How to tell players what they can do?

[Gnomasz]

I've got a hard time communicating with my players about rules in use and expected and allowed characters.

Example 1: I want to use BAD and ACT modifiers from Action 2. BAD is easy enough, I just say that's the penalty and we're done. But what about ACT? My group (and me too) is used to very fast-paced games where you just go and fight stuff because it's an immediate threat. The planning phase on last session concluded with just looking in which room does the bad guy stand through a one-minute Invisible Wizard Eye (and not using that knowledge). Long-term observation, gathering information and waiting for a good opportunity to attack just seems incomprehensibly abstract.

Example 2: I want to use (among other stuff) Imbuements and Dungeon Magic, but my players don't have the books (and won't buy them). How do I explain what options are available for their characters? I have learned that saying „You can play whatever you like and I'll come up with mechanics for this" does nothing to spring up imagination and it's the same sword-worrior, axe-barbarian and mage (just mage, no specifics) all over again. What could I do about that?

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Gnomasz

IBut what about ACT? My group (and me too) is used to very fast-paced games where you just go and fight stuff because it's an immediate threat. The planning phase on last session concluded with just looking in which room does the bad guy stand through a one-minute Invisible Wizard Eye (and not using that knowledge). Long-term observation, gathering information and waiting for a good opportunity to attack just seems incomprehensibly abstract.

So, your players all like fast-paced action and don't want to plan. Do you want to slow the game down and make it more complex, or do you want them to tackle opponents that they can't take without discovering and exploiting weak points? They may not be receptive to the first idea, but the second is often more compelling.

To use it, you need to provide information that makes it clear the opponent is too tough, plus clues to the weak points. Both sets of information need to be credible and convincing. Are they independent operators, or are they part of an organisation?

Example 2: I want to use (among other stuff) Imbuements and Dungeon Magic, but my players don't have the books (and won't buy them). How do I explain what options are available for their characters?

Have the opposition use these abilities. It's a great way to convince players that they need new tricks.

[dfinlay]

So, not all players will be receptive and you may not have the time, but I spend a lot of time (4+ hours per player often, but even 10 minutes is better than 0) discussing world, campaign and character with my players before they are allowed to look at the books or jot down any stats. Even if playing something like DF, this is important. Take the following two games "I want to play a game where you raid fortresses filled with lots of orcs, goblins and the like. I'll only have a handful of monster races, but the individuals will each have their own tactics and specialties and will work as a group." and "You'll be delving into the depths of Azag'joth, the enormous underground ruined city of an ancient empire. Azag'joth will be filled with powerful edritch beings far too powerful for any of you to defeat alone, but with good tactics, teamwork and preparation, you may be able to survive for a brief time." These are both DF but they will play very differently and different characters should be made for both. As an example of what I mean by a conversation, here is a snippet of an example:

Me: I make the Azag'joth pitch above
Player: I want to play a human Big Bad Barbarian Guy.
Me: Okay, so there are three major groups of human barbarians in the area around, but if none of them work for you, we can work something else out. The Atar are a nomadic horse-rearing people who live in the savannah to the south, constantly moving to find new grazing ground and fighting against the vampires who kept them as chattel until they rebelled. The Etrud are a group of woodlands warriors who regularly feud amongst themselves and who's leaders have learned, through meditation, to transform themselves into animals. The Talo are a group who live in frozen tundra where nothing else lives. In order to keep from starving, their warriors find portals to hell that are scattered throughout the landscape and raid them for demons to eat. Many of them have some small measure of infernal power that they gained from the constant consumption of demonic flesh.
Player: The horse-riders sound cool! I've always liked Mongols.
Me: Okay, so each tribe has a caste of warriors led by whoever in the tribe is the strongest-
Player: Me! I want that to be me!
Me: Okay, so you led the vampire-hunters for your clan. Why'd you leave?
...

So already, the character concept has gone from ST16 guy-with-big-weapon to ST16 guy-with-big-weapon, who specializes in horse-riding, vampire hunting (Occultism (Undead) with an optional specialty for Vampires), leadership and squad tactics. Not only is this a much more interesting character, he's more likely to fit into the game's ideas of knowing your foe and tactically outplaying them.

Also, note those little nuggets of ability ideas I dropped into the lore (infernal powers and shapeshifting). Those could just as easily have been Imbuements or the abilities from Dungeon Magic.

Finally, note that I made everything above up as I wrote it. While preparation is a good thing, don't be afraid to improvise these details. These conversations serve the side-benefit of fleshing out your world as well as their characters.

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by Gnomasz

I've got a hard time communicating with my players about rules in use and expected and allowed characters.

Example 1: Long-term observation, gathering information and waiting for a good opportunity to attack just seems incomprehensibly abstract.

Well, some of this depends on the characters that have been created, some of it depends on the challenges you give them. If the challenges are: "Here is a dungeon, go there and kill stuff." You are not going to get a lot of prior planning.

Instead give them challenges where the obvious solution (run in and kill things without thinking!) will not work well. For example, what if, rather than "Go into the local dungeon and kill things" the mission was, "Assassinate the Evil Duke of the neighboring Kingdom...but make sure that your own King is not implicated." That is a puzzle. They are going to have to do some planning and investigation...because you can't just walk into the Duke's castle and stab him. What if the challenge is to serve as bodyguards for the Princess as she is travelling to a pilgimage? But she is always wanting to go and be among the people...and the threats against her are unclear?
What if they are charged with scouting out a certain location to figure out where the enemy Kingdom's Army is located and what sort of forces they have. Rumor has it they have some special weapon...what is it? That isn't about destroying the Army, but getting the info for a later battle.

Give them challenges that can certainly end up in violence if that is what everybody likes...but include other problems. They have to find the target, they have to infiltrate the loctation, they have to learn a piece of information.

Example 2: I want to use (among other stuff) Imbuements and Dungeon Magic, but my players don't have the books (and won't buy them). How do I explain what options are available for their characters? I have learned that saying „You can play whatever you like and I'll come up with mechanics for this" does nothing to spring up imagination and it's the same sword-worrior, axe-barbarian and mage (just mage, no specifics) all over again. What could I do about that?[/QUOTE]

I have my players make characters with me one-on-one. I print out the books that are options so the hard copies are available to look at without them having to have bought them.

But, really, before Character creation, I present the players with a handout that has setting info and campaign frame. I don't say--for example--We are doing a Fantasy game, you have 150cp, go. That is going to result in people defaulting to D&D archetypes more often than not.

Instead, I have more of a frame. For example:
The Kingdom of Estaria is small and sandwiched in between two larger global powers: The aggressive and exapansive Kormier Dominion on the East, made up of an alliance of Elves and Dwarves, lead by a half-elven/dwarven imperial couple. The oppressive and racist theocracy, the Kingdom of the Gates of the Oak, made up entirely of Humans and their Orc servants, and lead by Ursula the Prophetess. Estaria is small, cosmopolitan, rich, and sits in the strategic crossroads between the two global powers. All trade, politics, and espionage go through Estaria. It is led by an aging King, Harold, with one direct heir, the drunkard Prince Gallant. Gallant is unmarried and no one thinks he'd make a good heir. The Kingdom is in a nervous position. This is where you come in!

So that is the setting intro.
...

This is where the character frame comes in. I'd probably determine this in consultation with the players. Various ideas I'd offer them:
Members of the Elite Royal Secret Police--troubleshooters , spies, and asskickers.
Young Nobles all in the court--politics, duels, jousting and schemes.
Heads of important factions in court (Head of the Gaurd, various embassadors, Head of Magic, Head of Trade)--politics, strategy, and power struggles.
Scouts of the Estaran Army--exploring, battling.
Thieves in the City--Poor people, theives, and scoundrels in the capital city.

Etc.

Figure out what they'd like and what you'd like. Then you make some more decision. So for Imbuements...who in your world uses imbuements? Mystic Knights? Monks? Decide who has access to those powers and offer that character type to players. Who uses dungeon magic? Decides who has access to those powers and offer that character type to players.

Give them something more to spark their imagination, and have an idea which of the new cool bits you want to add are connected to each of the different options.

[Gnomasz]

Originally Posted by johndallman

or do you want them to tackle opponents that they can't take without discovering and exploiting weak points? […]
To use it, you need to provide information that makes it clear the opponent is too tough, plus clues to the weak points. Both sets of information need to be credible and convincing. Are they independent operators, or are they part of an organisation?

This.
But how do I provide that information before they meet their opponent and jump to fight? I've stated it on the meta level, as a GM, before the campaign started (maybe typing wasn't the best way to do it), yet they've just walked into a location pointed by an interrogated thug, going headfirst against a well prepared and equipped necromancer. One PC got captured, the rest has fled. They already knew their opponent can turn insubstantial. They've rested, buffed one warrior with ST and invisibility and rushed to fight again, and I think they were just lucky that the mage didn't have resources to turn insubstantial again. I don't know how to spell the info in a way that won't be ignored. An accidental near-wipe of the party apparently wasn't enough. I think they might realize they're acting stupid, but have no idea how to act differently – and I don't know how to show them. I've thought about adding a helpful NPC to the party, but I'm afraid it might turn into me playing the game with myself.
The characters work for an organisation, the Pentaclists from Dungeon Magic (diviners who want to keep humanity from abusing magic). A huge potential to give information, but I don't know how to do it in a non intrusive way.

Have the opposition use these abilities. It's a great way to convince players that they need new tricks.

That's a good idea, will do! I'd rather have party mages belong to a school from the get go, but joining one sounds like a potential for a story.

Originally Posted by dfinlay

So, not all players will be receptive and you may not have the time, but I spend a lot of time (4+ hours per player often, but even 10 minutes is better than 0) discussing world

I've felt like I don't have time, but I'll try not to rush starting game any more, it costs a lot of nerves and time later on.

So already, the character concept has gone from ST16 guy-with-big-weapon to ST16 guy-with-big-weapon, who specializes in horse-riding, vampire hunting (Occultism (Undead) with an optional specialty for Vampires), leadership and squad tactics. Not only is this a much more interesting character, he's more likely to fit into the game's ideas of knowing your foe and tactically outplaying them.

Part of my problem is: the characters are fit to the game ideas, but the players don't use the skills. Though maybe talking about the character in a way You described would fix this, change the skills from a statline to part of the character.

Originally Posted by trooper6

What if they are charged with scouting out a certain location to figure out where the enemy Kingdom's Army is located and what sort of forces they have. Rumor has it they have some special weapon...what is it? That isn't about destroying the Army, but getting the info for a later battle.

That sounds awesome, thanks!

Give them challenges that can certainly end up in violence if that is what everybody likes...but include other problems. They have to find the target, they have to infiltrate the loctation, they have to learn a piece of information.

Well, technically, their current mission isn't to kill anyone, but to find an artifact and everyone who's been involved in creating it… But they seem to liven up only at the thought of battle. Yet when I've suggested running Dungeon Fantasy they have refused, saying they need a story to fight for, not just wealth. Maybe I'm just giving out too little information in-game?

I have my players make characters with me one-on-one. I print out the books that are options so the hard copies are available to look at without them having to have bought them.

I wanted to avoid hauling hard copies around (I run the game a 100 miles away from where I live, and I get there by train), but I guess I should at least for the character creation.

But, really, before Character creation, I present the players with a handout that has setting info and campaign frame.[…]
So for Imbuements...who in your world uses imbuements? Mystic Knights? Monks? Decide who has access to those powers and offer that character type to players. Who uses dungeon magic? Decides who has access to those powers and offer that character type to players.

Give them something more to spark their imagination, and have an idea which of the new cool bits you want to add are connected to each of the different options.

That I did, but maybe I did it wrong? Here's what I've written:

The royal academy of magic is the most known, but not the only place to study the arcane. It tries to keep magic from being misused. Sometimes it needs to use force, but a group of fragile seers isn't really well suited for this. That's your role.
You're playing as exceptionally talented people. Or exceptionally trained. Something like real-world special forces. Yet you're still human.
I deal with the mechanics.
It's a high fantasy world. Swordmasters create traces of fire with their swings or hit foes at range – even though they're not wizards. The best athletes can jump meters high and run a couple times faster than an average human.
There's a handful of magic schools: the seers from the academy, peaceful telepaths, undead-hating spellslingers, field-ready smiths and seizing the day elementalists of air and water.
It's a feudal kingdom and every man's obliged to serve in the army (and hence knows it). The nomad riders of the east are an exception, but their tradition demands knowledge of horses and the ability to shoot a bow.

Reading it over again I think I shouln't have said the "still human" part. But what else? Truth be said, two players have chosen to be part of magic schools, but they play so seldom it's barely noticable. The core players seemed not to even notice (One asked me about an idea for a mage, but said he "doesn't see a reason to belong to a school").

[A Ladder]

Sounds like you want to run a game that is different than what your players want to do.

Maybe ask your players what type of game they want?

If they want hack and slash, murder hobo, don't care about story - just give me shiny things at the end...and you want a scouting, planning, brains defeat brawn, pseudo medeival spy thriller... you're going to be banging your head against the wall when the players just kick in the door and try to hack the necromancers to death.



In looking over your OP I see some opportunities to add the necesity of figuring out things about the bad guy. Perhaps work on a delivery that lends itself to needing to know more things about the bad guy without resulting in death by combat.

Instead of just having a door, with a static bad guy on the other side, maybe put traps on the door/hallway? That way, they kick the door down and BAM! hit by a fireball trap. "Maybe we should check for hostile things before attacking next time?"

Or... the Wizard Eye only sees an Illusion of the bad guy in his room. Resulting in the barbarian just swinging through images and not getting anywhere. All the while the mocking laughter of the necromancer floats around the room. "Is he invisible? is the laughter magically projected from some far off place? secret doors in the walls?"

[Mailanka]

I generally either do an instruction scenario, early on, to get people to know what they can and cannot do. Otherwise, I create cheat sheets that list the options common for characters and/or specific to that character.

Say you're playing Monster Hunters and people don't have access to the books other than you. How do you explain the Destiny/Wild Card impulse buy mechanics? You can tell them once, but they'll certainly forget in the heat of combat. So you put it on a piece of paper in front of them, listing a bunch of things they can do. Eventually, they wont' need that crutch, but the first few times, they'll definitely make use of it in my experience.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Gnomasz

The characters work for an organisation, the Pentaclists from Dungeon Magic (diviners who want to keep humanity from abusing magic). A huge potential to give information, but I don't know how to do it in a non intrusive way.

Are the Pentaclists watching the party, via magic? If so, they can send a messenger to tell them "come back to base, we have information about what's going on."

If that works, given them some information. The trick is not to tell them what to do, but to tell them what's been observed about the enemy, and what hasn't. It needs to be clear from that information that the enemy is strong. Ask them what else they'd like the diviners to try to discover. Give them a situation where there's nobody handy to fight, but they can find stuff out. Make it clear that the diviners don't know everything.

Something that might be useful would be to try to characterise your players. There are a lot of schemes for doing this, and there's a TvTropes article that collects many of them. It sounds as if you might have a collection of Mad Slashers, but there's probably more to them than that.

[whswhs]

If you are going to have the character have two different sorts of arrows, why are you assuming one sort of arrow and not the other? You may have it in your mind that "arrow" means hunting arrow and not war arrow with an armor piercing point; if so, it's not surprising that the player makes the same assumption.

Player: "I shoot him with an arrow!"
GM: "Are you going for a hunting arrow or an armor piercing arrow?"

At that point you've forced the player to make a choice, not just to brush the question aside. If you don't carry forward the baggage that the standard arrow that everyone uses is a hunting arrow and that a bodkin point is an unusual option, your players are less likely to.

There are various things the player can say then. "What's the difference?" (and then you explain that the hunting arrow has better range but the armor piercing arrow will kill a target in armor) or "What's he wearing?" (and you describe his armor) or "Hunting arrow!" (and then you spend a couple of rounds describing how the arrows glance off the armor, and when he complains, you say, "Yeah, that armor's pretty tough; do you want to change to armor piercing arrows?").

[Gnomasz]

Originally Posted by A Ladder

If they want hack and slash, murder hobo, don't care about story - just give me shiny things at the end...and you want a scouting, planning, brains defeat brawn, pseudo medeival spy thriller... you're going to be banging your head against the wall when the players just kick in the door and try to hack the necromancers to death.

Well, we have tried a murder hobo campaign, and they were super careful about engaging anything and didn't want to fight just for loot (even though they had a long-term goal that they couldn't achieve for now from lack of resources) so we've scrapped that and started a new game.

In looking over your OP I see some opportunities to add the necesity of figuring out things about the bad guy. Perhaps work on a delivery that lends itself to needing to know more things about the bad guy without resulting in death by combat.[…]

So, challenge them harder, but non-lethal?

Originally Posted by Mailanka

Say you're playing Monster Hunters and people don't have access to the books other than you. How do you explain the Destiny/Wild Card impulse buy mechanics? You can tell them once, but they'll certainly forget in the heat of combat. So you put it on a piece of paper in front of them, listing a bunch of things they can do. Eventually, they wont' need that crutch, but the first few times, they'll definitely make use of it in my experience.

Huh. I haven't thought about it for non-combat options, but I guess I'll try now. It could also be a solution for a friend who's bored with his ranged character "not having any options in combat aside from roll to hit." Gotta make a cheat sheet on pop-up attacks and stuff.

Originally Posted by johndallman

Are the Pentaclists watching the party, via magic?
[…]
Something that might be useful would be to try to characterise your players.

Now they do, thanks!
TvTropes? I've got only 5 days off work left, I'm not sure I have enough time! Seriously though, I struggle with characterising one player: all I can say is he loves combos (for which I feel GURPS isn't really well suited) and keeps telling about needing a drive for character – which I, as GM, try to provide, but I don't get much enthusiasm out of any idea – I guess what I really need is a drive for the player. Well, there's an option of showing him in-game a school of magic that teaches Resist Fire, Rain of Fire and Fast Fire, but that's as far as I can go in terms of combos.

Originally Posted by whswhs

If you are going to have the character have two different sorts of arrows, why are you assuming one sort of arrow and not the other? You may have it in your mind that "arrow" means hunting arrow and not war arrow with an armor piercing point; if so, it's not surprising that the player makes the same assumption.[…]

Huh, a parable. I guess I could've asked the Wizard Eye caster if he wants to just check once where's what or if he wants to cast the spell multiple times over the whole night to see behaviour patterns. The question is, how can I prepare myself to ask stuff like this during actual play? The only thing that comes to mind is go over prepared clues, the character sheets and rules and consider possible moves.