Gawain's World: One Gamer's Perspective
-
And pass on that phat loot? NEVER!
-
And please… Please. PLEASE!!! For the love of all that is good and holy, find some new IC reason to search for the hidden portal at the back of Myron's Jell-O Cave. "Wow, take a look at this big mushroom!" is so old it just doesn't work anymore. Stop doing that!
Pretty sure there is a foot print pointing right at the portal. I try to do that with many secret doors.
-
the footprint might be underwater. Have to check.
-
Thanks to the intense Politically Correct environment of today's military, I've taken more conflict resolution, active listening, customer service, and effective communications courses than you can shake a stick at. There's one skill I've picked up from all this, though, that has truly made a huge difference in the quality of my roleplaying and game mastering:
Use in-character feedback to encourage roleplaying. Incorporate your players' words and player characters' actions into your narrative.
Everybody likes to be appreciated and valued.
- Use the specific words and actions the players use during your encounters.
- Have their words and actions actually affect the play beyond what the rules dictate.
Do this and you provide fantastic on-going feedback and encouragement. Plus, you'll find that the quality of roleplaying in your sessions will shoot way up too.
For example, here's two versions of player/DM interaction during a combat scene:
SCENARIO #1 - No Feedback"
@DM:The kobold measures you up and down, snarls and draws his short sword!
@Player:
What?! How dare he assault Gilthor the Mighty! I raise my two-handed axe high up in the air over my head, unleash a blood curdling scream and charge headlong at the foolish creature!
@DM:
OK. Roll initiative…You win, roll to hit...Great hit! Roll damage...The kobold dies horribly!
SCENARIO #2 - Feedback & Reaction:
@DM:The kobold measures you up and down, snarls and draws his short sword!
@Player:
What?! How dare he assault Gilthor the Mighty! I raise my two-handed axe high up in the air over my head, unleash a blood curdling scream and charge the foolish creature!
@DM:
The kobold flinches at your blood curdling scream. He nervously brings his sword up to parry your headlong charge. The creature is so intimidated that you automatically win initiative. Roll to hit and add a 1 bonus because of your mighty overhead swing…You land a mighty blow! Roll damage...The kobold is cut down in one blow with your two- handed axe. The poor thing didn't even have time to beg for mercy as, at the last moment, it sorrowfully realized that it was completely outmatched trying to defend its poor mate and 2 little kobold children. Great attack! How do you feel?
As you can see, I hammed it up at the end to try to make the player feel a little remorse–undeserved or not it's always great trying to draw a player reaction--but the essence of the point is there. The player gave such a great attack description that I had the kobold react cowardly and gave the character a couple of perks by way of the automatic initiative and attack bonus.
This rewards the player for good roleplaying and creates a better quality roleplaying experience for everybody at the table. And don't just do this for combat either. Anything and everything the players and characters say and do can be embellished, reacted to and rewarded (or penalized if the action was foolish).
Have more fun at every game!
-
Most of us are familiar with the basic alignment definitions. A 3x3 grid of nine alignments, and a character fits within one of those nine squares and no others. This system works perfectly fine… if the campaign setting is a black-and-white story-book morality play--or the original published Forgotten Realms setting. However many campaign worlds, including CoA, is very much a "shades of gray" setting, not unlike the real world. There are rarely, if ever, any absolutes, and there are nearly always mitigating circumstances.
Any discussion of alignments within a shades-of-gray setting should take these factors into account. You might compare them to political ideologies. Are you Lawful or Chaotic? Good or Evil? Democrat or Republican? Liberal or Conservative? Labour or Conservative? Well--like so many things in life, the answer is All and None at the same time.
Alignments, like politics, are often perceived on a one-dimensional sliding scale. Forgive my incredulity, but NO! That's WRONG!
Despite being shown as a grid, the alignment system is really TWO separate and distinct sliding scales. We usually call them "axis" as a matter of convenience, but if you look at the history of how the alignment system developed... and how they've been played (regardless of the finite definitions given to them)... The Law-Chaos Axis is fulfills a completely unrelated game function than the function that the Good-Evil axis provides. If we can think of them separately, we might be able to, together, as a gaming community, build a wholly more believable, and altogether dramatically improved, story in which to immerse ourselves.
Law-Chaos is visible. It is a character's behavior. It can be seen by anybody who spends a significant amount of time around you. Although a lawful character might occasionally do something impulsive, for the most part he is structured. He has a daily routine. He plans, makes lists, always arrives at appointments 15 minutes early. The Chaotic man is rash. He sees something, he goes for it. He might be self-serving, greedy, or hedonistic... he might be hyper, rambunctious, or simply bored. Whatever he is, one thing is certain: You never tell him the odds! One thing the Chaotic man and the Lawful man have in common? They both will nearly always follow the law, customs, and traditions of the society in which they are a part.
But… but... he's not LAWful. He doesn't follow the rules!!! You are confusing nomenclature with definition. Yes, it's likely that the chaotic might be perceived as more likely to be a law-breaking criminal because of his rash behavior… that perception doesn't mean that he will. The studious, neurotic, dope-smoking, bow-tie wearing, OCD college Philosophy professor is VERY lawful... but he's breaking the law. The wild, crazy, happy-go-lucky, teen heart-throb, daredevil musician is just as Chaotic as the professor is Lawful... but he's never broken the law.
The Neutral (on the L-C scale) guy, which I think most (all?) of us would agree should be 90+% of the entire world, isn't neutral because he's in between Law and Chaos... he's not undecided... he's not standing rigid to the cause of balance, enforcing a law for each chaotic act made--and breaking a law for each lawful act made... He, like the rest of us, simply have qualities of both. This hypothetical Neutral guy is introverted and loves surprises; he never plans, but hates when things don't go as expected; ne never intentionally breaks a law, although he is rarely ever early for a meeting; he is shy, yet opinionated. He is... you and me.
The Good and Evil axis is a completely different beast. It is vague, undefined, invisible. It is motive. It is intent. It is desire. Lord Hardcastle is CLEARLY Lawful. We know this because of his behavior. What we, the players, don't know is if he's Good, Neutral, or Evil... Why? Because his behavior doesn't betray his intent. Our characters can guess and speculate... we can initiate intrigue based on what we THINK his motives are but, excepting the DMs, not a single one of us really know--nor should we.
My own character, Balteus, is clearly of the Neutral variety. You can see this by interacting with him. He is a strong force of presence, convinced beyond all reason that Hardcastle is a devious, corrupt, power-hungry tyrant, and he doesn't keep it a secret... but he loves his home and his King. He is a loyal citizen of the Crown and demonstrates a great deal of restraint precisely because Hardcastle--corrupt or not--is a legitimate noble of the realm. For his allies, he is nearly always the voice of reason between the Lawful and the Chaotic. Without him playing middle-man those two factions would likely not remain allies for very long.
But... is he Good or Evil? Maybe he's Neutral. Is he genuinely purely out for the betterment of mankind or is he an evil power-schemer, playing politics, angling for a position of authority on whichever side ends up winning after the simmering heat between OT and Citadel explodes into a raging boil. Is he trying to make that explosion happen--forcing a Civil War, or does he simply see it coming with no way to stop it?
None of you know. Not one*. Why? Because Behavior can be observed. Intent can not. Think about that next time you consider how you're playing your character's alignment... and what you ICly say about other character's alignments.
*Okay, theres two or three of you that know because of OOC casual convo… but that doesn't count. My point is still valid. :mrgreen:
-
Having trouble thinking up a name for your newest character? Here's a trick I picked up from an article in Dragon Magazine many years ago… Roll the Dice!
LETTER: Roll 1d6
1-2 = Vowel
3-5 = Consonant
6 = End Name (reroll if under 3 letters or no vowels)VOWEL: 1d6
A = 1
E = 2
I = 3
O = 4
U = 5
Y = 6CONSONANT: 1d20
B = 1
C = 2
D = 3
F = 4
G = 5
H = 6
J = 7
K = 8
L = 9
M = 10
N = 11
P = 12
Q = 13
R = 14
S = 15
T = 16
V = 17
W = 18
X = 19
Z = 20When you end up with an unpronounceable name like "Zzglywgol", just try to fumble through the pronunciation, saying the sounds at different speeds and emphases, until you have something that almost sounds like a real word… and then spell out, phonetically, the word you've just said: Sigley Whigal.