Pathfinder - A Crazy Idea

Hello Everyone, I just had this crazy idea...tell me what you think about it. One of the things I note about roll20 gaming vs. gaming face to face with people in my community is that gamers here can be more transient. I have had people disappear, miss several weeks of gaming, then show up like nothing had happened and want to jump back into the game. In the specific case I am thinking about, he came to one session and was level one and the rest of the party was like 5th level. The level difference was no big deal, but the lack of respect for the rest of us in not showing up as promised, or even telling us, led us to ask him not to return. That got me thinking about how sometimes life just gets ahead of you and you don't have time to game. Real life always comes first, so sometimes you just can't come to the game, right? So here's my idea. I am running a Pathfinder game centered around a military unit that is exploring an unknown region. There are ~40 NPCs and about half dozen PC's playing at the moment. I started thinking, what if I continue to run my every Saturday morning noon game, while at the SAME time, in the same campaign, started running other groups of PCs on different days and nights. In other words, what if those 40 NPCs aren't all NPCs, but PC's who play on different days? Or if you want, you can jump into a couple of different nights and play with different people. Mix and match, etc. I discussed the idea with my buddy and he likened it to a show like Game of Thrones in which you have the overarching story, but contained within it are the stories of John Snow, Jamie Lanister, and the rest of the members of the story. What if you can't make Saturday's game? Well, there's an inpromptu game on Wednesday night, so jump in... The only problem I see with that idea is if one group get's into a situation - like in a "dungeon" - and has to stop the adventure in the middle of what they are doing...but I think I can manage those things easily enough. What do you think? Good idea? Dumb idea? Somewhere in the middle? Please comment, no matter what you have to say about it.

Good to see you're still full of ideas, Don :). I ran Shadowrun like this for a while; Missions; Show up if you wanna run, Don't show up if you can't make it. If we have enough, we'll play. It fell flat for 2 reasons; 1) Me. One session wasn't really enough time to get a decent closure for a single run. The concept sorta fell flat since missions were always left half-completed. You mention "what if we're stopping mid dungeon?' If you're doing a setup, a goal and want people to actually have the chance to roleplay a bit to make their character interesting? You will be running out of session time mid dungeon. It messes with the flow of your idea, something to be prepared for. I wasn't - and it led to a lot of good ideas of things in the same continuity (logical consequences to the previous run, etc) sorta going down the drain. If you want to do this, I recommend being harsh here; One session - One dungeon; skip the non-essential combats if you have to. All just my opinion of course, but that's my mistakes to learn from! 2) Them. I learned that what I like best GM'ing is ... entertaining my players. Bullshitting a bit on the side. Meeting new people's fine, but turns out I don't like most nerds. And most people who show up for these things cared most for whipping their virtual dicecock out. I love giving my players a chance to shine and interact with this world I made. In return, I don't really want much more than a chance to join in the fun from behind my screen. I'd like to surprise you. Tailor my world to that character of yours. People who are interested in this are usually not the people who are interested in something like what you're describing (or what I ran). They were much keener on gathering, rolling some dice, and while some were good fun to be around and got hoovered into my other campaigns, the vast majority signed out with a 'kkthxbye' and left me feeling I might as well have been a computer terminal. If that sounds like something you're okay with though; You'll be fine - and the idea can work ;-). Either way, I wish you the best of luck!

Thanks Niki I had thought about many of these things, and there are some things I had not, I appreciate the input. We have to find a way to play a game together sometime as players together. I think we would get along just fine. :)

So the idea seems interesting, but i'm not sure that Pathfinder is the best system for that. I imagine mass combat would be a common occurence in the campaign (unless it's 'we've got this 40 men, but we ALWAYS send 6 men scout teams to do everything) and it's just gonna be a vast sea of dice rolls or a boring combat with enemies not doing anything special becasue there is only so many hours in the session. There is also a problem of player decisions that involve entire unit. If team A decides to stop and rest in X, are you gonna railroad teams B, C, D into stoping there? Are they gonna have a chain of command? Because it's very easy for it to just turn into less compeling experience for anyone in 'less cool' group.

Usually that's what happens Serious - small units like a squad, with an NPC Sgt. so far have been exploring the area surrounding their base of operations. If you would like to take a look at the scenario I would be happy to give you a tour...PM me and I will show you. I also understand the foibles with games that have a chain of command and I agree with you...I already have a mechanism in place to make sure that isn't an issue, but I don't want to disclose that yet.

I'm glad you're so inspired to do this! ^.^ It's certainly one way to tackle the "missing-people-syndrome" of Roll20, and I applaud ya for that! But I do have to agree with the other people here, because of the disproportionate commitment going on. GMs have always had to given more commitment to the game than the players, but this is like 80% - 20%. The players can show up and leave as they please, while the GM is forced to be there at every impromptu and planned session, and that's a huge strain on you. I'm afraid it's just going to boil down to, "Alright everyone, impromptu session on Wednesday!" only to be greeted with one or two people and the sound of crickets. In my experience, there's a much better way to do this that I advocate to everyone, and it's one-shots. Send out a message a day or even a few hours prior, call out for 5-6 players to join up and run a quick session, then play it! There's no further time commitment, no problem with disappearing players, it allows YOU to set up when you want to play instead of everyone else, gives you tons of practice as a DM as well as letting you try out new ideas and concepts, and the benefits go on and on. Granted, I play one-shots for 5E where combat is faster, but I'm sure it'll work for Pathfinder as well!

Thank you for the input Benson. I have no problem with the idea of one-shots under the heading of the same campaign/story. In essence that might be what this "crazy idea" boils down to, I just hadn't thought of it in that light. Brilliant reasoning.

Reward consistent players. For example, if current party level is 6, then have new one-shot PC's begin with level 4 starting gear. After showing for 10 consecutive sessions, have the one-shot PC become same level if not already. Yeah, one-shots seem more reasonable and accommodating for real life purposes.

I don't do it that way. New players start at first level. Just like Frodo... Alternately I have in the past let people start at a level or two under the current party average, but with 0 xp. They have to earn xp up to the point where they started before leveling.

Don H. said: I don't do it that way. New players start at first level. Just like Frodo... Alternately I have in the past let people start at a level or two under the current party average, but with 0 xp. They have to earn xp up to the point where they started before leveling. Has this been working for you? I recall a couple of DM's doing the same, and either the players or the DM quit or got burned out. I remember one party kept running away from fights unable to combat the enemy equally. My barbarian who was only player to survive from level 1 to level 8 finally had mental breakdown from always running away and basically committed suicide by igniting a farm on fire then werewolf ninjas came to kill him.

It has worked well for me. I run a sandbox world, so "Aragorn has to defend Frodo", so to speak. Usually the smart ones end up using ranged weapons rather than trying to wade into the thick of combat. We even advise them to try that. One fellow didn't get it and died 4 combats in a row. He was sort of a tool anyway so one of the core members in the group used his black ball and we asked him not to return...but by and large, it works great. What I really like about it is 2 things. First, I personally hate starting with a higher level character because I feel no attachment to them. It's just a bunch of numbers to me. The flavor of playing the character develops as he or she levels naturally. Like the fighter who ended up picking up a canoe and hitting something with it after he had dropped his sword, and went through a combat doing so well with the canoe that he decided to use a feat to "train an exotic weapon" - canoe. It was large, and hulking and it only did a d4 subdual damage, but it was funny to watch, and occasionally they would ride it on water. That's an extreme version, but it was fun for a time. The other reason is that I never like playing a higher level character unless I earn the xp for it. I am that guy in MMO's who won't take free stuff from people. Unless I earn it - by myself or with others - I don't enjoy playing with it. Like I said, so far, so good in my campaigns.

Some related terms for games kind of like this, Open Table game West Marches style campaign If you google / read the blogs / or ask on Reddit, you can find some history and recommendations for this kind of game play. It can work and is a lot of fun. I've got about 40 players in my Basic Fantasy RPG campaign on Roll20 ("Explore Dungeons Inside A Strange World"). The party for any given session time is first-come, first-served, or RSVP for sign ups.

Thanks Gold, I will check it out!

I might be interested

Sweet