Roleplaying Census

[Alorael at Large]

This is just a quick census to get the roleplaying distribution on Spiderweb. There's quite a bit of AIMhack happening here, but what's the general level of experience with other tabletop games? What are favorite games?

 

I'm also curious about opinions. Are there non-roleplayers with no interest? AIMhackers who have taken up tabletop games in real life? Do in-person roleplayers play more AIMhack or less? Does AIMhack bring in a lot of new people?

 

If all of this is already known in the AIMhacking circles, I'm late to the party but still wondering.

 

—Alorael, who didn't really break down in-person tabletop, online play with friends, online play with strangers, and online play with strangers here, i.e. AIMhack. Polls are a starting point and a pretty histogram, not a full answer.

[Randomizer]

Back in college I used to play lots of table top RPGs and some of the campaigns lasted for years with sessions once a week to three times a week depending upon who was running it and available time. It was a pretty large group and whoever was available that night usually sat it on the campaign that was running.

 

There were some fairly interesting and funny discussions, like whether yelling your word of recall spell when fleeing constituted waking up the party when a lich appeared outside the hotel room window. The other player failed on his roll to wake up and was mad the one fleeing hadn't waited a few more seconds to properly wake him or grab his body.

 

I haven't had the time to play AIMhack or game since.

[nikki.]

I have played some in-person tabletop, but by now I've probably played an equal amount of that and AIMHack/other online games.

[BJ Back From the Beyond]

AIMHack constitutes my first really foray into group RPGs. I used to put on little RPG-like, free-form games for my friends, but that was way back when my age was a single digit. I used to really enjoy doing that. That's at least part of the reason I'm seriously looking at doing some DMing.

I don't really play table-top RPGs mostly because I don't know anyone in RL who plays them. Given the opportunity, I'd probably give it a try.

 

Edit: Also, 150th post! And it only took me 18 months to get there.

[Mistb0rn]

Originally Posted By: B.J.Earles

AIMHack constitutes my first really foray into group RPGs. I used to put on little RPG-like, free-form games for my friends. I used to really enjoy doing that. That's at least part of the reason I'm seriously looking at doing some DMing.

I don't really play table-top RPGs mostly because I don't know anyone in RL who plays them. Given the opportunity, I'd probably give it a try.

Pretty much exactly this.

[keira]

Originally Posted By: Mistb0rn

Originally Posted By: B.J.Earles

AIMHack constitutes my first really foray into group RPGs. I used to put on little RPG-like, free-form games for my friends. I used to really enjoy doing that. That's at least part of the reason I'm seriously looking at doing some DMing.

I don't really play table-top RPGs mostly because I don't know anyone in RL who plays them. Given the opportunity, I'd probably give it a try.

Pretty much exactly this.

Ditto.

[Enraged Slith]

I've played DnD and other tabletop games a couple of times. Maybe 10-20 sessions in my lifetime.

 

I'm not a big fan.

[Rowen]

Does playing Settlers of Catan count as a table top? Or are we reserving this for the old style D&D, Battletech, and Robotech paper and pencil games.

[Triumph]

Originally Posted By: Rowen

Does playing Settlers of Catan count as a table top? Or are we reserving this for the old style D&D, Battletech, and Robotech paper and pencil games.

 

Settlers is an awesome game, but I really don't think it counts as RPG.

[Actaeon]

Originally Posted By: The Tortoise Moves

Originally Posted By: Mistb0rn

Originally Posted By: B.J.Earles

AIMHack constitutes my first really foray into group RPGs. I used to put on little RPG-like, free-form games for my friends. I used to really enjoy doing that. That's at least part of the reason I'm seriously looking at doing some DMing.

I don't really play table-top RPGs mostly because I don't know anyone in RL who plays them. Given the opportunity, I'd probably give it a try.

Pretty much exactly this.

Ditto.

There's nothing to stop a group of Spiderwebbers from making the break into D&D proper (3.5, of course). Learn on Skype, and you can always teach your friends when you start to feel like an actual human interaction.

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: Actaeon

There's nothing to stop a group of Spiderwebbers from making the break into D&D proper (3.5, of course).

why would you want people to play the second-worst edition of d&d

[Actaeon]

Because it's the mostly widely known, and is at least better than 4?

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: Actaeon

Because it's the mostly widely known, and is at least better than 4?

What's wrong with 4th, in your opinion? It's actually one of my two favourite editions, along with BECMI D&D.

[A less presumptuous name.]

I am glad that I am no longer the only one who has never played an RP before. I've meant to, and I sat in on an early AIMhack session, but I don't have the time or energy to learn another style of gaming, let alone play frequently.

[Alorael at Large]

Warning: GNS theory buzzwords ahead!

 

Hey, I like 3rd edition, in its many flavors. 4th edition is much easier on the GM, and the tactical combat is improved, but the simulation suffers quite a lot as a consequence. You can't really model a world at all with 4E, and I've found that all the non-combat parts of the game fall apart with it—not because they have to, but because they do in all the practice I've seen. I suppose that puts me on the simulationist side, not the gamist side, but I think it's mostly too much game in 4E that rubs me the wrong way.

 

Of course, I mostly avoid both now, and if I were to run a game I'd jump on 4E for the hugely reduced prep time. My recent fantasy go-to has been Burning Wheel, which has both reduced prep time and more narrativism thrown in.

 

—Alorael, who is more curious about why Enraged Slith doesn't like roleplaying/D&D than edition wars. And he has just considered all the games he's played and the few he's read but never tried and now must concede that he's become one of those roleplaying guys. You know, those guys who whip out GNS theory buzzwords.

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: the most valuable P's

Warning: GNS theory buzzwords ahead!

Hey, I like 3rd edition, in its many flavors. 4th edition is much easier on the GM, and the tactical combat is improved, but the simulation suffers quite a lot as a consequence. You can't really model a world at all with 4E, and I've found that all the non-combat parts of the game fall apart with it—not because they have to, but because they do in all the practice I've seen. I suppose that puts me on the simulationist side, not the gamist side, but I think it's mostly too much game in 4E that rubs me the wrong way.

I've never met anyone who was able to convince me that "modelling a world" could be done with 3E, either (or really, any other edition of D&D, for that matter). Seems like if modelling a world is what you (generic you) want to do then you should probably be playing GURPS or Microscope or something. I'm just sayin'.

[Alorael at Large]

Modeling a world isn't really what I mean, although 3E comes closer. What 3E has is the stats and rules to understand what happens beyond adventure and combat. What does a wizard do in the community? Neither game is really clear on that, what with the emphasis on mayhem and destruction, but 3E's huge spell list gives more useful everyday spells than 4E's rituals. What are monsters like, compared to humans? 3E stat blocks give a much clearer answer. 4E's are eminently more usable, but also less complete.

 

And the big one, for me, is trying to picture what characters are doing. I can imagine 3rd edition combat. It's not realistic, by any means, but it makes a kind of heroic, magical sense. 4E has game sensibilities, and a lot of the abilities do things that I can't really picture sensibly. Magic can be weird, but even guys swinging swords do things that are either wuxia or video game moves. That's fine, but it's different, and not to my tastes.

 

[Edit: I think what I'm actually saying is not so complicated, although I clearly have a lot of unsorted feelings that aren't quite thoughts on the subject. Pre-4E D&D has an implied setting, and 4E's implied setting is a little different and I don't like it as much. Unrelatedly, 4E emphasizes its being a game more, and it goes beyond the amount of game I desire in my roleplaying. But 3E might get some nostalgia points, because I liked it before but have moved away from it now. Maybe if I first encountered it today I'd find it equally excessively game-oriented.]

 

—Alorael, whose actual desire to model is small. And his desire to play D&D is also small, regardless of edition.

[Skwish-E]

I started with D&D classic, but I haven't played at all since AD&D. I used to DM a weekly session with 4-6 players that lasted for a long, long time.

[Death Knight]

Ive played d and d computer games my whole life, yet ive never actually played one game of d and d. So sad...

 

I actually have a roleplaying group that is close to my town and operates weekly with it costing maybe $3 per visit. Ive just never gotten off my laziness to go there.

[macdude22]

@Death Knight live D&D can be a really fun time w/ a good DM that is willing to roll with whatever direction the players pull the game. If you have a shop close by they may run Wizards sanctioned starter event, Encounters, at little or no cost.

 

Encounters is what got me suckered into D&D, so much so that I bought the local game store.....

[Arch-Mage Solberg]

I have not done either of the two. At least I'm not the only one. There are at least 9 others like me who've not played!

 

Post #631

[Goldengirl]

My name is Goldenking, and I am part of the 28%.

 

I've never played AIMHack or tabletops. I don't necessarily have an aversion to doing so, but I don't have the time or the familiarity with the system, etc. etc. excuses.

 

I was almost going to join the Zombies! campaign, but I got to it too late.

[Colonel Haste]

This was a hard one for me to answer. I picked one-shots but am not sure that really describes me. I had the AD&D Dungeon Master Guide nearly memorized back in maybe 1985 or something but was too antisocial to have actually played in long campaigns with anyone. I remember buying dungeons (or whatever the pre-made booklets were called) and also designing my own, and then playing them with just me and my best friend and maybe one of our brothers.

 

By the time Exile came out I was in college (or grad school?) and my tabletop days were over. Since then I'm not sure I've ever played any other non-SW RPGs except for Baldur's Gate.

 

So I guess I'm an SW fanboy with non-relevant AD&D experience?

[Kreador]

Never tried an AIMHack, but I was a PnP gamer for years through grade school and high school. D&D, Traveller, GURPs, Heroes, etc. My user name actually comes from my favorite character from back in those days.

[Cairo Jim]

I wouldn't mind having a go at an AIMhack, but is unsure on how to do so.

[Actaeon]

Ditto. Perhaps someone could run a newbie campaign? Get us up to snuff? I'm been cast as a DM for so long, running a PC would be quite novel.

[Sudanna]

At least me and Sylae have campaigns at least somewhat ready to go. I'm waiting until my schedule is a little more regular for mine (Really just self-conscious, but that's the excuse), but with the recent ending of End of Days and the nearby ending of Island in Chaos, new campaigns will probably start sprouting up soon enough.

[nikki.]

I'm not saying a newbie campaign isn't a good idea, but I had B.J. (a total newcomer, I think) in my campaign and he performed magnificently. I don't think it's necessary, really.

 

As a DM, AIMHack can be confusing and stressful and a lot of hard work, sure, but as a player it's basically mastering one command to roll a dice (//roll-dice 1-sides 20), and interacting with the other characters/environments. You have your character sheet to look after, but it's still incredibly easy.

 

What I will say is to anybody wanting to play but who is unsure how to do so, come and watch a session. They're advertised here (and there is one going on in AIM chatroom SWCreeping right now if you're interested), and you'll get a good feel for how they work.

[Lilith]

sarachim's starting the Exile 2 campaign once IoC is over too

[Actaeon]

I'd love to, if I knew how to access it.

[Sudanna]

Put this in your browsers' address bar:

 

Quote:

aim:GoChat?RoomName=SWCreeping

[nikki.]

Actaeon, if you were talking to me, in your AIM client there should be a command called "buddy chat" or "join a chat" or something similar? Click that, and put "SWCreeping" as the room.

 

Edit: Or look at page two and do what Nalyd said.

[Actaeon]

On it. And you're on page two, too, Nikki.

 

Edit: Hi Nalyd! Didn't recognize your PDN.

[Aoslare]

Page size is not static. You guys are all on page one for me. I hate loading multiple pages so I have the maximum setting.

[Actaeon]

But if Nalyd's post is on page two, isn't Nikki's? Unless the latter makes the cutoff for page 3, I suppose.

[keira]

Originally Posted By: HOUSE of S

Page size is not static. You guys are all on page one for me. I hate loading multiple pages so I have the maximum setting.

Out of curiosity, is there a way to raise this? Us mere mortals are stuck at 99, idk if you guys are too.

[Alorael at Large]

We are too.

 

—Alorael, who doesn't think that the UBB particularly cares about how many posts you want to load. Name size is another thing. More characters is a privilege, not a right.

[nikki.]

UBB just doesn't like to juggle too many balls. It ignores one thing to stop another breaking the whole system.

[Cairo Jim]

Out of curiosity, is there another game on the go that's still joinable?

[keira]

Dantius recently stepped out of Zombies!2, so you could hop in on that, most likely.

[Dintiradan]

Originally Posted By: Nikki

UBB just doesn't like to juggle too many balls. It ignores one thing to stop another breaking the whole system.

Oh Nikki.

[Mistb0rn]

Originally Posted By: Actaeon

Perhaps someone could run a newbie campaign? Get us up to snuff? I'm been cast as a DM for so long, running a PC would be quite novel.

I've long been considering DMing a two or three part campaign series, starting with level one characters and going up from there, (sort of like the Selos/Risis>RoMD progression.) I have a basic map of my island and a general idea of what I want to do in each of the campaigns; a few NPCs, situations, and enemies. But I have no idea where to start as far as what preparation actually goes into running such a thing.

How much needs to be planned in advance, and how much do you let the players deviate from your plans? Is it excessive to have three alternate routes planned out around the same obstacle?
What do I do to ensure that situations are properly balanced and possible? How do I avoid giving too much away, while still telling enough that everyone isn't completely confused? How do I know whether to push the players forward or just let them muddle around in any given situation?

I'm just so totally new to doing something like this, with people I don't know IRL, it's a rather daunting prospect. I've been putting off actually thinking about it all year, but if anything's going to get done, I guess I need to start somewhere.

Any experienced DMs care to help me out?

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: Mistb0rn

How much needs to be planned in advance, and how much do you let the players deviate from your plans? Is it excessive to have three alternate routes planned out around the same obstacle?

My advice is: plan as little as possible. Have ideas of interesting things that you can have happen and interesting situations you can put the PCs in, but keep them as just that - ideas and possible situations, with just enough notes to use them if they come up in play. It's less work for you and it reduces the temptation to funnel your players through a pre-written plot that they may or may not care about. Let the players decide what they want the PCs to do, and then make it possible.

My preferred GMing style can be summed up with this advice: get the PCs into trouble, and then let them try to get themselves out of it.

Quote:

What do I do to ensure that situations are properly balanced and possible?

Take a look at what the PCs' abilities are and offer situations that allow those abilities to shine. And when in doubt, remember that it's better to make an encounter that's a pushover than one that accidentally kills off the party.

Quote:

How do I avoid giving too much away, while still telling enough that everyone isn't completely confused?

Instead of worrying about "giving too much away", provide situations that aren't dependent for their impact on whether or not the PCs know some big secret. Then, let them find out as much or as little about the situation as they care to know, based on how deeply and thoroughly they investigate.

Quote:

How do I know whether to push the players forward or just let them muddle around in any given situation?

Why not ask them? If players seem to be flailing around aimlessly, ask them "Are you getting frustrated? Would you like me to make something happen to help move things along?"

Hope this helps.

[Nioca]

Originally Posted By: Mistb0rn

Originally Posted By: Actaeon

Perhaps someone could run a newbie campaign? Get us up to snuff? I'm been cast as a DM for so long, running a PC would be quite novel.

I've long been considering DMing a two or three part campaign series, starting with level one characters and going up from there, (sort of like the Selos/Risis>RoMD progression.) I have a basic map of my island and a general idea of what I want to do in each of the campaigns; a few NPCs, situations, and enemies. But I have no idea where to start as far as what preparation actually goes into running such a thing.

First off, keep in mind one thing: You can never be prepared for players.

More seriously, it seems you've already taken a few good steps thusfar. Make sure to look over what you already have, and that it all makes sense and is reasonable. Don't start too big; take baby steps. Have your first fight be against a couple of thugs or a couple minor enemies, so you can get a feel for how a party operates and what it takes to handle PCs and enemies. Don't overplan your dialogue with NPCs. And most of all, remember that the DM's supposed to have fun too.

If I may offer a suggestion, try running a one-shot with just two or three player characters (preferably using players that have experience both playing and DMing). That can help you get a better idea of what you're up against, without putting a massive amount of pressure on you.

Quote:

How much needs to be planned in advance, and how much do you let the players deviate from your plans? Is it excessive to have three alternate routes planned out around the same obstacle?

To put this into very simple terms: There are wrong ways to DM, and there are different ways to DM. Some DMs work better doing a lot of planning and keeping players on a fairly linear track (Ephesos). Some DMs do better when improvising things on the fly and keeping options open (Lilith). Some DMs fall between the two. Some may not really even fit in this form of categorization at all.

It all boils down to figuring out how you work best as a DM. Do you handle things better when you plan things out in advance, or are you a fairly competent improviser? Unfortunately, that's a question that can only be answered by experience. I can say, however, that when you're first starting out, it's better to have too much planned than too little.

That said, don't let yourself get bogged down in little details. Do the big picture first, then work your way down to the smaller minutiae.

Quote:

What do I do to ensure that situations are properly balanced and possible?

Again, this is something that really comes with experience. Start on the easy side, then work your way up as you get a better feel for it.

That said, when planning a difficult fight, there's one thing that's key: Never underestimate the party.

Quote:

How do I avoid giving too much away, while still telling enough that everyone isn't completely confused?

First off, this only becomes a serious issue if you've got a complicated plot. Being a first time DM, you should avoid a complicated plot. As such, you should have no problem.

Generally speaking, this can wind up being the more difficult parts of handling a story. When in doubt, err on the side of too much, rather than too little. Additionally, while technobabble (or magibabble, depending on your setting) is fine, make sure things can be explained in layman's terms as well.

Quote:

How do I know whether to push the players forward or just let them muddle around in any given situation?

Yet another thing that generally requires experience more than advice. You'll generally get a feel for when you need to nudge once you've done a few sessions. A good rule of thumb, though, is to watch out for a lot of dead air (that is, no one posting messages) or keep an eye out for signs that the players are bored or looking for things to do.

Quote:

I'm just so totally new to doing something like this, with people I don't know IRL, it's a rather daunting prospect. I've been putting off actually thinking about it all year, but if anything's going to get done, I guess I need to start somewhere.

Yeah, it can be rather daunting. I was nervous as hell when I started Brigandage (something not helped with me jumping right into handling six different characters with no experience whatsoever). Understand that you're new, and a lot of mistakes are bound to happen. Understand that even if you weren't new, you'd still make mistakes. And understand that every DM running a session so far has screwed up at least a few times. The DM is human, and thus not infallible. Learn from your mistakes, try to do better next time, and you'll be on your way to becoming a good DM.

[Nioca]

*Sees Lilith's post*

Originally Posted By: Lilith

Originally Posted By: Mistb0rn

How much needs to be planned in advance, and how much do you let the players deviate from your plans? Is it excessive to have three alternate routes planned out around the same obstacle?

 

My advice is: plan as little as possible. Have ideas of interesting things that you can have happen and interesting situations you can put the PCs in, but keep them as just that - ideas and possible situations, with just enough notes to use them if they come up in play. It's less work for you and it reduces the temptation to funnel your players through a pre-written plot that they may or may not care about. Let the players decide what they want the PCs to do, and then make it possible.

Yipe! Improvising and low-planning's fine for DMs that have gotten the hang of things, but for a first time DM who doesn't have a feel for balance and doesn't really have his DM-legs yet (so to speak)? That's just asking for trouble. It's a lot easier to come up with interesting encounters in advance than it is on-the-fly; having a solid set of plans is a good thing for when you're first starting out. After all, if you need to, you can always deviate from the plan. But if you go with improvising off-the-bat, you're stuck with it for the rest of the session.

[Student of Trinity]

There's a happy medium. Too much planning is really counter-productive. On the one hand you may lose interest in your own story once you've spent too much time on it. And if you do stay keen, you get frustrated if your players make a detour that avoids a lot of your prepared stuff, so you're tempted to railroad them back to it, and that destroys the illusion that they are in control of their fate.

 

But you don't want to run out of bullets in the middle of the fight. It's good to have things at least sketched out fairly far down the line. It's also nice to have a few plot elements in reserve, that can be introduced very flexibly if the players do something so unexpected that none of your other plans can be used. The wizard who hates the party, for instance, can launch some sort of magical attack pretty much anywhere, anytime. So it's never a waste of time to get the party to offend a wizard as early as possible. But this is obviously a desperation move, if your players are older than about nine, so it's also good to try to develop a couple of more original 'instant adventure' items, that will actually fit into your campaign in some way.

[Alorael at Large]

If you're new to DMing, you might want to put some effort into creating an adventure that can't run too far off the rails. And it doesn't have to be obvious to the players. If they're in a forest, you can put the forest-obstacle in their way however they travel. If they're in a city, the thugs can accost them in an alley on the way from any given A to any point B.

 

If you're too obvious about it, some players get annoyed. Not all, though, and most will cut you some slack for being new.

 

—Alorael, who would say the most important thing to do is to have some ideas and start playing. Plan to the point that you feel comfortable. The less nervous you are, the easier you'll find it to pull out ideas on the fly.