About gaming ¿How do you play?

[Mendoza]

I was wondering how do you play... in this forum there's people from a lot of different and distant places, so ¿do we play the same way?

Performance:
In our gaming group, we play in 3rd person, narrating what our players do and say.

Freedom of action:
Normally, depending on the adventure, I like to give the players a total freedom of action. The players should find their own way to resolve the problems they face, so I do different encounters (even though sometimes I have to improvise) and solutions.

Combat representation:
We represent it with our old Warhammer miniatures and scenery because it makes the combat clearer and faster than with pen and paper. The distances in open space combat are measured with a ruler (5'=2cm), and the inside combat with a grid.

Master's screen:
I don't use it to cover me , I only watch the printed tables.

 

[urdinaran]

Performance:
Also in third person, but sometimes we roleplay situations. I'm not big on doing all the differnt voices for NPCs, and getting into long discussions.

Freedom of action:
Old military saying: No plan (adventure) survives contact with the enemy (players).
Another by some WWII German General: When planning a mission, the enemy can react in 3 different ways to your plan. He usually chooses the 4th way.
I have realized that I must be ready for my players to do anything; I read KODT alot.

Combat representation:
I have quite a selection of miniatures and a dry-erase grid map. Helps to let the players visualize what is going on.

Master's screen:
I only really use it to cover up my notes. Sometimes I will roll in front of them so they know I'm not fudging.

 

[Vincent791]

Performance:
In our gaming group, we play in 1st person, it's very interesting, we do it in a safe way, I mean, we're not running in the streets searching for the villian.

Freedom of action:
We have a main quest and from there we have a lot of subquests and adventures. But our players have complete freedom.

Combat representation:
Narrating all the action, sometimes we use a sketch to locate our characters if needed.

Master's screen:
Without it.

 

[samsonov]

Performance:
We play in 1st person, Gm usually makes different voices for an NPC. We've played with this style always.

Freedom of Action:
Pretty much same as Vincent791

Combat representation:
Miniatures and scenery with narrating all the action

Master's screen:
Our GM uses screen, to hide his notes and our little secrets :lol: He also rolls the dice in front of us, especially in critical situation. Though we trust him 8)

 

[Yogah of Yag]

Out-of-doors, unless weather forbids it. Campaigns/adventures are tailored to fit the time of year and weather. This adds to the experience.
For example, if the weather is hot and muggy (in summer) then the adventure takes place in Stygia, or even the Black Kingdoms. If very cold, in Nordheim. If foggy, rainy, or otherwise miserable conditions, then...yes, you guessed it...the land of Darkness and deep Night.
I GM, but have never liked the idea of a screen since this creates an air of suspicion and mistrust between yours truly and the esteemed players, except in the case of certain rolls where the PCs are not to know the results (e.g. Bluff, Sense Motive, &c.). Grid-maps only during combat or other appropriate times. I emphasize the narrative, story-telling, imaginative over the material, physical. With miniatures and other props the "magic" of story-telling is greatly diminished.

 

[SuperBeast]

Performance:
We mostly do 3rd person. However when we are in heavy role play mode, we will speak in 1st person.

Freedom of action:
I give the players all the chances they need to really screw things up!
Truly though, I give them plenty of options of what to do and where to travel to. I try to have at least a couple of different adventure threads running at all times. Of course, I am not above pushing them in the right direction when it is warrented.

Combat representation:
Painted mini's for the PC's and unpainted mini's for the mooks. I used to paint a lot, but now I don't. Thus I need to do something with the hordes of unpainted ones. We also use a battlemat and markers.

Master's screen:
Appearently I am in the minority here, but I hide my notes and stuff behind the screen and I roll behind it too. My players trust that I don't cheat, but we all know that I will fudge when it is important to the story. This does not mean I wont kill the PC's though (currently I have killed them all once, except for the smart one who ran away).

 

[VincentDarlage]

Performance:
1st or 3rd, depending on the player, really, and what he or she is comfortable with. I am comfortable with either.

Freedom of action:
Players are free to do what they want. I do little to no railroading.

Combat representation:
I only get out the mat and the minis when the scenerio is especially complicated. Otherwise, I mentally figure out locations, distances and attacks of opportunity to speed up play, and I show all of that through my oral description.

Master's screen:
I buy them (for the art, I guess), but never actually use them.

 

[Raven Blackwell]

Performance: 1st primarily. All NPCs speak for themselves and have voices, characterizations and mannerisms. Almost all descriptions in game are done from the PC's POV. 3rd person only comes into play for long-term things like overland travel. Players usually follow suit if they can.

Freedom of action: Total. All players are free to whatever action they wish- and then inherit the results of said actions.

Combat representation: Verbal description from the PC's POV only. I am big believer in the 'fog of war' adding to the RP experience- table top representations make the battle easier to grasp and thus less of a threat to the player. I don' tknow ho wmany times PCs have received friendly fire from poor planning.....8)

Master's screen: They get in the way.

 

[Sutek]

Performance: 1st person mostly. At least a loose version of it anyway. It takes us a while to get into things and the stimulus has to be pretty great to get us all focused and "in character". I mean, we're all 35+ years old - our ability to act like goof balls, even just in front of one another, has waned over the years...

Freedom of action: Absolute freedom, but the clues are pretty obvious if not numerous and sometimes unrelated. In other words, there could end up being several threads dangling for the PCs to follow, but it's totally up to them as to when and how to do so. In Conan more than in D&D there's lots of opportunity for downtime, carousing and general hooligan-type behavior, so they can spend hours of RPG time just screwing around. In D&D there's often much more of a mission build to things, and when I run Starget, it's total mission emersion - once you're given the goal ther's very little way to deviate from the situation at hand.

Combat representation: I use the grid and 28mm figures always. The d20 system is built around doing so and to forego using the grid and figs...well, you may as well just go play GURPS or something. The whole point of about a quarter of the rules is the combat grid.

Master's screen: In D&D, yeah. In Conan, there's just no point. Not only does it have errors and generally not all that useful sorts of tables, it creates a "superiority barrier" and the players automatically feel like you're up to something. (lol)

 

[Mendoza]

Ey, I'm not the only one! Some of you play 3rd person as well . I played once with a gaming group that played so good in 1st person that it made me think about change our way. I wanted to play that way... there was a "reality" feeling that lacks when using 3rd person.

The problem is that we (my group) don't feel comfortable using 1st person... we just don't find the words, so in order to create that "reality" feeling with my usual 3rd person I try to explain and describe everything the best I can, as a narrator.


The use of miniatures and escenery (trees, houses, hills, rocks) is really worthy. Some people say that it makes the combat a wargame more than a rpg, but we really like it and it doesn't make the players to forget about performing.

 

[Bushido]

Performance:
We play in 1st person, I think it add to role-play immersion.

Freedom of action:
The players are free, and they suffer the consequences of their actions.

Combat representation:
A friend of mine build me an awesone gaming table, with a sandblasted grid on a glass. It have lights under it so the table is illuminated so we can close all the lights in the room and the player can still read their character's sheet.

We use it mainly to create a mood. When fights gets complicated or when tha cation is in a building with many rooms, we represent it on the grid an play with minis.

Master's screen:
Always, nobody have to see what I'm planning...

 

[sanseveria]

Performance: We usually go with 3rd person, with the occasional switch to 1st. Most of the guys in my group are more comfortable with 3rd.

Freedom of Action: The players are free, although often enough inaction leads to some railroading.

Combat Representation: We use a visual baord or wall talker hung on the wall to represent the battleground. It's easy to set up, and when the fight is over you just erase and you're ready fo the next scene. Also useful for setting up marching orders and nighlty watch orders.

GM's screen: Got it, but don't use it. I do make good use of the map that came with it however...

SS

 

[René]

A friend of mine build me an awesone gaming table, with a sandblasted grid on a glass. It have lights under it so the table is illuminated so we can close all the lights in the room and the player can still read their character's sheet.

We use it mainly to create a mood. When fights gets complicated or whhen is a building with many rooms, we represent it on the grid an play with minis.

You're making me really envious! :wink:

 

[René]

Performance:
1st or 3rd person: changes often involuntary. No "rule".

Freedom of action:
Within the adventure total freedom. I have an overall plot designed from 1st level to ca. 12th with several "escape routes" should the players act in an unforeseen way which happens all too often as we all know.
But I don't find too problematic to find a connection to the main plot line even if all goes inthe "wrong" direction. The epsiodic nature of REH's CONAN stories which serve as example and are knwon by all my players, makes this method very easy.

 

[Odovacar's Ghost]

Combat representation:
A friend of mine build me an awesone gaming table, with a sandblasted grid on a glass. It have lights under it so the table is illuminated so we can close all the lights in the room and the player can still read their character's sheet.

We use it mainly to create a mood. When fights gets complicated or whhen is a building with many rooms, we represent it on the grid an play with minis.

Does your friend make request? Is this his business? I'd love to order one myself!

 

[Bushido]

Combat representation:
A friend of mine build me an awesone gaming table, with a sandblasted grid on a glass. It have lights under it so the table is illuminated so we can close all the lights in the room and the player can still read their character's sheet.

We use it mainly to create a mood. When fights gets complicated or whhen is a building with many rooms, we represent it on the grid an play with minis.

Does your friend make request? Is this his business? I'd love to order one myself!

I would say probably, but I'm going to ask him and get back to you...

 

[Etepete]

Performance: 1st, rather relaxed, theatrical fervour dependent on pacing and what's going on. We run Conan for pulp action, not deep-immersion drama.

Freedom of action: Loosely run, when a GM I don't act as much as re-act, so the players do have a lot of say. That said, there are things beyond their control as well.

Combat representation: Verbal, of course. I'm no board-gamer. I do use hand-drawn (gridless) tactical maps though, mainly for raids and recon.

Master's screen: Yup. As a matter of form though. I'm not used to reading off of it, so most of the times I need to check something up I'm halfway through the book before I realise it's actually on the screen.

 

[Trodax]

Performance: 1st person. No funky voices or stuff like that, though.

Freedom of action: Well, yes; within the adventure. No freedom at all between adventures, though. I could for example start a session with something like; "Since the last adventure, you have travelled north and come to the land of Zamora. During an evening of heavy drinking at a tavern you were overpowered and knocked unconscious by a band of slavers. You now find yourselves in chains, headed east towards Turan."
I don't usually play this way with other games, but for Conan, I think it works.

Combat representation: Dry-erase grid map (from Chessex) and counters (like the ones from Shadizar and Messantia). I have miniatures as well, but they are to much of a hassle to carry around.

Master's screen: Yes, to hide my notes. Dice are rolled in the open.

 

[Padre]

Performance: 1st person. Usually no different NPC voices.

Freedom of action: I like my players to think they have unlimited freedom, but I don't believe you can make a good story by letting the characters use this privilege all the time. It's a question of balance, I guess.

Combat representation: Verbal and sometimes maps. Maybe I'll check counters out some time.

Master's screen: Nope.

 

[Bregales]

Performance:
1st or 3rd, depending on the player, and what he or she is comfortable with. Most usually do 3rd person. I always do NPCs in 1st person, changing voices as necessary (it gets really bad some times when I'm not doing a good job). There have been several games in our Saturday group where we role-play conversations between players and NPCs and only do one or 2 combats in the course of the night. Of course, their insistance on pre-published adventures has led to more combat, but I still emphasize character representation throughout. Like Raven, in my group all NPCs speak for themselves and have voices, characterizations and mannerisms. Almost all descriptions in game are done from the PC's POV in my game as well. 3rd person only comes into play for long-term things like overland travel.

Freedom of action:
Players do what they want. I usually don't steer them. When a player says something, I ask "Do you really say that in character?" and they either reply "No man, I was just joking" or they say "Yeah." In my game, the characters do whatever they want. Whether they realize that I pay attention to all the consequences of each action is questionable. Right now I have 3 tribes/nations/groups of people out to kill the present party because of their past behaviors, and they don't even seem to realize it!! One player complains that there's no repercussions and I reply "Oh yes there are. Each thing evolves according to it's time."

Combat representation:
I'm totally copying Vincent Darlage's reply here: I only get out the mat and the minis when the scenerio is especially complicated. Otherwise, I mentally figure out locations, distances and attacks of opportunity to speed up play, and I show all of that through my oral description.

Master's screen:
I'm not totally happy with the GM screen, but it's pretty good I guess, and I do use it. I put my notes behind it. I may roll dice behind it, or have the players see my rolls (like when I rolled 8 natural 20's and the group couldn't believe it - 8 twenties out of 12 rolled, and the group's evil scheme was discovered. ~The use of the screen is kind of a joke, because I'm the least secretive GM in our gaming group.