| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 01:38:12
Alright guys, let me know if I am out of whack here, or if I need any kind of attitude alteration.
Recently, we have been playing in my friend's campaign, and his campaign is a definate "storyline." He has his idea who the villain is, who are characters are, and how our quest to go after the big bad guy should go. He has all of this written up before hand, and he is using several old school modules that he has converted over to 3.5 and strung together as the "meat" of the campaign.
At first I was a little put off by the "roles" of the campaign. He had a certain number of roles in the campaign, and he wanted us to pick from them. When there were only three of us to start the campaign, one of us had to be the "prince," who then had to be an arcane caster of some sort. Everyone else worked for the crown. Well, I could deal with this for the most part. But then I asked if I could be a ranger. "No, that doesn't really fit that character's role." Okay, how about a swashbuckler, "no, he is more of a bodyguard than a swashbuckler, you should proabably make him a fighter." What about playing a cleric? "Well, there is a cleric in the story, but you should fill the bodyguard and the spy roles first. I'll give you enough magic to compensate for the healing."
Hm . . . so I guess I'm playing a fighter then (in retrospect, I could have argued for a paladin, or maybe even a knight, but I decided I wanted the extra feats and I wanted to play him more like a pragmatic soldier than an idealistic sort). So we set off with no cleric. For the first few weeks worth of sessions, the magic items did work pretty well.
He also has another house rule, where all magic items are actually empowered by runestones, so you can take the runestones and put them in any masterwork item. I wouldn't do it, but hey, from a player point of view, this is fine with me. So I make sure that I have masterwork armor and a masterwork sword and all of that. Then, after we run into a few things that can only be hit by silver, or iron, etc. I start regretting that I didn't have a silver or iron weapon with me. He then says that we should have picked up some things like this, or holy water, or flaming oil. My imediate though is that we have played the last six sessions without being able to leave and go back to civilization, or else all of this gold that has been building up in our bags of holding might actually be put to good use.
I think I took the last a little too much to heart, because it felt like he was telling me that I didn't know how to provision a character. I bought a horse and a pack horse, and bought food and water, so that we could carry everything and we wouldn't starve or go thirsty, and then he gives us bags of holding fairly quickly into the adventure, and tells us that he isn't keeping track of food and water, after we have been out of town for a few days and I have been keeping track of it. I just kind of felt like I was poorly informed, else I would have provisioned myself better (though I did get a 10' pole).
I had a lot of fun when we were in the two towns we have actually seen. I loved roleplaying my intimidate checks, and even though its cross class, as a body guard I portrayed him as paranoid, so I have been throwing ranks into sense motive as well. But now we have been in dungeons FOREVER with no real way to get out until we "finish" them. So I'm starting to get frustrated, especially when I get hit with the "rust dust" that scraps all of my equipment except my shield and my greatsword (see a problem here?) As a fighter, I get REALLY annoyed at not having any of my equipment, especially when we have no way to backtrack to town so that I can get more weapons. I know, I have pulled the rust monster bit before, but I rarely have done it than made sure the PCs can't leave.
So eventually I scrounge some equipment from the clerics that I practiced my cleave skill on. I have armor again, but I don't want to give up my greatsword for a while, since none of the weapons we have found have been particularly useful. And we keep finding gold. I'm not complaining, but at this point, not only can we not get back to the town, we can't get back to my pack horse.
One player leaves, and two join. One picks up the rogue spot. The other says that they really don't want to play a cleric (I really don't get that idea, unless you get stuck doing it for a while, but I have heard this mindset expressed a lot). So he makes a druid with a couple of healing wands and removed disease and remove poison and whatnot, and theoretically we'll all be fine.
Long story short, we run into one of the campaign "sub bosses," a vampire lizardfolk. We manage to kill it, but my 6th level fighter is tagged for two negative levels. I know no one has restoration, but the sorcerer says he will cast resistance on my the next day, and the druid will cast bear's endurance, and I should get a pretty good boost to my save. Except that at the end of the adventure, with no way to avoid it, we are all knocked out, captured, naked, with no equipment again. Well, this would be mildly annoying, except for the fact that now I have to make my save without any help. I fail BOTH saves, and my sixth level fighter is now a 4th level fighter. And the DM tells us that the next few sessions we will be travelling through a lot of exotic terrain, far from civilization, trying to scrounge for equipment and get back to our original quest. Which, in my mind, translates as, "no cleric to cast restoration in time for you to get your levels back."
I guess I'm just a bit annoyed. The railroading wouldn't bother me near as much if we had been able to visit a town or two in between sessions so we could upgrade and get some better equipment. The idea that we are thrust into the next session without any equipment (even the gold we rightly earned) without being able to visit a town to ressuply and maybe hire a cleric to fix me, really rankles me, especially since I know that its only because he wants to keep on his timetable for how the "Story" goes. And I still keep thinking that maybe, just maybe, if he had let ME play a cleric instead of a fighter, I could have avoided some of this with a few good protective spells.
So, first off, any one that read through all of that, you deserve a round of drinks, and someday I'll let you collect on that. Or maybe just a few cookies. Secondly, am I being too much of a pain? Am I just too used to being a DM to relax and let someone else do their job as the DM and run their campaign their way? I am still having fun, for the most part, and these guys are great players in my campaign, so I wouldn't want a new group at all, but some of these things are just driving me crazy. |
| 23 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| dwarvenranger |
Posted - 27 Nov 2006 : 16:31:31
Railroading isn't any fun I hate having no choices. Likewise a campaign that revolves around one person isn't my cup o tea. |
| Kazzaroth |
Posted - 13 Nov 2006 : 12:11:50
I take cookie please :).
Anycase I would agree able nto update gear is frustrating. Gear must match even closely to the ECL what your char's presents. You will not tackle a mature adult dragon down whit mere masterwork greatsword (despite your obvious skills and feats).
I would had dropped some gear as looted treasure at least in such campaign which focuses onto not play in civilization. |
| shandiris |
Posted - 12 Nov 2006 : 13:28:25
I know i don't like those sort of campaigns at all, and as a DM i try to not railroad a campaign. But in my opinion if you as a DM write a campaign, you really shouldnt do the, you are the fighter your the ... . If you suddenly have a party of 4 fighters or clerics or what not, you should improvise in my opinion.
Now wheres that cookie 
|
| Besshalar |
Posted - 12 Nov 2006 : 11:49:49
quote:
Originally posted by Kalin Agrivar
thats true...but a skilled DM doesn't make you feel you are being railroaded...and with preparation (and knowing your players) you can prepare for any "swerves" your players give you, instead of DMing with an iron fist
I know that's what I always try to do but there have been instances where I've basicly been forced to scrap most of the adventure and had to wing it. Although i have to say that one of the best game sessions ever was done this way as well so it's not all bad. |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 12 Nov 2006 : 00:55:21
Point of fact...in a group about a decade (damn I'm old!) ago, we derailed a GM's campaign twice... well, not really derailed but in the first instance we merely used all of our characters' assets and knowledge and just turned the thing from a space-station based battle to a...hit and theft mission.
In the other instance we decided beforehand what we wanted to do (free Earth from an oppressive Terminator style machine state) and even printed our own flyers for that. When we presented those to the GM and said we had made millions of copies and circulated them among the human population he had no choice but to let us stage the "We-rescue-Earth" scenario.
Afterwards he told us he would not prepare any more scenarios for us because we were so crazy and would come up with something anyway, he'd improvise and run the show... ah the good old times... |
| Kalin Agrivar |
Posted - 12 Nov 2006 : 00:39:01
quote:
Originally posted by Besshalar
But I do kind of understand your dm's railroading tactics since there have been countless adventures that I have Dm'd that went the wrong way because the players just couldn't take a hint, or decided that some completely irrelevant little detail warranted some investigation.
thats true...but a skilled DM doesn't make you feel you are being railroaded...and with preparation (and knowing your players) you can prepare for any "swerves" your players give you, instead of DMing with an iron fist |
| Besshalar |
Posted - 11 Nov 2006 : 22:28:54
I have to say the same thing playing is supposed to be fun if it's not then something is wrong.
But I do kind of understand your dm's railroading tactics since there have been countless adventures that I have Dm'd that went the wrong way because the players just couldn't take a hint, or decided that some completely irrelevant little detail warranted some investigation. |
| Ergdusch |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 19:23:05
I soon will be able to experience how that is like playing as a DM - after 5 years I am about to play again. Hopefully I will not experience the same.......
However, some of what you mentioned above (and yes I'd go for the cookies, thanks!  ) is how it must be like playing - very frustrating! I do remember some situations where my players asked: 'Couldn't- shouldn't- wouldn't we have...' and all there was to say was: 'Sorry, no way! Deal wit hte situation as it is now and take it as a challange!'
Might be of so´me help, or not at all. What I want to say is - playing is suppose to be fun. If its not anymore than you can start complaining. Just my thoughts......
Ergdusch |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 16:02:08
Tell him that to repeat the same campaign again and again doesn't help him grow as a DM
Truth be told, I recycle some adventures I love dearly, even with people who played the thing before (thankfully they don't remember it), but I change things as well.
Maybe us old hands are far too used to "our style".
The major event sort of thing rings too much of DragonLance or some such thing. A novel-format only works for novels. RPGs are more like soap-operas...or sit-coms...with one difference, characters grow |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 15:54:36
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
Railroading sucks...sounds like a new DM. Hell, I tried recreating Memory, Thorn and Sorrow and it didn't work out at all. I never really bothered with railroading my players into anything before or after that session which did not last very long...
I am critical of GMs, as much as I am critical of everything else...after all with two decades of gaming experience, mostly GMing, I know my stuff. Plus, subtle hints usually get the same results from players than railroading would without forcing them in any direction... if they choose to go another way, I don't mind.
If I don't like a game, I get frustrated, and I quit.
In your case I'd either quit, or start derailing the train.
As I said, I like the guy, and he played a great barbarian in my campaign. He has put a lot of work into this, and he has handouts and and sets up all of his dungeons with his Dwarven Forge pieces and all. I know he is very proud of all the work he has done, so I don't want to cause any bad will, especially since I want everyone in the group to stay in the group.
Aparently he has run this same campaign for a group in 2nd edition and again in 3.0, and so far all of his players have loved this campaign. So this has basically reinforced that this approach works. He has mentioned that he wants the campaign to "feel" like a fantasy novel (I pointed out here that my DM style runs more like making a comic book series than a novel, i.e. not ONE major event but a series of consecutive ones, so that if one isn't followed up on, there are more related ones around the corner, but its a different style). |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 15:49:37
Railroading sucks...sounds like a new DM. Hell, I tried recreating Memory, Thorn and Sorrow and it didn't work out at all. I never really bothered with railroading my players into anything before or after that session which did not last very long...
I am critical of GMs, as much as I am critical of everything else...after all with two decades of gaming experience, mostly GMing, I know my stuff. Plus, subtle hints usually get the same results from players than railroading would without forcing them in any direction... if they choose to go another way, I don't mind.
If I don't like a game, I get frustrated, and I quit.
In your case I'd either quit, or start derailing the train. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 15:48:08
quote:
Originally posted by WalkerNinja
Given your situation, I think that I would bring up re-supplying issues to your DM diplomatically. I recently had to do this (very similar situation), because we hadn't been able to get to a town for the last 14 sessions, and he quipped that we weren't very well equipped. I pointed out that 1) we actually had VAST reserves of wealth... all tied up in city "X" where the civil authorities wouldn't let us return; 2)We had been doing lots of fighting, but had not accumulated any wealth, and even if we had; 3) we hadn't even SEEN civilization in 14 sessions or so...
As it turned out, he was a bit absent minded, and set his ways to mending, and appreciated my feedback.
As for your character: I wouldn't necessarilly enjoy being forced into Fighter (the most vanilla of the vanilla classes), and I would enjoy even less the thought of being beholden to another PC because the DM said so. That being said... you're doing the right thing by making the best of a bad situation.
One option that your character could (and probably should) take would be the Devoted Defender Prc from Sword & Fist. Its often overlooked, but its easy to qualify for, has full BAB progression, a d12 HD, better saves, better skills, and continues to give you bonus feats as well as some VERY nifty tricks to use while protecting your "charge." It would definitely illustrate that you're trying your best to fill your Bodyguard role.
Additionally, I don't see why certain clerics wouldn't be VERY adept at pulling body-guard duty. Multi-classing to a Cleric of Siamorphe should be spot on... you're defending a Prince after all. Making this decision should strengthen your DM's role for you.
I was thinking of seeing if I could Multi-class, especially if it looks likely I'll not get my levels back. Normally, me as a DM wouldn't allow it unless I had taken lots of time off to train for cleric or I had said that I was a clerical student that broke off before I became one, but he is more relaxed on his training rules. I was originally going to take Tactical Soldier from the miniatures handbook, but more and more before I lost my levels I was starting to think that my feats were more useful to the party as a whole.
|
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 15:45:08
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
It sounds like a video game...
Could you tell he is a big fan of Diablo?  |
| WalkerNinja |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 15:25:20
Given your situation, I think that I would bring up re-supplying issues to your DM diplomatically. I recently had to do this (very similar situation), because we hadn't been able to get to a town for the last 14 sessions, and he quipped that we weren't very well equipped. I pointed out that 1) we actually had VAST reserves of wealth... all tied up in city "X" where the civil authorities wouldn't let us return; 2)We had been doing lots of fighting, but had not accumulated any wealth, and even if we had; 3) we hadn't even SEEN civilization in 14 sessions or so...
As it turned out, he was a bit absent minded, and set his ways to mending, and appreciated my feedback.
As for your character: I wouldn't necessarilly enjoy being forced into Fighter (the most vanilla of the vanilla classes), and I would enjoy even less the thought of being beholden to another PC because the DM said so. That being said... you're doing the right thing by making the best of a bad situation.
One option that your character could (and probably should) take would be the Devoted Defender Prc from Sword & Fist. Its often overlooked, but its easy to qualify for, has full BAB progression, a d12 HD, better saves, better skills, and continues to give you bonus feats as well as some VERY nifty tricks to use while protecting your "charge." It would definitely illustrate that you're trying your best to fill your Bodyguard role.
Additionally, I don't see why certain clerics wouldn't be VERY adept at pulling body-guard duty. Multi-classing to a Cleric of Siamorphe should be spot on... you're defending a Prince after all. Making this decision should strengthen your DM's role for you. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 11:16:37
It sounds like a video game... |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 07:09:10
Well, It sounds like a campaign that would demand a good deal of goodwill from the players. Railroading can work (usually it wont) if every one is into it, but there's also certain demands that would have to be dealt with. A story that left plenty of time for role playing on the side of the main story and good communications on what is needed from the players. There must be a general agreement on this being the style this campaign is going to be played with. It sounds like the DM has had a little to much faith in his adventure and the logic of his own plans.
If you have told him about your feelings I don't see much else you can not do. It would in the end all be a question about if the fun elements of the campaign outnumber the irritants.
I will here end my ramblings. I prefer Bourbon (Four Roses would do nicely) and some sort of not to sweet biscuit. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 02:46:31
quote:
Originally posted by Mkhaiwati
Just be diplomatic then (considering how diplomatic you can be on the forum, I don't see that as a problem.)
Why thank you, I really appreciate that comment!
|
| Mkhaiwati |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 02:39:23
I kinda like mead, but since there isn't any good commercial stuff around here, a good homebrew will work. Or a good glass of wine (Moscato D'Asti, by Beni di Batasiolo).
Honestly, you have legitimate gripes, and I also hate to be railroaded especially into a character type I didn't really want to play. Since you get along well with the others, and you say that you are having some fun with the game, maybe just bear it out.
I do hope it gets better, or he asks for feedback on his GMing style. Just be diplomatic then (considering how diplomatic you can be on the forum, I don't see that as a problem.) |
| Kalin Agrivar |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 02:22:44
it sounds like to me he wrote the story for himself, and not for the players...if he is practically giving you pre-generated characters (or at least pre-generated character concepts) and then not allowing you the resources needed to survive his adventure
personally, I hate being illogically rail roaded...I'd be often tempted in that campaign to "de-rail" his adventure, until he relized to loosen up a bit
and I prefer rye and ginger if you please |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 02:15:27
After thinking about it, sometimes I think its in the presentation too. I don't know why, but if he had all of the "roles" as premade PCs and let us chose one, but then said someone had to be the prince, for some reason the begining would have felt easier to take for me. And don't mind me. I know I am still having fun at all of this, its just that I needed to vent a bit about this whole thing. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 02:09:50
Its a good bunch of guys. I'm hoping I can ride out this campaign and get back to DMing. I don't want to complain too much, because I'm much happier being able to play than not having a group at all. Buts is a big departure from my DM style. I guess that's what prompted the name of the thread, |
| stupnick |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 02:09:21
personally i completely agree with you. you can not drag your players through your story, with the fact that's rubbing off on them of "no matter what decisions you make it's already pre-set." it does not make for a good campaign or a good adventure. and making your players pay for this is outrageous.
just my 2copper |
| Kuje |
Posted - 10 Nov 2006 : 02:05:01
I dunno. It doesn't seem like a game I'd stick around in for very long. :) |
|
|
