D&D SURVIVOR

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

i've been thinking about a game of d&d survivor with a few twists.

so...

i was thinking we should try a game, starting with 6-8 players which means 5-7 sessions. during each session, the group would be required to answer some type of challenge, and at the end of each session (just like our last game) one player would be voted off....

however, last time we played, as people got voted off, the number of participants in each session diminished....

a twist in this game is that everyone will play (in some capacity) for all the sessions....

another twist is that the person who gets voted off in session #1 will be the dm for session #2, the person voted off in #2 will dm #3, etc....to the end.

this will add a very interesting dynamic to alliances.....people will have to think twice about making and/or breaking an alliance, and screwing someone so they get voted off....only to find that person is god in the next session......

this will necessitate that one rule we'll have to follow is that the dms have to follow the rules....thus, if a dm wants to be particularly mean to someone because of past transgressions.....so be it....that's part of the game....as long as the dm follows the rules....

another important point: this game will have two winners: one winner will be the last survivor....the other winner will be the dm that dms the best session (voted on by everyone at the end of the last session)...

a third twist is that as each dm puts together his session, he/she should try to work the past dms in as npc monsters...giving them further opportunity to give retribution to former lying stinking alliance-mates! thus, i as a platinum dragon, could focus my attacks on messiah's lying stinking fairy and try to smoke her wings and all....just for pleasure and revenge!

so....it wouldn't be a huge time burden on anyone since everyone will dm only one (albeit very special) session....also, we prolly shouldn't play every week...maybe every other week or once a month or somehting....to give new dms time to put together their stuff......

finally, i think we should have actual real world prizes for the winners....i'd kick in something for em.....

all in all i think this could add up to some very intersting/fun role playing....the dms would all be motivated to do creative good stuff...and as for the players.....they're gonna have fun.....even the voted-off past dms should get to kick some butt......

so what do you think?

[Kon]

Sounds a bit different than regular D&D, but I'm all for it. Not that I know how to play at the moment, but Isi told me all about the dice and how to attack.

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Sounds a bit different than regular D&D

aye....but we'd use standard d&d rules.

[BlueFlames]

Though I don't think I'll have time to play, I feel that rotating DMs is generally a bad idea. If somebody just wants to play, the notion of possibly having to DM at some point could turn them off, thereby reducing participation. Also, when you have various DMs, the quality and tone of the campaign will vary from session to session. Inconsistant gameplay and a campaign lacking a clear direction results in a pretty lame experience. I doubt the feasibility of having rotating DMs for any gaming beyond a series of one-shot adventures.

Also, in the situation you describe, being the DM is a consequence of losing. That means that after the first DM, nobody is going to want to be the DM, and few are going to prepare for the next session.

"A multitude of rulers is not a good thing. Let there be one ruler, one DM." -- Herodotus (slightly adapted)

[Chimera]

I was mulling this over in my head yesterday. Lazlo's idea is that a rotating DM would mean people would have to be careful about who gets voted off. I think it would add some pretty interesting dynamics to the game.


On the other hand, it would be hard to maintain consistency. First off, the DM isn't god, he's an adjudicator. He's not there to punish or reward the players, but just make sure they get whats coming to them for good or bad. Second, for this sorta thing we'd need people with at least some experience in DM'ing. Some people are just plain better players than DM (and vice versa).

I still think its an innovative idea and I'm not completely soured on it. I want to hear more ideas.

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

BF, i definitely wouldn't think of being dm as a consequence of losing....in fact in order to be one of the winners you have to be dm.

as far as game consistency, i agree...changing dms wouldnt be a good idea for a long term campaign, but there are two key difference here:

first, this is planned from the start to be short term, and second, i think the opening dm could easily provide a framework for the other players to set their individual sessions in....so there could be some logical continuitty to the story even though the dms would change. maybe the sessions start in some central location, and the party is teleported out to different locations for the sessions, and teleported back at the end of each session....

as for having people with dming experience.....i'vd dmd, so has messiah, chim, talon, and the "other person" i mentioned....so that's 5 with dming experience.

[Messiah]

The survivor concept is fine and proven, but the rotating DM thing is a wild card. BF has some good points. Wanting/being willing to DM doesn't mean you are necessarily up to it. Neither does it mean you'll do a good job. Yeah, bad DMs happen, but when the contest may hinge upon the running of a single session, it becomes a bit more critical that the DM be capable.

But I'd be willing to try. Traditional role-playing is far to rare a thing, these days, not to take the chance.

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

another option is to have one person....maybe chim or messiah (if they were willing to do it)....act as a dm manager throughout the game. meaning this person could provide reality checks on the dms actions, as well as acting as a resource for the dm if there are any questions about the rules, and, a general arbiter on the wacky situations which are sure to come up...this would provide consistency in the game quality but would still allow creative innovations in the individual sessions to come from multiple dms ....something i think will result in a fun/unique overall game. it also means it wouldn't be a large workload on the "dm manager" as the ideas are coming from the various dms...