GMing for new players (by a new player), I need experienced help - Page 2 - OG Myth-Weavers

Notices


Gaming Discussion

For all things gaming related.


GMing for new players (by a new player), I need experienced help

   
Well, I've just got back from the seminar, we got maybe half an hour of RP in the 90 minutes we had available as the rest was spent on people rolling characters, assigning skills and arguing over how the mechanics might work etc etc.

First thing that is clear is we need to swap to an easy rule set. Are there any very basic rule sets around that we could adapt to fit a mature game set in a space world? I'm thinking something where most challenges are direct ability checks and with a simple combat system.
This isn't ideal but we, as complete newbies to tabletop RPGs, are in no position to be focusing on how the mechanics work and what we can learn from them. However we have all interacted with narrative (books/film/games) before so this is something we actually can tackle.

My other problems are with keeping players IC; can you think of any ways I can teach the players this?
We managed to get all but one of the players to act IC during the characters first meeting (which moved to the brig instead of med bay) but only when talking to each other. Taking actions always fell back to OOC "I to convince the man to move so I can fix the vending machine" I'm pretty sure this should be an actual IC conversation where the PC tries to convince the NPC to move. But what should players do to describe what they're doing? Should they narrate as if they were writing it (Franks knees down and uses his wrench to unblock the vender) or something else.
How about a characters thoughts? Should they be included in a similar way to how they're done in PbP, do you announce Frank things that... or use some other method?


Anyway over the next week we're going to discuss the 4 dimensions of the game: World, Objects, Agents, Events and how to proceed playing the game in general to with the goal of getting us all more involved.

p.s. perhaps worth mentioning: The individual pre-med bay/brig mini arcs turned into just a couple of learn as you play isolated situations, similar to playing a round of a card game with all cards face up so we could discuss how the game should/could be played.

p.p.s. Thanks for the help so far guys, we wouldn't have gotten as far as the conversation in the brig without your help!

Quote:
First thing that is clear is we need to swap to an easy rule set. Are there any very basic rule sets around that we could adapt to fit a mature game set in a space world? I'm thinking something where most challenges are direct ability checks and with a simple combat system.
This isn't ideal but we, as complete newbies to tabletop RPGs, are in no position to be focusing on how the mechanics work and what we can learn from them. However we have all interacted with narrative (books/film/games) before so this is something we actually can tackle.
I would recommend D6 Space by West End Games. That's my primary system and it works like this: Want to do something? Find a skill that applies. Look at the number of dice. Roll that number of dice. If it's higher than the number in the GM's head, you succeed. If not, you fail.

Quote:
We managed to get all but one of the players to act IC during the characters first meeting (which moved to the brig instead of med bay) but only when talking to each other. Taking actions always fell back to OOC "I to convince the man to move so I can fix the vending machine" I'm pretty sure this should be an actual IC conversation where the PC tries to convince the NPC to move.
Everyone has their own way of doing this. I tend to RP my actions, but one of the problems with RPGs is that sometimes the character should be capable of saying things better than the players can. If the character is supposed to be a smooth-talking con man, but the player doesn't know how to convince someone to do something, then his best course of action is to just describe what he attempts and let the dice do the rest. If you stick around an RPG community long enough, you'll find that this is a somewhat contested issue; particularly the converse of this issue: what to do when you have a character that should be socially weak but a player that can sell water to a fish?

To be honest, just getting the characters to talk IC to each other is a great accomplishment for a first time group. Make sure they actually have to talk to important NPCs - they can't be dismissed with a dice roll - because what the player character says to that person is important to the narrative. But with getting some Random NPC to move is just a skill check; the only part that matters to the story is that the PC is a convincing speaker - and that you can do with dice, in the same way you don't need to describe every thrust and parry of a combat - the part that matters is that the PCs win or lose, etc.

As they get more comfortable with their characters, they'll probably get better at doing IC conversations anyway. If you want to couch them, the best way is to start adding more complex and important NPCs; people that have motivations that can't be simply be rolled off. Make the players put together a case for themselves. Note that this still isn't an excuse to tell the players a story, particularly if they don't seem interested.

Quote:
But what should players do to describe what they're doing? Should they narrate as if they were writing it (Franks knees down and uses his wrench to unblock the vender) or something else.
Everyone does things differently; I use "I do X" most of the time but I've heard it done any number of ways. As long as the point gets across, it should work out fine. Maybe you could experiment; perhaps saying "I do X" will help your players stay IC.

Quote:
How about a characters thoughts? Should they be included in a similar way to how they're done in PbP, do you announce Frank things that... or use some other method?
Honestly, I've never seen anyone do this well by explicitly saying or talking about how their character thinks. A good actor will find ways to imply what their character is thinking, but all RPers are not good actors. The only thing I can say is to perhaps have discussions OOC at breaks or at the end of the game, where you ask what the players thought their characters were thinking at various points. If the players start to do something incomprehensible, that's another good time to have this type of discussion to make sure everyone's view of the game's "reality" is the same and get a good idea of whats going on the character's head.

Hi there! I think it's interesting to see a bunch of people try to jump into RPGs for the first time completely uncoached. It is a bit like a bunch of virgins trying to write a steamy romance novel.

Most people get into these games via a more experienced gamer who can teach them the ropes because RPGs are almost always rules heavy and can be intimidating to learn right out of the book.

First off, if you want to do things properly, you probably can't do it in ninety minutes. Most gaming sessions last three to six hours, depending on the group, the game, and the amount of Mountain Dew in the fridge. Plan to relax and have a good time.

As far as systems go, I would suggest the Basic Roleplaying System from Chaosium. It is a little difficult for the GM and I think the layout of their books is terribly unintuitive, but it allows for quick skill rolls and can be learned in about five minutes from a player's point of view. I'm not sure what the BRP has in the way of futurey stuff though. The D20 system is definitely the most popular. The most simple of the simple is Melee and its magical counterpart Wizard. It was one of the first tabletop roleplaying games ever, invented by Steve Jackson himself. I cut my table-top teeth on it when I was about twelve. Again, this is mostly medieval fantasy based stuff. You could probably make it work for a future campaign but it would need some serious tweaking. Also, if memory serves, my brothers and I had to jury rig our own character advancement system because the rules don't come with one. I know there were some sequels that are likely better balanced, but I haven't looked into them.

http://www.meleewizards.com/rules.html

It seems like you've already put a lot of work into your campaign, but if things don't come together well you might consider getting a short pre-made adventure from your local hobby/game store or online (there are many sites that have free pre-made adventures). This will give you everything you need for the gaming sessions--NPC stats, backgrounds, descriptions, even sometimes images that you can show to your players. World building can be a very rewarding exercise for a GM, but also a very tiring one when you need to make stat blocks and detailed maps. Most pre-mades are appropriate for a certain level range. And speaking of pre-mades, this is an excellent character generator that could make your player's lives easier: http://www.pathguy.com/d20modern.htm It looks a little confusing but only because they tried to include every possibility--just ignore stuff that's not from D20 Future. And I heartily suggest having your friends create accounts here on myth-weavers, both to do their own research and to use our excellent character sheets, which automatically fill out many stats themselves based on your starting attributes.

One great way to get people to stay in character is to encourage them to give their characters their own voices, accents, vocabulary, etc. By making it obvious when the character is talking and when the player is describing, you can avoid a lot of confusion and it's also more fun. For thoughts or secret actions my group uses IMs. We all have laptops or computers and everyone has a separate chat going with the GM for stuff the other players wouldn't be privy to.

Thanks again for the tips. The plan for tomorow is to use the most basic rule system I can invent; everything is an ability check, combat is strength vs dexterity, thats it. That way we can focus on how narritives work in RPGs.

We problably won't get much done because I'm going to have to dicuss each characters background with their players before we start to ensure they've all put a decent amount of work into their idea. last session had one character who appeared quite well developed (a cowardly alcoholic russian doctor). I think our main focus is to get everyone happy with actual Role Playing before complecating things with TTRPG rules as I'm still finding them pretty impenetrable after well over 12 hours reading.

That idea of using laptops to have private conversations with the GM sounds brilliant. I've been wondering how to work around the things that some characters will know but others should remian in the dark about. I'd be interested in trying that out to see whether palyers help each other out or keep knowledge to themselves. Its a shame the seminars are run in a lecture room instead of a computer lab. I might suggest moving; I could see some of our players getting distracted though.

I'll report back for those of you who are interested. Hopefully some time soon, I'll get a decent enough handle on this stuff to be able to hold a discussion with all you experienced folks on what video games can learn from RPGs. No promises..

Heh, looks like your players took the railroading to the brig rather okay. Probably because they are first time players, or did you explain them at first that you are going to send their characters that a way sooner or later?

As others have already explained, talking IC-ly is sometimes a problem for players who are actually weak in that field. Often, those will be overshadowed by those players who have the skill/talent/charisma to pull IC talking and also have chosen to create characters that are highly dramatic (cowardly alcoholic russian doctor? ).

Make sure the other players are not left behind in the dust of the callow doctor, mind you.

For those players who are weak in IC-talking, allow them to roll for most of their actions, but occasionally prod or give them incentive to act out their characters. Reward them, whether with in-game results (XP, better roll result, etc.) or out-of-game accolades (Give a round of applause for Jim!).

But so as to not alienate the ones who are good in acting out their characters in the first place, also give them rewards for astounding play-acting. If they are performing eloquently in persuading an NPC, award them with a high roll result without even touching the dice.

Note role-playing is not always about play-acting or acting IC. For instance, after a rather emotional scene, the player declares that the doctor goes back to his hidden cache to pick up more medical supplies. Well, that's okay.

But if the player then declares that the doctor doesn't return soon enough, because he is drowning the dregs of the emotional backlash from the previous scene with alcohol he had stashed alongside the supplies... Now that is role-playing.

Or, if the player declares that while going over the supplies, the doctor finds his stash of alcohol. But instead of falling into a moment of weakness, he decides against it, scorning the tempting oblivion of insobriety... Wow! A powerful scene! Give the player a reward!

Note, this all can be done by talking in character, explaining the doctor's thoughts, or in a descriptive narrative by the player. As the DM/GM/Storyteller, you can also prompt these moments of role-playing, if you know what drives your players' characters, like in the example above, by tempting the doctor as he finds alcohol.

PS: For players that are unable to get into IC play-acting, tell them to do it in form of a narrative description: 'Frank tries to reason with irate man, showing his operating license and telling him that he will be out of his hair faster if he can just finish his job.'

Good luck, and most importantly, despite this being a class, try and have some fun!

Things went surprisingly well considering 2 of our 4 players didn't show up for the seminar so I had to give their characters a speedy exit from the narrative for the week.
However we got a decent bit of a narrative going with the two remaining characters forming a bit of a duo. The cowardly alcoholic russian doctor being the brains and the hugely muscled destructive bruiser providing the brawn (in one case attempting to use the doctor as a weapon by throwing him at a guard).

One thing that became abundantly clear was that the busier was the harder character to role play. I think this is in part due to him not being a talkative character. This lead to the players involvement being reduced to describing how the bruiser hit people.
This actually brought up a larger issue in that whenever a character was being quiet the player found this hard to convey to me as the GM. The only solution I found to this at the time was to urge the player to describe their actions in more detail. "I surreptitiously draw my gun and wait for an opportunity to attack" instead of "I draw my gun and wait". While this seems all good and well it became a problem because I kept stopping and asking the other player what they were doing now.

The question: Should I be trying to get the player to describe their actions or thoughts/reasons during conflicts or just wait for them to volunteer them when they're ready to act?
The issue I have with waiting is I can't build the NPC actions without knowledge of what's going on. We had a few instances last week of players announcing stuff they had been doing while I dictated the NPC actions, which of course broke the NPC actions.

Other than that, we found that the simplified rules made for a much more entertaining experience although the use of a D20 lead to comical situations with some major fails. e.g. Doctor got shived and had to get the bruiser to do some first aid. The doctor forgot to tell the bruiser to stitch him up before bandaging him and hence had to take the bandages off; he rolled a 2 so I failed him leading to the bruiser ripping the bandages off and causing the doctor yet more pain.

I'm glad to say that next week we'll probably be comfortable enough with the rules and RPing in general to get some decent character interaction. My plan is to make a couple of deep NPCs to study how the players interact with them knowing that they aren't heroes in the game. I'm thinking one of each: enemy either a guard captain or gang boss, another character that joins the party and a passenger that brings the everyday life to the party in someway.

One last thing, I'm interested in your thoughts on quests vs open world exploration. Should my NPCs give quests such as 'go steal us some more food the rationing is killing us' or should I just let the players decide if they help out or not with no explicit direction given.

Thanks again people, this has been a surprising success so far all thanks to your experience.

As you may have guessed, asking the players on what they characters are doing is the right way to go. Well, actually, it should be that you are giving them a situation, typically an obstacle, and ask how do the characters interact/react to it, which is why most combat rules are turn-based.

An indication of a superb roleplayer is one that even in the midst of his character's tirade, manages to stop OOC-ly, and indicates for the other players to either interject or declare what their own character is doing during said tirade. Of course, usually, it is the DM that has to do this, stopping one player and prodding or cuing the other players.
Typically, as players begin to get experienced in roleplay, they learn to interject themselves into the action. Those who don't, tend to to leave the gaming table early. Watch out for these, and try to give them enough attention.

In my opinion, the difference between open-world and quests-based exploration is... Small.

Open-world means your players do what they choose to, and what happens depends on how much you have developed your setting, or how quick you are on making up stories/narratives/situations by the seat of your pants.

Quest-based means you can offer a number of options to the players, but unless you offer them OOC-ly, you have to get the characters somehow involved with the quest-giver first. If you want to do it faster, typically the quest-giver is someone higher up in rank or power compared to the characters, like the head of the surviving guards, the appointed leader of the captured passengers, the captain of the ship in hiding, or even one of the raiders.

In the end, both still depend on how developed is the setting. The quest-based one is a bit more structured, and easier to handle by new players; obey the quest-giver, get reward or favor in turn. Of course, this only works so long as your players choose to follow...

Alot of what your running into, we run into all the time with gaming. You got the silent types who are happy being in the back ground, the out in the open type of people, ect...

Your job is pretty much to make sure to give every one some face time, making sure they are having fun. From what it sounds you are doing a rather reasonable job. Keeping going. We are here for you.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Last Database Backup 2024-03-19 03:32:24am local time
Myth-Weavers Status