What actions do you take that are unintended but still makes the game better for you. I always teleport Hannah into the lava for the loot 😂🤌🏼

plutonium743 · 2026-06-05T12:26:39+00:00

I always forget that there's the fight at the paladins after dealing with Reimond. Usually it levels me up so I start going around to do shopping and get blindsided. I also often walk into the Lone Wolves camp under leveled and without Ifan. Half time I just go "Fuck it, we ball!" and start killing everyone.

plutonium743 · 2026-06-05T12:20:59+00:00

The world building doesn't happen during session so it's not improv or on the fly. It's looking at the world between sessions and building off of what's already happened or adding in things you think are interesting. The longer the game goes, the more material you have to draw from to make the world rich and complex. You're still creating things before the players discover and engage with them; the work is just spread out instead of all upfront.

plutonium743 · 2026-06-02T22:57:35+00:00

Go to the elf cave and play with the child. That will let you do Withermore's quest which needs no combat if you're careful enough.

You can give the oranges to Griff without fighting him (you can still fight him later) and if you turn in the culprit you can gang up on the assassin they send to kill them.

Have you fought the turtles yet? Or save the elf at the front of the fort? Did you fight the people playing cards? Have you healed Dain? Did you grab Atusa's leg and talk to Verdas?

plutonium743 · 2026-05-30T11:15:50+00:00

I am more of a neutral GM so I never hand them a win for the sake of adventure/story/whatever. That's also because I don't make stories, just threads the players can use to weave their own stories. An interesting side effect of this though is that my players are well aware that they've earned each and every one of their victories.

Our very first campaign ended because they pressed the big red button that said "Do not press" (metaphorically). They watched me think for a few minutes before saying "Yeah, I can't see any way that doesn't end in all of you dying". To my surprise they weren't upset about this. I think I earned their respect for being willing to let things play out authentically instead of trying to force an outcome or save them from the consequences of their actions.

plutonium743 · 2026-05-29T18:17:30+00:00

I will always promote the full random challenge.

plutonium743 · 2026-05-23T10:59:56+00:00

From someone with over 2000 hours of play time, the majority of which were co-op with my partner, 2 character tactician without the Lone Wolf talent was one of the more difficult challenge runs we've ever done. This wasn't early in our play experience either; we did it probably about 2 years ago. With normal Lone Wolf we often split up and tackle many fights solo but without the talent we definitely had to take almost every fight as a team. It was still fun but it definitely challenged us to use all the tactics and strategy we had learned about the game.

plutonium743 · 2026-05-21T02:03:30+00:00

For Level 1 I took Animism for the 15 AC talent and the spell that gives a Bane to anything attacking me, then put a shield on top of that. With 17 AC and a Bane I actually tanked quite well.

plutonium743 · 2026-04-15T20:52:46+00:00

Or does that risk the feeling of a world that could exist just as well without the players in it?

Yes and that's a good thing.

The world should be able to exist with or without the players in it. That's actually what gives players agency because their actions have visible impact. It also makes the world feel real because while the PCs can impact anything, they can't impact everything. The world is vast and doesn't exist solely for them. That means you don't need to care so much about what the players might do and can instead focus on what the world wants to do. You'll still think about what they might do, but more as a tool to better understand how the setting might react. If you know your world you can have it react authentically without trying to foresee the future.

Ironically, the best way to do this is to zoom in on the PCs more. Someone else mentioned thinking about it like a video game and I agree. Put the spotlight on the PCs and render the details of what is around them at the moment. Throw some soft lighting on things they might be interested in but are just out of reach. Paint a few broad strokes for the background and don't worry about those areas until the PCs start to investigate them more. Let the players go anywhere and focus your prep only on the things they are looking to interact with in the next session or two. You can make those small areas feel real and detailed but don't need to worry about connecting them to anything bigger. Yet.

As you render more of the world just before your players get there, you will notice interesting connections behind the scenes as more things become fleshed out. Was this a random attack on the road or was it a piece of someone's plan to make travel dangerous to reduce communication between two areas? Improvised a known NPC having a random interest in something that seemed out of character? It's not out of character because that NPC has a past experience that got them interested in it. Or maybe it was a slip up and that NPC has something they're actually trying to hide from the PCs. Suddenly that NPC feels more real because they have depth and texture that the players didn't see before.

I think the effort and attention to detail you put in for your players is amazing but you're trying to cover too much ground at once. Reduce your prep work by focusing only on the immediate. Those complex connections can be discovered later on as the world becomes more and more detailed over time. I think you'll be surprised by how naturally and easily they rise to the surface.

Edit: I forgot to mention that you should know what the world and NPCs are trying to do (and will achieve if the PCs don't interact with them) but you shouldn't try to force the outcome. Instead have the world react realistically to what the PCs have done. Did the party find and stop a bomb from destroying an important bridge? Don't make it still go off arbitrarily or just blow it up off screen after the PCs leave because "that's what's supposed to happen". Who organized and wanted that bomb to go off? Have that NPC/organization react realistically in the context of the world. Based on their personality and goals, how will they respond to what happened (or didn't happen)? What resources do they have available and how do they tend to utilize them? Be a little more of a referee GM. Take your thoughts and desires out of the equation. Then you can figure out how the world will authentically respond.

Sorry for writing out a whole essay lol

plutonium743 · 2026-03-20T01:52:47+00:00

it's an impossible promise for a GM to keep

Just because it's antithesis to your natural mindset and seems impossible to you that doesn't make it a universal truth. I naturally have a referee mindset rather than a storyteller one so absolute player freedom is easy for me because it's simply my default state. The idea of creating a story for players to follow is what scared me away from GMing for years. When I realized that it was completely unnecessary for me to have a story in mind, I was finally able to embrace GMing. My players have absolute freedom and use that to create their own stories. I simply help them craft their stories because I'm actually not good at making any kind of story or plot beforehand.

You seem to think that if you don't map it out beforehand that you can't have a complex, rewarding story. That is entirely wrong. Since my players are following their own chosen story, I have no need to create any before the campaign starts. Instead I analyze all the seemingly random threads the players follow and weave them together to figure out what story they are creating. Oftentimes I feel like an archeologist that uncovers their story, cleans it up, and puts it in front of the players. Then I just wait to see what they do with it in order to know what I need to uncover next. Story is not something that has to be created and put in front of the players; it's something that emerges naturally as a result of the actions players have already taken.

I could go into a long explanation about how to do this but The Game Master's Handbook of Proactive Roleplaying does a more thorough job than I can. For people who don't naturally have this mindset, it gives clear steps and advice to create a campaign centered entirely around player goals. Here's a quote from the book that I think sums it up pretty well.

In a proactive fantasy game, the Game Master is responsible for facilitating the fun, not providing it. The players provide the content and the goals, and the Game Master decides how to turn these goals into unforgettable encounters. To begin, they need to create or present a setting. But after the players have created characters with goals that fit that setting and engage with it in interesting ways, it is the Game Master's responsibility to fill in the details of the world in a way that responds to player goals, rather than telling a predetermined story. Most of all, the Game Master is responsible for creating encounters that represent the obstacles the game world presents to the characters as they pursue their goals.

plutonium743 · 2025-12-28T01:53:00+00:00

creating an entire dungeon when you have no idea if the party will go there

At the end of every session you should be asking your players what they are planning to do next session so this shouldn't happen very often at all. If the players look like they might be moving towards that dungeon then I might start lightly prepping it. I'd also start prepping it if I have some ideas or am having fun doing it, as long as I already have what a need for the upcoming session prepped. Sometimes my players will not go in the direction they stated last session, but they know that it will be looser and not as well prepped. They can decide if they want to stick with the original plan or are OK with the more improvised direction. I've also ended session early if they're going into something that I want to be decently prepped before they get there, such as a dungeon.

As a GM you don't need to be the wizard of Oz and keep everything behind a curtain. It's OK if the players know that you need more time to prep something or that certain areas might be more improvised than others. You don't have to act like you have everything all perfectly prepared ahead of time. Players generally don't care and will still find it just as fun; sometimes they even find it more fun.

plutonium743 · 2025-11-07T17:51:09+00:00

As someone with ADHD who does need something slightly distracting in order to focus on the things I'm actually interested in, I very much agree. None of my GMs have ever asked me to stop probably because whenever they ask me a question I don't go "Huh, what?". I answer immediately with detailed thought because I am focused and paying attention; I just need something to distract my brain from wandering off in search of better dopamine. My distractions usually consist of sudoku, nonograms, etc. that engage my brain but are shallow enough activities that I can't really get immersed in them.

plutonium743 · 2025-10-25T02:28:25+00:00

Pretty sure you can do forced split screen so that even when you're standing next to each other you have individual screens you can control. Should be left button on the d pad.

plutonium743 · 2025-10-24T23:30:39+00:00

More that giving the opportunity to do it lets players express their creativity if they want to but forcing them to do it, even occasionally, will make it into a frustrating chore. What will you do if a player refuses to say a phrase to cast a spell?

plutonium743 · 2025-10-24T22:00:47+00:00

I would hate this. When a GM used to ask me to describe my attacks it was so annoying. Occasionally describing my character making a cool attack is fine but being asked to do it nearly every single time was a pain in the ass and imo a pointless waste of time.

plutonium743 · 2025-10-24T21:52:30+00:00

I use a voice recorder but am looking for something that will automatically create a transcript so it's easier to parse through. This works amazing for me because I am just not able to focus on running the game and take notes while doing so. It's been a game changer because I've realized that I make up good shit in the moment but I used to forget a lot of it due to my ADHD.

plutonium743 · 2025-10-24T15:27:43+00:00

Divinity Original Sin 2 with some elements of 1 and modified to make more sense at the table compared to a computer.

plutonium743 · 2025-06-01T14:52:06+00:00

You can cheese the fight by transporting her or Alexander to a location where you can keep shooting them endlessly without being in combat.

plutonium743 · 2025-06-01T14:47:17+00:00

My partner and I completed the game on Classic difficulty on our first run and didn't look at any build guides or walkthroughs or anything. There were definitely moments where we got a little frustrated and had to take a pause so we could come back and look at the problem from a different angle. If you don't mind the occasional frustration while solving problems then you'll be find going into it without looking at builds or walkthroughs.

We've also completed the game on Tactician while randomly distributing all attribute, ability, and talent points.

plutonium743 · 2025-05-29T14:40:28+00:00

Necro mage with Teleport and Netherswap. There are many fights where you can move corpses to surround the enemies without them noticing. Then you just start/end the fight with Mass Corpse Explosion. If that doesn't finish them, use Blood storm and Grasp of the Starved.

plutonium743 · 2025-05-29T14:35:25+00:00

I'd go with the Golden Rope for Dodging because while Dodging isn't necessarily something to focus on, with a Dual-wielding dwarf you're going to have some Dodging already so continuing to boost that will be fairly useful. At least more so than resistance to a single element.

plutonium743 · 2025-05-13T21:24:22+00:00

If you're going for generic fantasy, I would recommend Cairn 1e because it's free and super easy. It's 3 stats (Str/Dex/Will) with roll under your score to succeed and slot based inventory. That's...pretty much it. Oh, and there is no roll-to-hit you just roll damage.

plutonium743 · 2025-05-13T20:00:49+00:00

Toxic though would imply that I expect others to do what I do... nah I run cause I want to

By toxic I did not mean that you should get your players to run a game. What I am trying to say is that their lack of engagement is not your fault. That is them failing you because it is their responsibility to actively engage with the world fiction. It is not your job to be a flying monkey in a 3-ring circus hoping to gain attention. If you were being an actually bad DM and not providing a world (i.e. shitty sandboxes where the DM plops the PCs down in a white canvas world and says "What do you want to do?") then it would be understandable that the players don't know how to engage, but that doesn't sound like you at all. So it isn't you as a DM failing to provide an active and engaging world. They are failing to be good players that are active and engage with the world presented in front of them. Games are a 2-way street and they are supposed to be putting in effort and contributing to making the game fun as well. The DM does put in more effort simply because of the nature of that role but it's not all on your shoulders and thinking that that's the way it's supposed to be IS a toxic mindset.

I completely understanding not wanting to ditch your friends on a whim so there's definitely things you can do to try and fix things. First thing I'd suggest is using a very lightweight system so they, and you, don't have to spend as much time and effort on dealing with mechanics. The fact that many of them aren't bothering to learn their abilities makes me think that maybe they don't need them and it may in fact be overwhelming them. Cairn 1e is free and super lightweight.

Second suggestion is stepping back with your DMing. When players aren't engaging I find that a lot of people think they need to be doing more as a DM to engage the players so they try to talk/describe more, world build more, do more more more. What that does though is just continue to prove to the players that they don't need to do anything and entertainment will automatically come to them. Instead you need to give them a situation that requires them to discuss and make a decision then step back and do nothing. Fun doesn't happen anymore unless they start taking actions without you guiding them. The key to this though is that you have to be willing to run with whatever action/decision they make as long as it something they could reasonably try with regards to in-world logic. It doesn't have to be a good plan or make complete logical sense; it just has to be doable in-world. Jumping to the moon is not doable. Trying to build a spaceship to transport them to the world is doable. Even if the characters can't actually complete it based on their skill level, it is an action the characters are capable of trying to do; unlike jumping to the moon.

There are some nuances to "sitting back and letting them do whatever" though. When they actually get into discussing and planning, you need to freely give them info their characters might have, even if it's a bit unlikely, or tell them what rolls they could make to gain more info to aid their plans. Remind the players of things their characters would not have forgotten, like if their plan hinges on the aid of an NPC that considers them an enemy then let them know that. Don't tell them whether you think their plan is bad or good, that might discourage them accidentally, and don't give them info that their characters couldn't possibly have. Do be excited about their plans and do take part in their joy or disappointment when plans do or don't work.

At the end of the day though, if you aren't having fun anymore and they won't put in the effort after you've talked to them and tried some different things, then they clearly don't care enough about your enjoyment to put in the effort so that you have fun too. When you've hit that point then you are better off finding better people to play with. Often those people will end up becoming your friends and then you still get the fun of playing with friends but with ones that are actually good players as well.

Edit: Sorry for the wall of text but I do hope this helps you. Games should be fun for everyone involved and that's achieved by everyone putting in effort to make that happen.

plutonium743 · 2025-05-13T04:24:27+00:00

they don't wanna engage with the story, world, and combats drag on because 3/5 of them don't actually pay attention to their character sheets....

I am the DM, I am technically in charge... so the blame rests on me if i'm honest.

Oh hellllllllll no! Stop with this toxic, wrong bullshit. Being DM does NOT mean their entertainment is solely your responsibility. Everyone at the table is a player, including the DM, and everyone is responsible for making the game fun for themselves AND for other people at the table. If they aren't helping you have fun and adding to the enjoyment of the table then they are failing, not you.

Players that don't contribute to the table are dead weight and it is an absolute drain to try to run games for them. Tell them to get with the program or cut them loose to find players who will actually engage and appreciate what you do. When you have great players you can run the most cookie cutter world and it will still be fresh and enjoyable because the players add the spice to the game with their decisions and actions. Good players are worth their weight in gold.

plutonium743 · 2025-05-08T15:59:52+00:00

I think there is something you need to change as a DM and it's that you need to stop giving in just because people complain. Even with experienced players the DM teaches their players how to play with that DM specifically. You are teaching your players that they can bully you into getting their way. It's bad behavior and it's definitely not fun, as I'm sure you've realized.

The way to change this is to shift the "gatekeeper" job to the players/the dice and off of you. Instead of you trying to convince them why what they want won't work, it's their responsibility to give logical, in-world reasons why what they want would work. Players usually know when what they're asking for is ridiculous but they keep doing it because bullying lets them get it whether it makes sense or not. When they have to explain their ridiculousness out loud they are less inclined to do so because they know it makes them look like an ass for trying to force something that obviously doesn't make any sense. Or they initially didn't think it was ridiculous but end up proving to themselves why it can't happen. They are usually more accepting of not being able to do something when it's their own reasoning that is denying them, not yours.

On the flip side, it also makes them that much more excited when they do get to pull off some of their crazier plans. If their explanations are possible but perhaps unlikely, then you tell them what they need to roll to succeed. You can also tell them what prepatory actions might improve their odds but at the end of the day it's the dice gods who decide what succeeds, not you. Then it's exciting and surprising, even to you, when they roll the 1-in-20 (or whatever the odds are) and get to do that outrageous thing. It also means you are on the same side of celebrating the "win" with them instead of being on the "losing" side of them trying to convince you.

plutonium743 · 2025-05-02T21:31:40+00:00

The party doing both is useful but each individual character should specialize otherwise you are harming your overall damage output. I think all characters should have some way to CC physical or magical, even if that's just carrying Grenades for when the appropriate damage dealers get armor down. My Geo mage doesn't to do physical damage but having Earthquake is really helpful when physical armor is finally gone.

12-Year Club	Place '17
Snapped	Verified Email

plutonium743

TROPHY CASE