutely not breaking with the spirit of a fantasy, scify, or any other role playing game. 'If' the player is doing it to be a douchebag, or for other negative reason, then sure- but absolutely do not place this under the general banner of bad players.
Well said! I wholeheartedly agree!
The group I GM for also prefers a more consistent and "predictable" world, where the players have agency. If they *decide* to split five miles apart, they do so knowing that if they're in trouble, the nearest help is STILL five miles away. To defy that trivialises the players' decisions and pulls them out of that.
That said, if there's enough wiggle-room to say "yes, the castle is five miles long, but group B happened to get there earlier and walked those five miles of castle in that time." I will absolutely take that opportunity for a heroic rescue, but I will not obviously warp my "reality" to save the PCs, and I wouldn't expect that from my GM as a player either.
To be fair I did pretty much invoke divine intervention at level 1 to save a doggy the party was enamoured with. I'm a cold GM, but even I have my limits =)
If I do that, I generally state it as a question so the DM can give an explanation that works with my suspension of disbelief instead of against it. Something as simple as "You made a navigation error, and you're not where you thought you should be." will often do.
I had a party of first level characters I warned in advance that splitting up would be bad for them. They ran about aggroing everything and got themselves killed.
Geography, time, and dice rolling involves everyone. Thanks! I tend to get hung up specifically on time, but ignoring geography and keeping everyone involved are great tips as well.
I do have a request or two for you as well if you have time in the future:
1. Games with 1-2 players and GM. My wife and son have been begging me to run a game for them but I've never run one for such a small party. I obviously don't want to throw fights at them left and right. And I want to emphasize the roleplay even more, but I would love to hear your take on GMing for small groups like that.
2. The other thing I would like to hear you discuss is young players. Specifically how to keep them focused. And how to GM for a young group without being too 'Adult' but still not making it mylittlepony world or whatever. In one of my groups I've got young teens and tweens, and I often struggle with how describe things and have nps interact with them.
Hey, not guy but have some advice to offer.
1, move away from the traditional party mind set. Have a spy/heist like game where social encounter and puzzles are the main with a little combat.
Smaller party means you can slot in a npc ally or two without stuffing up combat. Not a DM PC but maybe this guard is also chasing the criminal they are and willing to work with them on this case.
2 Finding Nemo is Taken. The Lion King is McBeth. Its all about tone and presentation. Don't focus on the gore. Keep the politics simple enough...the lion king is a political story.
Children have shorter attention spans so maybe shorter sessions more often.
Chldren are painfully more comfortable and sure on themselves when sitting on the floor.
Let the kid made tough choices that affect things later in the game. Do you give the mcguffin to quest giver a or quest giver b? The choice will make them feel an importance they can't feel in the real world because they are 'just kids'
If they get a rule wrong, just go with it. Does it really matter if play it that this spell is range attack than spell instead of spell save. i always hated putting up xmas tree as a kid because my mother needs it perfect and her way.
good questions! I would be interested in hearing about these topics as well:)
+CaughtDingoes thanks for the tips! Especially with the younger kids, I appreciate the comparison.ls.
and my keyboard hates me
Awesome conversation points going on here - I didn't know about the floor and kids! Learn something new every-day how awesome is that?! To your first question - small groups I've got a series coming up of - one man show, two man show and ten men shows - dealing with different group sizes, so look out for that. I've get great memories and some - hopefully - helpful advice on all of them. As for the younger groups - having worked in TV for many years on kids shows I may be able to help with story for kids - but the seated on the ground thing is great. So added to the list! Thanks for the questions and Thanks for the answers guys keep it coming!
My group continuously tells me they will never forget the first time they all split up. I had been running an adventure for two sessions in which one player had gone off on his own while the rest stayed together. Eventually the lone player had adventured into the depths of a large cavern inhabiting an Ettin whilst the players that stayed together had set out to destroy a hobgoblin war band's weapon stockpile. The lone player was losing terribly and on the brink of death when I switched to the other party that had been caught by the war band and decided, as a last ditch effort, to detonate an explosive while they were still inside the weapon storage. The lone player was shocked and quite elated to see his previous companions tumble into the cave with several angry hob goblins, burying the Ettin with rubble. And thus the reunited band of adventurers fought their way out of the cave with smiles on their faces and an angry legion on their heels. .
Nice use of masking there. :D Your green screen game is strong.
I won't lie, I was surprised by the result, go Adobe I guess.
I can't count how many times I have seem the rules "ignore geography" and "ignore timing" leading to players not seeing consequences of rushing into combat with splitted party.
How can i get skill checks for the group that is sitting on the beach just waiting for the other half to come back. Throwing random unrelated stuff at the beach group can only go so far. Had a turtle come out of the water which they could butcher and cook. ;)
Also fun when i reuinite my groups and ask them what they do when they see each other.
Player A: "Uh.... hi?"
Player B: "Ehhh... i tell the other guys what has happened"
So imaginative. ;D
Hahahaha. To a degree yes. There should though very seldom be moments where one is just 'waiting for the others'. Encourage your players to chat in character :) Though by the sounds of things... hi seems to be the extend of their powers lol.
When they decide to sit a sidequest out themselves, not knowing how long it will take, my hands are kinda bound. Yea, they are not the roleplaying type. Actually told them "while the others do X, you could delve into getting to know each other", but nothing came of it.
So i ended up hurrying the 'away' group along a bit with the boring stuff, and had to step on some toes with the spellcasters taking forever to look up their spells.
I think players share some responsibility too getting everyone equally involved.
That is actually something that books and single player games tend to do. they just "tell the others what happened", because the player/reader already knows and doesn't need to go through it again.
So I could understand if the PCs just "tell them", but they miss out the opportunity for character development due to the reactions and interactions.
In those cases I personally like to stick a chatty npc that will ask questions about the pcs, initiating a conversation and letting them chat with each other. Sometimes they even forget the npc is there after a while, being just quiet and listening, which is perfect for when I use evil npcs who want to trick or spy on the party.
A couple suggestions to your problem: if half the party is sitting on the beach, make one of the players do a reflex save to avoid getting hit in the head with a beach ball, or volleyball. Then you can have an NPC apologize and then flirt with the characters, and try to get them to join them in a game. Lots of opportunities for rolls in a fast-paced sport like volleyball! If they're not interested in playing, then maybe that NPC from before can try to strike up or maintain the conversation. Sure it might be information that the players know or have spouted off a hundred times before, but each retelling is going to be different in some way!
As an aside, I personally hate the notion of "Oh I'll just tell my team what happened," because it conveys way too much information at once and doesn't leave room for human(oid) errors. Two players might've done the dungeon while the rest sat on the beach and told the volleyball player to bugger off, but those two dungeoneers are both going to have their own unique stories to tell and secrets to keep from that place! If you're keen on getting your players to become more involved in roleplaying, ask questions in the place of the other party members.
"Oh I tell them what happened."
"Okay, what DID happen?"
If nothing else works, make the beachgoers have to do constitution/fortitude rolls to avoid getting sunburns if they don't reapply sunscreen or run out of it.
Splitting the group in a dungeon is silly - for the obvious out of character reason that the dungeon is typically built around the entire groups strength level. But when you're in a town, I STILL know splitting the party is bad, because the GM isn't going to let us have a nice, safe week in a town. Because it's D&D, shit is going to happen even if I hope it doesn't. This is purely from a player perspective, and of course bad things happen because that's the game, but I feel like the only reason behind splitting a group being bad is that the entire game is based around the strength of the group - and we have to be ready to defend ourselves from a CR 6 encounter at ALL times.
From a 'story' perspective it doesn't make a ton of sense, and I'd hope the GM would be a little generous in balancing an encounter faced during a group split. Of course, others would argue "the world shouldn't revolve around you" yet I feel like that point is exactly what I'm advocating for.
What if the characters' personality pushes them to do it? I'm gonna start an Ars Magica adventure and I've got a rebel mage who is chaotic good, but may go full Darth Vader and become lawful evil, rallying the party to overthrow the magi and build a new order, but not all of them may accept. Is it possible for them to go in opposite ways, but keep encoutering until one last confront (or until them decide to join the other side)?
windswift: let's all go in different directions for the next three episodes.
So basically, punish players who expect things to make sense, instakill players who ignore warnings, and make player actions irrelevant because you have a story to tell and they aren't going to muck it up for you... I may be biased because, I'm one of those players you'd mock until I left simply because I expect a simple thing like "doors" to behave realistically, even when dragons exist, how selfish of me, but I typically find that extremist positions are, frankly, needless.
For example, I've had one GM whom was the exact opposite of you, I think you'd call him a "simulationist" (and I'd agree). He built a world, he built the politics, he already knows in advance the result of everything for the next 50 ingame years, and it's our job as players to muck it up and change stuff if we can figure out how... Or, in reality, how it actually played out, is we'd spend our time like currency and then be told of other peoples adventures by the in world news. I don't understand how people enjoyed his game, they played it like skyrim and just kept starting over trying to explore everything, but I felt betrayed from the beginning, why was I even there if the GM didn't care about me?
And I'm not going to comment on the other side, because I haven't played in one. All I know is I'd leave a game if the GM said "and now you're suddenly a mile away, because your team needs reinforcements, and also you are wearing your armor even though you were asleep a second ago." because that makes the game more about my stats than my actions. Oh, the party needs my HP, okay, sorry, here you go, take my whole character sheet.
There's nothing wrong with attempting to simulate reality. That mythical dragon has a heart, and a liver, and a brain, gaming systems are all about simulation, and making things make sense doesn't have to be at odds with the story. I think that while the GM and players have a contract, so too do the players with eachother, and if their actions screw eachother over then it's my job as a story teller to keep it interesting... but I'm absolutely not going to bend reality just because they need reinforcements... well, maybe slightly, but not noticeably.
I am running a D&D 3.5 session and I'm considering a party split with the intention of putting half the party on one side, and half the party in the other unwittingly so that they are forced into an avengers civil war-ish situation in which the characters must eventually face each other due to disagreement in how the main story situation should be handled.
Would this be a good idea? Thoughts?
I think I'm one of those weird GMs who actively, knowingly, and most importantly, intentionally puts in situations that merits a party split. Granted, I'm not one of those GMs who tries to weaken the party, I actually use that to the best of my ability to highlight the individual strengths of the party
My party splited once, The non combat group asked how they got in that combat they won, and how the combat group was buying food
I remember times when I thought to myself "Yknow, I know this is a completely fucking stupid idea... but... My character thinks differently, so I knowingly march toward my very likely death."
That's 90% of my current character in a lovecraft-inspired game. I deliberately made one of his primary personality traits 'I have zero self control and no consideration for the consequences of my actions." Just to see what horrific nonsense he gets himself into.
8:59 it's a noneuclidian castle
CORROMPIDO as a mathematician I laughed tears :D
NoLion inTheJungle you'rw welcome
Hey guys! I love this channel and would like to give my thanks to both this and How to be a Great Player.
My question is, how do I make story for characters that you simply wouldn't think have any.
Specifically I have a player who has made a naturalist barbarian who's philosophy is to kill literally all non party members eventually.
This can make it difficult to introduce NPC's and give him any sort of story aside from, "go there, kill them, go there, kill them, go there-," (you get the idea)
So to put it more simply, how do I get my players to spare NPC's and to care about their wellbeing.
Give the barbarian a dream sequence. But don't let them know its a dream. In the dream their weapons deal no damage and only discussion and working with people help. Once they get used to the idea wake them up from that dream and have THE SAME NPC's that they saw in the dream arrive needing help. If that doesn't work - talk to your players. Ask them if hack and slash is all they want. If the answer is yes, then it's your call to stay with the group or leave it. Just some thoughts ;)
+How to be a Great Game Master thanks a ton!
You guys are the best, keep up the awesome content and know that you have a fan for life. Oh yeah and...
READY FOR RAPING WHERE ARE THE RAPISTS?
:)
Talk to them first, and if they don't listen, have the world react appropriately and sic the military on them. After they're dead, piss on PC's corpses and start again
The seated look is much better
Yay! I agree too :)
That was cold-blooded 8:51
If players ever complain about time and space being weird, I think I'll just pull of a "weird, isn't it?" without really explaining anything.
Let them theorize and think there is something more than you taking the most convenient path :)
In fact, in the campaign I'm planning presently, time/space being weird is something that definitely makes sense, since it litteraly involves priest messing with it.
To be honest also, I prefer not bending either too much, but at the same time I don't get obsessed by it.
I think when you pull the "weird huh?" card, you should at least follow up on that if they investigate (sufficiently).Props to my DM who did that when we questioned why the guards wouldn't let our (very VERY obviously) epicly powerful characters pass until we "proved our strength" and it turned out there was a power struggle going on that they wanted to keep hidden.
the blip at 9:35, dont call real world. i have done that from the player side, but i also had a major misunderstanding.... i thought a river had moved a player 8+ miles in a matter of 5 seconds, and was wondering what river is moving 2000+ mph. it was just fast, not THAT fast
I want to try this but my players are always so scared to split up the party. Do you have any tips?
Oh for a party that sticks together. A revolving secret door can be useful to split the party. A collapsing bridge can work too. If you watch the penultimate episode of my Bacon Battalion and the Cursed Bones you'll see how I split the party up using a collapsing rope bridge. Just be careful of forcing a situation on the players that may frustrate them. If they like sticking together, then I'd say let them. :)
Okay, thank you.
Video suggestion: Likable NPCs
Recently i was part of a group when I, the player, wanted to punch every NPC in the face for being annoying.
The bad guys weren't scary.
The good guys were either dangerously incompetent, buttheads, currupt selfish snots or in one set of victims case The Flanders.
You on the other hand make characters that annoy the players but are awesome. im thinking the mer in the barbarians head, the drow (more scary than annoying) and the guy with the talking horse. (forgive me for not trying to attempt spelling their names)
Flattery will get you everywhere. Let me tell you I have learnt the HARD way about making likeable NPC's when a player got up from my table and told me my NPC's were all one-dimensional and flat. Another GM I admired told me straight up - your NPC's suck and you shouldn't GM... that was when I was 15 so I kinda took it to heart lol. Glad I didn't follow his advice though! It's added to the list because it's a good question to explore. As for Gowan, Mangastori (or Vestasius? not sure which Drow) and Does anyone really know his name? Or the horses name for sure? Thank man, glad you enjoying the show!
I'm glad you didn't either. I look forward to see it.
(I meant they annoy the PCs not the players. Serve me right for writing sleepy.)
I meant drow as in plural. Is it drows? I assumed it was like fish, deer, sheep... O_o ...anyway I think all three of the drow(s?)
are bad ass but I mean more that they when they were introduced they were a scary threat to the players but since the sacrifice I trust them more, not completely but FAR more than I did.
Excellent... I mean... good. Yes. Trust is good. The plural is Drow, Though if Cow is cattle... perhaps it should be Drattle?
Yesterday my party spitted up, the ninja followed a goblin he saw in the city to the forest, the rest of the PC stayed in the tavern listening to very calm music while drinking wine.
Well the goblin was a devil in disguise, the ninja got caught and started to run away without his mount (the horse got killed by a fireball), the devil was searching for him while burning everything in his path.
That was so cool, everyone was FUCKING preoccupied for him but couldn't do anything.
The music was perfect, i switched from "calm bard" music to "FUCKING CHASED BY A GIANT DEVIL" every 5 seconds, the tension was so high for everyone.
The ninja almost died from heart-attack after 3 hours of running.
I hope that most starships travel faster than zombies.
Lol! Are you holding some pent-up aggression for players who've taken the piss in your games? :-)
I love the whole "42 turns to get through corridor" line. As a GM I have never ever given a damn about how long a round or turn is actually suppose to last. I mean, firefights can last for hours as people take cover, try to avoid getting shot etc. Same goes for swords and sorcery, Maybe I can make three sword attacks in a minute according to game rules, but irl the character might hold back, or his enemy might withdraw a bit, and a standoff could develop. Sword fights aren't "I hit you, then you hit me", and the GM should make a fight reflect that when possible.
Tightly structured turn times don't belong in an rpg, save them for the wargames.
That's a very cool and interesting idea! Although I think you might find it hard to get buy in I like it, and need to use that as a descriptor base moving forward. A failed roll doesn't mean a failed strike, it means a moment to breathe, to reflect, and to assess.
Hello from 2021. Guy is looking very strange without beard now)
What are your feelings on starting stats for pcs?
Stats for me are never really a bother. Here's why - during combat if my PC's are calling +4 to hit, or 78% under, or 12 successes or whatever, I match my monsters accordingly. So when players ask for a silly stat generation method like Roll 8d6 and keep the highest I really don't mind. It's not a maths game, its a make-believe role-playing game. You want big numbers, good for you I also want big numbers :) You want low numbers, sweet, so will mine be. It really depends on the group though. If they don't mind, then I say let it roll and take it from there.
I'm so glad I asked you. That's a perspective I never considered. Thank you sir.
Just be warned - Number crunchers and Min-Maxers will be unhappy when you do this. Just ignore them :)
Putting the player in situations they can't possibly survive alone is IMHO what you should do with loner PCs, but instead of putting certain death at the end, you should put there a choice for the loner between certain death and a step to integrate into the party.
I personally don't mind getting killed because I split off from the group, especially if the area/task was dangerous and the character knew that. The more appropriate the death, the better I like it.
Sorcerer's amulet of astral projection, let the one sick in bed come by.
Also if your PC makes the bathroom excuse we don't need to make a check until the combat is over and then it is optional, right?
I have an interesting question. When is it ok to give a campaign a "bad ending'?
Hey there! Well by Bad Ending do you mean like TPK? Or everyone dies except the token dwarf?
Not so much TPK due to bad dice, but let's say that the party continually makes bad choices and let the 'bad guy' roam free to destroy the planet while they make no attempt to rescue their friend who has the medallion which can defeat the final boss. If the players are basically asking to be slaughtered, or perhaps you just feel like making a very challenging campaign and the PC's haven't leveled enough or figured out the clues yet, when is it okay to let the bad guys win? Afterall if this wasn't possible, what's the point in roleplaying?
One of my favorite experiences as a player, was when one of the other PC's attempted to backstab the rest of us and steal this magic armor to become king of the galaxy. He almost got all the pieces of it but my character was a droid who activated a self destruct sequence and killed all the other players. We all died, it was a horrible ending, and we all had a blast.
I think the trick here is you need to give them plenty of opportunities to fix the plot before the villain wins. Also give the villain plenty of smaller victories that the PC's are aware of. Only then if they still disregard do you start to do something about it... like bringing in a Hero NPC party who try to recruit the PC's and failing that, go off and fight the villain themselves. After all remember the game is for the players, so unless it makes sense for the villain to win it shouldn't really be level dependent or character solutioned. If the players don't care about the main villain... time to find a new villain for them to care about. In your example your death was a heroic sacrifice which is different from the other scenario you paint.
Get those drinking in the tavern into rolls at the same time as the other group? So flirt so the GM can get me into a brawl and or drinking contest? Okay, I like me my lemonade and eggnog. Or maybe it is a soup chugging competition, I can ask my GM for entertaining alchohol free options for me and my sober wizard paladin beast tamer.
The green screen looks much more natural when you're seated.
Thanks for the feedback, yeah I had hoped it would look better after the comments about standing last week :)
Don't you know you never split the party? Clerics in the back keep those fighters hale and hearty!
suits you better, I believe, without the beard!
If the party splits, then you need to separate the players, such as allowing them to step out of the room, so they do not get meta knowledge
That is super boring for the players not involved. I don't really agree.
Who is the beard stubble imposter?!?! OH it's Guy from 2016....
Oh no! Someone stole your beard! Who did this?!
This is only tangentially related, but, when you mentioned the "corpses with plate armor", I jumped to creative thinking and thought, "what if they were corpses because of the plate armor" and then "so there aren't any corpses without plate armor".
At that point, is it right to tell your players what can be deduced? Can I say, "you notice no corpse that is wearing only cloth armor, only corpses encased in metal". Is that too much information? There are many times where I want players to have time to speculate what they are about to face, so they can start their own inquiries. "What if it's a druid who considers metal blasphemy? What if it's an elemental that's cooking people inside of their armor? I look for scorch marks on the armor..."
Are there any concerns with spoonfeeding deduction to players that I should take into account? All in moderation of course, but besides moderation?
It can be really difficult to moderation deduction points, because what is obvious to us isn't obvious to others. I did a video on how to run a mystery a while back where I said you need at least 3 to 5 solid clues about any one thing. If the armour and the corpses are a vital clue, then give them many clues - scorched from the outside, fine on the inside, some rusted, some new, many different nations styles etc.
That sounds quite interesting, maybe I can use that one day^^
I'd say watch what you are saying, just tell them those corpses are all in plate armour. Maybe let them do a intuition or intelligence check on it and if they succeed you can stir some curiousity or mistrust.
Or as Guy said, drop many hints and not one, but I wouldn't tell them outright what is strange. It all depends on how important that part is for your session.
Apparently, NO ONE here knows how to handle this situation at all. DM: (Party A, after being in combat for a bit, and are starting to lose players, health etc.) "Party B, you have been walking for a bit, and up ahead, you hear the sounds of fierce combat taking place down the hallway....what do you do?" Seriously! If two groups are in the same area, is one going to just sit around in the entry hall while the other group explores and falls in combat? Maybe group A moved quite a ways closer to group B before they entered combat. What I am gathering from the video AND comments, there are not a lot of situational awareness and problem solving from some people calling themselves Game Masters. This is where my old math studies come into play. "Train A leaves Station Y at speed X, train B leaves station Z at speed R, where do they meet?" Two objects travelling toward each other closes the distance rather quickly.
1 Do not address player problems with character solutions. If you have a problem with a player, talk to him, or ban him if you must.
2 If you want to tell a story, write a book. The job of a GM is to give the players a chance to tell their stories.
you should watch the episode of critical role where scanlan shorthalt the gnome bard wad sent to create a distraction in one house preferably silently so the other half of the part could attack their true target. well scanlan didn't have anything to start a fire like the plan required. so he just burst through the ceiling as a triceratops spins a short circle jumps through a doorway draws some of them in fighting for a sec dimension doors to the roof and drinks the potion of firebreathing burning all the sides of the house and the bigbys forcefull push on one of the three luietents of the big bad right of the roof before doing an assassin's Creed fall to another big bys hand
That sounds... epic and insane and rather dangerous! But awesome.
How to be a Great Game Master have you watched any of critical role?
I have. Not a lot but i have. I have so little time outside of work and making content for the channel I rarely devote more than 10 minutes to anything. That's one of the reasons why my RPG sessions are always capped at 45 minutes or so (sometimes we crawl over but not often). Just no time!
I love your videos but have you ever considered investing in a new microphone?
The damned microphone... the bane of my life. It works fine unless it gets touched... then it's a pain in the ass. Was thinking of launching a fundraiser to buy the mics that I use in my profession, but at $500 it might be a bit much to ask. I am saving and saving and one day will get there!
Again, I would not play in this man's game. He has some interesting videos and food for thought, but having seen them, I'd be waiting for the petulant hammer to drop because I crossed the line between the story he wanted to tell and the story the players were creating within the context. Games award experience for success, but real experience comes from the failures.
"they would all be dead before we get to rescue them"
*_WELL THAT'S WHAT WOULD REALLY HAPPEN OF YOU SPLIT IN A PLACE FULL OF HAZARDS_*
stick together, people, don't fall in the Scooby Doo effect
lol, you crack me up.
never ever shave!
I thought you were going to go "Douglas Adams" and tell them to print: "DON'T PANIC" in bright yellow letters across their notes.
Hahahahha.... damn. I should have!
On a side note, have you read any of Dennis L. McKiernan's books? His "Iron Tower" trilogy, specifically.
And, do you have/use "The Complete Warrior?" for additional material?
So... books and I... I only read non-fiction really. One day I'll do a video on my library and you can see there is some fiction, but mainly it's Pratchett or Dever, and the rest is geological surprises in igneous rock or other exciting topics lol.
Good to know. One day, I will run a Halfling Ranger with the tool skill of rock sculpting.
LOL