Hi All,

I've just picked up a bunch of the books (6!) in preparation for starting a new campaign with some friends. I've played D&D ages ago (10+ years), but I've never done any GMing before. Admittedly I'm diving into the deep end here, so I'm looking for some advice. My plan is to start with a couple of the pre-made adventures and transition from them into something I've cooked up based around them.

However, in reading through the adventures, I notice there's an occasional setup I'm confused about how to deal with. In some cases, the adventure will present a number of options for skill check outcomes at a time in which there's nothing strictly prompting the players to do a skill check. Am I supposed to point out the options that are available to them or are they expected to attempt those checks unprompted? In some cases (ex. Onslaught at Arda, Shadows of the Future, p. 16) even pointing out that they could do a check may tip them off to coming plot.

Thanks for any advice.

It might help if you cite a page # in an adventure so people can reference what you're asking about.

4 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

It might help if you cite a page # in an adventure so people can reference what you're asking about.

Like this?

12 minutes ago, RogueJedi said:

(ex. Onslaught at Arda, Shadows of the Future, p. 16)

I'll see if I can find some of the other examples I ran into.

Ok, that one they are prompted. On arrival transmissions and the slave circuit are cutting out and something is wrong. That's a prompt and if they think to ask you can have them use the suggested check. It's an opportunity to learn there's trouble at Arda base.

2 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

Ok, that one they are prompted. On arrival transmissions and the slave circuit are cutting out and something is wrong. That's a prompt and if they think to ask you can have them use the suggested check. It's an opportunity to learn there's trouble at Arda base.

Right, I get that the transmissions screwing up is a narrative prompt. If you're also with players who aren't used to the format, they might not realize that there's something they can investigate about it right now. Just not sure if I should let opportunities like that slip them by, or if I should try to point out they could make a check to investigate.

If you guys are getting back into gaming and/or new to the system, here's what I'd suggest.

Give the narrative prompt, then give the players their own prompt. "This would be a good spot for the tech head to strut his stuff. Do you want to do something?"

Keep giving the narrative prompts, but gradually fewer of the OOC/Player prompts, so that they can start doing things on their own initiative. They might surprise you with the ideas they come up with.

50 minutes ago, RogueJedi said:

Right, I get that the transmissions screwing up is a narrative prompt. If you're also with players who aren't used to the format, they might not realize that there's something they can investigate about it right now. Just not sure if I should let opportunities like that slip them by, or if I should try to point out they could make a check to investigate.

All you have to say is in the transmission the base folks tell them something unknown is fouling the signals, they're not sure what. That should be all the prompting you should do, otherwise it's just too clunky and mechanical, if you tell them they can scan to find out what it is, even if they fail they know there is something going on. Like the "ok, everyone roll perception" even if they fail they know there is something to see.

I'd suggest starting with a beginner box before Onslaught at Arda. The AoR beginner box is good, especially good if you download the PDF followup. OaA is more complicated and if you're new to the rules I guarantee at the end of it you'll wish you'd known more before starting. This is not D&D (and I've played D&D since the first little paperbacks), and you'll need to "unlearn what you have learned".

It's worth keeping in mind that the skill options presented don't have to be the only ones used in every case - if the players come up with an approach that doesn't fall under the ones listed, go with it using a relevant skill.

The general practice in those adventures seems to be that off-skills used in those circumstances have a difficulty one higher than the supposedly obvious one. I wouldn't make it higher than that, especially with new-ish characters.

I'm in the same boat. My players often don't know what to do without pretty obvious prompting; even in the AoR beginner game they didn't know what questions to ask or what to do when trying to enter the hangar, for example.

Part of it is that none of them are sci-fi fans, so they don't have that background to draw on.

As an example, when they get to the point that the group of storm troopers were outside the blast door, they didn't want to get into a fight, but couldn't think of a way to draw them off. They'd been pretty stealthy so far, so I suggested they stage an alarm using the captured uniforms they had, or some kind of gas leak by slicing into the computer systems.

They liked the idea, but one of them said "I'd never have thought of that".

It may be that we'll just have to continue as a more choose-your-own-adventure game. The players like it, it just isn't as much fun as a GM.

If your players are having problems thinking of what to do, you can also give them an NPC ally or patron. The NPC doesn't necessarily have to travel with them, but they might call on the NPC when they need a clue. It gives you as GM a mouthpiece without breaking the fourth wall of the game.

On 7/23/2017 at 2:27 PM, SavageBob said:

If your players are having problems thinking of what to do, you can also give them an NPC ally or patron. The NPC doesn't necessarily have to travel with them, but they might call on the NPC when they need a clue. It gives you as GM a mouthpiece without breaking the fourth wall of the game.

A Helping hand NPC can be good for inexperienced or indecisive groups. However; if you are going to use an NPC as your mouth piece make sure your players will be okay with taking suggestions; as some players may feel they are being guided too much and may feel they are loosing their agency.

From personal experience I once used an NPC as a pilot/chauffeur (since no one wanted to pilot). The NPC always stayed on the ship but the one or two times the players got stuck I had the NPC contact the players via comlink just to inquiry about their plan, and the party was very hostile to this NPC being involved in any decision making, being highly suspicious of the NPC's motives. They could not get past the idea that the NPC was "me" and that I was trying to use the NPC to screw them over. This created problems later when story-wise the NPC was legitimately involved in the plot, the players had no trust of the NPC.

In hindsight this group had some players with the mentality of players VS the GM; but its important to be aware of what your players will and wont accept help-wise.

On 23.7.2017 at 10:13 PM, Darrett said:

I'm in the same boat. My players often don't know what to do without pretty obvious prompting; even in the AoR beginner game they didn't know what questions to ask or what to do when trying to enter the hangar, for example.

Part of it is that none of them are sci-fi fans, so they don't have that background to draw on.

As an example, when they get to the point that the group of storm troopers were outside the blast door, they didn't want to get into a fight, but couldn't think of a way to draw them off. They'd been pretty stealthy so far, so I suggested they stage an alarm using the captured uniforms they had, or some kind of gas leak by slicing into the computer systems.

They liked the idea, but one of them said "I'd never have thought of that".

It may be that we'll just have to continue as a more choose-your-own-adventure game. The players like it, it just isn't as much fun as a GM.

I had the same problem at the beginning. My solution was that I just encouraged players to try out things, and was lenient about their ideas. Some were stupid, and illogical, but I still allowed them. It didn't take long to players to find the right mindset, and now I have been able to be stricter and require more logical solutions. Trick is to guide them to the correct mindset. I still sometimes throw ideas for them, and sometimes they use them, more often they use their own or refine my ideas to something totally crazy. This is collaborative effort after all, and most important thing is to have fun.

I usually find a casual OOC conversation between players often scares up some inventive solutions. If they're chasing they're own tails I'll join in the conversation - just riffing off them really. It's unlikely that I'd ever say you can do This or That but responding to their own comments might guide them down a route. I don't think players mind a little subtle guidance when they're stuck for ideas. Really that's part of our role: to read and respond to player needs. It doesn't have to be the action postulated by the scenario but that's a good source of inspiration in how to deal with whatever solution the players do come up with.

Personally I tend to steer clear of NPCs to guide the PCs unless it's integral to the plot and they're the ones supplying a mission or a part of the objective. It's mainly a personal preference but I feel like I'd end up a. railroading too much and b. being more player than GM