DM Feedback

[dmw71]

For the last week or two, I have been debating whether or not to eventually start up and run a second game. With this game being my first attempt at DM'ing in well over 20 years, I know of several areas in which I would like to improve, but I'm interested in your thoughts as well. What, in this game, do you think has worked? What hasn't? What do you like? Don't like?

Keep in mind, any constructive criticism is likely to be more helpful than praise so don't feel the need to hold back. Seriously.

Likely, this second game will more closely adhere the published rules of the edition I decide upon (BECMI/BX, 1E or 2E) and be less customized than this game, but I'll almost certainly inject at least a few house rules.


If you could go through and pick-and-choose which rules being used you'd keep, or which you'd get rid of, how would you edit this game?

While there probably won't be any truly game-changing rules introduced into this game as a result of any feedback received, but there may be things which can easily be implemented if they will only better the game.

For instance, I created a new "character" in the US Dice Roller:

'Foxmoor DM (Public)'

I don't know how this will go over, but at least for the time being, I plan on making all initiative/hit/damage rolls using the "public" DM character and posting the results as links in the action threads. Obviously, things like surprise rolls, number of monsters appearing, and other "things" which are meant to be private will still be kept private by using my usual "private" DM character.

I figure, making these rolls public will not only introduce a level of transparency, but it will also help me for tracking purposes (last week a missed update affecting the current hit point total was pointed out to me). Also, in the event I ever have to NPC a character, all those rolls would be public as well.

I have other ideas as well, but the public rolls will be the first change improvement that I'll be working into this game. Thoughts?

[Alethan]

Second Game...
Question: A second game in the same Foxmoor universe/campaign/whatever? I find that to be a highly interesting concept. I love the idea of a GM playing multiple parties in the same world (even more so when that GM does it on different forums, though, where there is less chance of one group actually reading about the other group's adventures...) at the same time, where there is chance of them meeting. Should the GM ever try and FORCE such a meeting? No, because it might end up very badly, especially with a disproportionate number of players who have the "Hack-n-Slash, Kill Everything You Meet" mentality. But it could be fun.

Or it would at least be interesting to see how long it takes a party to realize a dungeon was just cleared out two weeks prior and all they find is the occasional broken weapon or a few pieces of copper - not even a monster, aside from a few giant rats doing "trash cleanup", to kill.

From a purely selfish perspective, my big question would be, "How will running a second game affect your ability to keep up with our game?"


Rules...
For the most part, I really like a lot of the rules you've compiled. You obviously put a lot of thought into them, and it shows.

Your method of Chargen is very cool and something I've considered following/borrowing.

I think the broken weapon rule needs a bit of amending. Maybe if a Nat 1 is rolled, then the player has to make a percentage roll (not another To Hit roll) for weapon breakage? Something fixed, like 15% (1-15 on a d100)? Give Masterwork weapons a 10% chance and magic items a 5% chance? (Hey, sometimes magical items break... but it should be a very low chance.)

As far as additional rules goes, the one class that has always proved weak at lower levels is the magic user. I've been in a few games where the DM will provide the MU with additional spells if they have a high INT, using the same guidelines as a cleric with high WIS. This wouldn't have much impact on the MU at higher levels (i.e. it wouldn't make them much more powerful at level 12 or 15), but it would give the character more options/spells at the lower levels. That gives them the chance to be something other than a torch bearer with one spell.

[wolfpack]

the only things I have seen so far I would amend are the broken weapon rule ( a broken weapon shuld be far less common) I would still add a saving throw versus normal blow or at least crushing blow for the weapon.

Advancement, I am still unlclear on how this is to happen. At level three to get a new spell I have to train but have not been provided the funds or place to do so. One things players wont like is being stuck not able to advance becuase the resources aren't provided.

[saalaria]

Loving it Dave - enjoying your style very much.
Would echo the other 2 on weapon breakage - how about falling over, throwing weapon accidentally in random direction, stabbing self (hmm maybe not that one as I may regret it) as alternatives?
Have wondered about advancement too but assume you have that covered we just haven't found it yet.

[dmw71]

Question: A second game in the same Foxmoor universe/campaign/whatever?

No. Truth be told, "Foxmoor" doesn't really exist. A lot of my earlier struggles were due to the fact that I am creating the world on the fly and there was a definite lack of continuity (e.g. directions of things changed, descriptions were missing certain features, etc...).

I'm sure I would benefit greatly by having a pre-built world in which to place my game, but I can't imagine coming up with the time to be able to create one in order to use it. I literally tracked down your 'World Building Academy - Gazetteer Writing Contest Winner' post and sent myself an e-mail to take a look at that http://world-building.com/ website.

It's still on my to-do list.

I find that to be a highly interesting concept. I love the idea of a GM playing multiple parties in the same world (even more so when that GM does it on different forums, though, where there is less chance of one group actually reading about the other group's adventures...) at the same time, where there is chance of them meeting.

My original idea (before I said 'what the heck' and asked ToniXX to open up the 'Adventures in Foxmoor' thread for me (<-- I didn't even have the title for this game picked out at the time and came up with the name of this game on a whim)), not used in this game, I still think is pretty cool and one I'd still love to try. At the time of launching this game, I wasn't sure how it would work in the play-by-post format (heck, I'm still not sure), but I suppose it could if the right players become involved.

My initial instinct was to run a modification of a published module (I went on a bit of a shopping spree at D&D Classics) which was great for me since I don't really have *any* experience with pre-generated modules, but maybe I'll have to revisit this original idea of mine and see if I can figure it out logistically.

I much prefer sandboxed games because the DM is guaranteed to surprise the players with unfamiliar material. The perk, at least in my mind, for running a published module (especially from PDF format), is the ability to screen capture maps.

Should the GM ever try and FORCE such a meeting? No, because it might end up very badly, especially with a disproportionate number of players who have the "Hack-n-Slash, Kill Everything You Meet" mentality. But it could be fun.

I agree with this. Even in this game I attempted to add 'new' players more naturally -- the player would create their character via PM and begin play in the same manner; I would "NPC" them in-game until they were introduced.


One cool thing about this "new" game idea I have is that it can accomodate a large number of players, and they can all be solo or in groups.

I imagine it will be a bit of a nightmare to track everything from a DM perspective, and might require a bunch of forums, but we'll see.

From a purely selfish perspective, my big question would be, "How will running a second game affect your ability to keep up with our game?"

That is a concern of mine as well. I know how much time and work keeping up with this game takes. Duplicating it would likely cause problems... unless I'm better prepared.

This second game is still nothing more than an idea. I'll continue to flesh it out and build it up before I even consider introducing it. I already know it would require a lot of advanced preparation so I would be sure to put all that in place before the game began. The "nice" thing is, I know the areas that have been problematic for me in running this current game so I would make efforts to prepare for those things ahead of time.

Your method of Chargen is very cool and something I've considered following/borrowing.

It's funny. I have no plans on using them again. I will likely keep some of the adjustment rules I have in place, but am leaning towards a method that will allow for the chance of a few bad rolls instead of starting out with a floor already in place.

I think the broken weapon rule needs a bit of amending.

I absolutely acknowledge this, and will be implementing the change after this current conflict (not during).

As far as additional rules goes, the one class that has always proved weak at lower levels is the magic user. I've been in a few games where the DM will provide the MU with additional spells if they have a high INT, using the same guidelines as a cleric with high WIS.

I do like this. Filed away in the mental Rolodex.

the only things I have seen so far I would amend are the broken weapon rule ( a broken weapon shuld be far less common) I would still add a saving throw versus normal blow or at least crushing blow for the weapon.

I'll have to remember exactly how I had planned on changing that rule, but I will. Epic fail on my part. I don't want to change the rules mid-encounter, though, so they'll be put into place at the next break in action.

Advancement, I am still unlclear on how this is to happen. At level three to get a new spell I have to train but have not been provided the funds or place to do so. One things players wont like is being stuck not able to advance becuase the resources aren't provided.

I've actually questioned the rate of advancement as I've worried characters have been advancing too quickly. Too many fluke awards, maybe? (Speaking of which, you're probably due your 400xp for 4,000 points.) More actual encounters will certainly provide the group with the resources that otherwise weren't found on small groups or teams of low-level creatures. As you might expect, there is a great deal of financial gain to be had if/when this lair gets cleared out.

The thing is, though, you really haven't had an opportunity to stop and train anywhere. Admittedly, though by design, O'Hare is a bit of a goofy place. Beyond that, though, a lot of levels have been reached while in the middle of "something;" be it the middle of a fight, traveling to/from a location to another location, etc... I imagine, the party will seek rest and restoration at its earliest opportunity and, hopefully, will have managed to find some needed resources by that time.

Loving it Dave - enjoying your style very much.
Would echo the other 2 on weapon breakage - how about falling over, throwing weapon accidentally in random direction, stabbing self (hmm maybe not that one as I may regret it) as alternatives?
Have wondered about advancement too but assume you have that covered we just haven't found it yet.

I did address both of these already, but clearly those are two areas I need to consider. Well, the critical misses have all but officially already been addressed, but the advancement rules might need to be revisited.


Good stuff so far, people. Feel free to keep the suggestions and thoughts coming.

[tooleychris]

I've been DMing since late 70s and I really do like your house rules. Many I've used a version of for years.
I won't echo the breakage problem, you're aware of it. I might change it to a second missed to hit roll after fumble results in a item saving throw with magical properties adding a bonus to the save.

Also, if using finesse rules I might, and do in my games, ALL light weapons.

Love trading out spells for class specific spells (cleric cure spells )
Agree with Alethan about magic users. In my house rules I allow a save vs spells on the magic users part after casting. Success means he retains the spell. (I use a negative modifier per level) So a 3rd level spell would require a save vs spells at -3.

As you've undoubtedly seen with Grim, barbarians are a bit OP (hence the high XP requirement ) If I were to run a D&D game that allowed them I would completely change them.


Your DM style seems right on as far as one could tell in PbP.
You're fair and even lean towards the player side.
HOWEVER What are we facing here, a hundred frigging trogs?

[tooleychris]

Crap! If I may amend my previous, while I appreciate the fact that u show us ANY map at all, I think you might find RPtools mapmaker easy to use and...prettier. And it's free!
( don't smite me. You said be constructive )

this map took about 15 minutes.

[dmw71]

I've been DMing since late 70s and I really do like your house rules. Many I've used a version of for years.

Thanks. Likely, when I do start up another game, I'll want to start with a clean slate again. I may end up carrying over many of the rules used in this game (hence my questioning what rules the players feel work, and which don't), but I also won't hesitate to scrap everything.

Also, if using finesse rules I might, and do in my games, ALL light weapons.

Duly noted. The finesse weapon rules and the different "weights" of armor (limiting dexterity adjustments) are two rules I know I like and will almost certainly be carrying over (so it won't be a 'complete' clean slate).

I'll consider your 1:1 light weapons-to-finesse weapons ratio. It would make it easier, which is a good thing.

Love trading out spells for class specific spells (cleric cure spells)

This will likely be kept, too.

Agree with Alethan about magic users. In my house rules I allow a save vs spells on the magic users part after casting. Success means he retains the spell. (I use a negative modifier per level) So a 3rd level spell would require a save vs spells at -3.

I like both of your suggestions. I know I won't be as rushed to get started for this next game so I'll have more time to really *think* about all the different aspects and house rule (or not) accordingly.

If I were to run a D&D game that allowed them I would completely change them.

The UA classes never crossed my mind when I first pulled the trigger. Even now, thinking about it, I'm not sure what to do with barbarians? If I use them again, I will definitely dedicate some more thought to them (and call upon you for your suggestions).

Your DM style seems right on as far as one could tell in PbP.
You're fair and even lean towards the player side.

I appreciate that. I *am* on the players side and will always tend to favor their side, but one thing I won't do is make monsters unnecessarily stupid.

HOWEVER What are we facing here, a hundred frigging trogs?

At most.

NO. APPEARING: 10-100

[dmw71]

Crap! If I may amend my previous

No amendment needed. Feel free to post a million suggestions if you'd like. I'll consider everything.

while I appreciate the fact that u show us ANY map at all, I think you might find RPtools mapmaker easy to use and...prettier. And it's free!

Ha! I knew it was only a matter of time before a map comment was made. Didn't bbarsh create a tutorial for that tool? I may have to actually give it some serious consideration. I'll also need to make sure it works on a Mac. (I so miss having a PC.)

this map took about 15 minutes.

I would love to be able to build something like that. I think it would be a great aide for gaming purposes.

It's learning how to use the frickin' thing in the first place that's the trick. I suppose I should just commit myself to learning how to use it before I start anything else up.


Keep the suggestions and thoughts coming!

[Zhym]

Hi there. Long time lurker, first time poster (in this campaign, anyway)...

For those who don't know, I have a character waiting to get into this game. And I'm really, really hoping that you all survive. Partly that's because if everyone gets killed by trogs, Kendrick Llewellyn the paladin may never see action (at least in current form). But it's also because I've been watching the game. Read the whole thread. Kept up with all the moves. And it's a really good campaign, with lots going on (like whatever the heck the deal is with the people in that one tavern). It's obvious, both from the custom rules and the game itself, that a lot of work has gone into this campaign. As a player, I love that. And I'm hoping to be able to join the campaign.

So try not to get killed, y'all.

I've exchanged pms with dmw71 on the critical miss rules. I'll spare you all the gory math (unless you really want to see it), but I calculated that the current system is quite costly to players. Critical misses would be expected to cost characters at least two to three times as much as characters get from critical hits. And that's before taking into account the fact that critical misses hurt players much more than they hurt monsters (who are usually dead before the loss of a weapon will matter, if the monster even uses weapons). If I could make one change in this game, I would scrap (or heavily modify) the critical hit and miss rules immediately. I wouldn't even wait for the current combat to be over. I think they're that bad (sorry, dmw71).

Personally, I would also relax the leveling requirements. Characters shouldn't be expected to pay more money than they possess just to gain the skills that come with a new level. I think this is just an artifact of the power vs. treasure level in this campaign. In AD&D 1e, the training costs were primarily a means of siphoning money from characters [citation needed]. In a lot of these old school modules, gold was given away like AOL disks (there's an old reference for you...). But in a campaign that's stingier with the treasure—either intentionally or accidentally—the by-the-book training costs are insanely high. And they make it even harder to survive a very tough campaign.

Oh - and RPtools maptools absolutely works on the Mac. I use it for the games I'm running on here. I'm not sure whether it's easier than the ASCII art, though. I have the benefit of pre-made maps I can build on top of. In your case, if you have access to a scanner, I'd say you could even go with a pen & paper map scanned in. Or just use a drawing program.

[Stonjuz]

Although I really hate the cliche 'my 2 cents', here's mine.....
My only concern is that my posting hours are not timed well with the desired midday posts (to allow optimum dm followups)
If the DM is content with my posts not arriving until the evening hours, or early hours the next morning, then I have no complaints. None.

[wolfpack]

welcome zhym, not sure we make it out ofd this one though, at least not many of us. Way to many misses by the PC's and not enough by the monsters.

[dmw71]

I'll reply to these in reverse order:

welcome zhym, not sure we make it out ofd this one though, at least not many of us. Way to many misses by the PC's and not enough by the monsters.

I'll admit, when you guys entered the lair and got "trapped" by the group sneaking up behind you from the other branch of the 'Y' intersection, I thought you were doomed. It's still pretty much up in the air, but you've managed to make it interesting. Considering they've outnumbered you -- probably 2:1 -- and sometimes getting three attacks per round after breaking their javelins, they have missed a lot more than you realize A lot.

Although I really hate the cliche 'my 2 cents', here's mine.....
My only concern is that my posting hours are not timed well with the desired midday posts (to allow optimum dm followups)
If the DM is content with my posts not arriving until the evening hours, or early hours the next morning, then I have no complaints. None.

I don't have any complaints with your posting rate, or the timing of your posts. I know I've started to grow into more of a routine for my own posting -- basically, the time spent on the train commuting to-and-from work -- with the ability to occasionally check in more frequently during the day depending upon my workload.

For those who don't know, I have a character waiting to get into this game. And I'm really, really hoping that you all survive. Partly that's because if everyone gets killed by trogs, Kendrick Llewellyn the paladin may never see action (at least in current form).

No one knew... because it was meant to be kept a secret.

I'm hoping to be able to join the campaign.

Even though the plan was to have you started in a completely separate adventure and not join the original group, depend on how things go...

If I could make one change in this game, I would scrap (or heavily modify) the critical hit and miss rules immediately. I wouldn't even wait for the current combat to be over. I think they're that bad (sorry, dmw71).

I freely admit that the rules are broken and thankfully haven't been an issue since (*knock on wood*) that stretch where there were at least a half dozen natural 1's over a two day period.

Personally, I would also relax the leveling requirements. Characters shouldn't be expected to pay more money than they possess just to gain the skills that come with a new level.

I don't completely agree with this. I do recognize that there hasn't been enough treasure distributed up to this point, but it does exist and will be found. I've relaxed the training requirements from how they were originally drafted (only training when a new skill or spell level is acquired), but admit that the advancement rules might need to be reexamined.

I've mentioned it earlier, but the "opportunity" to train hasn't really been there. I'm sure arrangements (exchange of services, for example) could be made in lieu of financial contributions when a character is in a position where training would be possible.

Point taken, though.

In a lot of these old school modules, gold was given away like AOL disks (there's an old reference for you...).

This was hilarious!

Oh - and RPtools maptools absolutely works on the Mac.

Great. No excuses now, right? Actually, I think I meant to learn the tool a long while ago but, and I the term used to describe the graphics, but they take up a lot of hard drive space which, on my old computer with its 60GB capacity was a definite issue.

I use it for the games I'm running on here.

I didn't know you were running a game. I'll (eventually) have to check it out.

I'm not sure whether it's easier than the ASCII art, though.

ASCII art sucks. If the amount of effort required is even close, I'd just assume learn how to use this tool and make "cool" maps instead of the garbage I'm producing now.

In your case, if you have access to a scanner, I'd say you could even go with a pen & paper map scanned in. Or just use a drawing program.

I have zero artistic talent. I'll stick with the ASCII maps before resorting to a hand-drawn map of my doing.

[tooleychris]

Maptools alone is just :
1. Find the pic you want
2. Drag it onto your map window
3. Repeat until complete
4. Print screen (capture )
5 save pic to photobucket/drop box
6. Copy link to your post
It has thousands of options you'll NEVER use, but if you just use it for maps, it's a piece of cake.

[Zhym]

No one knew... because it was meant to be kept a secret.

Oops. Sorry about that. I figured that since the character would show up in the die roller if anyone searched, Kendrick's existence was at least semi-public knowledge.

Personally, I would also relax the leveling requirements. Characters shouldn't be expected to pay more money than they possess just to gain the skills that come with a new level.

I don't completely agree with this. I do recognize that there hasn't been enough treasure distributed up to this point, but it does exist and will be found. I've relaxed the training requirements from how they were originally drafted (only training when a new skill or spell level is acquired), but admit that the advancement rules might need to be reexamined.

I've mentioned it earlier, but the "opportunity" to train hasn't really been there. I'm sure arrangements (exchange of services, for example) could be made in lieu of financial contributions when a character is in a position where training would be possible.

Point taken, though.

I think the issue is the same regardless of whether ot is cast as a lack of funds or lack of opportunity: having to train before the next level takes effect makes it tougher for characters to advance (and, hence, survive). That's fine if the characters have been kicking butt and collecting loot, but if they've been barely surviving their battles, it just makes it that much harder for them to survive.

Which gets to one of the toughest issues in homebrew campaigns, I suspect: balance. Modules have the advantage of telling you the appropriate levels. With a homemade campaign, you just need a feel, and that feel is going to depend not just on your design but on how the players act.

I suspect that the training requirements were meant for a "delve, then head back to town" model. There's no doubt that AD&D 1e can be very restrictive of advancement by the book. That's especially true for magic users, who not only have training costs and training requirements at a new level but also get a single measly spell when they reach a new level.

My opinion is that level training should be an opportunity for role playing, story hooks, and relieving the player of excess cash, but shouldn't significantly delay the leveling process. In some campaigns, training requirements absolutely make sense. In others, not so much.

I think your current variation on the rule is reasonable in terms of realism or logic, in that it gives players the leveling benefits that wouldn't ordinarily require training. Magic users don't automatically learn new spells in the middle of a dungeon crawl just because they killed an extra few orcs, for example. On the other hand, one could rationalize instant ability gain as something the character has been working on all that time, but only mastered when he or she leveled.

I think the rule I'd use, if I got to make one up, would be that characters got all leveling benefits immediately but on the condition that they train (at some expense) at the very next opportunity. But I'm not sure how that would work.

A note on treasure: I've read that if the characters find even half of the treasure in a dungeon, the DM is doing something wrong. So I'd counsel against assuming that treasure will be found merely because it exists.

I have zero artistic talent. I'll stick with the ASCII maps before resorting to a hand-drawn map of my doing.

Heh. Fair enough.

[dmw71]

Maptools alone is just :
1. Find the pic you want
2. Drag it onto your map window
3. Repeat until complete
4. Print screen (capture )
5 save pic to photobucket/drop box
6. Copy link to your post
It has thousands of options you'll NEVER use, but if you just use it for maps, it's a piece of cake.

Good to know. I will have to try and start playing around with it sooner rather than later. I was always envious of Omega's maps in the long defunct 'Tavern Tales' games (which served as my introduction to 2E), and it would be cool to be able to make something even close in quality.

[dmw71]

My opinion is that level training should be an opportunity for role playing, story hooks, and relieving the player of excess cash, but shouldn't significantly delay the leveling process.

This makes perfect sense.

Truth be told, I'm not even sure why I put training requirements in the game in the first place. I never used them when I used to play as a youth (granted, I rarely made it to the second level so it was a non-issue), but it's not exactly "fun," which is what the game is meant to be.

If going with my "clean slate" for future games, training requirements are likely to be scratched. For this game (or any game once it's already started), I'll admit to being a little reluctant to make significant rules changes mid-stream unless they're absolutely required (e.g. critical misses). I'm not sure if training expenses would fall into this "required" category for change, but I'll consider it.

[dmw71]

Oh - and RPtools maptools absolutely works on the Mac.

Great. No excuses now, right?

By the way, I finally got this thing installed on my Macbook. I originally downloaded it the night this discussion took place a few weeks ago, but every dmg package I downloaded and attempted to install came back with some "file is corrupted" error. I just tried again and, after much tinkering, figured out that the problem was with a security setting. My "Allow apps downloaded from" option was set to "Mac App Store and identified developers" and changing it to "Anywhere" during the installation process did the trick.

Now, to figure out how to use the thing.

There might be presentable maps in this game at some point after all.

[dmw71]

[Now, to figure out how to use the thing.

To this point, I am planning on starting with their Wiki and tutorials, but am open to any tips or suggestions from those already familiar with the tool.

[Zhym]

If you have any questions, Google is a great resource.

Seriously, I'll be happy to help as much as I can, although I'm only about a 2nd level MapTools user myself.

BTW, you can set your security setting back where it was after the first time you've launched the app, and I'd recommend doing so. OS X is incredibly unhelpful in its messages when it doesn't like the fact that a Java app isn't signed.