I'm here for the RP, so I want stuff to make sense in-character. If you're playing, say, a dwarf who's spent all their life underground mining and stuff and has only recently set foot on the surface world, they logically should have no idea what a windmill is when they see one. If that character approaches a farm and says to another character "Hey, let's go check out that windmill", that doesn't make sense - their player may know what a windmill is, but there's no reason for the character to magically have that knowledge when their player has made a point of saying "My character has spent their whole life underground and everything on the surface world is strange to them". Similarly, if we meet, say, a black dragon and I know my character has never met or read about dragons before, I shouldn't then have them yell "Watch out! They breathe acid!" because how would they know that?

I'd rather keep track of all the stuff my character knows, and similarly only share with other characters knowledge that my character has. I've been in games where people for some reason post what their characters are thinking or feeling, for example. But I don't see the point - no-one can act on it...well, not unless they're telepathic or empathic or something and have ways of picking up on it ;). If you're just posting between you and the GM, fine, share whatever you like. Your character feels angry? Say they feel angry. But when any other players can see it, say instead that they fold their arms and scowl or something. It's...surely basic RP, is it not? And that's why we're all here, after all - it's in the name - "RPG" ;).

There are lots of ways for that to happen, including not taking things literally. That's how I watch Star Trek, for instance. Some people put in a lot of effort to make it make sense, but I just ignore the stuff that doesn't, because it's generally just an excuse for an interesting story.


Books? Stories? Similar contraptions used in inexplicably windy shafts underground? But it probably doesn't matter. The important thing is that the player is contributing a suggestion to the group for a way to proceed. The focus should be on that, rather than on who said what and why.


If their player was foolish enough to make an absolutely statement like that, then no, there'd be no reason. Fortunately, things like that are easily avoided.


Books? Stories? But again it doesn't really matter. The important thing is that the party is being attacked by a dragon, which has more ways to cause problems than just its acid breath. If a GM includes a monster that is made less challenging if a particular fact is known about it, then they're setting themselves up for conflict with their own storytelling abilities and the players. Better to avoid that, I find.


I don't see the point either, but mostly because I find that I'm not particularly entertained by reading about those things.


Whether or not someone can or should act on it greatly depends.


It's important to bear in mind that "roleplaying" means different things to different people. To some people it only means talking to NPCs. To others, it means emoting. To still others, it means drama. To me, it means anything the character does that it's even remotely plausible for them to do, so I'm roleplaying even if my character is in combat and not talking.

But my point was that there's a key reason people act on out-of-character information. If that reason doesn't exist, then they have almost no make the game less fun for anyone by acting on that information, and also everyone else has less reason to police such actions.

Even if that reason exists (which it probably will), I'm not going to devote a lot of effort to not sharing things about my character that other characters plausibly wouldn't know, nor calling them on it if they use that information.

It's also worth noting that when players know things the characters do not, there is potential for entertaining irony, or for players to otherwise enhance the game for everyone. "Metagaming" is not inherently bad.

Eh, I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree. Just don't expect my character to act on stuff they have no reason to know about, or for me as a player to tell you stuff about said character OOC - if you want to know stuff about my character, don't ask me, have your character ask them. Roleplaying to me is...well, playing a role, ie my character. I'm not channelling myself through my character, I'm creating a person and giving them motivations, goals, a personality etc, and then seeing what happens when they set off interacting with whatever the world around them happens to contain :D.

Fair enough, though it seems as though some things might be obvious to a character, yet not to a player, and that giving the player additional clarifications would help them player their character more realistically.

If you want to know stuff about my character, ask me, the player. I probably don't know the answer myself, so that will be a good opportunity for us to collaborate and come up with something cool that makes the game more interesting for everyone.


Do you control the character? Are you responsible for its actions? If a player is bothered by something your character is doing (which, yes, some feel shouldn't be an issue, but can be, practically speaking), is the only recourse to handle the issue in game?

Thank you for discussing this, by the way, and for having an open mind about how others approach the game.

It's a funny one - I am controlling the character, but sometimes my characters say or do things I don't expect. I'm not sure quite how that works, but somehow it does :D.

If I was gonna ask a player something about their character it would probably be more along the lines of a rules/mechanics clarification - "How long did you say this buff lasts?", or "Which arm did you say your character had that creepy-looking scar?", etc. Stuff that my character should be able to remember but I, for whatever reason, don't, and it's easier to ask for a quick clarification/reminder than trawling through previous posts trying to find where it was originally mentioned :D.

That said, I plan on keeping notes on all things I deem significant to have notes made about them (so things like other PCs, locations visited, NPCs met, a timeline of events so far, etc), so hopefully I won't have too much trouble remembering narrative stuff that my character should know. Of course, I could decide my character forgets something (like, if they had low Wis or something, then I could logicise that that might be the case), but I suppose that'll depend on the thing they might've forgotten ;).

[Private to Just_V: Speaking of notes - while I think of it, could you do something for me? I've tried this in another game that started a few months back and it seems to be working nicely sof ar - could you add me to a group all by myself and create a new thread only visible to said group and called it "Caaru's Notes" or something, and then I'll use it to...well, make notes. It's easier to organise and has more space than the scratchpad, and is contained within this game part of this site so I don't have to open any other programs or anything in order to access it. If you wouldn't mind setting that up, that would be great :).]

Caaru has asked for a private group, that way she can both  make multiple threads for organization, and I can see them (versus the scratchpad).

This is a closed game, meaning this isn't a multi-game board. So I have literally a couple dozen groups to use, and so could easily make five groups for player discretion. If you want a private group, for whatever reason, just let me know. Lord Winter I know prefers a more open format, which I can appreciate, but each to their own.
This message was last edited by the GM at 18:49, Tue 29 Oct 2019.

The reason for asking for it in the form of a private group was purely so that I can keep my notes, well, private ;). I wouldn't expect people to be trying to read my notebook at a physical table, so this is the same thing ;). I only plan on using one thread, just with multiple posts on different subjects. Not sure if there's a character limit on thread posts but it seems highly unlikely that I'll go over a thousand posts all by myself :D.

@DM: it's okay.  Take all the time you need.  The game will be here when you're ready for it.

Yeah, it's all good - it's been a couple of years since I first made this character and ended up not able to play them as much as I would've wanted due to the game closing down. I'm sure I can wait just as long again, if need be ;).

Let us know if you need to vent, too.  I don't mind being a sounding board for the people I RP with.

In reply to Ryu Zaku (msg # 65):

Much appreciated Ryu, but I tend to be far more vocal and share too freely with my RL affairs. I may take you up on that, but hopefully i won't have to. . Thank you all for the patience. I have some experience from corresponding with Lord Winter, that if the delay is an issue, he will certainly have none with waiting to let me know at a proper juncture--when I'm not so wound tight. Lord Winter is quite the pragmatic. So that clears any worry of a pile of trouble waiting for me.

Simply put, last time I GMed, and had a RL event, two of the seven players were quite ugly. It's made me jumpy. If it was painful IRL, seeing people (in that game) make it worse just put salt lemon juice and glass dust in the wound. It's relief to know there won't be any of that. :) It's always good to give people the common benefit of the doubt, but when you don't know people...wow...it floors you when they surprise you.

Anyway, I'm taking a few days to power down at the very least. I might pop on to the RPoL to read posts of games I play, but probably will just watch T.V. or play a video game in my free time. Otherwise just the necessities; chores, sustenance, and rest. Nothing strenuous, or even taxing. I'm on E.

He lives! :3

Woohoo :D.

Is there anything we can do to lighten the load? I've GMed my share of games and I know that it can be stressful trying to make everything mesh together with unassailable consistency and logic, and I also know that friendly players don't always need that and will happily go along with much less, especially if they've had personal input.

In reply to Lord Winter (msg # 69):

Actually, that last part is probably the only help I need. Most players, I find, can do that though. D&D has long since been a game where you bring your own pickax and shovel and mine for the fun in whatever situation you're in.

Right now my own literal OCD is working through the process, and setting a line of what's necessary and what's just better than enough. To be honest, it's relaxing to do this step, and it makes so much difference later. Once the map is done, it'll serve for a while. It's meticulous but rewarding.

No, I mostly want to shed the RL stuff and ease into this, rather than dive back in. Part of it is wanting to keep RL stuff out of the game, and part of it is being jumpy it'll interrupt again JUST as I'm getting into game.

Of my three games (on RPoL) this is the middle of the line in terms of ease. I run a game that's easier, and I run a game that's more demanding. 4e is actually only difficult in maintenance, and that I've already got Ryu to help with. If anyone else chooses to help with the maps you'll get XP and treasure boosts, but that's the best way you can help. You can't do that yet though. Obviously because we haven't started.

WHEN we start, the two things I find most helpful are updating battle maps, and writing synopses of events, for short hand. I started this process on table-top, as a player funny enough, and when I started to GM I found it a very good way to keep players' memory engaged.

Anyway, I have some more "work" to do, and then I'll comb over sheets for more specific details, and we'll start. Right now I've barely glanced at them; as I like to first make encounters irrespective of the groups' powers, and then fine tune it by going back and looking closely.
This message was last edited by the GM at 05:40, Tue 26 Nov 2019.

I don't think that's what I meant by input, but I think your overall message is clear.

In reply to Lord Winter (msg # 71):

Well, what input would you suggest, specifically?
This message was last edited by the GM at 05:37, Tue 26 Nov 2019.

None, if they're not looking for any. If they are, then I couldn't be usefully specific without knowing what kind of input they want. To be clear I'm talking about creative input from players, not input in the form of PC reactions.

Oh. heh. No, creativity is never in short supply in my games. :) While I always encourage that, I never "ask" for it. It's a given. That's funny that someone would have to...like...ask for that. To me that's odd. As far as creativity goes, I don't ever ask for it. If anything I have to stop people from giving away too much, and even that's seldom. People here have already been giving me, what you might call creative input, Caaru foremost, but also the others.

No, my work is logistical. Matching monsters to areas. Matching conflict to imperative action. Matching areas to locations. Matching quests to locations. Matching backgrounds (soon, but not yet) to those locations then. It's all just reading, rereading and sorting. It goes with the territory. It's like making a TCG deck, most of the work is just sorting. While I'd love to share what work I can, this would require a Co-GM to "help" with. It just takes time. Just hours in and hours out. There's no shortcut to that. I suppose, sure I could have you guys plan an encounter, and if you (as whole) want to do that...um...okay sure. I rarely do that, but if that's what you all want to do, sure! Yeah, THAT will "help". But then, why am I here, is the thought that runs through my head. I'd be game for that. ;) Though I'm sure that would be worthwhile, for anyone. xD

That said, if you have an idea, just put it out there. Ideas, however, I have an abundance of. If you want to give an idea, I'll consider it. It won't help me get done any faster, but if you have an idea, by all means give it.

I'm not going to get hung up on it, but I'm baffled for an empirical example of what you call "creative input". Some time, when the time is right, I'd like to know.

Right now though, it's just packaging the world so navigating and resources are observable. Then quests in a way that's imminently available to both the character and players. It's just writing and reading. Nothing cerebral, just very much the "work" that goes into being a GM.
This message was last edited by the GM at 12:35, Tue 26 Nov 2019.

Are you open to explanation as to why it's not odd?


I'm not sure what you mean. Not all DMs approach things this way.


There are shortcuts, and there are ways to make more likely that the effort one is putting forth is going to be worth it.


If you're honestly asking it, there's an answer to that question.

Thanks for the invitation to some input. I'll move forward with it soon.


See, it's the "I'll consider it" that gives me pause. If I don't know how likely an idea is to be used, I'm not sure how much effort to put into it.


Alright, please ask when you want to know.


My point is that there are other approaches. If you like your way, more power to you. Just bear in mind that if you're dissatisfied with any aspect of it, there are other ways.

Consider also that you don't need to have all the world info right now - that seems like a lot of work. Especially as this is as forum-based game, and therefore will run much slower than a tabletop one. I feel as a GM that while it's okay to be active, there seems much more call to be reactive, responding accordingly to whatever the PCs might decide to say or do. No point in setting up some whole big quest line about one thing if it turns out the players find some other (likely completely random) thing far more interesting. Oh, there's a big spooky mansion on the hill? Hmm, yeah, we might check that out, but Bob the frog merchant, who sells edible frog tongues, is running out of stock and just asked us if we wouldn't mind going into the swamp and killing him some frogs. That sounds much more fun!

Disclaimer - Swamps are stinky, slimy, and generally icky. I would probably show symapthy for Bob's plight but otherwise look for other interesting stuff to do in town :D.

But I'm sure you get what I mean - don't worry about building all the world now - we're only gonna see the bits we're interacting with directly (or otherwise hearing about from NPCs and stuff), so we don't have to know the rest of it doesn't actually exist yet :D. And you might find you get some super cool plot idea from something one of our characters says or does - how we interact with each other, or with NPCs, little character traits we have and so on. Feel free to lay out the buffet and see what each of us chooses, then go out to the kitchen and bring out whatever complements that stuff :D.

I agree with this and everything else in that post.

Okay. This does not help me. From the moment I made this game, this has been the mission plan. It;'s remained unchanged. Read it here.Link back to this game.  It's simple guys. You're thinking there's a burden. It's not,  it only became that recently. So stop. If you want to play, focus on the only material I've given. I am making campaign setting. It uses a map. It's based on exploration. Ergo, I am making make to explore. That is literally as far as I've gotten. I tried to tell you this. Instead, I get this above.

So I'll open another thread and we can nitpick there. This has officially gone off topic. I'll open the discussion now.
This message was last edited by the GM at 09:29, Wed 27 Nov 2019.

Umm...what I meant was is it sounds like you're trying to build the entire world before letting us play in it, when you don't need to - you just need to build the bit that we're in, so we can start, and then do the rest in the background while we're busy messing around with whatever's in the area we've started in. Otherwise you might as well have just not bothered calling for players and getting us to join yet, rather finish up the worldbuilding and then look for people to play around in it.

Sorry life has hit you hard, J_V.  Just know I'm rooting for ya, and look forward to anything you do in the future.