On timing in role-playing games

[klecser]

I wrote this from the perspective of Call of Cthulhu and investigative role-playing, but I think that it applies equally to the advanced social structures of Glorantha and Runequest, so posting here too.

 

Edited June 28, 2019 by klecser

[styopa]

Granted, I'm coming at this from the position of DM'ing now for eek, 40 years, my immediate impression of new DMs is that they are far too slavishly dedicated to the written material.

Whether it's the precise layout of a map, to the placement/appearance of monsters, to the pacing of encounters, to treasure they find - I freely 'wing it' when I feel it would be more fun for the group.  This doesn't mean coddling them, it doesn't mean trying to kill them or save them from stupid choices (although I've been known to throw some shit in published adventures where I suspect someone might have read it and not be totally forthright about it...).  No, the dice have to be the arbiter of outcomes, or players will feel they're simply dancing on the DMs strings - IMO that's no fun.  It also deprecates their choices; if there really isn't risk, there can't be bravery.

Make that NPC a woman, get rid of that encounter because it doesn't make any sense based on how you set the adventure in your world, add some dogs because that 'smart BBEG' wouldn't be so stupid as to leave the place unguarded while she's away.  Throw in a piece of treasure that will really "work" for the player who last session got pummelled because he played in-character (if they find it).

The point is fun for your group.  Full stop.