General conversation/OOC commentary

Here's a question about role-playing during rest periods.

Are you satisfied with how we've been conveying out-of-combat conversations between characters?

In my real-time games, I encourage my groups to choose two PCs who will have a conversation during the rests, which is generally viewed as a fun opportunity for the players to explore their characters when they aren't in life-or-death situations (ie, most of the rest of every session). We've already tried this in part 1, where I called it "Travel Interludes"). These are conversations that are asynchronous to the current action in the game thread: monologues and dialogues that happen between multiple PCs, and/or between one or more PCs and one or more NPCs. I'm just checking in: are you satisfied with how that worked/has been working? Or do you have other ideas that you'd like to try?

I really liked the interlude. There were a lot of NPCs to keep track off, but I like the interaction

I’m not too sure how I feel about the out of combat interactions so far. I like the idea, but with Part 1, I found it difficult to keep track of the large list of characters, which made it feel more like a chore at times because I had to keep scrolling back to see who was who (I tried to keep up with everyone’s conversations).

Another thing is that I’m unsure that we needed 3-4 different times where we just took time to speak on the road, the issue here being that it felt repetitive, and not as engaging because the situation was essentially the same every time. But I’m not against it, and it might’ve just been because we were on the road.

Overall I’m good with it, but I wanted to see how it goes for another one or two chapters before I really know.

I am not trying to make anyone feel bad, and I hope this doesn't feel mean-spirited. But in much the same way that I like to celebrate dramatic, unlikely successes with dice, I like to to acknowledge really bad luck. And so I feel like this needs to be called out and highlit in some way.
If you didn't have inspiration already, I might give you Inspiration just for that phenomenally bad roll! 480 possible combinations, and you got the third worst possible! That's amazing!

I don't know; I want to make a trophy or something. Some kind of reward for really noteworthy results.

In his public games, the DM who wrote these early Dungeon in a Box adventures, David Crennen, implements a system of hidden "Achievements" that would unlock when the players/characters got certain results or took certain actions. Each Achievement is accompanied by a one-time use game benefit that the player can cash in at a time of their choosing. Such a benefit might be "Turn this in for +5 to initiative in one encounter" or "Turn this in to roll a skill check with ADV." I hadn't considered doing this in our game before now, but it is something that some players really enjoy. We've already played a full module without using anything like Achievements, but I wonder how you all feel about introducing that sort of meta-game thing? Or is it preferable to call out the extraordinary, like this really bad roll, to celebrate/accept, and then move on? I'm happy to go either way.

I'm good either way, but a word of "warning":

The GP dice roller and I have a history of disproportionately bad rolls, so if you're going to give a mechanical/meta reward for that... jusy be ready to potentially hand it out more than you might want to. Lol

Saaaame. We can compete for Biggest Failure crown.

I personally enjoy flavoring/acknowledging the epic fails as much as the epic successes. It’s all in good fun when I do it in the games I run and it adds memorable interactions. It’s not like someone CHOSE to roll bad so I don’t feel like it’s an attack on the player. Sometimes the dice just don’t agree and it makes for fun opportunities for extra flavor, jumping off points for fun RP, or just some inside jokes for the group.

I will gladly take awards for having the angriest, most spiteful dice.

I'm happy either way honestly, it does sound like it could be fun.

Two things:

1. Hearing no strenuous objections, I'm going to implement Achievements...starting now. It'll take a bit for me to do the artwork and decide on a good list, but I have ideas for what some of the triggers will be.

2. Bramlin's player, WhiteDwarf, will be out for at least another full day, according to his post in the general Absences thread. Ordinarily, I would have a character follow the "default" instructions so the action can continue with the character in the background, playing a supporting role. But in this particular situation, it may be that there's only Bramlin left to try to get on the carriage and get control of the horses...which is a more active role than a supporting one. So I'm torn. I don't like one player gating the action for all the others - delays and absences happen for all of us, but it shouldn't mean that everyone else has to wait - but at the same time, I'd prefer that the outcomes of events/encounters are determined by players controlling their own PCs. Are you all OK with waiting a day or two longer to see what WhiteDwarf wants Bramlin to do, or do you want me to continue the narrative now?

Since WhiteDwarf made us aware of his absence, then I think it is ok for your to default his actions and continue the narrative.

As someone who often posts in the middle of the night due to my own need to be away during the "normal" hours, where does one find this "absences" thread? I don't see it.

Index > General > General Chat > absences
Or try the link that spaceseeker19 provided

I am fine with waiting, and I am fine with the the DM piloting a character as "in character" as possible.

Needs of the story and all that.

And for what it's worth, I can see Bram trying to stop the wagon... it seems in character for him. But I understand the hesitancy. Hence, why I'm ok to wait.

It may not read as a link on a phone, depending on browser, so I'll try to underline the links in future, to make them more obvious.
Like this: Absences thread.

Well, I guess I'll roll for Bramlin to get onto the carriage, as that is gating the other checks. If he doesn't make that, then we would continue with just Adran on the carriage anyway.

Just an aside about the carriage: anyone who is still on the carriage if it crashes will be given a chance to leap free, tuck and roll (Acrobatics) to avoid being hurt, separate from the actions you are taking in round three. It's clear to all of you that it will be an acrobatic feat to escape if it crashes. So if you want to use your action(s) to try to get the passenger out or make one last attempt at gaining control of the team, you can, and still be able to get out unscathed yourselves via an extra roll if you can't prevent the crash.

An additional, ancillary note: I think I can say with some confidence that, whenever there is an event or situation (not an attack) that would cause the PCs some damage in this Greenwold campaign, they will be given the opportunity to reduce or completely avoid it using a saving throw or ability check: traps, avalanches, acidic hail, trip hammers, aerial bombardments of grecian ice, volcanic eruptions, crashing carriages, etc. This is meant to be a heroic campaign where the PCs do extraordinary things; it's not meant to be an OD&D campaign filled with gotchas that will kill your characters for player inattention.

If I'm wrong and there is such a thing later in the campaign, I'll call it out to you all as we go into that situation, something like: "You realize that if you don't get off the magic sled now, you will cease to exist when it enters the sphere of annihilation." That sort of warning tells you what your characters would know, and gives you the opportunity to have your characters avoid death from ignorance, or choose to sacrifice themselves in a spectacularly dramatic fashion.

Deleted my post since we're back to the original plan.

Happy to hear that @spaceseeker19

I just want to put it out there, for the record, if ever my delay in response is impeding story progression when my character may be pivotal to resolving the situation (like everyone else has failed a check or we really need that CHA skill), I am fine with GM rolling for Zin in line with her established behaviors and actions. Given my dice roll history, it’s more likely to succeed if someone else rolls anyway.

Same here, if I haven’t responded in a day, definitely roll for me!

Ditto.