by Docman14

Related Item: Ravensburger AG

No one at Ravensburger knew anything about promos

by St Cretin

Same as others.
As closing time comes near, I look for good places to end the session, either cliff hanger or a break in the action. We don't have a hard stopping time but aim for around 10 pm +/- 15 mins usually.
I usually also ask what the group thinks about doing next session, so that I can guide my prep, if I need to.

by Timrinehart87

Related Item: Dread

Put me down for one - Tim R.

by edwskrk

Related Item: Dread

I'd like to play! -Ed S.

by cosine

Do you find this confusing? I get that. "rules first" is shorthand for "is something happening in the game? before you decide what happens check for a rule that tells you how to handle whatever is happening to the game state" Here's a concrete example.

GM: The door is locked.
Player: I've got lock picks and a 45% skill to open locked doors, so I'm going to try.
GM: Okay, roll the dice.
Player: I rolled a 23% ! [note: it's a roll low to succeed system]
GM: The lock clicks open and you may open the door if you still want to...

Classic "rules first" There's a rule for resolving what happens when a character tries to do this specific task. Apply rule to establish result and continue. The GM here is like a referee; they are responsible for remembering the rule and helping the player apply it. There was a story contribution at the very start. The GM set the scene by telling the player there's a locked door. This is NOT a "story first" situation though. There's always going to be story - setting or scene. The rules require context for the GM to apply them.

GM: The door is locked.
Player: I want to make an entrance! I'm gonna shoot the lock with my shotgun, kick in the door, and step through saying "I'm here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum."
GM: I love it! The room beyond the door is a shady, dingy warehouse. At a tiny table under a bare lightbulb sit 4 thugs. It looks like they were playing cards, but now they scramble for their guns in panicked surprise!

Wait... what? Were there rules for this? Shouldn't someone be rolling? umm... no? Could the GM have applied some rules? Yes! But perhaps because they liked the player's contribution, they chose not to. It's just establishing context. That's going to be a required element of all RPGs. Is this a "story first" game... kinda? Maybe not? We aren't really given in the example clear demonstration of that. It's got a "story first" vibe, but this could also just be "rulings not rules" game play. The GM is just deciding in the moment what feels right.

GM: The door is locked.
Player: My character is a sneaky guy and I am just looking for clues about where the kidnappers may have taken Mr. Wolf So I will try carefully pick the lock, open the door only for a moment, and slip into the shadows inside before anyone notices.
GM: Okay, There are some thugs inside playing cards, but it's pretty dark beyond their little table. I'm going to set 3d6 against you. How much are you going to spend?
Player: Oof. I've only got 5d6 for this scene. If I fail, what might happen?
GM: I suppose the thugs will chase you off if they see you. They are pretty mean guys, too. If you don't get even a single success, they will beat you badly and throw you off the dock into the bay. But if you Ace this, you not only sneak past but you might hear them talking and maybe they let a clue slip?
Player: No way! With that kind of risk, I feel like Mr Wolf should be tied up in a chair in the back room. Rescue imminent, Wolfie!
GM: Okay, if you Ace it, Mr Wolf is tied up in the back room.
Player: I spend 4d6 [dice clatter] Yeah! 3, 5, 5, 6!
GM: [rolling] 2, 4, 5. You cancel out my dice completely and you have 4 or more left so Ace it! You sneak in unnoticed and see through a grimy window Wolf slumped in a chair beyond it.

This is very clearly "story first". You have a GM and a player negotiating over how the situation might turn out. They agree to terms establishing possible results cooperatively. There are game mechanics here. In this system I just made up for the example, the GM and player are spending resources to get their desired outcome, but that outcome was arranged first. Gm and player are working out a good story and the rolling is there to help decide whose contributions will be used going forward.

In this imaginary system, there are apparently "degrees of success" Sort of critical hits and critical failures? A "rules fist" approach can have that, but a "story first" design can too. What makes this "story first" isn't that. It's that the GM and player are sharing narrative control.

by EvenreachGames

<div>Cover of What the Cardinal Flower Protects, Daggerheart Compatible edition</div>

by EvenreachGames

<div>Cover of What the Cardinal Flower Protects, 5.5e-compatible edition</div>

by EvenreachGames

<div>Cover of Where the Watermint Grows, Daggerheart Compatible edition</div>

by EvenreachGames

<div>Cover of Where the Watermint Grows, 5.5e-compatible edition</div>

by Steve Dubya

<div>Front Cover from PDF</div>

by Steve Dubya

<div>Front Cover from PDF</div>

by Steve Dubya

<div>Front Cover from PDF</div>