|
|
Post by Rabbit on Sept 29, 2009 15:10:55 GMT -5
Hey players, So I wanted to take a moment to get your feedback. I know we are all very open to discussing games, but I do want to do this semi-formal review from time to time. For each of the below bullet points please answer these 3 questions ; What have you liked, so far?
What have you not liked or prefer less of, so far?
What would you like to see in the future?- Plot (the individual adventures and any overarching story):
- System/Rules (all the technical stuff and how it is used [or not used]):
- Setting (NPCs, locations, etc):
- GM Style and Presentation (all the above has to go through a filter, that’s me):
- Players (the other people at the table): SEND ME THESE REPONSES VIA PRIVATE MESSAGE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO SPEAK FREELY. AFTERWARDS I WILL SHARE THE GENERAL REPOSNSES IN A GENERAL WAY.
- And anything else:
[edit: also, if you would just rather not do these feel free to let me know. the intention is to improve this and future games, but not mandatory.] |
|
|
|
Post by Enric on Sept 29, 2009 18:01:05 GMT -5
This is an interesting idea. I'll write my answers up when I get home.
|
|
|
|
Post by icnivad on Oct 1, 2009 13:06:45 GMT -5
# Plot:
I have been enjoying watching the adventure and the world unfold. While single adventures like the calzone experience are fun, ultimately I think I'm a fan of larger arcing stories. It's like TV, I can only enjoy a show for so long that ends every episode the exact same way it starts every. That said, I totally understand that it's easier GMing single non-strung-together adventures, and that this started off as a series of one-shots and I think that you should stick with what you have the time and energy to do. Just throwing this out to be thorough.
# System/Rules:
Pretty standard d&d here. I'm a fan of D20 for it's rules structure, bringing a combat strategy element to role playing. D20 tends to lack though in role playing, where an over-abundance of rules can lead players to stop thinking "outside the box". I'm not sure what the optimal solution is, though. I've always enjoyed an online aspect of a game where the characters personalities can be developed as well as more detail about the world, npcs, and plot can develop. I understand, though that this takes a lot more time for everyone.
# Setting:
I think that we're just starting to get to know the world. Adding maps and a wiki has really helped.
# GM Style and Presentation:
So far great.
# Players:
No problems here. That one guy that plays the Kobold is kind of an ass, though.
# And anything else:
I'd like to throw out a reverse question to the GM. How is our interaction as players working out? Would you like to see anything else/more/less/different from us? More character goals to help drive plot? etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by reefwood on Oct 15, 2009 10:23:38 GMT -5
Hey players, For each of the below bullet points please answer these 3 questions ; What have you liked, so far?
What have you not liked or prefer less of, so far?
What would you like to see in the future?- Plot (the individual adventures and any overarching story):
- System/Rules (all the technical stuff and how it is used [or not used]):
- Setting (NPCs, locations, etc):
- GM Style and Presentation (all the above has to go through a filter, that’s me):
- Players (the other people at the table): SEND ME THESE REPONSES VIA PRIVATE MESSAGE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO SPEAK FREELY. AFTERWARDS I WILL SHARE THE GENERAL REPOSNSES IN A GENERAL WAY.
- And anything else:
- Plot - I like how this world is unfolding a small, relevant slice at a time. I haven't noticed any overarching story arc but have enjoyed the mix of individual adventures. Also, I think both of these approaches work well for our spread out schedule where weeks can go by between sessions because it seems like we're okay even if we can just remember what is happening with the current adventure/location. I really enjoyed the calzone episode because it involved several elements that were new to me - animated objects (I've used in games before but never seen as a player), the calzone (a rad monster with neat abilities like garlic gas spewing when injured), the jilted lover storyline - and I always like seeing new things in our games. Plus, the dwarf being covered in red which turned out to be pizza sauce was pretty good too. In terms of actual plot, I don't recall anything I haven't cared for yet, and as for what I want to see in the future... goblinoids & more humans
- System/Rules: I really like 3.5. I like how there are rules that cover almost everything we want to do and how many of these efforts can have variable results dependent on a random die roll. Of course with so many rules, it's seemingly impossible to know them all or avoid confusion at times, and I do prefer for the rules hang out in the backseat - always present but not necessarily dictating the story or actions. A few things that come to mind from the last session are:
1) Rules left out - such as the 20% miss chance for concealment when fighting in shadowy illumination. This seems to be one of the things we pretty much never remember. I didn't even think about it until after the session, and I don't mind if certain rules are left out, especially minor ones and if it's done consistently. Being flat-footed at the start of combat I think is forgotten a good bit too. At least, I rarely think about it, but again, if both sides are forgetting it, no big deal cos it probably evens out well enough.
2) Rule confusion - grapple can be a tricky beast, but it actually seems like we are getting the hang of it. The Hide skill is another one that I didn't fully understand until more recently - the part about needing to have cover or concealment in order to make a Hide check and what that even means, and that came up in the last game but seemed to be quickly resolved.
3) Backseat driver - as much as I prefer to have the rules not dictate my actions in terms of story, I caught myself thinking along those lines when we found the book with the drawing of what looked like a beholder. I was good about not using my player beholder knowledge in character, but I did think for a moment there about how it would have been more useful to have picked aberrations as my second favored enemy. Luckily, the choice that made more sense for the character had already been made.
All that being said, I am very happy with the system and think we handle the rules great most of the time, even when they don't go exactly by the book, whether planned or not, and along the planned lines, that's another good thing about this system - being open to house rules and adjustments as we see fit.
- Setting: I'm digging all of this. These has been variety in locale, terrain, weather, friends & enemies... which helps keep the game interesting. Also, I like how the NPCs have helped connect the adventures.
- GM Style and Presentation: Thumbs up here. One thing in particular that I like is that new (to me) elements come up a fair degree, such as the calzone monster. The mob is another good example, and I am totally curious how it works, but even more so, I like that the mechanics were not revealed. It's fun to come across an unknown factor, and I don't mind not knowing a rule if I don't have to.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rabbit on Feb 10, 2010 11:49:30 GMT -5
hey everyone, I would like to take some time to get everyone's feedback again. For each of the below bullet points answer these 3 questions ; What have you liked, so far?
What have you not liked or prefer less of, so far?
What would you like to see in the future?- Plot (the individual adventures and any overarching story):
- System/Rules (all the technical stuff and how it is used [or not used]):
- Setting (NPCs, locations, etc):
- GM Style and Presentation (all the above has to go through a filter, that’s me):
- Players (the other people at the table):
- Edit: The Wiki (it is fun to update but takes a lot of time, is it worth it?)
- And anything else:
|
|
|
|
Post by reefwood on Feb 10, 2010 15:34:45 GMT -5
hey everyone, I would like to take some time to get everyone's feedback again. For each of the below bullet points answer these 3 questions; What have you liked, so far?
What have you not liked or prefer less of, so far?
What would you like to see in the future?- Plot (the individual adventures and any overarching story):
- System/Rules (all the technical stuff and how it is used [or not used]):
- Setting (NPCs, locations, etc):
- GM Style and Presentation (all the above has to go through a filter, that’s me):
- Players (the other people at the table):
- Edit: The Wiki (it is fun to update but takes a lot of time, is it worth it?)
- And anything else:
[/li][li]Plot (the individual adventures and any overarching story):[/b] The goblinoid/troll horde that crossed The Wall seems to be providing a loose overarching story and is like a slowly escalating doom. The horde helped keep Darven invested because he was a goblin-hunter. Also, the mage that sent us to the dwarven tower (b/c of the horde danger) was one of the Bloodwise, which is how we got to this continent in the first place, so Darven was more willing to help him than a random person asking for help. So yeah, I like the horde idea/presence. After leaving the dwarven tower, we decided to go to Nightfall because it seemed like the horde might head there soon. Though, I'm not sure if we had much of a plan on what to do once we got there, so I think I started to lose focus. Also, it took almost 3 sessions to reach Nightfall, which isn't to say that I didn't enjoy those sessions, but all together, I think that may have been too long. Especially since there wasn't too much that really drew us deeper into the Nightfall/horde plot. Plus, the horde-related stuff that did come up was only at very start and end of these 3 sessions. The middle adventure with the creepy ruins was my favorite one, but in retrospect, maybe something more horde related in the middle would have helped me keep more focused. Or maybe the creepy ruins wouldn't have thrown my focus off as much if it the journey was only two sessions long. Or if the ruins were in the first or third session. On the flipside, putting the most different adventure in the middle makes sense because it lets you drift away from the main story in the first session, then completely leave it in the second session, and finally get brought back to it in the third session. I guess my focus loss also stems from the fact that I wasn't super tied into the main story when this latest journey took off. Cos the main tie-in - the dwarven tower - was already resolved, and the tie-in we took from that point was getting to Nightfall, but we didn't have any specific goals. So yeah, I think it was just the combo of both a long break from the main story and not having concrete goals tied into it that made me lose sight of the main story. And of course, I also know that guesstimating how long a challenge/adventure will take isn't easy. As for the individual adventures... I liked the challenge of the river encounter because it was just a different type of challenge with having to steer and just hold off the ambush while we slowly escaped. It also gave us a taste of the horde. Fighting enemies of different strengths at the same time was also fun. And it was neat (even if bad for us) that one of our big spells got used up right away against weak enemies when it probably would have been better to save for the tough ones. I don't know if the goblin archers were intentionally laid out as bait, but I thought it worked well as such and made me think twice about spending resources. What I didn't like about this challenge is that it seemed as if there was an unending supply of enemies. I didn't mind that so much at the time, but looking back, it feels like they came at us over & over until we were sufficiently pummeled. I'm sure this wasn't the intent, and maybe there was a limit, but if there was a limit, it seems like it was too high of a limit. I think it may have been more fair if one side had a limited supply because otherwise we had no escape route - A) once the raft was on the shore, we couldn't get it off, so it wasn't just another problem to deal with but an end to that option, which would have been fine if we had other options, but B) going to land just meant more & more enemies, and C) not everyone could swim away, so that option meant leaving Marle and maybe Brass to die. If we could get the raft moving again or clear one side or didn't have characters that were sure to drown, we could have at least runaway. Rather than just have the enemies stop when it seemed like the right time, which like I said, may have not been the case. Also, since after this, we had a long break from horde-related things, another clue or tie-in would have been nice, but then again, maybe we just missed it, and we could have tried interrogating one of the enemy... although, I think we may have been in full retreat mode due to the unending supply, so taking the time to do that may have not seemed like a viable option. Oh, and the dino stuff afterward was fun and a good change of pace. The creepy ruin adventure was rad. I was worried that the big battle was going to turn into another limitless enemy challenge when the zombies started pouring out. However, since there was only one tough enemy and a challenge that could be defeated (the puzzle), I think unending zombies would have been a fair element if they were kind of weak, but it seemed like they were kind of tough. Or at least not that weak. But then only a limited amount came out, so that was okay. The main challenge in this last session was extreme, and I mean both ends of extreme. It could have been totally avoided (but even that was just because Darven - who isn't even much of a caster & only has 3 spells/day - had the right spell prepped), but once it wasn't avoided, we were totally outmatched. Once we got hit, we really couldn't beat its grapple (I think I heard it had +30, so if it rolled 1 for 31, Darven needed to roll at least a 19), and had just as little chance to not be swallowed, and once that happened, we didn't have enough hit points to have much chance to cut ourselves out (Darven didn't get a turn to try). It was still a fun session and memorable way to go out, but thinking about it now, it was an extreme challenge. [/li][li] Players (the other people at the table):[/b] The meta-gaming has toned down, so I'm happy with that. [/li][li] The Wiki (it is fun to update but takes a lot of time, is it worth it?)[/b] It was a while before I started looking at the Wiki, but I like it. But it's not vital to me. If you are struggling to find time for it, I don't mind if everything isn't recapped. Though, it would be good to still post the in-game notes we find. That way they are much easier to find than having to search through the threads on this board. And since they are already typed up, it should be easy to copy them into the Wiki. I guess the same could go for maps made on the computer. Wow, I didn't think I would have much feedback when I first saw this post, but once I started, a lot came out! And I didn't cover every topic, but I think my main response covered a lot of it. If I think of more, I will add to this post later. |
|
|
|
Post by Rabbit on Feb 10, 2010 18:24:53 GMT -5
reefwood, Thanks for the feedback. I agree and can see your perspective on most everything you wrote. I am going to respond to a few things but not all since other people have not had a chance to respond yet. I agree that the amount of sessions between Crow Keep (the dwarf tower) and Night Falls was a bit long (longer than I originally intended.) And just as a reminder the reason you decided to travel from Crow Keep was because of a letter found on the dwarf were rat leader. swordsandsages.wikispaces.com/Bloodbeard%27s+Lettlerswordsandsages.wikispaces.com/A+Living+Time+Line A down side of six weeks in real-time to link a plot point is they can be forgotten. So I can understand how a player’s/ character’s motivation can be lost. Yeah, I wanted to give something that was not related to the overarching story and would give more depth to the ‘mysterious jungle’ continent you were on. Kind of like the Hostile of the Sacred Stone was for The Great Orc Planes. Agreed, it did run a bit longer than expected. Also, I planted some Bugbear bodies in the temple (scouts of the horde) as a reminder that the horde was around and even in the area, but I think that did not have a very large impact. The East side of the river with the goblin archers was pretty much a limitless supply. If something happen where you clearly decimated their numbers they would have stopped ‘regenerating’ but the intended impression was that they were limitless, the unstoppable horde. The West side of the river had a specific amount of enemies with a specific strategy. The troll pulling the boat onto the shore was a totally organic action. I agree that it kind of killed a major option for you (which limited your options) but it was an action taken by a NPC in step with his motivations as opposed to DM rigging behind the scenes. In General I wanted the river encounter to feel overwhelming. And so I made that a part of the horde’s battle tactics. Using the invisibility and attacking in waves was meant to damper your morale. In truth you killed everyone on the west side of the river and were pretty much safe when you decided to flee. (The remaining horde may or may not have trailed you… I guess it depends on what their reason for being at the river was.) I have mixed feelings. Was that too much of a challenge? In a direct confrontation I think yeah; it killed two characters. But there were ways to avoid it. Perhaps if there would have been more time planning an ambush of some kind or attempting to lose the dinosaurs.... But I don’t want to spend too much time on that line of thinking because it is not the point I am trying to make. As a GM I would like the players to consider that perhaps not every challenge is a combat and perhaps not every challenge is winnable. Despite some jokes I made last night it is never my goal to kill characters. I do want to give you challenges that are challenges that might even kill you. The potential of character death creates drama and suspense. That said, a T-Rex eating two party members from a long running campaign in less than 10 rounds is pretty damn extreme. Perhaps a little too Mountain Dew. And if I do, “like the players to consider that perhaps not every challenge is a combat” then perhaps I should work on providing some more obvious alternate challenge types. |
|
|
|
Post by michael on Feb 10, 2010 19:45:22 GMT -5
While this is completely true, during last night's T-Rex encounter, I don't think we as players had as much of a choice as it seemed. The problem is that we had just encountered that T-Rex last session. When we encountered him, we did decide the risk wasn't worth it. Consciously or not, sicking him on us again is a cue for us to act differently than we did the first time around. If we had run, I think it would have been a very unsatisfying encounter. Running once was exciting, but doing it twice in a row is boring. I think we all knew that going in, at least on a subconscious level. So even though it might not have been the smarted course of action, we attacked because the DM was (intentionally or not) nudging us to attack by giving it to us twice, and also because it was the only fun course of action.
Anyway, I still enjoyed the session, but I'm much better at picking things apart than praising them. I'll do the full status report later when I have a bit more time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rabbit on Feb 10, 2010 20:06:17 GMT -5
While this is completely true, during last night's T-Rex encounter, I don't think we as players had as much of a choice as it seemed. The problem is that we had just encountered that T-Rex last session. When we encountered him, we did decide the risk wasn't worth it. Consciously or not, sicking him on us again is a cue for us to act differently than we did the first time around. If we had run, I think it would have been a very unsatisfying encounter. Running once was exciting, but doing it twice in a row is boring. I think we all knew that going in, at least on a subconscious level. So even though it might not have been the smarted course of action, we attacked because the DM was (intentionally or not) nudging us to attack by giving it to us twice, and also because it was the only fun course of action. Anyway, I still enjoyed the session, but I'm much better at picking things apart than praising them. I'll do the full status report later when I have a bit more time. yeah, that is all a really good point. Part of the reason I had a T-Rex tracking you (even though you already encountered it) was to have something happen before pushing the session to the bugbear encounter and the besieged Night Falls. In a way I had anticipated (wrongly) that you would try to escape it again. I even made rules for using a survival roll against the t-rex's survival/track roll to loose it. But yeah, as a GM it is a bit unfair to temp you to face the same overwhelming odds twice in a row. And truth be told; I was excited to see a t-rex vs dudes in armor battle... In general it can be hard to figure where the group is. What is a good enough challenge for everyone? In Crow's Keep (the dwarf tower) the challenge was far too weak and not very interesting, but here I seem to have swung too far in the other direction. |
|
