Also remember VtM is personal horror, stress on the personal always.
One thing I do is make my players do a influence map to each other as the coterie and to people in the city. I have them create one boon (a person or thing who has helped them in the past. Someone who helped them in a breech, a Nossie who did them a solid) and one bane (a person or thing that has hindered them. Their Sire's other Childe, a diablerist that tried to hurt them etc)
The influence map to their coterie should consist of lines of moments that helped define their relationship. One line is good to one player, the other is conflict to the other player. So perhaps (for example) the Ventrue of the group holds the Gangrel in high regard because that Gangrel saves them from a shovel head. But in contrast the Gangrel has conflict with the Ventrue back because maybe the Ventrue inadvertently knocked down a building their herd had influence on or domain.
Help them build these wider city connections, let them add their own lil mythos and lore to the game and then use it. They're their worse enemies in that regard. Force them to expand on their history always. Force them to think about their characters night to night activities, encourage ambitious actions and goals.
Then, you start plotting conflict around those goals and building your net. I would encourage you as a ST to always try to make your plots connect and have strands leading into one another even if by a lil touch. Things don't happen in a vacuum and a powerful enemy has their fingers into everything usually. So make the ghost of those fingers known. It'll be very satisfying when they reach that had of the serpent down the line and realise it had a circle.
Anyway. I could sperg about VtM and WoD STing all fucking day.
You don't need to go big and bombastic for VtM plots. I would encourage the opposite. It's not about world ending or city rending issues all the time. Sometimes its just about simplistic horror that feels close to the heart and makes them question their existence and their humanity.
Give them opportunities to do that, force heavy decisions that don't seem super grandiose but are felt by the PCs because this is a breaking point for them. A child vampire that secretly hires them to off herself because she wants to be put to rest after a century of torment in a body that will never age, a ghoul gone wrong that spins out of control and kidnaps their Malkavian Domitor to spread out the vamps blood and use it to keep everyone he loves alive longer...at the price of their sanity.
Give 'em chances to really ride into grey mortality cuz its not black and white in WoD. At all.
Similar vein but what do you think of MapTool overall? I have a friend that wants to start a game and is trying to figure out which online VTT to use and it's between this, Roll20, and Foundry. Foundry is the one that looks the most interesting to me but it's also $50 USD + tax versus MapTool being... $0
Maptool's reddit has the tagline "The Milenium Falcon of VTTs" and that could not be more accurate. The interface is clunky with zero sharp edges removed, but it performs like nothing else. You can do not just basic bitch things like line of sight/vision blocking, with lightsources and custom distances, but you have full HTML5 scripting available. If you go full autist you can have your spell zones auto-calculate who's hit and how much damage they take.
They also just rolled out height-aware vision in a recent update that I haven't played around with a lot but looks like its got some real potential.
I've been using it for about 10 years. It is free, its insanely powerful and customizable (I still don't do even a fifth of what it could do), but good goddamn is there a skill cliff - though its gotten much, better about that.
I refuse to use Roll20 because they were little bitches with their kickstarter: They promised all backers Lifetime Backer Access. That ended up being "60 days of premium, worthless flair, and being dumped into the free tier like any asshole who signed up later". (I didn't expect full premium forever, but come the fuck on. At least give us some no-ads or extra storage or something) This tells me that they will alter their terms at any time once they have you sucked in.
That said, my hateboner not withstanding, Roll20 is great as a low-barrier to entry system if you aren't sure if you want to commit to a campaign/group. All your players need is a webbrowser, no special software or scary computer numbers needed.
Maptool's reddit has the tagline "The Milenium Falcon of VTTs" and that could not be more accurate. The interface is clunky with zero sharp edges removed, but it performs like nothing else. You can do not just basic bitch things like line of sight/vision blocking, with lightsources and custom distances, but you have full HTML5 scripting available. If you go full autist you can have your spell zones auto-calculate who's hit and how much damage they take.
They also just rolled out height-aware vision in a recent update that I haven't played around with a lot but looks like its got some real potential.
I've been using it for about 10 years. It is free, its insanely powerful and customizable (I still don't do even a fifth of what it could do), but good goddamn is there a skill cliff - though its gotten much, better about that.
I refuse to use Roll20 because they were little bitches with their kickstarter: They promised all backers Lifetime Backer Access. That ended up being "60 days of premium, worthless flair, and being dumped into the free tier like any asshole who signed up later". (I didn't expect full premium forever, but come the fuck on. At least give us some no-ads or extra storage or something) This tells me that they will alter their terms at any time once they have you sucked in.
That said, my hateboner not withstanding, Roll20 is great as a low-barrier to entry system if you aren't sure if you want to commit to a campaign/group. All your players need is a webbrowser, no special software or scary computer numbers needed.
If Fantasy Grounds Unity supports Dungeondraft Universal VTT format, you can import and export maps. I've never tried, but posts from people who have said that it'll move over maps, assets (i.e. doors), and vision blocking layers. No idea if it'll move over macros and the like, but my assumption is not.
Fantasy Grounds is also on the shitlist (but not as bad as Roll20) because they sold perpetual licenses for "Fantasy Grounds", then to get around free updates, rebranded the next release "Fantasy Grounds Unity" (See you bought a perpetual for Fantasy Grounds, but this now FGU, completely different, another $150 please. I'm also overly sure how their "phone home" system works with perpetual licences, and I have a general and strict aversion to paying for software that requires someone else's infrastructure to be working.
However your old copy of Fantasy Grounds will still work, they announced the change well in advance and continued legacy support for a while - they pulled a pretty shitty move, but they weren't complete asshats about it.
Like I said in the tl;dr on that, its really bad news for PF2e, its great news for PF3e. PF2e was far too late for the 4e crowds because I don't think Paizo released anything 4e (who can blame them) so PF2e taking about 7 years after the end of 4e was too late. PF2e was too different for PF1e powergamers to get down with, and anyone who liked 4e had been homebrewing for a decade and didn't need someone to tell them what to do.
When Wizards releases 6e, Paizo if they have any sense should be ready with PF3e which will be to 5e what PF1e was to DnD 3.5e. I have a feeling I won't like it (or its players) any more than I like a PF1e munchkin, but can't deny its a good move for the company.
Intel needs its AMD.
I've posted before but D&D's real power is their (at this point) 50 years of material that is more or less compatible (or convertable) that uses the same language, same tools (dice). Even the bastard child 4e, you can take Keep on the Borderlands and swap out the monster stat blocks with something level appropriate and boom, 4e adventure path, which is why they use odd words in weird ways (like unnamed "Saves") in 4e.
PF2e trying to be its own thing doesn't tap into that history and vocabulary. PF1e did as a 3.5 clone. PF2e didn't bring anything to the table anyone still playing PF1e in TYOL 2019 cared about. PF1e also, from annecdote, seems to have gotten the 2e "PCs should die-die" crowd to jump ship, or at least engage in heterodoxy.
Anyway that a lot of autism to say
My main point was Blaizen was saying people saying this meant PF2e was dead were wrong. I was telling him the haters were probably right about PF2e, but it would let Paizo make money and continue on as 5e module publisher.
I am annoyed whenever I see everything being released as "5e!" but also can't fault any publisher/writer for taking easy money. I will say Wizards learned only the worst lessons from 4e but whoever was in charge of their licensing department was an evil genius for throwing the doors open wider than they were for even 3.5e, and working with DTRPG to do the DM Guild thing.
I assume you mean 5e, 4e was notorious for it's SRD and it's one of the reasons 3pp content was pretty much nonexistent (or at least nothing like 3e) thinking they can take a cut from everything and being butthurt about pathfinder. the DTRPG thing really only kicked off with 5e (especially considering how sparse and crappy the official output is).
I just disagree on the 2e part, it would be only an issue if they stop selling it tomorrow and go full 5e, which I highly doubt they will do anytime soon (or ever). paizo is wotc's main competitor, given their history it's easy to say "lol fail", but that ignores it's also a unique case. paizo re-selling their content is simply increasing it's value, since it's already been made and produced and 2e players will buy it anyway, you just get 5e sales on top. same way half the kickstarters and other shit do an "also as pf1 version", yet no one claims every time that happens 5e is suddenly finished and unpopular, because content != system. it's also easier to make a 5e version than the other way around, and 5e players not having any standards to begin with given how happy they are to pay for shitty modules and then pay more on dmsguild for fixes and filler or spent their own time on it, so you don't need to put any effort in 5e content anyway (imagine paying 50 bucks for a railroady ready-made wotc book you have to spend as much time and effort to fix than doing your own thing in the first place).
if it gets people to know your name and potentially give your system a try that's a bonus, maybe even more so given it's still officially supported and "not dnd's worst edition" as they've been told (unless they also believe "pf2e is 4.0 - shit edition", at which point it becomes really difficult to recommend them anything that's a step up from 5e without going full blown pf3.5).
the problem I have with the whole 4e discussion these days is that same way "4e is like an mmo" back then, now any system more crunchy and gamey than 5e is suddenly called a 4e reject (not that there are that many that get released these days anyway, as much as it sounds a like faggy paizo defense it's the semantics that annoy me). it's like calling every fucking videogame that's not brain dead easy a soulslike. by that logic a more complex 6e must then be "4e 2.0" too, which inevitably would run into the same issue pf2e apparently does in that 4e players have been doing their own thing and don't need a "new" 4e...?
besides, I don't think we'll see a 6e anytime soon, and even if it happens for marketing it most likely won't change too much to not chase away their existing playerbase that like it exactly for it's "accessibility" (and not create another pf). any form of 6e will probably double down on that to get that elusive demographic that doesn't know how dice work or thinks numbers are a racist tool to oppress minorities.
the same playerbase which has also never heard of keep on the borderlands and unironically thinks 5e is the name, not an edition number. if you're the kind of GM who does your own homebrew and port, you're not limited to just dnd anyway and can pull from every source, so dnd's own historic content doesn't really matter. anyone else will just buy a module to run, openly or not, where it again doesn't matter if it's previous dnd content (now in shit) or comes from somewhere else.
@ZMOT
You are quoted bugged, and yes I mean they learned only the worst lessons about 4e to apply to 5e.
PF2e has 4e all over it. More than just enhanced crunch, The class progression feats are just 4e powers by another name - just no H/P/E tiering, and since its class-not-universal you can balance shit a little better. (Honestly its more like D&D Next with the vancian casting returning, but that's more hair splitting than more people care and admittedly DNDN was always a transition ruleset so there isn't an 'official' DNDN)
PF2e is to 4e what PF1e was for 3.5. They just too long to get it out.
Anyway, that is immaterial - Paizo shifting to 5e is huge and means they are focusing away from from the system after 3 years. This is some serious levels of throwing in the towel. Again, Paizo is going to be fine, they are not going to go full cut and run on PF2e, but I doubt any new content is entering the production pipeline for 2e.
I very confident that for the 50th anniversary in 2024 WotC will announce 6e's development, or at least the 5e version of D&D Next. 10 years is about the average life span of a D&D edition.
Hold the fuck up, they sell "fixes" for the official adventures in DM's guild and what's more, it is the own writers doing that shit? I thought fixes were mostly a community thing or for exceptional cases such as hoard of the dragon thing and even then kobold press offered the fixes as a free supplement.
After just about 2 years my D&D 5e campaign is just about at the end, and my players are about to confront the Lovecraftian flesh god they have been trying to stop from entering and absorbing the entirety of their plane into itself. It's going to be nice to take a break from DMing, I am really starting to get burnt out with all the balancing, map making and attendance babysitting. As I ran the game I did less and less art, but I did get off my ass to make the final boss for the occasion.
Hopefully none of them browse the Farms for the spoiler!
After just about 2 years my D&D 5e campaign is just about at the end, and my players are about to confront the Lovecraftian flesh god they have been trying to stop from entering and absorbing the entirety of their plane into itself. It's going to be nice to take a break from DMing, I am really starting to get burnt out with all the balancing, map making and attendance babysitting. As I ran the game I did less and less art, but I did get off my ass to make the final boss for the occasion.
During tonight's game the party got a lecture about proper treatment of prisoners, even chaotic evil ones that willingly allowed themselves to become host to the spirit of Yeenoghu, and how we weren't to transport an "origami gnoll" to the holding cells via Galder's Speedy Courier.
During tonight's game the party got a lecture about proper treatment of prisoners, even chaotic evil ones that willingly allowed themselves to become host to the spirit of Yeenoghu, and how we weren't to transport an "origami gnoll" to the holding cells via Galder's Speedy Courier.
I just tell my players:
If you try to torture a prisoner beyond some smacking around, they will die of shock. If you seriously mistreat prisoners, they'll probably stage a rebellion and get some divine help to be as dangerous as if you'd just fought them to the death. If you turn them over the authorities and the authorities opt to summarily execute them, that's not on you. I'm not running some weird Hostel or Marathon Man playing pretend, live your dark sociopathic urges on someone else's time.
Just a funny question on my part: what would you guys do if the players just ignored your declarations and then mutinied and hijacked the game despite your efforts? Just wondering, since I've read stories where that on rare occasion happens.
Admittedly it's usually due to the players just getting sick of a shit GM, but I'm just curious to see the responses,
Six foot gnoll in a three cubic foot box. There was debate on whether it would fit or not, which was solved with a strength check.
I just tell my players:
If you try to torture a prisoner beyond some smacking around, they will die of shock. If you seriously mistreat prisoners, they'll probably stage a rebellion and get some divine help to be as dangerous as if you'd just fought them to the death. If you turn them over the authorities and the authorities opt to summarily execute them, that's not on you. I'm not running some weird Hostel or Marathon Man playing pretend, live your dark sociopathic urges on someone else's time.
Yeah, nah, we're not doing that. If threatening/a few smacks fails, then we let the spell caster handle it if they have something appropriate. Worst thing we did to a prisoner was cut off his tongue, but he was also a child murdering piece of shit warlock and we didn't want to risk him getting loose again.
Just a funny question on my part: what would you guys do if the players just ignored your declarations and then mutinied and hijacked the game despite your efforts? Just wondering, since I've read stories where that on rare occasion happens.
Admittedly it's usually due to the players just getting sick of a shit GM, but I'm just curious to see the responses,
Depends on what you mean "ignored my declarations", and how many players.
Assuming they are just ignoring what I said and continuing to play like I wasn't there/talking, if it is the whole group, I stop the game (or my part of the game), pack my shit, and leave. IF they want to go off the rails, they can go without me there. If I get a group apology we can talk about picking up again, but baring that, I'd probably be done with any player in that group for good. I don't have time for that shit.
I don't get GMs like the one from @DDBCAE CBAADCBE 's story; its fucking playing pretend. Why be miserable? Do literally anything else.
If its just one or two players out of the blue, I'd talk to them after session, see what happened and either see what's wrong and if anything needs fixing, or tell them not to come next week if they aren't going to respect my & everyone else's time.
Generally I've not had an issue. The couple of times someone has started to do stupid shit to do stupid shit, several members of the party stop both the character and the player and tell them to stop fucking around because they want to play the game and see where the GM is going with this.
I just tell my players:
If you try to torture a prisoner beyond some smacking around, they will die of shock. If you seriously mistreat prisoners, they'll probably stage a rebellion and get some divine help to be as dangerous as if you'd just fought them to the death. If you turn them over the authorities and the authorities opt to summarily execute them, that's not on you. I'm not running some weird Hostel or Marathon Man playing pretend, live your dark sociopathic urges on someone else's time.
Yeah, nah, we're not doing that. If threatening/a few smacks fails, then we let the spell caster handle it if they have something appropriate. Worst thing we did to a prisoner was cut off his tongue, but he was also a child murdering piece of shit warlock and we didn't want to risk him getting loose again.
Torture makes perfect sense in certain situations, such as an evil/anti-hero campaign where the cast definitely wouldn't care in character, or a time sensitive situation where finesse was not possible, such as getting answers out of mook to locate a kidnapped child who's about to be sold off. And, in any case, this is medieval times; torture was how you got information, even if you were town guards. Ground rules should just be established at a session zero so that everyone is comfortable with such situations, and it must be made clear that torture is for utilitarian purposes, not prurient ones.
Just a funny question on my part: what would you guys do if the players just ignored your declarations and then mutinied and hijacked the game despite your efforts? Just wondering, since I've read stories where that on rare occasion happens.
Admittedly it's usually due to the players just getting sick of a shit GM, but I'm just curious to see the responses,
As @Ghostse said, I'd just pack up and let them keep playing on their own. Obviously they're getting on just fine without me, so why should I waste my breath if the group doesn't want Big Papa giving them their quests and playing the villains?
Torture makes perfect sense in certain situations, such as an evil/anti-hero campaign where the cast definitely wouldn't care in character, or a time sensitive situation where finesse was not possible, such as getting answers out of mook to locate a kidnapped child who's about to be sold off. And, in any case, this is medieval times; torture was how you got information, even if you were town guards. Ground rules should just be established at a session zero so that everyone is comfortable with such situations, and it must be made clear that torture if for utilitarian purposes, not prurient ones.
You aren't wrong, but my experience has been its better to just ban it or reduce it to a Intimidate roll, because then your subtle sociopaths push the line between "We have to torture this guy" to "We GET to torture this guy".
I flex on "Batman style Interrogation" (i.e. Holding them by their leg over a cliff - you are threatening them but not actively harming them [yet]). Twisting arrows, malicious (necessary) medical treatment, etc. They don't have to be saints.
Knowing your players also helps.
I'm also a lot of less strict on the rule in a game where.... its face to face and everyone knows each other. Because societal shame will keep their darkest impulses in check. An zoom game with people I don't know very well? I'm going to enforce that ban rigorously.
There is also the "Fear" problem - Which is PCs will think absolutely nothing of standing the path of a charging dragon with a wooden shield and rusty longsword, because they aren't actually in danger. That is, the NPCs have limited ways of effectively torturing the PCs.
You aren't wrong, but my experience has been its better to just ban it or reduce it to a Intimidate roll, because then your subtle sociopaths push the line between "We have to torture this guy" to "We GET to torture this guy".
I flex on "Batman style Interrogation" (i.e. Holding them by their leg over a cliff - you are threatening them but not actively harming them [yet]). Twisting arrows, malicious (necessary) medical treatment, etc. They don't have to be saints.
Knowing your players also helps.
I'm also a lot of less strict on the rule in a game where.... its face to face and everyone knows each other. Because societal shame will keep their darkest impulses in check. An zoom game with people I don't know very well? I'm going to enforce that ban rigorously.
There is also the "Fear" problem - Which is PCs will think absolutely nothing of standing the path of a charging dragon with a wooden shield and rusty longsword, because they aren't actually in danger. That is, the NPCs have limited ways of effectively torturing the PCs.
I allow torture within reason and while I’m willing to play it out with a player that can responsibly handle it without being all edge lord I will do a fade to black if it drags on too long.
On a related note I’ve recently been playing a villianous character in a different game wherein after kidnapping the middle-man for a high profile criminal syndicate I only had to threaten to torture him with a few tools that I found at a cult temple once. I got the information out of him, killed him, and dropped his body off at the syndicate’s doorstep to provoke them. So far it’s working. They moved out of their main base of operations after I continued breaking in every few nights to rob them and generally be a nuisance. My plan is to gradually muscle them out of the territory and take over their turf.
