Sam Seer's Blog

I ran a one-shot of The Warren this weekend for my Dad and two of my sisters. It was my first time playing (or running the game) and, overall, it was a success. Here's the two big takeaways: The Worst Thing: Presenting the Mission These days, I think one-shots are best when there's a clear goal. So I presented a mission right away. Here's what I said:  Dusk is coming on when you hear a voice over the hill. 'Tu-lip! Ja-ack!' It's the Widow Opal, looking for her two lost rabbit kits. What do you do? Immediately, I felt the misstep. I presented it like a choice, but for the Players, it didn't feel like a choice. They felt they could either (A) accept the quest, or (B) derail the session I had planned. In an effort to course-correct, I told them it really was a choice and—because the map was robust and the Players were generous— they immediately chose a different action (steal cabbage from the garden). It turned out OK, but it was a valuable lesson. If I could ...

Next time you're running a combat encounter, try telling your Players this: A creative stunt will always do more damage than your weapon. A stunt is anything: cutting a chandelier, collapsing the roof, pushing off a ledge, choking with a grappling hook, etc. It just has to be creative. As for "more damage", it doesn't have to be game-breaking. Just increase their weapon die a step (d8 -> d10) or, if it's a wound-based system, increase damage by 1 wound. The important thing is that Players know they will be quantitatively rewarded for their creativity.  Are those doubts I hear? Now, I hear what you're saying: why would a chandelier do more damage than a tool literally made for bloodletting? Where's the goddamn verisimilitude ? And to that I say: I don't give a fuck! It's more fun this way! This is a way purer expression of the tabletop RPG medium because it capitalizes on tactical infinity. Plus, it reminds me of another unrealistic rule that...