How Do I Even...?

Let's not forget, this game is part of a bigger endeavor, the GM Mentoring Project. Once First Foray is underway I will present the idea to Keleth and the community to see if there's interest. Until that happens though, I will post my noob-DM questions here.

How do you guys feel about the in-story-thread world-building questions?
1. Is it generally a good idea to involve players in world-building?
2. Is it better to keep world-building OOC in a world-building thread, or is it fun to sometimes do it in-story the way I've tried to do it here?

I know not all players enjoy participating in world-building but I feel like with this particular group it might help to ground you in the world (and with the sheer amount of creativity here it certainly helps make my job easier!). The other side of the coin I suppose is that it might take away from the feeling of the world being "shiny and new" I think is the way Len put it. My thinking is that there are more familiar places and there are more mysterious places.

Thoughts, everyone?

I think doing it in-game is just fine as long as it's not a constant thing that slows down gameplay. It definitely depends on the group, but I think that this group is more that up to the challenge of collaborative world building!

Thanks for the input, Nate! I hear ya and definitely agree regarding the danger of slowing the game down, particularly coming on the heels of a 4-day interval between my last post and this latest one! I'll narrate your entrance into the city by tomorrow whether or not everyone's chimed in with Pradeshi lore.

Hey Jabes I love this stuff. It takes me awhile though. Can you unlock the thread so I can post what I wrote?

Sure thing, Len! :-) In case some of the others also feel like adding to the Prologue (not required) I've also temporarily put the last part in a spoiler box so I can repost it later.

Chapter 1 remains open and feel free to move it along too. :-)

Ok, real talk.

I think I put forth an okay social interaction SCENE at the Aunties' house I'm pretty sure I failed to build a social CHALLENGE (which was the intention, of course). I think we were on the right track with Sunitha playing hardball, Ybus responding with pointing out that Aditya had altered the contract, and then J, via OOC because he was seeking our input, outlining Urban's thoughts on the matter.

I think we could have been onto something there, could've been a good series of Persuasion challenges. I mean, I love RP without dice-rolling but in this case I specifically tried to put together a challenge using that would use the mechanics but I think maybe I ruined it with this: "Feel free to have Urban act as his code of conduct dictates but the Aunties have now made their own decision and are obviously about to pay you (unless you refuse to accept or something)."

Thoughts?

Thank in advance!

Yo, DM. First off, I don't think anything was ruined. The scene was smooth, still held some tension waiting for reactions, seemed reasonable and realistic, and was enjoyable. So I don't think of it as a missed opportunity as much as you seem to.

But your point of discussion is well taken. I just have to say that I too go back and forth about when to apply Persuasion (and other Skill Checks) and when to just roll with the circumstance. And if you say something needs Persuasion, I don't care what anyone says, I just think the DCs are so very arbitrary. And then I would ask: How do you incorporate in the language and angles that the Player submitted actively in game play? Sometimes it is good, sometimes it is bad. Does that make the DC go up and down? Do they get Advantage / Disadvantage? And then if so, then you are letting the actual player input influence results, so why not just go a step further and let the input determine results instead of the roll?

I think it can be tough on Players when they are really coming up with good things to say, sound logic, did their homework on detail, good delivery...but then they botch the roll, so they fail. Or vice vesa, they say stupid stuff then roll a 19.

On the other hand, obviously a characters attributes should be able to influence results even over players own capability. A meek player who is nervous of every conversation and a bad speaker/writer should still be able to capitalize off of an 18 CHA character with Persuasion proficiency.

Hard to make one call for all times on this broad idea. On this specific scene, I think you could have done it either way. This way worked out fine. If you would have said Urban had needed to roll skill, that would have made sense too so any result from that good or bad would have been easy to accept.

I think its a judgement call based on the feel of the moment and your knowledge of the NPC and circumstance. Sometimes, an NPC might be willing to hear arguments and offer up a positive response. Other times, that particular NPC just would not budge on their position under any circumstance. Knowing some of that as a DM might help decide if you let it roll by a talk-through or really push the outcome to the realm of the chaos dice just to see what happens.

In my experience, these situations do depend on what the players do versus what their characters are capable of, and the DM needs to balance those out. To use the scenario of Ybus and Urban speaking with the Aunties, Ybus was purely setting up their side of the argument for why they should get paid, and my inclusion of the Performance roll was to see how well I could imitate Aditya.

As a DM, I would take that and apply it to the DC it would take to Persuade/Intimidate the Aunties to honor the contract, based on how I felt the Aunties regarded the characters. Maybe the Aunties want to play hardball and the DC starts at 18; Ybus' antics might lower it to 15, but there's still room for convincing. Urban could step in and give his spiel, and depending on his words the DC might lower again to 12 or 13. Or the DC might increase if it's felt that Ybus or Urban insulted the Aunties.

Once each player has bolstered their side, I would have one character roll. If they meet the DC, the Aunties are impressed and willing to pay. If they don't meet the DC, there should be an RP reason (maybe Ybus committed a cultural gaffe when impersonating Aditya, something that is frowned upon).

Of course, if in your opinion the players are doing everything right, I wouldn't make them roll. I did that in my Boot Camp roll because while the player tried to roll Persuasion (and got a 7), the situation was set up in such a way that I felt the target was put in a good mood and did not feel threatened enough to resist.

Also, if the Aunties had ulterior motives and wanted to see if the characters would stand up for themselves, like a test of will, then I'd just RP the whole thing. Set it up like there will be a Persuasion roll, but at the last minute the Aunties reward the characters and compliment them on their skill.

Regarding characters that might have high enough Charisma, but the player doesn't know what to do or is socially awkward, I'd ask the player what they want to accomplish and try to coax a plan of action from them. I wouldn't force them to RP it, and if I think their idea sounds reasonable, I would consider it the same as if the player wrote up a convincing spiel and adjust the DC accordingly.

So basically, sometimes there doesn't need to be a roll if the players do everything right and there's no chance of failure. I would ask for a roll if the target of the social challenge is still on the fence and not entirely sure, or there's a historical reason to account for the possibility of failure (maybe the Aunties got burned in the past). In the latter case, even if Ybus and Urban said and did everything right, we'd roll Persuasion; failure means that one of the Aunties remembers the past incident and reminds everyone, which causes all of them to shut down.

I'm going to double-down on what CancerMan said! RP trumps all, as long as they are staying in character. If the dumb barbarian jumps in with this super eloquent speech with a charisma of 7, I'm gonna call BS and tell the player that "Yes, that's how it sounded in your head, but THIS is how it came off".

I try to only do rolls if it makes sense (with possible bonuses/penalties depending on how they approached it), but I kind of suck at social encounters, so I don't always hit the mark on that.

Thanks so much, everyone! This is a lot to chew on and I'm loving every bite of it! It's a balancing act, isn't it? I guess everything is, huh?

So. The Golden Child. Am I going to get the the Deus Ex Machina lecture now? :-D

We've had two combat encounters now. I would love a critique! I have specific questions, but would like to hear from you first, whether general feedback or specifics. Thanks!

Maybe it is the group and how well we mesh, but I haven't seen any problems with combat. I love the battlefield features that you brought over.

Nothing stood out for me as being problematic. It appeared organized and fluid enough that we weren't completely lost.

I have to agree with HyCo and CancerMan. This has been very smooth thus far. You're doing awesome, Jabes!

Combat all good, DM.

One of the best things you have going on is the list of battlefield features. I haven't gotten a chance to really incorporate those too much yet, but Urban is going to be Tavern Brawling with some of that equipment in the future. YEEAUUUHH!!

Thanks, guys! And I trust you're not just being polite!

Okay, specifics:

The Baddies

I built this encounter around a picture in my head. I knew I wanted a demon and I knew I wanted the ROUS from "The Princess Bride." I also wanted this to be deadly but survivable. I had an ace up my sleeve in case things got bad: the Golden Child, who would cast protection and healing but no offensive spells.

ROUS were easy. I felt like Giant Rats weren't robust enough so I went with Giant Badgers minus the burrowing. I had in mind that I could use the sewer to escape or move between the back alley and the interior but the latter never came into play.For Numsie I felt that any demon I picked was way too much for you guys. I thought maybe a Vrock but I eventually settled on a Shadow Demon without the incorporeal stuff, and tacked on the sunlight sensitivity when in demon form. The Setup

It was super interesting when you guys took the parallel alley. The encounter was designed such that you'd fight the four ROUS in the alley first, then after breaking down the door or finding some other way in, face Numsie and his last two ROUS. With your out-of-the-box thinking I had to do some quick thinking of my own, and I think it played out better than I had originally planned (even though the four ROUS became superfluous, but more on that later).

The Fight

I wanted it to be a desperate fight, but one that you would win. So yeah, guilty as charged, I had several plans for how I would let you win, hopefully without being too obvious.

I think I achieved the desperate odds...
...and I was a bit concerned when Numsie hit Baracus (still wounded from the barn fight) for 10 psychic damage in the first round with a bit of ROUS damage to boot, but you guys had such great teamwork going, and then Baracus nailed that Grapple contest, and then Numsie crit-fails back-to-back grapple escapes! IT WAS MARVELOUS!

In only three rounds you had almost taken out the demon I thought might be overkill. So I brought all the ROUS in. That's when Baracus whales on Numsie for 20 damage (I realize now that I had been remembering to factor in Numsie's resistance to Erden's fire attacks, but had completely forgotten to factor in his resistance to Baracus' non-magical unarmed strikes).

So Numsie expires, and the ROUS scurry away. Victory! Maybe I could have had Numsie survive a few rounds more, and/or I could have made the ROUS matter at least. Would have made for a more memorable fight, maybe.

Thoughts?

I've been so slow to get in on this thread. I've typed multiple paragraphs and then deleted them, because I mostly just want to say great job. I know you want to dig deeper. I can relate. I never feel like I can get real deep feedback from players, and I want to give you more than great job, even though you're doing a great job.

I think the level of difficulty was appropriate for the first couple of encounters. In the barn you scooped us out early and at the time I wasn't sure why but I went along happily with it and it was great. I can see now the action is coming fast and furious and I'm having a blast.

The second fight you did give us an "oh shit, it just got real" moment. I don't think it was spoiled by any of the issues you described above. On the contrary, it helped establish Baracus as powerful in my mind, validating the effort I put into my character build choices. We had a chance to play around with tactics, which is important for this group - lots of tactical thinkers here. And you turned up the heat enough to get us to push the envelope a bit, take some risks.

Even better, you've set up a potential future scene if we encounter Numspa again. We already know some of his tricks, but he knows not to underestimate us and he'll bring even more firepower.

I also liked the multiple combat objectives you offered us. We took a risk to drag Numspa into the sun instead of piling on the damage, and it was worth it. That teaches us that using your battlefield features will be worth it in future encounters. In your fight, things were hot enough that not only did we feel like we had to get clever, we had interesting material to work with.

I follow Matthew Colville's youtube videos, and he recently made one about Metagaming and the nuances within.

One point that stood out to me was a specific scenario in which the DM asks a player to make a skill check, and that player fails; if it were Perception, the character doesn't sense anything. Another player immediately pipes up and asks to make the same skill check, perhaps trying to argue that they would have been doing the same thing. Colville considers that pretty egregiously as metagaming, and it's something I've never considered, but ultimately agree with.

I've seen this happen at other tables, and even popular streams like Critical Role. I agree with Colville's argument that if the DM calls out an individual for making a skill check, there is already an assessment that that character is the only one in a position to do so. Having another character request the same check simply because they're sitting at the table and want to know or succeed at what's going on is metagaming.

There are other videos in his channel about "Running the Game" that I think new DMs might glean a lot of information from.

I just realized that I haven't thanked you guys for the above. Thanks! I really appreciate all your input!

Now about Ybus wandering off, I briefly considered running that via new thread or secret note but I wasn't worried about you guys metagaming, and anyway I thought you might enjoy reading along the side-story. On the other hand, a case might be made that it breaks immersion, or that everyone making all the effort to not metagame is in itself an undesirable situation that robs you of your fun.

Thoughts?