This is a place for people to just chat, get to know each other, maybe regale everyone with tales of weird and interesting moments that happened when you were running a game.

Hey, I'm Liz. I thought that I might as well introduce myself just because.

Well I hope you enjoy your time here and hopefully your quick application is a good sign that there'll be a number of people interested in this idea.

Hi there, I thought I would introduce myself.  I'm Barry, I'm running one game on here with my brother but am often itching to start something on here with strangers.  I've no questions right now, but this sounds like the kind of place I would be interested to be a part of.

I'm glad to see people looking towards running games coming in here. That was my main inspiration for making this afterall. If you have anything to ask go for it.

Hello strangers,
Figured I should join you guys, rather than just stare inside through the window. ^(''') (0_0 ) ^(''')

The more the merrier.

Hello Window Watcher, are you an experienced GM or relatively new to GM'ing like me.

Hey Barry,
I've been doing free-form play-by-post for a few years. Certainly not an expert, but I'd like to think I have at least some idea of things.

Nice one, pleasure to meet you.

'ello...

Guess I should check in.  Hello everyone.

Hello hoppa

Already got 4 people in now looks like it's not a complete flop so hurrah. I expect not many people will apply as the add gets buried under games but I'm sure we'll get more each week with new bumps. In the mean time things have already gotten off to a start so if you've got other things you want input on keep it going.

Good idea Watcher, like a glossary or something.  Nothing worse than trying to reference information without a glossary.

First fresh face of the week with today's bump.

Goooood morning! :)

Hello everyone. glad to be here.

Hello everyone, I'm Tim :)

Currently, I'm only a player in pbp games, but I am interesting in starting a game of my own once I have a bit more time. I'm eager to learn, and I see there's already some good information posted here!

Heyo...

Hello new people

ok that's the second mention of photobucket, i've put a notification about this in the original post, everyone happy now?! lol

Well photobucket recently implemented a cost to be able to have your PB-hosted images show up on third party sites.  I dunno if it's a great host any more.

Hello all, I'm evileeyore and I've been GMing for almost thirty years...

I was thinking about skipping coming in here... but... I'm starting my first PbP game, so hey, there might some hidden problems I've never encountered before.  So, yah, howdy.

Most of my GM and Player experience comes from face-to-face tabletop and LARPing, I've never done virtual tabletop, but I have played in PbPs for about a decade.  So if I offer any advice, that's where it's coming from.

Hiya evileeyore

@Advisor: Yes. :3

@pdboddy: Yeah, exactly.

Welcome aboard new people.

Hellooooo to other new peoples! :D

Hi folks, I'm sure you've seen me around the boards, but I've shortened my handle for this cozy group. I hope to have some good discussions with you all. :)

Hello Ike, nice to see a few in here now.

Hi Barry, yes, a nice little group.

Provided it remains a 'Yes' game, we all Keep Posts Going, and we don't suffer from Player Attrition, it could turn out to be a treasure trove. :)

But if we can't solve those problems for ourselves here, what chance do we have outside?

Greetings all. Great point Ike.

Just a couple of quick questions.

1 Can we get a thread where we can suggest topics?

2 Can I suggest we have a topic on how to apply rules in a game?

1. If you want to suggest a topic, just pm me it and I'll set it up.

2. Could you elaborate and/or right up a post if you are looking for advice about something in particular and pm that to me.

I'd like to discuss with people what their opinions are on how flexible to be with the rules. I've seen all types, and sometimes new GM's find it hard to be flexible. A thread where that could be discussed would be beneficial to new GM's.

Sounds like a good idea, I'll add it now.

Wow, we're getting a pretty big cast here. 0_0

The more the merrier, I say!

Indeed we've come further than I could have believed in just a couple of weeks. I can only hope this whole thing is being helpful for you all. I can't really keep up with all the topics all the time myself but I'm liking the discourse I'm seeing.

   Good Morning/Afternoon/Evening ... (whatever your preference, I suppose)

   Been a GM/DM for over 30 years (has it been that long since the 80's already?) Just joined the group not all that long ago, but I've been on RPoL for about a year now ... nice to see there's a place where Q &A is welcomed and encouraged. Wish it had been around earlier, but better late than not at all.

   Looking forward to discussing ideas and slinging thoughts with all y'all.

Cheers

Now this could be a good thing, or what we could be seeing here is a bunch of fast-posters (me included) creating a barrage of posts over a weekend that will present some players with a wall of text on Monday and make them wonder if this 'game' is for them. If the GM can't keep up, what does that say?

Which is precisely one of the problems we were discussing. We have our own live case, right here, folks. How should we handle it?

Do we discuss it amongst ourselves and risk leaving the slower posters even further behind, or do we wait and ask them and risk losing momentum?

Maybe this needs its own thread?

Sorry, I play Devil's Advocate sometimes, too...

My vote:  Ignore it.


This is the sort of forum style that best works with people investing some time.  A lot of these threads will be of value over time as in we likely aren't the people we are preaching to, but rather newbie GMs (and Players with an interest) who come later, even years later, and skim for content.

Does this mean sometimes a few of us wait until our day off to really dig into a thread?  Well, that happens.



Honestly, this forum (in my opinion) would do better in the General wilds area rather than 'sequestered' away behind the Game 'wall'.

The thing is, the admins took out the ability to create "discussion forums" some time ago.  At least, I cannot see where to click to make this a thing, but there are some that are out there.  The World of Darkness forum being the only one that I know exists still.

So this will have to be a "game" discussion forum. :P  Advisor will just have to advertise it in the "wanted - players" forum.  HAH, I wonder if this place could qualify for "wanted - GMs", since we are looking for GMs to add to the discussion. XD

Good shout pdboddy - I think this is more 'GM's wanted'!

The Management removed the ability to create Discussion Forums at will, presumably because there were too many useless ones being created, or lots of fizzled out non-starters cluttering up the public board. However, they still recognize the value of good Discussion Forums.

What they do now, I believe, is encourage you to set up 'games' like this, and then, if you accumulate several thousand posts over a period of (I'm guessing) maybe a year, then you can apply to the Powers That Be to have the Game promoted to a Forum.

That way, anything that makes it to become a Forum has already proven its worth and has a strong and dedicated following.

Oh I fully expected to lose track of this by the time we got into double digit people because I can't devote the kind of time I used to be able to months ago to reading everything. It's not a bad thing though as long as people are staying on topic and not running away from themselves on tangents. It will also mean that soon I'll need to start looking for people to help moderate things though, you know just to keep an eye on threads and maybe later if I start getting more pms then a second GM to help handle that. My goal here has always been to get the ball rolling, not be the end-all-be-all of reading and replying to every thread all the time.

In reply to Advisor (msg # 44):

Fair enough. I don't plan on being on or posting here every day, but I'll check it several times a week at least. Don't expect anyone should commit to that unless they just have nothing better to do. This is a resource and community chat, so we should contribute, but don't worry about making it your life. (Unless you really want to.)

In reply to Ike (msg # 43):

That does make sense.  I missed whatever discussion there was about it, if there was anything posted or announced.  It was a while back, and long faded into the cobwebs that are my thoughts and memories.

@Advisor: I'm willing to help out as a co-GM if and when you need assistance with accepting new people or pruning/adding threads and so on.  I am sure there are probably a few folks in here with a similar disposition, so if and when the time comes, you need only ask.

Ditto.  I'm likely to be in here everyday at least reading the slower threads and then hitting the tough nuts when I've a day off.

So far, I've read everything too. I can't guarantee to be here every day, but I'm willing to share the load, if needed.

I too would be willing to share the load, and I think you will find that most will. We are GM's and know how much work goes into this type of thing.

   Not to worry, I think most of us are here on a daily or twice weekly basis, so we can (hopefully) police each other when it comes to the topic drift. I'm personally on twice a day - once in the morning to catch up on stuff for my own game, and later in the afternoon or evening to catch the rest, as well as anything that might have spilt over from the morning's chatter.

   And, like Voice said, we're GM/DM's ... we know all about the work that goes into things like this.  :)

Well thanks for all the offered support guys. Greatly appreciated. When the time comes I'll likely put a fresh thread up looking for volunteers to keep an eye out for that when it happens.

Looks like we’ve got through the initial flurry of posts about common themes and we’ve hit the dangerous ‘first hiatus’. So here’s something a little less general to keep us going - a concept I’m personally struggling with as a GM:

Game Groups, Time and Intrigue.

It's a complex topic and I'm hoping for some involved responses, so perhaps it will warrant its own thread, where I'll explain the problem I'm facing.

I'll look forward to reading the issue Ike.

I wouldn't worry about silence in here.  The advice is likely to be demand led anyway so it will be bursts of activity then pause.  And of course, as things are addressed there is less to ask.

I fully expect there will be peaks and troughs in activity here. Afterall this isn't an ongoing game where everyone should be posting every few days to keep up their activity. It's a resource, so if no one has anything they want to talk about then there very well might not be anything for many days at a time until either someone comes up with something new or more people join in. No biggie.

Cool. :)
I notice Barry and Window Watcher have apparently opened new threads here, but I'm not sure how. I don't have a 'Post a New Topic' option on my screen, so maybe I need Advisor to open a topic for me. How did you guys open a topic?

I opened it in their names

When my topic came up, Advisor posted it for me.

Ah, OK, I await your convenience, then. :)

Can I say, I'm not clear on what this topic implies.  Perhaps you could explain a bit?

Do you mean what the friendly chat is? It's a place for people to just talk and get to know each other, basically the equivalent of an ooc topic.

I think he means a clarification of the topic I'd like to discuss.

I don't want to clog this thread with details and solutions, but basically it's a game management issue about how to handle intrigue between PCs using Game Groups and other techniques to keep everyone's plots secret, and how to handle time issues (and retain players) if one player wants to move forward to the resolution of his intrigue while one or two more have convoluted plots that need to be addressed beforehand.

If you want to start a new thread then pm me with what you want the name and body to be

Sorry, Done.

I see we're getting quite the circle on our hands...

The GM's done another round of recruitment. :)

please, less a circle and more an icosahedron ;)

and yes I was a few days late in bumping the recruitment thread so the latest wave have been coming in since yesterday

Hello! I'm the new blood, looking to lurk around and maybe ask some questions if any come to mind. =]

Nice to meet everyone!

Hello Celsius, hope you're well.

Greetings Celsius, welcome to the team. :)

Greetings to all you new people!

Hello all! Gonna be a taker more than a giver here... (of advice, of course!)

  Welcome, everyone.

For someone to give there has to be someone to take!  Welcome on board HarkDorse

Aloha to all you new folks. :D

Hope everyone's doing well. I only just bumped the thread yesterday, forgot that I'd done it on Monday last week. Whoops.

Happy Thanksgiving to you folks in the US. :)

A recent Community Chat thread about 'guilds' has reminded me that our GM can ask to have our Discussion Forum included on the list in the 'Heaven' resources forum.

Might I suggest a thread for Tips on what new GM's should not do? Specifically like railroading, and rolling for their players. And my personal favorite playing a PC character that's also more powerful than the rest of the PC's.

Generally from what Advisor has said before, he prefers that proposals be PM'd to him.  I can say if I was in his shoes, this would make things easier for me.

The issue I have with something like that is that those things require some manner of discussion and they are opinions rather than 'never do these things' because there are situations where for example it is acceptable to railroad, or some situations where people might find it appropriate to roll for the players. So if you want to make a discussion topic about one of those where you put forward your opinion and open it up for others to offer theirs then go for it.

Any character played by the GM is bound to be more powerful than any other character, if only because it has a direct connection to the Master of the Universe.

I agree with Advisor, every 'don't' can become a 'maybe' depending on context, but discussions are often informative.

Sure experienced GM's know that there are exceptions to the rule, but a new GM should know that these should be avoided until they know when it's appropriate. I suffered through the loss of many players as a young GM due to not knowing these tips. I could have used a few pointers but the internet didn't exist back then.

An experienced driver knows how to drive fast, but when you get behind the wheel the first time a good instructor doesn't take you onto the autobahn with it's unlimited speed limit. Or onto a race track with other drivers on it all going 180 MPH.

This is supposed to be a place for new GM's to get tips from older more experienced GM's.

As to GM PC's I just don't do it at all. I only sent NPC's along if they need help.

Absolutely. I wasn't suggesting that we shouldn't have such a thread, just that the subject isn't necessarily black and white and it can be informative to a new GM to discuss some of the circumstances when exceptions may be appropriate. PM the GM with an official proposal and let's do it. :)

Friendly warning, I've noticed two times when RP on rpol slows down. From just before Thanksgiving, to just after New Years, it gets down right dead in here. And from around the second week of May till mid August. Where it gets spotty.

This is due to vacations and other family commitments taking people away. So expect the delay during those times.

Makes sense. I've said before that if this place goes dead on occasion it's not a big deal since it's not an ongoing game. It's a place for people to come when they need help. And on that note I've been bad on keeping up the advertising for it, so I better get back on that.

It is good for newer GM's to be aware of it though, in case they're worried that their game is dying.

   I'm planning to take a few days off between the 19th and the 26th, and plan to let my players know so they don't assume that the game hasn't died over the holidays. I try to keep my players in the loop, and they've been good to let me know when they are unable to post for longer than a couple of days. I think I'm blessed in that fashion with this bunch. (Crossing my fingers that is truly the case).  Communication between you and your players is always the key, especially in a medium like this.

   That being said, I'm coming up on a year's anniversary for my game - never thought I'd last, but I'm not complaining. Must be doing something right. :)

Merry Christmas to all!

Merry Christmas

merry Christmas :)
happy kwanzaa
glorious solstice
hoppin hannuka

I hope everyone's having a good holiday!

Merry Christmas!

Grats on your 1 year

Merry Christmas everyone

Happy New Year

Happy New Year!

One more revolution around our local star is complete.

So with the holidays well and truly over I've begun readvertising, expert a few new people in if anyone wants to get a new discussion going or revive an old one. There's no dead threads here if you have something meaningful to add.

Hello,

I somehow missed this when it was first posted, but I joined as soon as I saw it. I've probably posted more as a player than as a GM on this site, but I've gotten a few games started that have managed to stay active for a few months.

I've been playing and GMing games since the early 90s. I think I have some good perspectives to offer, but I admit I have a lot to learn.

Welcome, welcome, unfortunately, I don't have much to add at the moment, but who knows? Maybe that'll change later down the road.

Welcome Centauri. With 25 years under your belt, I'm sure you will have plenty of advice to give, but none of us ever stop learning.

I'd like to give people a friendly reminder on rule #4



It's good to show your support but if that's the only thing your message says it doesn't really add to the discussion.

There is some good conversation going on about RPOL games with large groups of players in this thread here: link to a message in another game

It may be of interest to some of you. :)

In reply to Liz (msg # 96):

Everyone has something to contribute. :)  Welcome aboard.

Anyone else ever have to fight the urge to make a new game when you start getting the GMing doldrums? Beginnings of games are always so invigorating with all the energy players bring. I've got no real room to complain, my current game has three very active players. Just... new and shiny...

Heh, yeah, I have to fight that urge all the time. Every time I get a new idea (and I have an active imagination) I want to start a new game. But I just don't have time. There's a limit to the number of games that RL allows me to play, and I'm usually on that limit, so I can only start a new game when I finish an existing one.

Sometimes someone else offers me a part in an irresistible game that takes my pressure needle into the red zone and I'm juggling to keep everything in the air.

That buzz at the start can be tempting, but it's not real. They all drop off after a while, and a lot crash and burn. A bit like relationships, I suppose - the ones that matter are the ones that last.

Yeah, new and shiny is very tempting.  You're not alone.  It's not just the energy the players bring, but something new tends to bring me energy as well.  It's really easy when you're enthusiastic.  The difficulty comes in keeping your enthusiasm as the game progresses.

@Ike When you mentioning starting new games when you finish old ones, how often do your games reach their full envisioned conclusions?

@pdboddy You’re definitely right about the GM bringing their own energy at the start of a new game. I find my quality at its highest for the first three months. The mental hack I’ve found for recreating the effect later is to do major arcs. Wrap up all threads after a certain block of time, then write up a whole new introduction, a bit of a pseduo reboot.

The current game I’m running is near the end of the first arc I had planned. I’m probably going to wrap it up there, or at least shelve it for six months, I’m really itching to try something new and mix things up with some fresh blood.

In reply to Talon (msg # 104):

Not as often as I'd like. Maybe my dreams are too big and/or my players are too transient.

Some of my games are true sandboxes - there is no envisaged conclusion, I just provide a world for the PCs to explore and they make their own story.

Most often, though, the players drift off looking for that First Time Kick, and I'm left watching the tumbleweeds roll through the ghost town of my creation. :(

Maybe I should shelve the blockbuster epics and concentrate on the one-reel shorts. :)

You can't screen an epic when your actors are on zero hour contracts...

I sometimes wonder if I'm just a boring storyteller, but OTOH, very few of the games I play in reach a satisfactory conclusion either.

Most games on Rpol seem to fizzle out after a couple of months either because the GM disappears or because too many of the Players disappear. Nobody has stamina any more - they all want a quick fix and move on. As soon as that initial buzz goes, the players go with it. :(

Ah, sad times.

Out of curiosity, how big are the games you run, number of players, number of active groups, posting rate you expect of yourself and your players? On the flip side, your most successful games, what traits did you see in those that might have made them more successful?

I’ve discovered I’ve gotten pickier about what games I’ll play in on Rpol over time, I’m too jaded to learn a new system for a game and not interested in another iteration of D&D. It’s gotten me to try running a free form game, but I still haven’t seen an ad for one that’s intrigued me enough to try signing up. I’m also not a very good player :( I get too restless with the pace of play-by-post.

In reply to Talon (msg # 106):

Since I don't play D&D or its derivatives, I've never had to put a limit on the number of players, cos I don't get that many applicants. The initial numbers depend on whether the advert hit a chord. If so, I might get a dozen or more RTJs and I'll sign most of them up, unless there's any obvious warning signs.

Usually, however, after the honeymoon period is over, it'll drop down to maybe four to six steady players. However, if they're good players, and they prove their worth, I'll often let them play more than one character. I don't do that initially, of course - I don't want to lose three characters when one player drops out, but it usually means that I can maintain six to twelve PCs in the plot.

Active groups will depend on the plot, or lack of one - in a sandbox the players choose where they want to go, but I try to keep everyone focused on one or two groups, I don't want to be running a handful of solo games under one umbrella. It's too much work.

I aim for daily posting. It's comfortable for me and I want to attract like-minded players. Sometimes we manage several posts a day, sometimes its several posts a week, depending on RL.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of things that you can't change in the middle of a game, so even if you learn something new, you might have to wait until your next game to implement it. I think properly advertising what your game is about helps enormously. My longest game is meandering to a conclusion with a dedicated core of players, but some of them like action scenes and some of them like to engage in conversation. It's difficult to keep them all happy all the time. In subsequent games I've tried to provide more of a feel for the game up front, so I'm attracting players with the same goals.

You definitely need to keep the action going, whether its slashing, shooting, investigating or romancing, but the biggest difficulty is one that I have no solution for: there's a limit to what a GM can do - you can describe a scene for the players, a secret document, a hidden door, a mysterious stranger or a fire-breathing dragon - but if nobody picks it up, if everybody waits for everybody else to go first, if it takes a week before somebody decides to actually do something, the game drags, no matter how exciting its potential may be.

You get restless with the pace of PbP as a GM, too.

New service for those who post from a phone. http://responsive.rpol.net/ is the Mobile site. No idea how it works, but everyone should know about it.

Couple of new people coming in. Play nice.

Don't we always?
Welcome, folks. :)

hello and welcome :)

Hello to the new people!

Hello all, Just wanted to post a question, that may turn into it's own topic. My question: To what extent do you believe a GM should let the players develop the world? I of course am talking about a homebrew world. As messing around with the Forgotten Realms for example could lead to some serious issues.

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 113):

The players should develop the world as much as possible. It has the benefit of causing the players to find the world plausible, instead of questioning it. Plus, it's fun to do.

I see no really compelling reason why any setting shouldn't be subjected to the same treatment, as long as the whole table is in on it.

God Games are possibly the easiest to do this with, though.

rarely let the inmates run the asylum... :)
perhaps listen to their suggestions and if desired give them a (preferably small) portion of the city or world to work with. give guidelines for what they can create (magic items? artifacts? new races? etc.) but do the decisions yourself. and always keep them guessing. the only time I tried this was over a year or so before i stopped. i love the creating and working on the campaign world and didn't want too much to be in some else's creative hands.
more importantly for the fun of the players i realized that to let them have access "behind the curtain" takes something essential out of the a game that's hard to keep in the first place when everyone knows the game so well: mystery. mystery is magic, and that magic is what makes the fantasy game work, just like a fantasy novel. the suspension of disbelief is less difficult to achieve when the mystery is still in place, and allowing the characters too much access to the world may take that away.

Maybe I should clarify. I have started a new game, and deliberately left most of the world unmade, so the players could be as free in their backstories as possible. If they wanted to be from a nation based upon ancient India they could. If they wanted to study ancient languages they could make whatever ones they wanted. The idea is I would use their backgrounds to help fill in the world. I'm not saying they could make up everything in those areas but they were free to do whatever they needed to get the society they needed for their background.

I'm asking to what extent do other GM's think this is advisable?

It really depends upon the quality of the players. As a player I like a full background, with a realistic chronology and geography that fits into the world that the GM has sketched out so far. Where there are gaps at a minor or major level I'll embellish the background with the detail. Saying you were falsely accused by some lord isn't as interesting as actually naming him.

As a GM I encourage the players coming up with interesting backgrounds for the character because it shows that they've put some thought into it. If they want to expand on that, with or without my encouragement, to detail other NPCs, factions, organisations and even countries I'm all for as long as it doesn't veer away from my concept. At that stage I'll jump in with a couple of thoughts - not to stop them but to steer them and ensure the world remains consistent with my vision.

In general I find that type of player-driven development relieves a lot of your effort , reducing the pressure, and giving the players more of a stake in the game.

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 117):

As you can see, you get a range of answers to that question. Done people can't conceive of playing in or GMing a game in which the players had creative input, others prefer it.

Other DMs do think it's advisable - I'm one. But you won't find a consensus on it.

I think letting the players have a hand in crafting the world is fantastic idea, especially the more casual your player group is. In my real life tabletop group it would take holding a gun to their head to get them to read a source book, because of that I know if I use a pre-made setting they'll have no idea what's going on. Over the years I've learned just to make homebrew settings that start with a single dot on the map, then as the group explores the map fills in and I use names they've given me to name the new places (Having them make locations themselves would be even better, but man, they are so casual)

So I'm all for your idea! Loosening up your grip on the reins can actually help immensely in a tabletop game. I've know a lot of GMs, myself included at times, who say 'that doesn't fit my visions so I'm going to throw every complication possible at you to try and nudge you back onto my path' The approach you're doing really lets the players have a hand in the world.

Tip: Just add the caveat that nothing they make is sacred. A lot of writers out there get prickly when you fiddle with their creations. As the GM, you're definitely going to want to introduce a corrupt priest to their holy order or a dark segment to its history for plot-hook purposes, some players will take that better than others.

I'm gonna be 'that guy'... this convo definitely needs it's own thread.  For ease of finding later if nothing else.

Call it "How Much Do You Allow Players To Fill In Your Gameworld?" or some such.
This message was last edited by the player at 17:17, Sat 14 Apr 2018.

In reply to evileeyore (msg # 121):

  I'll second the motion and the name.

good idea, i'll be a third vote 'yes' for this topic's own thread

*edit ...and the name too :)
This message was last edited by the player at 17:58, Sun 15 Apr 2018.

I'm up for a new thread, but my vote is for the topic to specifically be for people who are interested in learning about or teaching about giving control to their players.

That wasn't the OP's question, but it's a nice siderail.

In reply to evileeyore (msg # 125):

It wasn't literally his question, no, but subsequent conversation seemed to indicate that it was more about how to do it.

The original question was more to get a discussion going about something I was curious about. I felt we were less active in this "game", and we needed a new topic to discuss. The question is sort of a McGuffin. I do genuinely want to know what people think about my question, but if it starts another line of talk as well that's great!

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 127):

Alright then. If a question/advice thread gets made, I'll participate in that.

Seems the GM hasn't been online in a while. Someone else by any chance has received GM powers to create a new thread?

It doesn't seem anyone else has GM powers.
I just rMailed Advisor to get their attention.

If/when they return, we may want to appoint some co-GM's just so this doesn't happen again. We had some volunteers before.
Are co-GM's able to grant access to new players? Or just head-GM?

~

Chiming in on the previous question, I'd probably follow the middle-road, case-by-case approach. Building the world can be fun for the players and give some variety, but some people might get way out of control and off the rails if you don't restrain them. I think the point of "it can spoil mystery" is also good to consider.

Spoiled mystery is always brought up, but rarely well examined and rarely in light of how such games actually go. It's taken as a pure negative, without any trade offs considered.

As for players getting "out of control": if they're being disruptive, they'd be disruptive in any game. But I find that when players are given creative control they're /less/ disruptive, because once they have contributed and messing around they do would only mess up their own creation.

Further, because people can create what they want, anything "out of control" that gets created can be added to in such a way that it comes back "under control."

Sounds like everyone has a different vision for how much control they're giving the players in this process. If you let the player make up a city name, a few features and the local mayor, they'll still be surprised when you throw in the wrinkle that the mayor is a cannibal using the local militia to whet his human cravings. They'll just be that much more taken aback that the nice, Santa Claus looking figure they made up now also eats long pig.

So, players can make stuff, then the GM plays with that stuff how they see fit. That'd be my vote if you have very casual players.

I'm willing to moderate this as a co-GM if that's ok with everyone. And yes Co-GM's can grant access. They have all of the powers of a GM, except maybe to shut the game down I think.

   I don't have a problem with it.

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 133):

That's fine with me.

Good on someone to poke me. Please do remember though if you want a topic made you need to pm me the details.

Also if someone wants to be made a co-gm I'm fine with that, pm me and we'll sort it out.

Someone new joined us.

Also congratulate A Voice in the Dark as a new co-GM here to keep an eye on things.

Hi. Not sure where I should post my question.

Post it here, if it merits it's own thread, I'll move it.

I'm looking for tips on how to generate interest in the players wanted section. Also tips on keeping players interest and keeping games moving.

Are you having trouble getting players to sign up, or from sticking around after game starts?

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 141):

Both. I have one game that I only have one applicant for after 2 weeks and one game that I've had two people drop out of.

Also sometimes the games slow down and no one posts for a couple of days. When that happens I try to make a post with something going on in the world bit I don't want to seem like I'm pushing
This message was last edited by the player at 17:41, Wed 23 May 2018.

Then again, why not push? In situations like this, I will usually have some impending situation come to pass. I don't do this as punishment for inaction, just as a way to give the players something to react to. Players often don't feel very proactive, and I don't really blame them. It's nice when players take initiative, but lots of players are unwilling to do that, because they don't want to step on the toes of the GM or the other players.

That was my thought too. Give them something to do. I'm used to playing and running in regular tabletop or larp settings which is  much more real time responses
This message was last edited by the player at 17:50, Wed 23 May 2018.

Send me a link to the game you are having trouble keeping people in, and the one no one is applying to. I want to look at specifics so I can see where you might be having problems with it.

Yes, play-by-post calls for much different approaches, and lacks most of the basic non-verbals that a GM at a table can use to judge engagement. It calls for a lot more direct communication and action.

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 145):

link to another game This one is the one I've only had one player sign up for.

link to another game This is the one I've had two drop out of. However I did have more sign up at about the same time

Ok I have a couple of ideas why the Black Jewels game might not be working. First of all I've never heard of the author or novels. If it's too obscure of a genre it may not attract notice.

Then there is the freeform aspect. Freeform is difficult to pull off, since it truly does need everyone involved to be in good form for it to work.

On top of that, you are setting it so far out of the established story, that you are alienating the target audience. If I'm playing a Doctor Who game, I expect to interact with characters from the show. Kind of hard to do when you set it 10000 years in the future...

Finally there is the latest bump that you did. It is such a girly post that it immediately turned whatever interest I had in the game off. Though females are definitely on the rise in gaming, this is still a large majority male pastime. Having it scream girly is sure to drive off some males.

I'll check out the other tomorrow, and give you my thoughts.

well, I plan to have Daemon, Lucivar, Geoffrey and Draca as potentials to be met by the pcs. Also if they decide to have any interactions with the demon dead they could meet others from the novels. trust me 10000 years is an established timeframe in the stories. it was 10000 years between the first and second wars between the realms. There are long lived races where men of 1700 years old are described as just coming into their prime. as for people who are unfamiliar with the series that's why I put up so many information posts, with descriptions of how the world works, available races, court hierarchy and blood laws and protocols.

That might be part of the problem, though. If you're starting a game that people know nothing about, then drown them in information they need to know in order to play, they're going to be hesitant to join. And that's assuming they're willing to read it in the first place. You'd think people are willing to read given the medium of RPOL, but... *shrugs*

I personally don’t apply to games that have pages of extra backstory and world knowledge to read and study prior before applying, I’ve done all the homework for too many games that fail within a month. I’m replying on a phone or would normally elaborate further, but that’s some food for thought.

I think a Voice in the Dark nailed a lot of it. Especially the freeform part too, until the last year I avoided freeform like the plague, it’s only recently I’ve given it a second chance and only then when it’s highly structured freeform (Not as mutually exclusive as one might think!)

I haven't found a system that works for the unique magic system

In reply to Mythrah (msg # 152):

I recommend creating an interest check post first, to find people who care enough about the stories and settings to be interested in playing, and then collaborating with them to find a system that works, or agreeing to handle it in freeform.

You might try something like GURPS or FUDGE or … I dunno, is SALT a thing? I wanna say SALT is a thing. Anyway, one of those "generic" gaming systems that people are familiar with already so they don't need to learn new rules, but they don't feel like they're floundering without guidance on all fronts.

When I'm in your situation Mythrah, I often prefer to use the Storyteller system (because I'm familiar with it, but also I find it much, much less confusing that GURPS, with which I am also familiar - but any game that ever requires me to find the cubed root of something is asking too much of me ;) The Storyteller system has the benefit of being rules light, and having a sort of built-in magical system already in existence (in the form of Mage). Potential drawbacks? You need to learn the system. Potential benefits? Others will already know it. (And you may get lucky and find someone willing to help be a sort of co-GM/assistant GM.)

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

happy holidays to all :)

link to another game

Recently decided to start GMing again and created a God Game if anyone's interested.

Happy holidays to everyone :)

Happy New Year everyone.
God games are not my thing, but glad to hear you're taking up the GM's mantle again, Liz. If you need any support, that's what we're here for. :)

Hope everyone's survived the pandemic... been a while...

Still alive.

Always good to be on the right side of the grass.

Still standing.

I wanted to revive this game, since it's a nice source of information, especially with questions I wouldn't think to ask.
With the main GM disappeared though, I don't think the advertisement thread can be bumped.

So I went and basically recreated the game, copying over relevant threads. (This game is not marked as sole ownership, and given the nature of the game, I think it should be okay?)

See link below, and go to "Rules and Request to Join" thread to see how it works, if you're interested.
link to another game

Have you attempted to contact the GM, Aurzel?


In the future I recommend a discussion within the game itself before attempting to hijack and recreate considering A Voice in the Dark, one the two GMs, just posted here one week ago.

I didn't attempt to contact Aurzel. I figured with him being gone for over two years, there wasn't much point.

I had jumped to the conclusion that only the main GM can bump the advertisement thread. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) Sort of figured even with the "recent activity" the game was still mostly dead.
I didn't want to pin the work of revival on Voice either.

But yeah, I might have been impatient and jumped the gun. My bad.
I can work something out with Voice if needed.

Uhm. What? What game? This is a discussion forum for GMs to pass along ideas and such.

Officially it's a game, as per site rules, so it has to abide by the rules for games.  One of those rules is it can't be mentioned in certain subfora, because it's a game.

I know, I've been banned for for that.

well i've enjoyed our 'game' for its entirety. good place to have any discussions about being a gm on rpol. i suppose i still don't have any relevant questions atm :/
glad its still going, i was pleasantly surprised when a question popped up the other day after so much silence

Ditto, and agree.


I've been GMing since the late 80s, so I've mostly answered my own questions long ago.  Mostly.

It's more a potential resource for new DMs.

Yes, but without the greybeards hanging around to dispense the occasional advice... it's just questions being asked of the void.

And A Voice In The Dark, you might want to bump either this game in Players Wanted or go ahead and abandon it, as Window Watcher has decided to roll out their competing 'community' and is bumping to increase visibility.

I saw this game/community had its advertisement thread bumped. (Didn't realize a co-gm could do that.)
I've informed those that joined my version that they should join over here. I'll delete my version after a little bit (give people time to react).
Hopefully we can get some life here again.

Thanks!

Okay, confession time. I haven't run a game on rpol for years, so I can't remember how to bring RTJs in. Anyone know how?

Go to the GM menu -> Player Management -> Add Wizard -> Assign New Character (you'll have to type in a name) -> Continue Adding RTJ.

Where would be a good place to ask for ideas for a RL game I'm doing?

Probably quick advice thread.

Welcome to the newest members of our group/club/forum(?), RabbitBull and Limey!

Please welcome the newest members Dez, Hawke, Fugitive, and Buck!

Hi everybody!

Hi everyone. Glad to be here.

Everyone Say hi to ScaryWiz

Lots of new faces, good to see.

Hey everyone!

Welcome to our newest members Big H and Mad Mick!

In reply to A Voice in the Dark (msg # 186):

Hello! Good to be here. So far I've been just a reader and not a participant but if I have advice to ask I know where to go.

Hey, everyone! It's good to be here!

Welcome aboard to all the new peeps!

Hello everybody!
Bobblin the merchant here and ready to mingle.

Since this is a place for GMs to ask for help/help others, how about we get a new thread about descriptions?

Personally I’ve always struggled with describing places/people/etc. and while most types of advice are well meant, as someone who’s not a native speaker it can be challenging.

Also I’m surprised that there is no riddle/puzzle thread yet.

In reply to Bobblin the merchant (msg # 190):
I'm happy to discuss description, though i I doubt my advice will be popular.

Why does not being a native speaker make it challenging? Do you mean that you play with people who are more fluent in the language than you are?

In reply to Centauri (msg # 191):

Ha, yeah. All native speakers and they let me do the GMing.

I mean I’ve been GMing for that lot since 2018 and I think I’m doing fine but I’m always looking for better ways to describe the environment and people.

I agree with Bobblin, could our GMs create a new thread for tools and techniques for describing the environment and actors with in it please? Seems interesting

Good idea on advice for giving descriptions, I'm also in favor of a dedicated thread.
Riddles and puzzles could be interesting too.

I like this idea.

Glad to hear that people like my ideas. Dungeon/Quest building is a big part of a GM’s work and I’m looking forward to share ideas and see what you guys are doing.

In one of my older games I created a “Riddle of the week” to keep the players engaged and it worked rather well. I don’t know if that would be too much but it was fun and we could perhaps have two threads. One is a simple collection of riddles and how to make them better and the other one could be a riddle of the week for us GMs to wreck our brains.

Perhaps a puzzle a week, not limited to riddles.
A weekly thing might keep people poking their heads back in.


A thread that might be worth while is "how (not) to make an effective bad guy." Or an imposing NPC (not necessarily an enemy).

Maybe a thread on how to prevent GM burn out? Maybe even player burnout.

"Things to establish at session 0?"

Getting a bunch of new threads and discussion might revive this place a little. If a few are duds, no biggie.

Perhaps I can kick-start the Puzzle/Riddle Thread:

I think some rules might be in order...

1. Puzzles/Riddles shouldn't be too difficult.

2. Puzzles/Riddles should be suitable for the setting. I'd assume its mostly Fantasy but Sci-Fi is also possble. Please mention that at the beginning of the puzzle/riddle.

3. We should wait until the answer is posted before posting another question. Maybe limiting it to 12 days?

4. Puzzles/Riddles might be original/made by the poster which mean AFTER trying to find the answer we can talk about how to improve it.

Anything other rules we could add/change?

In my view, they can be any difficulty, as long as it's not required that they be solved. Besides, what seems easy and obvious to one person is going to be very difficult to someone else, and vice versa.

Personally I hate puzzles in RPG's. I spent a lot of time developing a character, working their mechanics, their personality, their mannerisms maybe. But then you go into a puzzle room and I might as well just throw the whole character away. Like my mechanics typically don't matter. You have to OOC solve the puzzle in order to IC solve the puzzle so I can say "My barbarian bangs his head against the wall over and over again." but it's actively distracting the group by making that comment rather than trying to think about the puzzle and solve it so we can move on.

Like the one time in recent memory that I used a puzzle there were something like 3 ways that I figured the PC's could solve it and it's actual only purpose was to demonstrate the affects the environment had on their abilities. (specifically their spells lasted longer or shorter based on their location and the 'correct' door was the one where affected at the same rate as the entrance.)

I tried to use a labyrinth once then I realized just making a maze would be stupid, time consuming, and pointless. So I just replaced it with a set of "would you rather" encounters where the PC's knew two doors would lead to a challenge themed on one of the character's skill sets.

I think it depends on the type of puzzle. I was in a game once, for example, where there was a partially sealed door - open enough that we knew it was there, not open wide enough to let us through (or even to see through - it was a stone door that lifted into the ceiling). There was a large hole that, when we shone a torch in, revealed a turning mechanism; the problem was, as the mechanism turned, it sealed the arm of the person turning it into the wall - thus, you had the option of leaving your buddy there, or chopping his arm off (we did the latter). Obviously not appropriate for all games, but this shows an example of a puzzle, of sorts, that doesn't strictly require a ton of out-of-character thought (at least, not by default). These days I could probably think of other solutions to the "puzzle," but, well, kids be kids, y'know?

Celestial monkeys for example.

But that really does reinforce my point. A "Bad" puzzle is a completely OOC exercise that must be accomplished to progress.

Even if it's optional it's still "Bad" since you are really just deciding that you didn't want to play D&D or whatever that night and would rather watch your friends solve a Rubik's cube or something.

A puzzle needs to be like any other encounter. It needs to have consequences for the attempt (like losing your arm or burning spell resources) not simply time consequences, since the players being good at puzzles should have no bearing on how fast your 220 IQ wizard or 6 Dalai Lamas in a trench coat wisdom Cleric solves the puzzle.

Puzzles are a staple of RPGs some people really enjoy them some don't best thing is to tailor them to the players. I do agree that progress should not depend on figuring out the puzzle and sometimes you need to allow a roll of some sort if the game is being bogged down.

It sucks when the guy playing the high INT character can't figure it out because their player can't, but the low INT Barbarian player has it figured out but can't find a reason for their idiot character to contribute. That's when allowing the roll or an out of character discussion is the better bet.

Again though don't make it a pass or fail. Instead make it determine how long they have to spend figuring it out before they do. Roll a 20 they figure it out within a few minutes, but roll a 5 they spend several hours. Even if they decide to move on a great idea is to have the high INT suddenly figure out the puzzle in their head hours later. Now the group has to decide do they continue on or go back. RP opportunity.

Regarding the high Int character not being intelligent enough to solve a puzzle, that's part of the reason I decouple the "brainy" ability score from actual character smarts. If there isn't a skill difficulty check for it, anyone can do it, if they feel it fits their character. Using big words, solving a puzzle, forming a battle plan, etc. The player decides how smart their character is in such things and I'm fine if everyone is equally smart or as smart as their player on those things.

Also, low "mental" stats are not an excuse in my game for playing a disruptively stupid character. But a high "mental" stats character can be played "dumb" if desired and it's not disruptive.

For that matter, a low "physical" stats character can describe themselves and their abilities however they want, but some actions will require rolls, and we'd want to be able to make sense of any failures.

Overall, this helps me relax about lots of the historical gyrations around "Intelligence" as both the name of a ability score and a player trait that is on display during play.

Great discussion.
I feel like that's exacttly why we have to talk about it.

Puzzles and riddles should only be used for players that enjoy the occasional brain teaser or used sparingly.

Also, riddles and puzzles should never block the main path of the party. They should add to the adventure, give extra treasure or information.


I'm not sure how other do it but my puzzles tend to look something like this:




Now, the riddle is pretty straight forward. Personally I give those characters with extra INT a little boost. Usually in the form of notes just to make them feel better about their characters. Next I'll let them roll for hints, nothing special there, if they pass the DC they'll get the hint.
If they fail I'll tell the wizard (or whoever rolled the highest) where they might find the information.

I fundamentally disagree with this if for no other reason than that the concept is nonsense. The only optional content is the content that your party doesn't find. If they come to the door with one face that tells lies and one that tells the truth they are going to try and get through it. Even if it's not 100% necessary to the plot. For one they don't know that for sure. For two players don't tend to just bypass non-dangerous challenges if there is a hint of a reward. For three you still waste the night having them bash their head against the puzzle, even if they ultimately fail.

You can punish them for taking the easier way around, potentially. But if they are still attempting it, failing for their OOC shortcomings , then taking a penalty for going around the challenge then it was still a net loss on your game experience.

Over some decades of GM'ing I have never put this type of riddle or puzzle in my games, unless it was in a commercial scenario which included it. Never had to play in a game that included it either, except for the same reason.

Solving it just feels OOC, unless you invent reasons for dice rolls but that becomes a different thing altogether where an investigation following clues can be role-played through. I don't think that is the same thing as the initial proposition.

The following threads have been created:
-How to Handle Puzzles (posts from this thread were quoted over)
-How to Make an Effective Bad Guy
-How to Describe People, Places, Etc.
-How to Prevent GM Burnout (and player)
-Things to Establish During Session 0 (in Game Description)

Also, the Reference List thread has been pinned.

If anyone else has ideas for threads or such, feel free to let us know.


In other news, with the new GM's, taxes have gone up 150%. (Taxes are a thing now, btw.)
Benefits are being suspended and renegotiated without you. The phrase of the day on my management calendar is "cost cutting."
I'm also seeking fellow conspirators and mutineers for a hostile takeover. Don't tell the other GM's.

@Sir Swindle You missed what I was saying. If you have a key piece of info the party needs to get, locked behind a magical spell that needs a riddle solved, or if they need to open the door with the puzzle lock in order to finish the mission. Have at least one or two other ways of getting to what they need. Also don't let it dominate the entire session unless the group is having fun. If they are frustrated give them a roll to determine how long they will take and move on.

@Window Watcher. Yep up 150% from 0%. Wait that's still 0%!

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 206):

I guess riddles and puzzles aren’t your style.
I’ve been GMing (and a little playing) for over 5 years now and my group is enjoying them a lot.
We like to be mentally challenged and sometimes the funniest stuff happens.

My party was in a room with the doors locking behind them. A countdown started in a foreign language whenever they pulled the lever and 3-4 riddles were carved into the walls. The riddles were re herrings (just describing the man buried in the giant tomb they were in) and the lever actually kept the door locked.
One of the riddles talked about kindness or something (I’ll have to take a look at my notes) but somehow the party was convinced that it meant milk. Of course they tried at once to milk the rogue’s mice which she’s kept with her since she was little. I didn’t let them go through with that, i asked where they’d put the milk and tried to get them to focus on the lever again.

They got it a short time later and we’re still laughing about the time they wanted to milk a pair of mice.

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 206):



That’s rough, would you care to explain why? I think I fail to see why puzzles can’t/shouldn’t be optional.

In reply to Bobblin the merchant (msg # 212):

Would Alexander's cutting of the Gordian Knot been as profound if said knot had prevented people from easily becoming King by untying it?

Would any of Hercules' labours be worthy of telling if he could have 'easily' cirvumvented them?

Puzzles should be exactly like monsters: know when to fight, know when to run away, something many players have trouble with.

The GM should be flexible, however, and offer multiple ways to solve the problem, and reward players for their resourcefulness.
This message was last edited by the GM at 12:46, Fri 09 Dec 2022.

I gave several reasons why 'optional' isn't a real thing in a meaningful sense. It's mostly psychological, but that doesn't actually matter. I can't even tell a group that this puzzle is optional since there is no actual reason they CAN'T solve it with no effort. Other than OOC they don't know the answer.

P.S. not giving the group the answer because your barbarian is too dumb to know it isn't an excuse and you are being shitty if you do that. You are smarter than your barbarian and your wizard player is dumber than his wizard. Figure it out OOC and then IC narrate appropriately.

I did your work coming up with arguments for your statement. At least those that I found.


This sounds more like frustration than an actual reason. A corridor that leads to the BBEG directly can have a side passage that's locked for the moment and the party has to return at some later point after acquiring the correct key. Which in this example is the puzzle/riddle but could also be a literal key. Only because in your decades of GMing you've never done that, doesn't mean that its impossible/nonesense.


That's true, though my players have learned that my D&D world is a moving living thing and that they can return to previous encounters and try their luck again. But that's something I think you have to tell/teach your players as a GM. My players are more than happy to try and slay the giant troll, at the same time they'll try to learn about it and retreat, preparing accordingly and try again should it proof to be too tough.


That's the GM's fault then. As the GM you've to judge your own players and how much time you want to spend on riddles and puzzles. Trying to figure out a riddle for 3 hours is fun only for hardcore puzzle fans. Give them a time limit in which they either get simply locked out of a treasure room or have to use resources to still get it.



I assume you're talking about my INT thresholds for extra hints? I see it the same as trying to break down a door. Why would you punish a wizard with a DC15 to kick down a reinforced door? It's totally unfair and a "shitty" thing to do. Or a Barbarian use their STR instead of CHA to intimidate!
Personally I'd say it would be bad if I weren't to let the Barbarian roll at all. It's just more difficult as he wanted to roleplay someone with lower INT.

I'm okay with calling it a simple "Agree to disagree". I like the occasional puzzle while you don't. If you wish we could continue this conversation via Private Message?
This message was last edited by the player at 14:30, Fri 09 Dec 2022.

Moving to the puzzle thread.
This message was last edited by the player at 18:13, Fri 09 Dec 2022.

Wow damn I never would have expected this to still be going after ... *checks dates* over 5 years ... huh
Well massive props to those who have kept things alive and been helping people out!

Hey all! I know it's been a bit busy over the holidays, just want to keep the discussions going. If people have a topic or question they want to ask feel free to ask me, Window Watcher, Pdbody, or Advisor to start it up. Feel free to just interact as well.

Yeah, the place is waking up after a bit of a nap.

Please boot me from this group. thank you

You should be able to click the little [i] icon next to the game's name, and then you will only be alerted if you get a PM (which I've never received here, so you should be permanently set).

Mantra for Friday, GO Paizo, GO.

Please tell me they announced a "Pathfinder 5th edition" that is just 5th Ed but with an OGL.

Because, and lets all say it togeather, you don't own your mechanics.

The ORC is here!

TLDR; Paizo announced the Open RPG Creative License (ORC for short).  It will not be owned by them, but overseen by an independent non-profit.  It will be irrovokable, and anyone can use it.  Paizo has also said that there is no OGL content in Pathfinder 2e, or Starfinder, and that going forward will be published without a license, until the ORC is completed and published, at which point Pathfinder and Starfinder will be published with the ORC.

Not nearly catty enough. As it turns out no one ever needed a non-profit to NOT enforce their copyright (what little of it was actually relevant to the hobby).

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 225):

The OGL was a brilliant idea, allowing people to create content for a game system, where they could feel confident that they'd not get sued, and the company that owned said system could be confident that their content was not being plaigerized.  For 20 years, it was win-win.

Given the amount of content created under this license, it is preeminently relevant to the hobby.

Literally all it ever allowed for was 3PP's to say what game the content was for (and to a lesser extent allow them to use the IP worlds and monsters as needed)

You can't plagiarize something that is, by it's nature, not owned.

Not sure how you can say that it wasn't owned.  But sure, I guess it meant nothing.  /s

I can, at this very moment go reprint a nearly word for word copy of the D&D 5e core rule book. I would have to scrape the actual trademarks out, Mordenkeinen, beholder, etc. but the mechanics of the game can remain 100% intact with no alterations to them functionally. Game mechanics don't fall under a trademark or patent, only specific verbiage might fall under a copy right. They would have no actual legal grounds for a case against my newly created Generic Fantasy Game.

Now GFG wouldn't have the same brand recognition as D&D so my sales would suck. If you wanted to write 3rd party material for GFG you don't really have a fan base to rely on. But it could exist and I could sell it. It's basically how all the unauthorized SRD's stay afloat.

d20heroSRD had to change hero points. 13thagesrd had to change the names of the icons. Names can be protected legally but the mechanics can't (so far).

Sure, and you'd get sued for copyright infringement if you copied it nearly word for word.

You would have to do a significant rewrite of the core rulebook, in order to explain the mechanics in your own wording.

Game mechanics can be patented.  I don't assume WotC has patented anything, but they can be patented.  There are patented fairy chess moves, and patented video game mechanics.  It wouldn't be a stretch to patent some of the D&D game mechanics.
This message was last edited by the GM at 17:47, Fri 13 Jan 2023.

I only know of two existing game patents, tapping from magic and a very specific set of poker dice. It is nearly impossible to prove novelty in a game. At this point everything D&D has to offer is already public in terms of patents.

https://www.gamesradar.com/vid...-might-surprise-you/

Falcon chess has a patented move for the Falcon.  I think that patent has expired.

https://www.chessvariants.com/large.dir/falcon.html

Sure, it might be difficult to patent novel game mechanics...

But D&D could probably lay claim to a few, even today.  Would it be worth it?  I don't know.

Circling back to the original purpose of the OGL: You wouldn't have to worry over being sued, and the company granting the license wouldn't have to worry about their stuff being ripped off whole cloth.

It was to the benefit of everyone.

The OGL is dead, all hail the ORC.

I bet you'd be surprised. At one time, perhaps, but my guess is that the equivalent to the statute of limitations would have run out by now.

Please move any further discussion on the ongoing OGL story to this thread: link to a message in this game

I don't mind the initial discussion, but when it begins to dominate a thread it should move to its own thread. Thank you.

I want to personally  thank everyone here. If you have watched the OGL thread you see a lot of discussion, and disagreement, all of which has been strenuous but still respectful. It is heartening to me to see our community able to disagree without it devolving into a shouting or name calling match.

These times have people disagreeing and not being able to communicate without such attitudes, have shown our society is failing to live up to its core values. (The right to free speech and to assemble.) And therefore I thank you all for remaining true to the spirit of the community, which is to promote discourse.

Keep up the good work everyone!

Recruiting

I've done an IC thread for a game I'm going to run and got far more interest than I thought likely. So I'm going to have to cull numbers down after reviewing their RTJs.

My question to other GM's here is, what have you found to be the most relevant things to ask for in an RTJ that speak to a player's likelihood to stay, contribute, write well, be engaged, etc.

For me, the character concept,,,  If a player is invested in the character they create then they will usually stick around...

I've actually had good luck, thus far, with people who tell me up front that they don't ghost games - but if you ask for them to say that, it's meaningless, because what else are they gonna say? "I regularly ghost games"?

I would say the biggest thing for me is if I'm with them in other games or they run a game of their own. Both things tend to reduce the likelihood of ghosting (but not eliminate it entirely). However, in the case of the former, there's a happy medium - one or two games is best, because anything more, and they might conceivably be overwhelmed with the number of games they're in and begin ghosting.

Lissa, it is true that a player who puts a lot of effort into the character concept may stick around - but they may just be really excited about character creation. Same deal with a player who writes a lot.

Ultimately, I feel like it's often a craps shoot. :/

(That said, if you can push the RTJ process long enough, some people will end up showing their true colors during the RTJ process itself - that will help eliminate those most likely to ghost quickly.)

People who have DMed on here probably have more respect for player attrition and not wanting to be one of those ghosters.

I have ghosted, never intentionally, but it's happened.  :|

In reply to V1510n (msg # 236):

I would suggest not worrying so much about the character concept, since either the character would either fit or need to be changed. Many players change characters when they hear what others are playing. I know I don't like being the third mage in a group.

I recommend asking about the person themself. When you get to know a person it helps connect to them. Psychologically  it's harder to abandon someone your friends with. Don't ask for identifying details, but interests and preferred playstyles and such all can help. I don't do anime, so when I end up in a group of heavy anime fans, I sometimes have to bow out shortly into the game, since I don't feel as connected to the group. Similarly if for some reason you find a player who has a great character concept but hates dungeon delving, and your game will involve heavy amounts of dungeon delving, that's not a player you want. they won't be happy, and are more likely to ghost.

The old posts of the "Player Attrition" thread has insight on this.

As was said, if you draw out the RTJ process a little, some applicants might fizzle out before they get in the game (saving a headache).
Can ask for a concept before the full RTJ write up. Can discuss with them a little.
Maybe ask questions just to drag the discussion out a little. Some GM's really like to drag it out.

Try to be clear what the game is and isn't, expectations, etc.
Try to keep momentum going, and address anything that's holding things up. Encourage player communication so people know who's waiting on who.

Telling players in the game information "If you gotta leave, it's fine, just let us know" might help, but maybe not. Similarly "Let us know if you'll be away."

And just try to run the best game you can.
Like others, I think attrition is largely luck.
I've also had long time and active players just disappear too. (Some eventually came back.)

Accepting more players than you want, knowing some will drop, is a common strategy too. (I.e. If you want 8 players, recruit 12+, knowing some will probably drop.)

... On the above strategy, does anyone have a ratio they like to aim for? Like if you want 8, do you accept 12, 16, 20?

Just be aware that this strategy has been known to backfire. I wanted 3-5 characters in one of my games, so I accepted 8 (Window: I dont really have a hard and fast ratio - 3 people seemed like a reasonable number to drop). Unfortunately (?) none of them have ghosted. It's a good problem to have, but definitely resulted in more work on my part.

The ratio completely depends on how many you can handle. I'd suggest something like 50% more than your average ideal number. So in Storyteller's case he wanted 3-5 so we'd call that 4 and accept 6 people. It's obviously not a hard and fast rule, if you feel like 3-5 is your ideal but you could also handle 6 no problem then maybe do 7 or 8 like he did. Obviously that can backfire like in his case but that is very much the exception.

So:

1. setting expectations
   
2. ask for a character concept

Anything else that's good to have in an RTJ? (other than character name).

It depends a lot on the game. I've said a few times that in games where you are doing truly random stats a character concept is actually harmful to the process.

Expected post rate doesn't hurt. At least it tells you who are your weekend warriors and who are the online 24/7ers.

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 225):

There are a few things I feel need to be said here. D&D's open license contained no actual requirements that the open source license  couldn't be altered, or removed without notice. Thus, legally speaking, it could be altered, or removed without notice. It was not, and this is important, a contract between the publishing company, and anyone else.  This is something I've mentioned in a few places, and usually gotten flack for, but its true, nobody actually can say that  D&D's open source license can't be altered.    Everyone held to the expectation that it wouldn't, and that is an understandable expectation, but there's nothing currently present to exclude the possibility.

Legally.

We'll avoid poor decision.

Now, by giving it over to a non-profit to maintain,  depending on how it was given, and I've not listened to this part, so this is a bit of a guess,  but if you state in the original license that the holder cannot retract the license, or cannot alter certain elements, then you have *cue the fan fair music* an open contract.   This, if it is indeed the case, something third-party sources can more reliably ride elephants and have them dance on.

Yes, poor humor, but still, tis true.

Posting frequency expectations. How you run the game. Tonal expectations, if you have any pet peeves or focuses for the game: after all, they don't know what you are planning.

You want to weed out disinterested players who aren't going to flake when you find out the style you run doesn't match what they envisioned.

Length and depth you want of the background/concepts. What kind of characters you are looking for and what you want in an RTJ.

I feel there's a number of times I've put way more effort than I should have on RTJ's that just didn't fit the scope of the game: and I wouldn't have suggested that concept if I had some idea what the GM was looking for.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:13, Sat 21 Jan 2023.

That's why I usually put a maximum on RTJ length. Also why I don't apply if there is a huge invasive RTJ requirement.

But then I hate backstory; reading or writing them.

I do this often with non home games. I prefer 5-6 players so I'll recruit 8-10 knowing some will drop. This has, delightfully, bit me in the ass on occasion. I'm currently running 7 players in an online game. They just won't leave! Great problem to have.

Anyone else have to almost constantly resist spite-starting new games. Like "Oh, that's a cool concept but you are doing it just the stupidest. Here, this is how it's done!" but you know that it's a passing fancy and you won't be able to sustain another game/you have been working on getting something to the RTJ phase and it would be a distraction?

Also guilt-starting games "Yay, us six players got through character creation and the GM ghosted after the first IC post. Well I know I have a player base and I did just brush up on the rules, maybe I could run one but without banning the one book I like."

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 251):

I think it's only a bad thing if you're a forever-GM and actually just wanna play for once.

But if you don't mind starting and running another game, it is a decent way to start off with players who should stick around.

That bit applied to both, lol

That's why I qualified it with "But if you don't mind starting and running another game..."

xD

I have felt the second version but not the first, but also there's also the 'that would be a cool idea and I want to see it happen but I wouldn't be able to keep it up'.

So, I don't remember which thread it was here or if maybe it was on the discord. But someone at one point mentioned not considering or critiquing incomplete/wrongly submitted RTJ's.

My new game has 6 applicants so far and 1 of them is what I would consider a full and correct RTJ.

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 256):

What's your question?

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 256):

I think it was part of "Letting potential players know they didn't make the cut #2"

Ya I didn't find it in a key word search but that's also where I thought it was.


Not feeling friendly or chatty, I take it?

I just wanted to know if you had a question.

Basically that's ALWAYS my experience so IDK what people are doing that they can just categorically exclude people.

For that matter I had the same thing happen on RSVP's for my wedding! So it seems like amore inherent problem to having people fill out a form.

I said it in my reply, though I might not have been the first, someone can check the other thread. But I am always frustrated when people do not follow simple instructions. I'm that way when it comes to work and I'm that way when it comes to personal time too. If it's something small then sure I won't be mean about it but if it's something blatant like say point 3 is: x race is banned and they make a character with x race then they clearly did not read your rtj info.

My frustration at people not following simple instructions outweighs my desire to accept and help those same people. If it is consistent (like your case where the majority of rtjs are failing) or a situation I cannot ignore (such as at work) I will give a blanket statement basically a 'please go back and reread my instructions'. If I can ignore it though then I will and if it takes another week for more rtjs to turn up then I'll let the people who had the courtesy of submitting a successful rtj know something like 'there have not been enough good rtjs yet for me to select a party however yours is still up for consideration, I am going to give it another week and see who else applies'.

If you look over the RTJs that are wrong (depending on how wrong they are) and find some interesting concepts, I would probably reach out one-on-one to see if they can/are willing to modify it to fit your campaign...  For me, when I submit a RTJ, I always submit the concept with "I would like to play X race but understand if it isn't allowed. If not, I would select Y or Z"... Obviously not choosing a race banned in the RTJ for any of the options...   lol




That is a good point...  There is no preset window for RTJs to be submitted so closing it is entirely at the DMs discretion... If you don't have enough good ones then just bump the original Wanted - Players post...

This is great discussion, but it should move to the Letting potential players know they didn't make the cut #2 thread since it's part of that discussion. Thanks!
link to a message in this game

Do y'all read your player's PMs. Like not the ones to you. Like I've seen one GM at least that was appalled by the idea. But we are also basically the sole moderators for our games.

Generally speaking, I don't read PM's between players.  If it seems like there's some friction or an argument brewing, then I will at least glance at them.

Yeah, I'll read player PM's. Just so I know what's going on, what they're thinking, and if I can add anything.

I'm sort of surprised that's not the norm (let alone it being appalling). Maybe a busyness thing.
Plus if they truly want something to be private, rMail is a thing.

 I'm assuming if I can hear something, you can see it. Every time I post a new PM, and I have some PM heavy games, it says "Be aware DMs can see all PMs." Whether DMs do read all my messages, one  game I have well over three hundred PM messages in just one PM sub-thread, or not, if I wanted to contact people outside of the game, then   R-mail is certainly a thing, but let's be real, its not like I'm trying to hide stuff from the DM, since that would be counterproductive.

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 265):

I don't intrude or listen to PMs unless someone from the PM asks me to. It's never happened, but sometimes I've been given a quote to back up something they are concerned with.

I feel that PMs should be private. (Shocking I know.) and unless invited I stay out.

That's not to say I've not accidentally opened them. Usually I open them just to indicate they've been read, and immediately close them. Sometimes though I'll mistake it as a PM to me and read until I find it's not and then close it.
This message was last edited by the GM at 19:27, Wed 15 Mar 2023.

I will definitely open them because showing as read scratches an itch for me, if I'm curious I will browse them and see if it's anything I might be interested in. There are circumstances where that might be the case like if the players are talking and they've gotten the wrong idea about some info I've given them. Then I know I might want to go and give them a nudge to correct that in the game.

Yeah, this.
If they have a good idea, can help build it up further.

This. :-P

Question for my fellow DM peeps...  This is D&D 5e related...

I have a PC vs NPC sparring match...  Wooden weapons, so no damage...  Goal is first to 5 hits...

Question 1 - Normal combat, a Nat 20 would do an extra damage roll. How would you account for that in this situation? Or would you bother with it?

I'm thinking (and suggested to the group) that the Nat 20 might give two hits...  One hit for the attack and a second hit for the additional (unused) damage die.

Each player had a different suggestion so we now have the following options:

• Two hits awarded to the attacker
• Advantage to the attacker on the next attack
• Disadvantage to the opponent on the next attack
• Opponent knocked prone by the force/intensity of the attack

Everyone agreed that they would all be equally ok so we have a conundrum where we can't decide on which to use (ironically, the one sparring had no opinion on the matter). I'd like to get everyone's thoughts on this...


Question 2 - No offensive magic (e.g. - magic missle, fire bolt/ball, etc.) is allowed since this is strictly a sparring match; however, non-damage dealing spells like color spray are...  Would you count the casting of a color spray spell as a hit? I wasn't going to but some of the players said it should be counted... Thoughts?
This message was last edited by the player at 10:29, Sun 26 Mar 2023.

I would just count it as two hits. You are extra succeeding at your goal of scoring strikes.

Advantage/Disadvantage works if you want them to matter less.

Knocked prone is too many steps to bother with for a gimmick.



For the second. It depends on the values of the judges. I wouldn't count it especially since getting a color spray off basically means you just won the match anyway. The extra hit would hardly matter.

Similarly with Sleep you would reasonably just win within the narrative. I can walk up to a sleeping person and rapidly tap them 5 times with a stick before they wake up if I'm not trying to hurt them.

Just to clarify, the color spray is independent of the Nat 20...  the color spray was the first attack of the match whereas the Nat 20 was rolled on what would be either the 3rd or 4th hit (i.e. - round 4)

Plus, with color spray, the contest wouldn't end automatically since the CS blindness only lasts a single round (i.e. - until the end of the caster's next turn)...  And the PC rolled an 18 and 19 for a disadvantaged attack so the CS was really a waste of a spell... that is what started the conversation about whether the spell was a "hit"
This message was last edited by the player at 13:08, Sun 26 Mar 2023.

Thought it was longer. Still. It's not like you can NOT hit with color spray. So in terms of a martial challenge its not really a demonstration of skill.

There are spells that would simply win the match so it seems like overkill to count hits for spells.

I think a penalty (or disadvantage, if you prefer) to the one who was hit by the critical makes more sense in the fiction than awarding two hits. And giving it to the one who rolled the crit means it's more likely they'll get another crit, and that doesn't make sense to me either.

Good point...

I wouldn't allow any offensive spells, that defeats the purpose of the challenge. Something like mage armor or shield would be fine, but spells are just too easy to overpower the opponent.

As for a crit, either the double hit or disadvantage to the defender's attack as they got knocked back.

For the crit I prefer the 'gives you advantage on next attack' or 'gives opponent disadvantage on next attack' options rather than 2 successes. My reasoning being 2 hits is twice as good in this fight, but in a normal fight a crit is not twice as good it's more like 1.5 times as good (since you dont add your mod twice). Additionally in a crit you have not 'technically' hit the opponent twice, just once but really well.

Additionally, I see it this way because I have always seen HP as not just a representation of 'how much damage you can take' but as a catch all for both physical and mental capability like tiredness, actual cuts/bruises/burns/etc, willingness to continue fighting, etc. So to me a critical hit isn't doing more damage because the cut is deeper (I mean it could be) but more generally it's an attack that took advantage of an opening/weakness from the opponent to 'damage' their 'ability to fight' better than normal, what better way to demonstrate that than the advantage/disadvantage mechanic if HP is not being used.

As for spells I would actually argue that attacking spells should be used, they can just be used in a 'minimal' state. It's the equivalent of playing laser tag. Instead of throwing a ball of fire at full force you're throwing a 'warm ball' if you like. That does get into the question of 'do spells that have an effect on a successful save still hit?'.

The other alternatives would be 'spells never give a hit, they just make landing a hit easier' (which I do like) or, 'no spells allowed' (which hurts spell casters).

If you're a spell caster you're probably not as good at stabbing someone (some exceptions do apply of course) but spells are your balancer. You are less likely to land a hit, but if that person is blinded you're getting advantage, it balances out. And for the comment of 'well sleep is OP because I can just tap them 5 times lightly and be good' that would not work. In a tournament like that they would be counting 'fatal' hits or at least 'good' hits. Tapping someone lightly so as not to wake them would not count as one. A sleep spell would essentially just give you a free crit (which goes back to how do you award crits above). Then the fight continues as normal since a 'good' hit would definitely wake someone from the spell. The more OP stuff would be something like hold person but even then they will have chances to save out of it.

Interesting point about granting advantage potentially snowballing (which might be desired).
And about crits normally only doubling the die, not the modifier, thus double point might be too much.
With the above in mind, I'd probably go the disadvantage route. (Though the other options aren't bad.)
Knocking down... unless the attacker is able to attack multiple times (follow up attack when they're down, thus getting advantage), I don't think there would be a point since the defender can just get right back up?

On magic, it might help if we knew the context of the sparring match.
If it's only a contest of strength and weapon skill, magic might be out.
Friendly sparring match, the PC and NPC might set their own terms.
Maybe all magic is allowed, and just handwave it being nonlethal. (If you do that, maybe drop the point system and just go normal HP.)
If those involved are lunatics, they go at it with full lethal force, and just have a healer on standby. :P

Unless the stakes are high, I wouldn't overthink it, and wouldn't allow it to bog the game down.

Wanted to bounce some ideas off people:

Most game settings have a “common” language that most people speak, and then a bunch of other languages. It’s pretty much assumed PC’s know common, and then maybe some other languages.
I was debating having a setting where “common” is only a plurality, not a majority, and try to emphasize that most people (both PC and NPC) don’t know it.
Does that sound like it could make things interesting, or just make communication a chore? And potentially closing off players from certain opportunities, or other players.
Maybe it depends how many other languages there are. (Fewer probably works better.)
Might depend on the nature of the game too. (I was picturing a contained sandbox/open world, with different areas being populated by certain groups/languages.)

Another idea was having sign language be more commonly used. Besides being a different language, it has some added utility (silent) but also drawbacks (hands free, takes longer) to a spoken language.
Similar idea with like morse code.
DnD has Thieves’ Cant as like a language of code words and gestures with alternate meanings.

Any thoughts on how to make languages more interesting beyond “Orcish is spoken by orcs, Evlish is spoken by elves”?
I debated once having a language that is very simple and limited, but easy to learn, thus it acts like a “common” language.
Maybe some languages are sister languages (like real life).

Firefly, if I remember, had English as the common language, but Mandarin was also largely present, and phrases from it were often used by English speakers (often for cursing). (I believe the history was the USA/West merged with China.)

Any other cool tips or tricks people have done to incorporate languages?

I think the biggest issue with this would be that the players would always have to type speech in a language group...  Secondly, as you said, you could wind up with a party that can't speak to each other...
This message was last edited by the player at 22:49, Wed 05 Apr 2023.

In my HB world, I tend to have multiple human and nonhuman languages, usually I have a single predominant language, think Latin in the Irod a Middle ages.  While many of the people tend to know it, not everyone does. What I do have is a Trade language, which is a mixture of various languages that have morphed into a language centered around Trade. Almost everyone speaks that, but it doesn't cover every situation.

I find this makes for some interesting encounters, and encourages people to seek out new languages. I do recommend that all the party members speak at least one common language. Interparty communications are key and while a small amount of confusion can be fun, constant communication issues are disruptive.

Having a non common language helps make exotic locations more memorable and interesting. It makes them stand out. But ALWAYS have at least one NPC that can speak to the party. Sometimes it's fun to have tis NPC take up scamming the pcs, as this encourages them to learn the language, if only to discover this.

In reply to LissaAzules (msg # 282):

You do realize you don't have to only run games on rpol right? This channel offers universal advice.

I think the biggest issue would just be it's one of those ideas that seems immersive or world build at first but after you have to play through dealing with it for a few sessions it just drags the game down or becomes hand waved away so there was no point in the first place.

An alternative I might suggest is rather than having completely different languages you have different dialects. This has always been a thing in the real world and, I think, largely unutilised. This way everyone can 'understand' each other without really 'getting' each other. If you want real world examples think of some of the different meanings words in the UK and USA have. The same sentence can mean two very different things in each place, or a sentence can have a meaning in one place and be gibberish in the other. This way you can have simple conversations easily enough but you can also throw odd stuff like this in to add flavour and perhaps cause confusion.

Can confirm, happens in Ars Magica all the time. PC's routinely have to resort to magic or go betweens for simple conversations with NPC's

I'm reminded of a story from my father. When he was newly married, my mother spoke with a deep south Mississippi accent. His uncle was from Boston. When they met he would have to sit between them and "translate" due to their accents.

My father grew up in Missouri where they have a more neutral midwestern accent. It's the one most often called no accent.

Having nothing to do with the language conversation...  I am considering a new game and could use some advice...

The concept is that the PCs get trapped in a castle and cannot escape without something that is not to be found in the castle.

When they enter the library they discover that some of the books are actually portals to short campaigns. Each book will be the equivalent of a one (or two) shot at tabletop. Each book can take the players to a different time period, dimension, plane, world, etc. (For example, one book might take them to the Death House from Strahd, another might find them in the underdark, and so on)

Solving the campaign for each book will get them one step closer to escaping the castle. What I need the most atm is an idea for the "something" they need to escape...  I've considered that each campaign could award a piece of a key or part of a riddle that needs assembled in the right order to open the magic lock, etc.

Basically, I have too many ideas to choose..  lol  Additionally, I'll take any suggestions you have on short/one-shot campaigns that can be utilized...

First thing that popped into my head that's pretty traditional and splits up nicely is the classic rod of seven parts.

Nice...  that didn't cross my mind... although, I don't know how many parts it will be yet...  that will be decided in conjunction with my players...
This message was last edited by the player at 20:26, Sun 09 Apr 2023.

I was thinking of making one of the books lead to our world...  possibly ancient Egypt, Rome or Greece... maybe Nazi Germany like Barbara Hambly's Sun Cross series...

Moorcock’s Eternal Champion has a lotof inter-planar travel, might provide some insight.

I think I’d pick my favorite books, movies, TV shows, etc. and visit one or two sites of each.  Maybe going thru the ruins of Angband or Moria, slog thru the swamps of Dagobah or sneak into Jabba’s Tower, the ruined city of Quo or a nest of the Dark, Castle Volkiher or Blackreach, exploring the warrens under Mount Thunder or slog thru Sarengrave Flat, etc.

Those are all good ideas Blue. I especially like the Darwath suggestions...  I always wanted to run a campaign based on that setting...

Very much sounds like the first MYST game. May want to check if that's something your players want. That game isn't for everyone.
This message was last edited by the GM at 00:49, Mon 10 Apr 2023.

Reminds me of the kids' book series "Magic Tree House," cause they'd read books and go to a bunch of time periods, usually bringing something back that would help solve their current problem.
The nostalgia...

Thinking of how you trap them in the castle might help you think of things needed to escape it.
Might not strictly be a castle.

Possible idea:
Castle is on a remote island at sea (probably magical). Anything removed from the castle that belongs there fades back into the castle.
They have to gather pieces to assembly a seaworthy boat. The body, the sails, the sextant/compass (navigation), oars, food/drink, shelter, searchlight, etc.
Perhaps some necessary pieces were already acquired by a previous group who failed, getting the players going in the right direction. (But, spoiler! Some are actually just still working on the mini-quests, possibly trapped, to be encountered by the players.)

Or maybe some other kind of vehicle, like a balloon or hang glider. Maybe they have to repair something rather than build it from scratch.
Perhaps items inside the castle can be brought along into the mini-quests, just not out of the castle.
Maybe they have to retrieve famous items from history, real or mythical.

Surprisingly the castle idea reminds me of the Doctor Who episode: Heaven Sent.

Should use it for inspiration and use some of the ideas. They will help with the claustrophobia feel you need to make it work.

I had forgotten about that episode as Capaldi was one of my least favorite Doctors but it is a great idea.


I'm not sure I follow your meaning here... Maybe because I never played MYST but also because the players would know the concept (i.e. - trapped and have to jump into books to escape) before they signed up... What am I missing?


Never heard of that series before... Will have to look it up...


This actually jogged a memory of the Staff of Jericho obelisk device they built in R.I.P.D.

Taking inspiration from The Riftwar Saga, you could have them have to shift from section to section of the castle by passing though a portal, crossing whatever one-off adventure setting, to get to a different part of the castle, rinse and repeat until they get to the castle exit.

That has interesting possibilities...  Thanks Blue!

Actually going off what Blue said what about keeping the theme of the castle in everything so that each section is an adventure in part of a castle in a different setting. So you could have a section that's right out of Strahd's castle, another that's a creepy dungeon, another that's maybe an undead infested garden, a library with a cult or angry librarian - and then you make each one thematic based on the period you want to do it in.

MYST is a game where you are trapped on an island and have to use magic books to travel to other worlds. But to find those worlds you solve puzzles. And all of the other worlds also contain puzzles. It's fun if you enjoy puzzles, which I do, but not everyone likes the game.

That's interesting. Sort of a castle that intersects in many dimensions at the same time. Your quest to find the parts of the "key" spirals inwards and upwards as you progress through the castle and it's many faces?