Magritte sets the Date

 

Next Game

Hello boys,

Hope all is well - Assif, hope you get well soon, bud.

As tonight's game is not on, I've used the time to look through my diary. It's a little jammers, but here are some dates I can do...

I've assumed no Saturday mornings as that would be your Friday night, but there are some Sunday mornings that woulc work (8am start for me, 9pm for you).

NOVEMBER:
Saturday 26th 

Sunday 27th (pm and am)

DECEMBER:

Saturday 10th

Sunday 11th (pm and am)

Sunday 18th (pm and am, though am isn't ideal as I'm out the night before)

What a Dungeon Master wants, what he really, really wants!

Scott's potential game mastering of his own Ozzy campaign and a few recent grumbles about ours has gotten me thinking about why I plan encounters and limit the world of Fissa as I do?

Why, in a world of 'high' fantasy, do I set conditions on what treasure and equipment you're likely to find?

Why do I religiously insist on keeping track of the twenty odd arrows in your quivers?

I think it comes down to DMs creating the game worlds that they would want to play in.

I loved playing the video arcade game 'Gauntlet' when I was a teenager. I'd probably love it now, but it'd annoy me in a role-playing world that the Barbarian could carry and throw unlimited hand-axes.

Although I really enjoyed our shared (Sorry, not you David) University campaigns, I was often frustrated by the choppy tone that came with multiple DMs and a vague storyline.

The worst session for me though, was Sven's single attempt. I really liked Sven and good for him for having a go, but the fact he set deliberately impossible challenges and unbeatable monsters was beyond annoying.

For me, it's a case of having options. If my character was designed to be able to jump twenty feet across chasms, why, when wanting to jump a river would the DM suddenly contrive a reason for why that was impossible? A giant wave suddenly rises up, there's an invisible barrier, you just can't do it so shut up etc.

David, spoke about plot armour. He's right of course; although I don't really want to kill you all, players should absolutely not have it. The element of risk and ultimately death, is vital to the game. Without a real possibility of failure or consequences of poor decisions, there really is no game.

Don't want to be burned to ash by a gigantic fire breathing dragon?

Then D&D is probably not the game for you.

As a DM though, especially in a sand-boxy game like the one we're currently playing, the NPCs shouldn’t have it either. They can't for the exact same reasons. If you know absolutely that I'm going to keep the villain alive, no matter what you do, how hard you fight or how cleverly you plan, what's the point of even trying?

Obviously, I’ll try to keep the important ones alive. Hell, I’ll even try to keep the trivial ones alive too, but they can't be immortal. They have to exist in the same world that you do and abide by the same rules.

It was super irritating for me when you managed to capture Egrow, as he was quite important to Sir Briefadel's plans but, fair play, you were in the right place at the right time, made a decision to target him and you succeeded. 

Estrid's choice to blind and then murder him was, given how I'd conceived her, just the action that she would take. To do anything else would’ve needed charm and persuasion.

In the very first combat encounter of the 'Rat King' session, the bandit leader Spider Murphy managed to escape. Assif assumed it was because he had a future purpose and therefore 'plot armour'. In reality, it was just because he had excellent Climb and Jump skill rolls and wanted to stay alive!

That said, what the players want matters too. 

I know Assif wants to hit things and a session without any battles for him is a session wasted. Fair enough; I can't promise a battle, but I can certainly make it much more likely. I'm also very aware that Assif hates book-keeping but I still need him to at least keep track his expendable items like arrows and potions.

Scott seems more invested in character development and a clever application of tactics. I try to plan for every possibility, but Scott surprises me more often than not and I’m glad of it. It’s like a fun little battle of wits.

I think David is the most invested in the story though and staying true to his own/his character’s core beliefs and morals. That's a interesting area for us both to play with. 

D&D is a game built on three pillars: Combat, Exploration and Interaction (Role playing) and all three of these pillars are vital to any game. The precise proportions though, can vary by what the players want and the skills of the DM.

I'm no actor and although I'll have a go, I realise that my strengths lie more towards the story telling aspect, making puns and cardboard models. 

Finally, the problem with finding magical equipment. I try to limit the amount of magic available as I believe it can easily unbalance a game and the more you give, the more you have to give. It's a destructive boulder on a slope, that once started, can't easily be slowed or stopped. 

Give a character a hundred magic items and the player can’t help but forget what they have and utility items, no matter how brilliant, are often ignored. Also, there should be a reasonable explanation of why they’re there. If I just insert exactly what the players demand/want, whenever they want it, the story becomes broken, and our shared group suspension of disbelief is utterly destroyed.

That said, just for LOLs, I've inserted a loot pile containing a specifically targeted item for each of you in the very next (possible) encounter, should you want them.

Ah, zigga, zag, ah!

Happy Halloween!

 

Practical Diplomacy

Double checking his restocked potion bandeliers and hitching his refilled quiver and longbow up across his wiry shoulders, Magritte risks posing the question he'd been delaying asking...

"After everything you said, everyone you killed; why did you allow those three Human soldiers to live?”

The ram-horned Satyr looks genuinely baffled, but the achingly beautiful Estrid calms him instantly with a gentle touch of her pale hand on his darkly tanned arm.

“I understand your confusion Magritte and, truth be told, I’m not all that certain if it was a wise decision or not, but we had to convince the Human Fortu that we are on the side of the angels. The barely-elf Rifkin did his best to persuade his companions, but that gesture of 'mercy' could only have helped our case."

Magritte gnaws at his bottom lip for a moment…

"You’re the goddess and I bow to your judgement, but I’ve got a really baaaaad feeling about this."

The Loyalty of Men

Awake, alive and completely healed from their extensive wounds, the three surviving Scarborough soldiers' glance around themselves. All their compatriots lie dead and their leaders have either abandoned them or been butchered themselves.

Even if they hadn't been deprived of their weapons, there's little chance of escape. 

Whispering, the swarthy Barbella hisses into blond Henshaw's slightly jug ear.

"What do they want wiv us? Are they gunna eat us?!"

Henshaw answers in a low but nasal voice.

"I don't know... I fink they're planning on handing us over to that big bloke in the blackish armour... If they do, play along and follow my lead... And Doberman... Don't say nothing stupid... In fact, don't say nothing at all!"

The short, wide and trollish looking Doberman looks up blankly.

"Wha?"

Bad to the Bone?