One thing about sticking to a set of core rules however is that it gives the players the feeling that when they won something, it wasn't because the DM simply handed it to them, but because they played by the system, manipulated the odds themselves, and triumphed because of it. If you as a DM give it to them too much, it might diminish the player's own sense of accomplishment. Sticking to a set of core rules does, as I would say it, empower the players, because there's a set of existing rules that the players can learn, play around and exploit.
This is a dangerous advice. I totally agree overall, but some DMs i ve played with resorted a lot to this excuse: "i know my story! I dont want mechanics to control my story". Mechanics can be an obstruct for the story and may slow down the flow, but they also keep things balanced. In multiple occasions i ve tried to use my X magical ability that worked one session and didnt work next session at the exact same situation ... just because the DM thought it didnt fit his story at the time....
allatar15 although you may have a point about it being an excuse for your dm keep in mind most of those problems are caused by an inexperienced or bad dm. The rules give structure but shouldnt be in stone. For example one of my players wanted to make a cleric in pathfinder that was lawful evil and used fear and intimidation to control people. However in pathfinder clerics dont get intimidation. If the rules were set in stone then it would be tough luck however its easy enough to give a 1 for 1 with diplomacy instead. Main point changing things should have a balance to it and should also any changes should be clearly decided upon before the session starts.
allatar15 Actually, the rules DON'T hinder story, at least not well-written story. The rules are a framework. Lets say you want a troll thats immune to fire, the go to for most adventuring parties. You don't have to cheat, you just have to think. Instead of just dropping in the troll, put someone behind it. An alchemist who is mutating local trolls, or someone equipping his lieutenants of the monstrous races with items that take off the edge of their weaknesses. Want to keep pesky PC pursuers at bay from your perfect paragin of pain? Set up henchman who have prepared actions to counter them. Use spells, enchantments, and even natural occurences to keep them from taking him down. The rules are not a straightjacket. You can use them to ground your story in the system, and even provide some interesting background, or even additional antagonists for the party. Sure, you killed the evil overlord, but that infrastructure is still intact, so uh.... here comes some new problems.
Which is why they stressed that a clear understanding of the mechanics should be had before even beginning to ignore or modify them, at the consensus of the group. This is something I always do with my group - if there's an issue brought up by a circumstance in the session, I always ask the group if it's ok to change or dismiss a particular mechanic from that point forward, or ask them their thoughts on the matter before making any decision on the matter.
The way Ryan describes his gaming is not the way I normally like to play - and *that's okay*. I'm not at his table and neither are most of us here. He's describing his way to play, and if everyone at his table is having fun and enjoying the way it plays out, then all the rest of us don't (and shouldn't!) really have a say in the matter. So many different playstyles, and to tell the truth even most of us play differently when with different groups. Read the room, read the table, and make sure everybody likes what's happening.
Thank you, Satine Phoenix and Ryan Green - Ryan for the excellent ending, and Satine for the wonderful reactions to it. It was ust what I needed tonight. It is good to know that there are such people in the world, to play and imagine, and to carry us all through the dark time in life. Thank you
I completely agree with the guest on a good description and adjusting the narrative based on it. I've been incorporating this into my games for a few years now.
As usual Satine, another great episode and FANTASTIC guest GM!!!! I have always rewarded characters with a backstory who believe, if only for a few hours, that they are their character and roleplay it out! Narrative, narrative!!! I retired as a GM some years ago (been playing since 1983) but I have a new group interested, so I happily emerge from my crypt, dust off my tomes, and prepare to teach a new generation the art of fantasy roleplay!
I just want to say I totally get enjoying character creation as a DM. Thanks to Crit Role and these wonderful tips from you and Matt, I started running my own game in a world I've been thinking about for a few years now. I went in with a vague idea of a plot and how to begin, but once my players started working with me on their characters and filling the world with their stories the world and the plot changed and grew into something much bigger and including things from their own stores. Its like once the players start living in the world they breath life into it far beyond what you can come up with alone
I think there is a balance of mechanics and story telling. Mechanics don't limit story telling if the GM knows how to utilize them. I use them and the story telling in no ways lack. In fact, the group has tons of fun and has come back for years and we use Pathfinder RPG which is very mechanics driven. But again, a great GM can still have those, let the players tell the story and make it epic
I feel that mechanics are there to inform the limitations and capabilities of the characters. Lets look at the bandit example - Rogues get a guaranteed critical if they are 1st to act. In the example rogue for sure was 1st to act so he got a critical, rogues do insane amout of damage with sneak attack while normal bandit has only ~11 hp (PHB source). So I dont see the need to "bend" the rules there. The Important lesson should be the correct interpritation of mechanics into a roleplay by the players.
This is from pg. 230 of the 1e AD&D DMG: It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. Never hold to the letter written, nor allow some Barracks Room Lawyer to force quotations from the rulebook upon you, if it goes against the obvious intent of the game. As you hew the line with respect to conformity to the major systems and uniformity of play in general. Gygax kinda held to the idea of 'Story over Mechanics' it seems.
Exactly. Steadfast rules in RPGs have always been optional since the beginning. Rules are guidelines. The only 'permission' necessary is if a player wants to do something against the DM's 'rules' for his game.
I have a testimonial about giving myself permission in a campaign where I was DM and the players were playing in my home-brewed setting. They were up against an NPC that I had just introduced and intended to be a recurring villain, and he even came equipped with a McGuffin in the form of a pendant which he could activate in order to absorb and store kinetic damage in order and escape. The player fighting the villain, however, got a crit against my villain, but instead of just activating the pendant and diving off the barge, thereby disappointing the player, I gave myself permission to change the mechanics of the situation mid-scene. I caused the pendant to overload from the amount of damage and instead of killing off my villain, it transferred the stored kinetic energy to another target in his line-of-site, who just happened to be the villain's first mate (they were pirates), who promptly exploded. This satisfied the players and also allowed me to have a more complex and now even more revenge-seeking returning character. Hooray for self-permission!
Kudos Satine for this informative video. I have always stated to players that D&D is a co op story telling game where the rules are malleable and interchangeable. You use what you want or need and can change them to best fit your game and or player experience. Unfortunately there are so many Rule lawyer types that believe the rules can not be altered in any way and they are gospel. Those that believe this tend to limit their games to something more then what it can achieve, as far as entertainment and the stifling of creativity that is the heart of Dungeons and Dragons. For instance in a game I run I add what I like to call a Destiny Dice. It is given out rarely in a game much like inspiration. If someone in the party does something I find awesome, which enriches the story and experience for everyone I award the team a 1d8. I allow this to be rolled only at pivotal points during the game where one decision can change the outcome of the entire story. The roll of the die can either kill an important enemy in a OHKO regardless of the amount of hit points the enemy has, or it can lead to drastic repercussions against one or all in the party. When I call out that the party can choose the roll the Destiny Die or refuse and hold on to it, the looks on their faces is so fun to watch. It's very much like drawing a card from the deck of many things. You just don't know what you will get. I encourage everyone to try their luck and creativity in creating homebrew rules or additions to their campaigns.
This is great. The issue is exactly what kept me from tabletop RPG for five years. I come from a very rich and strong play-by-post Tradition, where all the roleplaying comes from a narrative, and there are seldom clear open "quests", instead lives of the Charakters unfolding. So when I first learned of tabletop rp'ing and read the very first players' handbook I could not feel convinced of reducing people and their stories to tables and stats. Luckily for me, I found a group - after only a few Bad experiences - where people enjoy playing. So now that I'm trying gm'ing for the first time, it's great help to know a few Hacks of disregarding mechanics in favour of the narrative.
Following "The Rule of Cool" is usually a good idea. As long as your group is more interested in the story than the mechanics, the rules should take a back seat to the story.
It doesnt really reduce, though. See, here's the problem: there are tons of ways to do things within the rules, but most GMs are in this mindset that its story vs. Rules. Instead of trying to figure out what rules need to go, try to figure out how the rules can HELP your story. Theyre not opposed.
Sean McTiernan The bad experience I mentioned was of the reducing sort. It went so far as the GM mindlessly throwing my PC into a Situation of pure panick, thinking that it shouldn't matter since it did not affect my stats. In General I do like boundaries and frameworks, not only because of a sense of reality but also because they bring about creativity. It's the same with rules. Play-by-Post might not have a players' guidebook but dies not mean players can disregard a sense of realism which makes the story believable.
nodeterin Yeah, thats some crap GMing, then. We GMs have a duty to our players, after all. The rules exist for one such reason, to keep the GM from just doing whatever they feel like, and the players just having to go with it. GMs like that breed the sort of players who define problem players. Some may become more fixated on the rules, and come into leveraging them as a Rules Lawyer. Others can become the sort that make completely broken characters, expecting the GM to keep them relevant. Power Gamers, Munchkins, so many come out of situations of a bad GM that pushed them down that path, either by encouraging the behavior, or by them trying to guard themselves against such abuses of their characters. Its like the Star Wars movie, orginal trilogy, versus prequels. In the originals, Lucas was held back by a jumber of limitations, and had to work within them to create the best story he could. Fast forward to the prequels, and Lucas was beholden to no one, and it showed.
To quote a friend of mine: "I am reluctant to throw out rules that were created and thoroughly tested by a professional game designer." No problems with house rules, but I've had GMs who are completely new to a roleplaying system, with no knowledge of the mechanical interactions within it, who start houseruling right away. It is extremely frustrating. Please make sure you understand a system or at least the mechanic you are altering before you alter it, for the sake of your players. If your games don't really make much use of rules, disregard at your discretion :P
Hou c'était tellement classe! He said in French, his native language, because of all the awe he was in, after witnessing that awesome (quite literaly) "DM us out of here" moment.
8:08 i've heard a LOT of malaprops in my time but... "skull-drudgery"? wow! that's a new one! lol great episode and spot-on advice as usual. i also love how diverse all her gm guests have been. it takes all kinds...
Epic GM us out. Permission. I have a great DM when it comes to permission. I'll often come up with odd characters that have depth. For my current Paladin, I wanted something more than the typical vision. So I chose a Teifling. A Devil with Grace. I've always played characters who were poor, but I wanted this one to be a Noble. So I asked my DM if I could create my own House. As a result, House Mortez is the noble House that reflects what would happen if House Lannister from GoT blended with the Addams Family. We are the odd. The mad. The misfit. But, we are also the powerful. The cunning. The ruthless. The members of the House break conventions at every turn. He took this concept and ran with it, creating dynamic stories about why our Patron, a Lich by the name of Lucius, sought his undead form to await the return of his lost love, Shan. He spun tales around the creepy yet endearing members of the Mortez who, although strange, know loyalty, steadfastness, family and love greater than most. One of the greatest missions of the Mortez is to find "Lost Progeny", those that are distantly related to House Mortez who might be those misfits and monsters to others...home. Because of this style of storytelling, his attention to detail and the willingness to give the players permission to create characters that may not follow traditional "alignment" , and he's totally into adding depth. I'll use texts and whatnot to contact him between games to tell him what "Veritas" (the Teifling Paladin of the Crown) would be thinking or his perspective on something that happened...that he may not be sharing with other characters because of who or what he is. Because he allows this sort of thing (and encourages it), he knows how heartbroken Veritas was when he laid his young squire and herald to rest. Rescued from a slave market, Tinsil the Gnome knew only fear. So when she was bought by Veritas, she expected similar treatment. The Teifling was cold at first, but taught her of the Mortez traditions, the faith of The Red Knight, and built her courage to face the unknown. When she was struck down by an ooze in a temple that was, itself, collapsing and flooding, know one else knew how shattered he was when he had to remove his Mortez clasp from his cloak, wrap her in it, and left her behind. The DM gave room for those kind of scenes and emotions, even if only by text. He's huge on collaborative storytelling like me, so those kinds of moments can only happen if the DM allows that sort of thing to happen, and I'm lucky for it. It's why our Halfling Rogue multiclassed into Warlock when he was seduced by the female Imp "Noir". It's why the barely literate Elf Ranger "Finray" learned to speak broken Juten (our word for the Giant language) after the death of his best friend Gutwrench the Half-Ogre. It's why all the depth and colour happens in our campaign. Because our DM WANTS us to ask permission to colour outside the lines.
One of my house rules is rolling saving throws. If a 1 is rolled the target takes double damage. As it's usually the players throwing spells that require saving throws it's heavily skewed towards them, but when they come across an enemy that throws spells I can see them cringing with every dice roll.
My philosophy is, if my players want to fiddle with the rules, so will my encounters. If my Barbarian is gonna think about every possible outcome while in a rage, the next barbarian they come across might think a bit more in a rage. If my wizard wants to blow spells that he shouldn't, so will my next spellcaster.
I'm DMing a pathfinder campaign for my family, who has never played table top games before, and I switched the rest and death mechanics from Pathfinder with the ones from D&D 5e, mostly because I like the 5e rest and death more then the pathfinder
Our GM stepped away from the table for a bit so we gave ourselves permission to do some things. We killed the Emperor, assumed his title and divided the galaxy amongst ourselves... He came back and we were back on a jungle planet trying to help bird people...
What defines "a good experience"? The very first time I played - had never heard of RPGs, my brother was the DM and I and my best friend were in the 8th grade. We rolled up characters - had no idea what the stats meant, other than high was better than low, and went to a dungeon outside of town. My character died in our first combat. I rolled up a new character and my friends character took him back to the same place. My new character died in his first combat. Both by wolves, by the way. But, I was HOOKED. Here was a game simulating something I had never experienced before. That was in 1978. I'm still playing.
Yes to all of the above with this video! Surprised you didn't mention how back in the day, when people would call Gary Gygax with game questions asking what a particular rule or item meant, he wouldn't answer them. He would ask "What do you think it means?" And once told, he would usually respond, "That sounds pretty good to me." Speaking of which, may I recommend for those who haven't seen it, Matthew Coleville's "The Map Is Not the Territory" video (ruclips.net/video/3v2_JDz2Di0/видео.html)? It's elaborates on so much with what is said here.
I suggest that players and GM's together can change the rules. Rules do not need to come from on high, from the mighty DM or system manufacturer. You do not need to judge your game from whether or not your players don't want to play it. It's better that they have the say from the start, and when stuff comes up. Additionally, it is the player's story, not the GM's. The GM makes the world, the players make the story. NPC's may have their stories, but they are not there to Make the PC's do things. (Of course, I am talking about a campaign here.)
If I play with a GM for the first time, I'd want them to adhere to the rules. That way I know that they are competent and not just making everything up.
#askSatine One of my house rules is that I have banned the revivfy spell just because I think character death should be that easy to avoid amd get tons of flack for it. Is there a happy medium between that spell and resurrection?
Well in response to Satan disintegrating me I would like to reflect it back at him with my super energy reflecting shield! As cool sounding as his outro was, I'm pretty skeptical as to how you can forgo the entire system of rules only occasionally rolling a d20 to see if it's high or low. It reminds me of the very first time I played d&d at lunch hour. Long story short my DM allowed me to, IN ORDER: jump high into the air off of a boulder, pull out my bow, purchase that bow because i never actually had one, and shoot a dragon in both of it's eyes -- I was allowed to do this because that's what I said I wanted and the DM didn't want to tell me no. To me, the rules are there to help you tell the story, just on a more micro level. Coup de grace maneuvers encompass the rogue example and I would much rather roll even a 50/50 chance to see if a beehive is nearby because shortly thereafter when the party is -- idk about to drown in a sealed trap room, someone will just say they go grab the 'deus-ex-lever' and open the exit door. The rules provide a gravitas that flighty play disables. Not to say that it would necessarily be a good thing, but I seriously doubt this guy even COULD deliver a TPK.
#asksatine is there a formula, or a format for super noobs like myself to create engaging dialog as a character. i always freeze up and end up being very boring to myself and others.
4e has very simple mechanics. I'd argue it's actually simpler than 5e, it just has a lot of them because every power is technically a special mechanic. But once you have your powers picked and printed out on cards it's super simple to play.
Not to mention stuff like GURPS 3E (building a vehicle in that ruleset required both a PHD in nuclear physics as well as sacrificing your first born to the old gods for their favour) or A Time of War (trying to get a grip on your characters origin path requires an entire weekend and preferably two assistants), let alone truly dreadful system like FATAL (roll to establish your anal circumference, but don't forget to apply the proper modifiers, then do the same for your maximum anal circumference!).
Eu amei os revelations, inclusive quero mais XD gostei do formato episodico pq dava pra colocar o jogo pra baixar antes de sair pro trabalho e jogar o episodio na hora do almoço kkkk e o formato episodico instiga a conversa, acho interessante /o/ a pegada sci-fi das tecnologias dos ultimos jogos não me incomoda, eu já achava tecnologia a maquina de fazer munição do RE3, nunca tinha visto uma na vida XD mas mesmo que não incomode também não faz falta /o/ PS: Moira ganhou meu coraçaum S2
It's easy to learn, but difficult to master. Knowing when to use your powers, how to position, and the interplay between all of the various factors, is very difficult to get perfectly. Technically, all of these things apply to the other additions, but 4e lays them out in a way where you're cognizant of them, particulalry the cooldowns (encounter power vs daily power etc)
"It's OK to fail. It's OK to have flaws and have low hit points." _- hands player participation award_ "I want to bring as many real life rules & restrictions into the game as possible." This is exactly why I started playing, to have all the worst things about real life in my fantasy. I'm still trying to find a DM who will let me play the OfficeWorker class.
4e D&D was simple as hell, you seriously trying to *cough cough* call it out over 3e? (Not that complicated rules is a good or bad thing necessarily) But seriously, 4e was very simple and so far the easiest edition i've found to teach new players BY FAR.
Why would you need permission to roleplay? Most of the things she says about giving people permission to do things seem like nonissues anyways. See, it's permission? See this other guy? He agrees so even more permission. The thing about Dread was that it was a small game for one session. GM nightmare to keep it all perfect for 20+ weeks.
I don't use xp and use feats as things that are rewarded to players for things like training in down time and just sometimes role playing, and levels are given when I feel that players have done enough to become more proficient in their class and multiclassing is only able by divine right and from being taught it
I'd like to hear more on the ways you run that. I've never been big on XP math myself and favour X amount of encounters before you level up. Kind of like a token system. And not just combat encounters. For the end of an epic quest I might give two, or chuck one out for some good town RPing. Its a looser system for more casual games.
I like what he says but anyone who ever played any World of Darkness game has been in a scripted scene. As for that being what D&D is about I'll disagree. D&D has its origins in Chainmail a miniature fantasy war game in fact characters started as specialists and commanders and evolved from there. In truth I would not rank D&D in the top five of systems that are best for Role Play. I would easily place Cypher System far above D&D for Role Play as I would most versions of Traveller any system that either does not have a active character advancement system or that does not give the character experience based on combat is likely to be more Role Play dependent. Can you do what he talking about oh yes and have at it are you still playing D&D when you throw the system out not really because D&D is a system only. I do encourage anyone to change the rules or throw them out as you prefer but I also suggest that if your constantly throwing out the rules maybe you need a system that does what you want better. With the right system you'll find that the system helps you run the game the way you want and will even give you different and maybe better stories.
Then why even bother "playing" an rpg in the first place? Just throw away the rulebooks and play pretend. Not there's anything wrong with that mind you, as long as you're all having fun.
There's plenty narrative focused systems out there that favour roleplay over rollplay. And with the right group and the right campaign, you can spend a lot of time each session without doing any dice rolls. Heck, my group once went almost three sessions without doing any dicerolls in World of Darkness because we had a lot of fun just interacting with NPCs and the world itself. Though eventually combat cropped up, and at the point the dice got dusted off and put back to use. Combat being the biggest problem when it comes to doing narrative focus. Because if there's no real possibility of failure due to just handwaving the characters being able to do it if they describe it, there is no sense of accomplishment afterwards. And that then cuts out what most players are looking for.
A game for you to check out: Fiasco. Basically no rules, just everyone telling a dramatic story together, with minimal dice rolling to introduce complications
![FORTNITE CLASSICS IS BACK! Fortnite Item Shop [November 15th, 2024] (Fortnite Chapter 5)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RbQURbeFwqs/mqdefault.jpg)
Satine's face when the guest is "DMing us out of here" is always the highlight of the show for me :P
So what does Ryan do in his spare time? Commands Pirate ships in the Caribbeans?
no just fencing
Chills Ryan, that DM outro was awe-some. Definitely going to check your channel out now
Satine dying all the way
One thing about sticking to a set of core rules however is that it gives the players the feeling that when they won something, it wasn't because the DM simply handed it to them, but because they played by the system, manipulated the odds themselves, and triumphed because of it.
If you as a DM give it to them too much, it might diminish the player's own sense of accomplishment.
Sticking to a set of core rules does, as I would say it, empower the players, because there's a set of existing rules that the players can learn, play around and exploit.
Otherwise, the "win" is whenever the GM decides.
THAT BASS VOICE THOUGH.
Damn, yes.
1st guest on this series to give me chills.
The difference between in and out of character emotions...i must remember this
As angry says: "You are free to play the game wrong any way you want to"
I used to have a teacher who would say 'feel free to start building your house by the roof if you want, dont let me stop you'
Oh the next GM tips, safe words.
Pineapple
sea cucumber
I know, right?! And here I was, wondering if it was just me XD
This is a dangerous advice. I totally agree overall, but some DMs i ve played with resorted a lot to this excuse: "i know my story! I dont want mechanics to control my story". Mechanics can be an obstruct for the story and may slow down the flow, but they also keep things balanced. In multiple occasions i ve tried to use my X magical ability that worked one session and didnt work next session at the exact same situation ... just because the DM thought it didnt fit his story at the time....
allatar15 my dm is the same way.
I am sorry for you hehe. Well i bet many DMs are like that, because not all of us are professional storytellers/actors. It is a very dangerous advice.
allatar15 although you may have a point about it being an excuse for your dm keep in mind most of those problems are caused by an inexperienced or bad dm. The rules give structure but shouldnt be in stone. For example one of my players wanted to make a cleric in pathfinder that was lawful evil and used fear and intimidation to control people. However in pathfinder clerics dont get intimidation. If the rules were set in stone then it would be tough luck however its easy enough to give a 1 for 1 with diplomacy instead. Main point changing things should have a balance to it and should also any changes should be clearly decided upon before the session starts.
allatar15 Actually, the rules DON'T hinder story, at least not well-written story. The rules are a framework. Lets say you want a troll thats immune to fire, the go to for most adventuring parties. You don't have to cheat, you just have to think. Instead of just dropping in the troll, put someone behind it. An alchemist who is mutating local trolls, or someone equipping his lieutenants of the monstrous races with items that take off the edge of their weaknesses.
Want to keep pesky PC pursuers at bay from your perfect paragin of pain? Set up henchman who have prepared actions to counter them. Use spells, enchantments, and even natural occurences to keep them from taking him down.
The rules are not a straightjacket. You can use them to ground your story in the system, and even provide some interesting background, or even additional antagonists for the party.
Sure, you killed the evil overlord, but that infrastructure is still intact, so uh.... here comes some new problems.
Which is why they stressed that a clear understanding of the mechanics should be had before even beginning to ignore or modify them, at the consensus of the group. This is something I always do with my group - if there's an issue brought up by a circumstance in the session, I always ask the group if it's ok to change or dismiss a particular mechanic from that point forward, or ask them their thoughts on the matter before making any decision on the matter.
So true it even says you should in the handbooks.
The way Ryan describes his gaming is not the way I normally like to play - and *that's okay*. I'm not at his table and neither are most of us here. He's describing his way to play, and if everyone at his table is having fun and enjoying the way it plays out, then all the rest of us don't (and shouldn't!) really have a say in the matter. So many different playstyles, and to tell the truth even most of us play differently when with different groups. Read the room, read the table, and make sure everybody likes what's happening.
The different styles of GMs are part of what makes the game so much fun. It would be dull if everyone was Ivan Van Norman or Mike Mearls or whomever.
Pro tip: Plug your guests in the description.
Thank you, Satine Phoenix and Ryan Green - Ryan for the excellent ending, and Satine for the wonderful reactions to it. It was ust what I needed tonight. It is good to know that there are such people in the world, to play and imagine, and to carry us all through the dark time in life. Thank you
I completely agree with the guest on a good description and adjusting the narrative based on it. I've been incorporating this into my games for a few years now.
He's literally GM goals, I agreed with everything he said. I love this guy.
As usual Satine, another great episode and FANTASTIC guest GM!!!! I have always rewarded characters with a backstory who believe, if only for a few hours, that they are their character and roleplay it out! Narrative, narrative!!! I retired as a GM some years ago (been playing since 1983) but I have a new group interested, so I happily emerge from my crypt, dust off my tomes, and prepare to teach a new generation the art of fantasy roleplay!
I just want to say I totally get enjoying character creation as a DM. Thanks to Crit Role and these wonderful tips from you and Matt, I started running my own game in a world I've been thinking about for a few years now. I went in with a vague idea of a plot and how to begin, but once my players started working with me on their characters and filling the world with their stories the world and the plot changed and grew into something much bigger and including things from their own stores. Its like once the players start living in the world they breath life into it far beyond what you can come up with alone
I do love his favorite moment being character creation. I agree. Back stories and the like and letting players write "our story."
I think there is a balance of mechanics and story telling. Mechanics don't limit story telling if the GM knows how to utilize them. I use them and the story telling in no ways lack. In fact, the group has tons of fun and has come back for years and we use Pathfinder RPG which is very mechanics driven. But again, a great GM can still have those, let the players tell the story and make it epic
I feel that mechanics are there to inform the limitations and capabilities of the characters.
Lets look at the bandit example - Rogues get a guaranteed critical if they are 1st to act. In the example rogue for sure was 1st to act so he got a critical, rogues do insane amout of damage with sneak attack while normal bandit has only ~11 hp (PHB source). So I dont see the need to "bend" the rules there.
The Important lesson should be the correct interpritation of mechanics into a roleplay by the players.
This is from pg. 230 of the 1e AD&D DMG:
It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. Never hold to the letter written, nor allow some Barracks Room Lawyer to force quotations from the rulebook upon you, if it goes against the obvious intent of the game. As you hew the line with respect to conformity to the major systems and uniformity of play in general.
Gygax kinda held to the idea of 'Story over Mechanics' it seems.
Exactly. Steadfast rules in RPGs have always been optional since the beginning. Rules are guidelines. The only 'permission' necessary is if a player wants to do something against the DM's 'rules' for his game.
Ryan's GMing out moment has literal inspired me for my next session I'm running.
Dear Ryan, please read a telephone directory and record it for distribution. Thx.
I have a testimonial about giving myself permission in a campaign where I was DM and the players were playing in my home-brewed setting. They were up against an NPC that I had just introduced and intended to be a recurring villain, and he even came equipped with a McGuffin in the form of a pendant which he could activate in order to absorb and store kinetic damage in order and escape. The player fighting the villain, however, got a crit against my villain, but instead of just activating the pendant and diving off the barge, thereby disappointing the player, I gave myself permission to change the mechanics of the situation mid-scene. I caused the pendant to overload from the amount of damage and instead of killing off my villain, it transferred the stored kinetic energy to another target in his line-of-site, who just happened to be the villain's first mate (they were pirates), who promptly exploded. This satisfied the players and also allowed me to have a more complex and now even more revenge-seeking returning character. Hooray for self-permission!
This guy sounds like an awesome GM.
I on the other hand force my players to track every arrow and copper piece.
Sounds boring
Kudos Satine for this informative video. I have always stated to players that D&D is a co op story telling game where the rules are malleable and interchangeable. You use what you want or need and can change them to best fit your game and or player experience. Unfortunately there are so many Rule lawyer types that believe the rules can not be altered in any way and they are gospel. Those that believe this tend to limit their games to something more then what it can achieve, as far as entertainment and the stifling of creativity that is the heart of Dungeons and Dragons. For instance in a game I run I add what I like to call a Destiny Dice. It is given out rarely in a game much like inspiration. If someone in the party does something I find awesome, which enriches the story and experience for everyone I award the team a 1d8. I allow this to be rolled only at pivotal points during the game where one decision can change the outcome of the entire story. The roll of the die can either kill an important enemy in a OHKO regardless of the amount of hit points the enemy has, or it can lead to drastic repercussions against one or all in the party. When I call out that the party can choose the roll the Destiny Die or refuse and hold on to it, the looks on their faces is so fun to watch. It's very much like drawing a card from the deck of many things. You just don't know what you will get. I encourage everyone to try their luck and creativity in creating homebrew rules or additions to their campaigns.
This is great. The issue is exactly what kept me from tabletop RPG for five years. I come from a very rich and strong play-by-post Tradition, where all the roleplaying comes from a narrative, and there are seldom clear open "quests", instead lives of the Charakters unfolding. So when I first learned of tabletop rp'ing and read the very first players' handbook I could not feel convinced of reducing people and their stories to tables and stats. Luckily for me, I found a group - after only a few Bad experiences - where people enjoy playing. So now that I'm trying gm'ing for the first time, it's great help to know a few Hacks of disregarding mechanics in favour of the narrative.
Following "The Rule of Cool" is usually a good idea. As long as your group is more interested in the story than the mechanics, the rules should take a back seat to the story.
It doesnt really reduce, though. See, here's the problem: there are tons of ways to do things within the rules, but most GMs are in this mindset that its story vs. Rules. Instead of trying to figure out what rules need to go, try to figure out how the rules can HELP your story. Theyre not opposed.
Sean McTiernan The bad experience I mentioned was of the reducing sort. It went so far as the GM mindlessly throwing my PC into a Situation of pure panick, thinking that it shouldn't matter since it did not affect my stats.
In General I do like boundaries and frameworks, not only because of a sense of reality but also because they bring about creativity. It's the same with rules. Play-by-Post might not have a players' guidebook but dies not mean players can disregard a sense of realism which makes the story believable.
shallendor Fortunately both... Mechanics for the feel of adventure and as a tool of storytelling.
nodeterin Yeah, thats some crap GMing, then. We GMs have a duty to our players, after all. The rules exist for one such reason, to keep the GM from just doing whatever they feel like, and the players just having to go with it. GMs like that breed the sort of players who define problem players.
Some may become more fixated on the rules, and come into leveraging them as a Rules Lawyer. Others can become the sort that make completely broken characters, expecting the GM to keep them relevant. Power Gamers, Munchkins, so many come out of situations of a bad GM that pushed them down that path, either by encouraging the behavior, or by them trying to guard themselves against such abuses of their characters.
Its like the Star Wars movie, orginal trilogy, versus prequels. In the originals, Lucas was held back by a jumber of limitations, and had to work within them to create the best story he could.
Fast forward to the prequels, and Lucas was beholden to no one, and it showed.
To quote a friend of mine: "I am reluctant to throw out rules that were created and thoroughly tested by a professional game designer."
No problems with house rules, but I've had GMs who are completely new to a roleplaying system, with no knowledge of the mechanical interactions within it, who start houseruling right away. It is extremely frustrating. Please make sure you understand a system or at least the mechanic you are altering before you alter it, for the sake of your players.
If your games don't really make much use of rules, disregard at your discretion :P
Man, that GM us out of here was amazing!
Man....that DM outro was killer! I am using that for my campaign in their next dream sequence!
Yes. All the yes. I've always tried to DM like this but Mr Ryan Green is my new favourite DM...
I like seeing them "gm" them out, and how excited she gets at some of the stories.
Yeah that outtro was pretty amazing. Every week is awesome!
One of the best episodes!
Hou c'était tellement classe! He said in French, his native language, because of all the awe he was in, after witnessing that awesome (quite literaly) "DM us out of here" moment.
I got chills when he DMd at the end.
8:08 i've heard a LOT of malaprops in my time but... "skull-drudgery"? wow! that's a new one! lol
great episode and spot-on advice as usual.
i also love how diverse all her gm guests have been.
it takes all kinds...
That’s my little brother right there!! 🙌 love you bro
#3 The DMs Guide really hammers that in. The rules serve you, not vice versa.
Epic GM us out.
Permission. I have a great DM when it comes to permission. I'll often come up with odd characters that have depth. For my current Paladin, I wanted something more than the typical vision. So I chose a Teifling. A Devil with Grace. I've always played characters who were poor, but I wanted this one to be a Noble. So I asked my DM if I could create my own House. As a result, House Mortez is the noble House that reflects what would happen if House Lannister from GoT blended with the Addams Family.
We are the odd. The mad. The misfit. But, we are also the powerful. The cunning. The ruthless. The members of the House break conventions at every turn.
He took this concept and ran with it, creating dynamic stories about why our Patron, a Lich by the name of Lucius, sought his undead form to await the return of his lost love, Shan. He spun tales around the creepy yet endearing members of the Mortez who, although strange, know loyalty, steadfastness, family and love greater than most. One of the greatest missions of the Mortez is to find "Lost Progeny", those that are distantly related to House Mortez who might be those misfits and monsters to others...home.
Because of this style of storytelling, his attention to detail and the willingness to give the players permission to create characters that may not follow traditional "alignment" , and he's totally into adding depth. I'll use texts and whatnot to contact him between games to tell him what "Veritas" (the Teifling Paladin of the Crown) would be thinking or his perspective on something that happened...that he may not be sharing with other characters because of who or what he is.
Because he allows this sort of thing (and encourages it), he knows how heartbroken Veritas was when he laid his young squire and herald to rest. Rescued from a slave market, Tinsil the Gnome knew only fear. So when she was bought by Veritas, she expected similar treatment. The Teifling was cold at first, but taught her of the Mortez traditions, the faith of The Red Knight, and built her courage to face the unknown. When she was struck down by an ooze in a temple that was, itself, collapsing and flooding, know one else knew how shattered he was when he had to remove his Mortez clasp from his cloak, wrap her in it, and left her behind. The DM gave room for those kind of scenes and emotions, even if only by text.
He's huge on collaborative storytelling like me, so those kinds of moments can only happen if the DM allows that sort of thing to happen, and I'm lucky for it.
It's why our Halfling Rogue multiclassed into Warlock when he was seduced by the female Imp "Noir". It's why the barely literate Elf Ranger "Finray" learned to speak broken Juten (our word for the Giant language) after the death of his best friend Gutwrench the Half-Ogre. It's why all the depth and colour happens in our campaign. Because our DM WANTS us to ask permission to colour outside the lines.
This is sweet! Actors studio stuff for DMs! Well done Satine
God damnit Satine's expressions are the absolute best.
i wanna play that outro campaign like DAMN that's appealing
One of my house rules is rolling saving throws. If a 1 is rolled the target takes double damage. As it's usually the players throwing spells that require saving throws it's heavily skewed towards them, but when they come across an enemy that throws spells I can see them cringing with every dice roll.
Excellent advice, Ryan. Also kickass voice.
My philosophy is, if my players want to fiddle with the rules, so will my encounters. If my Barbarian is gonna think about every possible outcome while in a rage, the next barbarian they come across might think a bit more in a rage. If my wizard wants to blow spells that he shouldn't, so will my next spellcaster.
literally every Rules Book about RPG´s I have read so far (be it Pathfinder, DSA, or DnD) had in it as it´s very first rule "change the rules" :D
Me and Satine just stared at each other with the exact same expression... Consider me subscribed to your Twitch!
is it called fudging the rules because when your on a diet you will break it for some fudge?
This guy and TJ Storm are some great DM story tellers.
duuude. wish i could like this a few more times.
6:33 Thank you so much for this.
Ryan and I are on the same page with a lot of stuff. Rock on!
I'm DMing a pathfinder campaign for my family, who has never played table top games before, and I switched the rest and death mechanics from Pathfinder with the ones from D&D 5e, mostly because I like the 5e rest and death more then the pathfinder
Our GM stepped away from the table for a bit so we gave ourselves permission to do some things. We killed the Emperor, assumed his title and divided the galaxy amongst ourselves... He came back and we were back on a jungle planet trying to help bird people...
I love that the son of Ron Jeremy is a roleplayer like us
a funny comment
I actually rushed to check his bio; not literally his son though :(
hahaha, no. Just kinda looks like him
Satine probably skipped 3e+4e and isn't familiar with each systems distinct flaws\
skipping them is the best approach I find.
This guy's role playing game style=City Of Mist
And a great tip with listening.
So, who's up for a game of Bandits & Beehives? :-)
Never let the rules get in the way of creating a good experience for your players.
What defines "a good experience"? The very first time I played - had never heard of RPGs, my brother was the DM and I and my best friend were in the 8th grade. We rolled up characters - had no idea what the stats meant, other than high was better than low, and went to a dungeon outside of town. My character died in our first combat. I rolled up a new character and my friends character took him back to the same place. My new character died in his first combat. Both by wolves, by the way. But, I was HOOKED. Here was a game simulating something I had never experienced before. That was in 1978. I'm still playing.
You learned one of the fundamental principles of RPGs: Enjoyment of the game is not dependent on winning. Therefore, you had a good experience
This guy talks like an awesome GM.
A surprise attack on a stealth roll of 1? No way josé!
Yes to all of the above with this video! Surprised you didn't mention how back in the day, when people would call Gary Gygax with game questions asking what a particular rule or item meant, he wouldn't answer them. He would ask "What do you think it means?" And once told, he would usually respond, "That sounds pretty good to me." Speaking of which, may I recommend for those who haven't seen it, Matthew Coleville's "The Map Is Not the Territory" video (ruclips.net/video/3v2_JDz2Di0/видео.html)? It's elaborates on so much with what is said here.
Good advice!
Love all the enthusiasm!
Best games I've ever played were homebrews of the Age system
It would be awesome to get some advice from a teen gm and some insight on the new generation of storytellers
I suggest that players and GM's together can change the rules. Rules do not need to come from on high, from the mighty DM or system manufacturer. You do not need to judge your game from whether or not your players don't want to play it. It's better that they have the say from the start, and when stuff comes up. Additionally, it is the player's story, not the GM's. The GM makes the world, the players make the story. NPC's may have their stories, but they are not there to Make the PC's do things. (Of course, I am talking about a campaign here.)
That's the fastest I've ever died in a role playing situation. Awesome, though!'
If I play with a GM for the first time, I'd want them to adhere to the rules. That way I know that they are competent and not just making everything up.
Aw yeah, og Pit Crew Ryan Green
#askSatine One of my house rules is that I have banned the revivfy spell just because I think character death should be that easy to avoid amd get tons of flack for it. Is there a happy medium between that spell and resurrection?
Well in response to Satan disintegrating me I would like to reflect it back at him with my super energy reflecting shield! As cool sounding as his outro was, I'm pretty skeptical as to how you can forgo the entire system of rules only occasionally rolling a d20 to see if it's high or low. It reminds me of the very first time I played d&d at lunch hour. Long story short my DM allowed me to, IN ORDER: jump high into the air off of a boulder, pull out my bow, purchase that bow because i never actually had one, and shoot a dragon in both of it's eyes -- I was allowed to do this because that's what I said I wanted and the DM didn't want to tell me no. To me, the rules are there to help you tell the story, just on a more micro level. Coup de grace maneuvers encompass the rogue example and I would much rather roll even a 50/50 chance to see if a beehive is nearby because shortly thereafter when the party is -- idk about to drown in a sealed trap room, someone will just say they go grab the 'deus-ex-lever' and open the exit door. The rules provide a gravitas that flighty play disables. Not to say that it would necessarily be a good thing, but I seriously doubt this guy even COULD deliver a TPK.
But I'm not even Catholic!
That was great. Although the Hydrosnail thing reminds me of the snail from OoTS.
Best ending ever!!
#asksatine is there a formula, or a format for super noobs like myself to create engaging dialog as a character. i always freeze up and end up being very boring to myself and others.
If Satine thinks 4e has over complicated mechanics, she obviously hasn't touched 3.5 or Pathfinder.
4e has very simple mechanics. I'd argue it's actually simpler than 5e, it just has a lot of them because every power is technically a special mechanic. But once you have your powers picked and printed out on cards it's super simple to play.
Not to mention stuff like GURPS 3E (building a vehicle in that ruleset required both a PHD in nuclear physics as well as sacrificing your first born to the old gods for their favour) or A Time of War (trying to get a grip on your characters origin path requires an entire weekend and preferably two assistants), let alone truly dreadful system like FATAL (roll to establish your anal circumference, but don't forget to apply the proper modifiers, then do the same for your maximum anal circumference!).
I fear for the sanity of anyone who would actually play FATAL.
GURPS mayhaps
4e is a wonderful board game.
Destroy cities? Way ahead of you. Luskan is already a pile of rubble in my game
Just realized the label up her right shoulder x) Do you spice?!
good eye!
she got that jar from a charming little gnome for only 50 gold. what a bargain!
Isn't there a save versus ash?
Now plz GM for CR crew at least one session. :D with Matt as player as well
He's a player in Ivan's Dread
Great Idea for when VM ends and they take a break till the New story
Daaammmnnn, he just killed the viewers lol
Eu amei os revelations, inclusive quero mais XD gostei do formato episodico pq dava pra colocar o jogo pra baixar antes de sair pro trabalho e jogar o episodio na hora do almoço kkkk e o formato episodico instiga a conversa, acho interessante /o/ a pegada sci-fi das tecnologias dos ultimos jogos não me incomoda, eu já achava tecnologia a maquina de fazer munição do RE3, nunca tinha visto uma na vida XD mas mesmo que não incomode também não faz falta /o/ PS: Moira ganhou meu coraçaum S2
Yes, not at least, to you.
I love how she gives a little "aside", bashing 4th edition. Hahaha.
Uhh...4e is the 2nd simplest edition of D&D. How is it mechanically complex? lol
It's easy to learn, but difficult to master. Knowing when to use your powers, how to position, and the interplay between all of the various factors, is very difficult to get perfectly. Technically, all of these things apply to the other additions, but 4e lays them out in a way where you're cognizant of them, particulalry the cooldowns (encounter power vs daily power etc)
"It's OK to fail. It's OK to have flaws and have low hit points."
_- hands player participation award_
"I want to bring as many real life rules & restrictions into the game as possible."
This is exactly why I started playing, to have all the worst things about real life in my fantasy. I'm still trying to find a DM who will let me play the OfficeWorker class.
Peter Saumur and a penchant for losing their stapler.
World of Darkness?
4e D&D was simple as hell, you seriously trying to *cough cough* call it out over 3e? (Not that complicated rules is a good or bad thing necessarily) But seriously, 4e was very simple and so far the easiest edition i've found to teach new players BY FAR.
I disagree. I still have no idea how to calculate to hit damage in 4e.
Why would you need permission to roleplay? Most of the things she says about giving people permission to do things seem like nonissues anyways. See, it's permission? See this other guy? He agrees so even more permission.
The thing about Dread was that it was a small game for one session. GM nightmare to keep it all perfect for 20+ weeks.
I don't use xp and use feats as things that are rewarded to players for things like training in down time and just sometimes role playing, and levels are given when I feel that players have done enough to become more proficient in their class and multiclassing is only able by divine right and from being taught it
I'd like to hear more on the ways you run that. I've never been big on XP math myself and favour X amount of encounters before you level up. Kind of like a token system. And not just combat encounters. For the end of an epic quest I might give two, or chuck one out for some good town RPing. Its a looser system for more casual games.
О чем говорит этот гидро смаил?
gandsRyanHype
Lol *ahem* 4e
His off center tie makes my eye twitch.
First!
edit: but yea i like these DM tips videos keep up the good work.
Lmao 4e overly complicated.
I like what he says but anyone who ever played any World of Darkness game has been in a scripted scene. As for that being what D&D is about I'll disagree. D&D has its origins in Chainmail a miniature fantasy war game in fact characters started as specialists and commanders and evolved from there. In truth I would not rank D&D in the top five of systems that are best for Role Play. I would easily place Cypher System far above D&D for Role Play as I would most versions of Traveller any system that either does not have a active character advancement system or that does not give the character experience based on combat is likely to be more Role Play dependent. Can you do what he talking about oh yes and have at it are you still playing D&D when you throw the system out not really because D&D is a system only. I do encourage anyone to change the rules or throw them out as you prefer but I also suggest that if your constantly throwing out the rules maybe you need a system that does what you want better. With the right system you'll find that the system helps you run the game the way you want and will even give you different and maybe better stories.
Take away the mechanics, yes please. Modern RPGs need less mechanics IMHO :) Leave mechanics to video games and board games :)
THIS... IS... ROLEPLAY!
Then why even bother "playing" an rpg in the first place? Just throw away the rulebooks and play pretend. Not there's anything wrong with that mind you, as long as you're all having fun.
There's plenty narrative focused systems out there that favour roleplay over rollplay. And with the right group and the right campaign, you can spend a lot of time each session without doing any dice rolls.
Heck, my group once went almost three sessions without doing any dicerolls in World of Darkness because we had a lot of fun just interacting with NPCs and the world itself. Though eventually combat cropped up, and at the point the dice got dusted off and put back to use.
Combat being the biggest problem when it comes to doing narrative focus. Because if there's no real possibility of failure due to just handwaving the characters being able to do it if they describe it, there is no sense of accomplishment afterwards. And that then cuts out what most players are looking for.
Nah. I need some crunch alongside my RP. If I didn't have it, I would run amok!
A game for you to check out: Fiasco. Basically no rules, just everyone telling a dramatic story together, with minimal dice rolling to introduce complications
Ok. content aside. Its interesting. But. What is it with her mouth? It is not really in the middle of her face.