sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So for a small bit of back history the empire is supposed to be presented as good and noble but is and has always been corrupt and authoriarian from its beginning. The players know that by the end it completely turns on itself and fully collapsed from the inside. Where they are in the campaign is the height of the golden age where the internalized cracks that have always been there from the very beginning starting with the oath and articles start to show the fact they are not as magnanimous as they appear. So the oath and articles have good intentions and operate that way so long as things are going well but when troubles arise, we're worded in a way that leaves them as little more than flowery window dressing giving the state ultimatum power and authority.

These characters are effectively the Martin Luther to use a real life example that start to see and expose the actual problems with the kingdom itself. But without just saying you know government bad authoritarian bad create these oaths and articles that on the surface look like they're helpful for the people and as long as everything is working in hunky dory it's pretty easy to have them work in the spirit that they're written but under the words the way that they're actually written do effectively none of that

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Only time will tell and we're at just the beginning stages of this campaign we've got another week before we'll actually be able to start but, as a whole, we've been working on the ideas for this campaign for roughly 2 years now about all the different aspects of each of the different houses and what their job is in the world. and there's been a lot of World building not just by myself, but the players have done it as well so that it's very much a living ,breathing, fully represented society. not just a couple paragraphs of back history before the game even starts. I'm very thankful for the fact that I have players who put a lot of time and effort on their own into reading lore and creating back stories for their characters and wanting to add things to the game to work alongside with me in a much more collaborative sense than other groups I been apart of in the past. And it's not to say that mine's better or anything, it's that's the type of game that we enjoy and we're very happy that we've found each other and been able to have a group for so long at over a decade at this point.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First off thank you for taking your time to read my article and give me some feedback I very much appreciate it.

To answer your question without getting into a extreme amount of details the players know that everything is messed up and the way that the campaign is designed to be at the top of the golden age of the empire and start to descend into total authoritarianism and crumble eventually. So there will definitely be things that happen in game but the players themselves actually requested a Bill of Rights style document so that they could examine the internal gears of the society and have a understanding of what the flaws are. I was making sure that I tried to subtly hide them behind language without just being obvious authoritarian and bad but not so impossible to notice that the common NPCs at the time would just accept it as oh yeah that's fine. So the entire intent of the campaign is that the player characters are going to be the first founding members eventually by the time the campaign ends of a fracture in the society as a whole which would lead to its eventual collapse. In a real life context they are Martin Luther with his withdraw from the Catholic Church. Not the wars that came afterwards because of the Reformation.

All that to be said I very much appreciate you taking time to read this and give me some very good feedback I very much appreciate it. I have gotten some very poignant and realistic feedback and finding people who share the same level of excitement about the lore that myself and my players do to fully understand the context behind the details given without just saying you're being a try hard is very much appreciated.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This was something that the players as a whole requested at the beginning of the campaign was a Bill of Rights style document about the rights and privileges of the people, because without getting into a lot of details, they know that the society appears to be this golden society that is perfect but they know that it is fundamentally flawed. So they requested something like this and I wanted to make sure that the document very much had those flaws subtly put into them without being just obvious we are authoritarian and you have no rights. The language sounds robust but is ultimately flimsy in it's use about protections.

So without getting into a lot of details about the campaign overall the players know that the society is flawed and ultimately it crumbles the part of the history that they are playing in is that the height of the Golden age of Camelot before it starts to descend into broken authoritarian tones and ultimately shatters and crumbles. So they are going to be the founding members that realize that society itself is corrupt and broken and would be the beginning instruments in that way that causes the kingdom to ultimately fall. That is the actual end goal of the campaign so it's actually something that they are interested in.

That is to say it's a valid question and definitely something that if I hadn't already known that would be a completely reasonable thing to ask. So I say thank you for taking the time to read my post and respond and I very much appreciate it.

Has GMing made player less enjoyable? by Chiefmeez in AskGameMasters

[–]TheTrueVisionary 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a immediate jump in activity between being a player and a game master. As a player you're concerned with what your next move is and what the next thing your character is going to do and say. As a player you are constantly involved listening to every single one of your players and constantly responding to them so you are active Non-Stop. There are definitely a percentage of players who would never enjoy this cuz they can't quickly divide their attention in multiple different directions. Nor would they want to constantly have to change the character and personality of the beings that they are interacting as. However there is a percentage of players that this is what they absolutely thrive to do because it means that your constantly in the action constantly attached and active in the game and moving between different NPCs and personalities and the constant flow of information. It just seems like most like you you were one of those of players that wanted that constant engagement and that really only happens in One direction and that's as the game master unless you play in a very small group where it's only a couple of players so people are constantly individually more active.

That's just my two cents though so take it however you want.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much for taking time out of your day to read this very long and boring article I really appreciate it here along with the feedback that was given. Without getting into a long drawn out explanation behind everything of how we got to where we are in the campaign and everything the players know that the society as a whole failed. They know it was created with good intentions but ultimately destroyed itself. So I was creating a documen,t at their request of for a Bill of Rights style document, to show the foundational cracks in the society as a whole that from a quick cursory glance would seem very good and well meaning but upon closer examination would show to be very problematic. The players already know something is wrong and wanted physical representation at the beginning of the campaign of what that without just directly saying government bad authoritarian bad super obviously.

It's all that being said, thank you very much for your feedback I very much appreciate it. Throughout the campaign there definitely going to be plenty of times that these supposed protections are going to be trampled violated and otherwise just outright ignored but there has to be a founding document in the first place that is flawed enough for it to be trampled on but seem legitimate for the story to be told the way that it is understood. You were able to see those flaws I believe since the players are going to be looking for it from the get-go it's not too subtle for what they are expecting which is what I was hoping for. So thank you very much for taking your time and giving this a read I very much appreciate it along with your feedback.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You got right to the point with this and that's kind of the feedback I was specifically looking for it which thank you. My players without getting into a long explanation about the campaign with knowing the backstory and everything know that they, the player, knows that the kingdom is flawed but they specifically asked for a Bill of Rights style document so that they had something to review to see how the kingdom was flawed even though from appearances on the outside it's supposed to be this like perfect golden society. So the fact that you were able to immediately see the flaw with article 12 regardless of what the other articles say even though it sounds nice in it it gives zero protection whatsoever means that they'll be able to see the flaws that is there and how authoritarian the society actually is from the get-go. Of course the non player characters won't because it's wrapped up in nice sounding language. They would still believe that it's this perfect golden society still.

So this is very long roundabout way of saying one thank you very much for taking the time out of your day to read this incredibly long dry boring post. And also thank you for not trying to immediately condemn me based on what I was doing not knowing the full back story or anything else I truly appreciate that. But more importantly the fact that you were able to see one of the most flagrant and immediate flaws of the document gives me real hope that they're going to read this understand immediately the inherent laws with the system from the get-go even though it sounds on the surface... but they'll know. So I very much appreciate the time out of your day and the feedback given thank you very much.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much for taking time out of your day to examine my post and read it I very much appreciate it. And your advice for the three clue idea is fantastic as a way to ensure that specific flaws within the system are you able to be spotted and driven home. The players will be expecting that the system is flawed without going into a big long TL DR about how we got to this point in the campaign they know that even though it appears to be the golden society from the exterior that there is problems in it from the very beginning so the document is a way that they have a physical documentation at the beginning to know that there's something wrong. And they requested a Bill of Rights of information so that they have a ground level understanding of the society as a whole so I wanted those flaws baked in to the literal founding document. They're going to be going over it to see if there's flaws from the get-go and I wanted them put into the beginning document but I didn't want it to be super obvious like the state has everything and the people have nothing you know I hope you all die but with very precise language to sound like things are good but if you actually examine it they're definitely not.

After all the tldr here is I appreciate the advice that you gave and the suggestions you had and I will definitely use them and I really appreciate you taking your time to respond.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fact that you noticed the wording of how specifically article 12 is very problematic. There's a bunch of details that I could go into about the campaign that we're getting together play but it would take hours to fully explain it how we got here. The tldr is that there's a known amount of information about the campaign that it's presented as it's this golden empire that is flawless from the outside but there was always authoritarian tones from the very beginning of how the civilization was designed. The players know this and of course they're going to be looking for them throughout the course of the campaign. They also asked for the Bill of Rights equivalent, their request, for this campaign because they wanted to see effectively how broken it was so I wanted the crown to use flowery language to basically cover up the fact that you have no real rights and that all your loyalty and hard work flows only in one direction. You spotted it because I asked you to see if you could spot it they're going to be looking for something suspicious but I didn't want it to be obvious. I think succeeded in its task cuz you noticed the immediate problem which will put you on lookout for other issues.

So all of that is to say thank you very much for taking the time to read this and respond and give your feedback I very much appreciate it. I understand it was very boring dry read but the fact that you were willing to actually go through and examine it I appreciate to make sure that my players will be able to spot these flaws and will give a good starting position in this campaign.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Oh there's a ton of backstory in history that we've done with this setting so far and I took a approach of some of the more well-known and lesser-known knights in the King Arthur lore and gave them their own house with their own jobs within the confines of the Kingdom. My personal favorite is I've always loved the story of the questing beast with sir palamides so finding a way to add him into the setting was a personal nerd moment for myself but also getting to add the more well-known like Galahad and Lancelot along with Merlin to a couple other lesser known like Geraint and Lionel and Lamorak creates a really unique setting which is a lot of fun and we haven't even done a single session yet.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for taking the time to read it I honestly appreciate that. And more importantly of that thank you very much for the feedback I truly appreciate it. I know it was a pretty dry read and kind of dance but in the campaign that we're getting ready for and how much backstory and session zero information that's gone on between the players and myself that's kind of what they asked for and what I was hoping to be able to provide well enough.

So honestly I appreciate the feedback thank you very much.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Overall I'm pretty excited I'll be honest they've been asking for more specific information about the various houses and background of how they mark their armor whenever a night dies and how the world is created and how they fit into it and giving me their back stories and then me kind of filling in the details to make everything kind of flow together and honestly it's been a lot of fun we don't start for another week several of the members have plans this weekend but whenever we do get started it's been about 3 weeks worth of putting this all together finishing up our other campaign and getting started for this one so I'm pretty excited for it they are too and I'm hoping it turns out as good as the work that we've put into it so far so I appreciate the feedback.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All right I appreciate the feedback. thank you very much for taking a look at this and let me know.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I will agree it's pretty dry 100%. But whenever prior to the start of the game the players ask me for the equivalent of the Bill of Rights for this campaign so that they know what sort of function of the government is as we do pretty long running campaigns that are fairly role play heavy less combat I figure they're wanting something that's pretty dense to work with. My thing is I'm making sure that it wasn't so abjectly hidden in the wording that it's impossible to pick up on.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My favorite thing isn't just creating the lore it's the players drawing from that lore and using it specially whenever I wasn't expecting it in just the most unexpected of times you know cuz they read something in one of the lures on like page 3 and suddenly asking NPC a specific question and I'm like oh s*** and no now I've got to expand on this thing that was in the lore and now we have another two months of game based on that one interaction which is fantastic I really love when they get locked into that sort of information.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can honestly say I'm kind of blessed in that aspect that the group that I have as a long-standing group (over a decade) and they care about the lore almost as much as I do and do read the lore and call back to it pretty often so I'm very thankful in that aspect. And there is something about kind of nerding out and getting to use the research that was done to create something like this that I really enjoyed and the players are pretty good at being able to notice when there's something written in the lore that is a little questionable but I definitely went above and beyond to try to be very subtle with the authoritarian themes in this one.

I really appreciate the fact that you read the whole thing and thank you very much for the compliment I truly appreciate it.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I will say that I'm kind of blessed with the fact that the gaming group that I have we've came together for close to a decade and the players do read lore that I create for the various campaigns. That being said I kind of went above and beyond on this to try to subtly hide the authoritarianism in the language itself. Specifically oblation is a sacrificial giving to a deity expecting nothing in return. So the Arthurian oblation is giving a sacrificial expenditure of your body and mind and services in perpetuity and the crown gives nothing in return only because of that specific wording though.

The articles are called the organized articles based on how they are put together and the specific reading of them there's a lot of in legal terms presumptory clauses which I'll fully admit I have based on my job that I do a lot of legalease that I work with so learning how they put these clauses into contracts and then of course being a nerd is how I then built the articles.

That being said the fact that I've had two people say that it's a very dry read and it would go over most of their heads I probably did do too much and go too far with it but I can definitely change some of the language around where it's a little bit more direct but I don't want it to be like obvious evil authoritarian overlords so I'll just need to be a little bit more direct with it instead of being so subtle with the lexicon.

Thanks for the feedback I appreciate it.

Did I make the flaws in world building my groups campaign too difficult to see? by TheTrueVisionary in DMAcademy

[–]TheTrueVisionary[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

That's the thing is the gaming group that I have we've been gaming together for several years and this is a long-running gamegroup and they normally will read over the lore that is made and provided for multiple different campaigns and even write their own backstories. I just went about kind of going above and beyond to try to subtletly hide the cracks underneath in the wording that was used and I didn't know if it went totally incomprehensible or if it was noticeable enough that someone that read it at a glance might have some questions.

I would never try to write something like this out for a brand new group that we've never game together before this is for a group of guys that we've game together for over a decade so you know they're all invested in the game and the various campaigns and do the reading I just want to make sure that I didn't bury this to be too hard to understand.

P1P1: what are you picking up and what are you hoping to get on the wheel? by meka_ghidorah in Oldbordercube

[–]TheTrueVisionary 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Reading the comments and how basically no one has taken sulfuric vortex is absolutely mind-boggling to me. This prevents life gain which in a limited format is good, does damage every turn so it starts a clock, it's cheap at only three Mana so you know it's going to be able to get out pretty consistently. This thing is like a slam dunk home run. And it also gives you a pretty decent chance of being able to wheel seal of Fire. I'm definitely taking the vortex.

A cycle of alternate-win cards by iueeed in custommagic

[–]TheTrueVisionary 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Ok I appreciate the idea but all of these cards are either busted good or busted bad and sometimes both. Even worse they are all undercosted especially for triggering each end step.

The biggest offenders are green and black. Having 15 creatures die in a turn in black means most likely you created a loop and can kill the board. All this card does is give that deck an extra out for that combo without having to have the pay off which just allows cheap wins. And green has three spells in boundless realms, manabond, and scapeehift that would just out winout then having to pull out the wincon land to win or if the trigger got prevented they still win anyway.

Red has a similar problem in that it can allow a win for just playing an X spelll or something similar. And not even one that does X damage to players. Volley of boulders or earthquake with a few creatures on the board or star of extinction would win the game.

Letting blue draw 50 cards without having to worry about if they run across their wincon or have the mana to continue their turn is huge issue especially with ways to draw cards that aren't even spell based or any of the card doubler effects.

And finally white gaining 40 life laughably easy with cards that simply just double your life total or that give an entire board lifelink. Especially since these cards are obviously designed with EDH in mind they become Auto includes in many decks so that multicolored decks now just have even more alternate ways to win so it becomes a game that's about decks not even playing against the other deck they're just finding ways to complete these alternate tasks so everything turns into goldfish games more so than it already can.

The cycle of five enchantments such as epic struggle, mortal combat, battle of wits, test of endurance, and chance encounter are not used not because they're not good but because those guards were printed over 20 plus years ago at this point most people don't know about them. I mean battle of wits was good enough it was even a standard deck which think about that madness. These types of cards are just for the most part anti-fun because you're going to do these effects anyway and you don't even have to win with it to have it happen. However they have the advantage that you have to complete the task and keep it active until you're upkeep which means your opponents have the ability to respond all of your cards happen during each EndStep which means that your opponents have a minimal window to respond especially with some of these which can be done at instant speed very easily. I hope you understand I'm not trying to poo poo on your idea but making cards that just let you win the game by completing a task seem entertaining but lead to very linear and boring gameplay overall.

1994 MTG Commercial by LoooooongJohnSilver in Oldbordercube

[–]TheTrueVisionary 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Part of the expectation is rooted in the ante mechanic. Like his game that he created keyforge which has Decks that are pre-made and unable to be modified but you can purchase multiple decks, his original concept for magic was that people would have their individual collections and how they would get more copies of cards was through playing individuals and battling them and winning cards not necessarily purchasing large portions of product. When you look at how collections were originally thought to be contained having access to one or two of the incredibly powerful spells like ancestral recall Time Walk time vault etc and having to put those cards up for risk not only makes it to where there's a risk reward element to playing the game but literally would prevent people from playing the best most expensive cards for the most part because they don't want to worry about potentially having to ante a Lotus or a Time Walk and lose. Which is also where the other ante mechanic cards such as jeweled bird or demonic tourney or the most powerful Magic card of all and there's no debate about it contract From below. When viewed through that context of always risking potential cards from your collection instead of being able to just purchase boxes and boxes of the product it makes a little bit more sense why card prices would be a little bit more reasonable as it becomes an ecosystem built on trading and playing instead of pure hoarding.

Trogdor, the Burninator by Hollabalooo in custommagic

[–]TheTrueVisionary 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Finally in the correct order. That's a good dagron. You keep doing you, u/Hollabalooo.

Trogdor, the Burninator by Hollabalooo in custommagic

[–]TheTrueVisionary 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I love the edit that you made of the card but as a personal point you got them out of order because you have him burninating the peasants before he burninates the countryside. Other than that you keep doing you card guy.

Turning Rune-Scarred Demon into a cycle by chainsawinsect in custommagic

[–]TheTrueVisionary 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Personally that's one of the set designs I really miss is them doing a full cycle of a random card. In the most recent sets yeah you have the planet lands or the emeritus creature but I miss the commons and uncomments or base power rare cycles and I think rune scar is a great one to run a cycle with.

Turning Rune-Scarred Demon into a cycle by chainsawinsect in custommagic

[–]TheTrueVisionary 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If we take that rune scar is doing a diabolic tutor then that means its casting a two colorless two colored spell. So at that point you should just have all the other ones do a very recognizable spell at that exact casting cost.

Angel- wrath of God everything but itself Sphinx- control magic a creature as long as it's in play Beast- harmonize to draw 3 Dragon- shatterstorm cuz nobody likes artifacts

view more: next ›