Hey /tg/, I don't usually lurk on this board, but I may be changing that soon. I've GMed games for years now and I was curious as to your own personal playing styles and any tips you may have acquired over the years. I'll start...
>Always focus the story around the PCs and let their choices drive it. No one plays to hear about your novel and be observers.
Pic unrelated but it felt somewhat correlated.
>>44380022
I have never once been in a game that centered around the PCs in a dramatic sense and has been any good; and I've lost track of how many groups I've been in in close to 15 years.
Maybe, just maybe, if you've assembled a dream team of mature spotlight sharers, this can work, but the overwhelming majority of the time, it either peters out into nothing happening, or descends into the party killing itself.
DO make the parties choices matter, and have very visible effects on the world, but you'll get way farther casting them into the reactive role, not the proactive one.
>>44380232
Well, I consider myself lucky then. I've had a very good time with group.
>>44380265
And, pray tell, what is your current campaign about?
>>44380022
>Always focus the story around the PCs and let their choices drive it. No one plays to hear about your novel and be observers.
This guy gets it. DM for 18-16 years or so, I do the same. European though, so no D&D, very different pnp rpg culture here.
>>44380232
>>44380285
What did all those groups during those 15 years have in common?...
>>44380285
We've been playing through some DnD 5e with the Hoard of the Dragon Queen, heavily modified to fit the PC and develop them while still following the story.
And I guess I should've written out my initial post a little better. I agree with your sentiment that if a story is only about the PCs most often it will derail and go crazy, I was meaning more along the lines of choice. However, my group is very mature about their game and roleplay to their heart's content. We have played games with purely a focus on them too which have ended fairly well.
>>44380341
Damn man, you've got some experience. I've only been doing it for about 4 to 5 years or so. Got any lessons you've learned over that time?
>>44380400
About story:
Your instinct is going to be to write a giant story and try to stick to it so it's not wasted. Don't do that. Instead, focus on building the surroundings and important characters in the region the players end up staying in.
Keep track of the important places and characters in the region. This doesn't have to be a huge task, I usually just give them all a goal that I define with a couple of sentences, and a stat for how much resources they have, and another for how much social influence they have. For towns or villages etc, I try to do the same, like what is this town about (farmer stuff, trade, peace, beating the neighbouring town).
Then, between and during sessions, i try to figure out how to make those things relevant, and feel alive even when they're not actively doing things there. If they're in town A and having a pint they might hear people grumbling about those good for nothing horse thieves in town B, or how they dammed the stream to irrigate their fields or whatever. Or how the merchant is a big fat thief. Or how there's there's talk of war. Whatever, the point is, let the players know that there are things going on around them opportunities to latch on to, they're not just sitting around waiting for some guy with a golden exclamation mark to run into them. Maybe when they're back from a journey or other adventure, the place they usually hole up in are on the brink of war. Or maybe they're in a port city under siege and they have to figure out how to leave in one piece, and the friends and enemies they make while doing so become other people you keep track of.
About characters: Try to make the players sit down and make characters together. It helps them figure out how they fit together and it actually curbs the excesses of the players who are tempted to make superduperspecial character backgrounds, which is good because character backgrounds are less important than how players make their characters come alive during sessions.
>>44380528
Hey thanks alot for the advice.
>>44380817
I also love that bit about the players making characters together, I'm going to use that next time I start a campaign.
>>44380817
Let me know if you want more, didn't write longer because post limit.
>>44380841
Yeah it's a good way to ensure that you don't end up with 4 characters that just flat out don't fit together. They way things happen in our group is often that we talk about what sort of theme we're in the mood for for a campaign (intrigue, war, adventuring etc) and people start brainstorming characters, and when someone comes up with something fun the rest of the group kind of latches on and does characters that fit in. This has the benefit that we often treat one PC as the central character who's got a more dramatic background to pull ideas for events from, and the rest kind of end up adding a lot of variety and different motivations that all still fit under the umbrella of the first character.
>So what if he's a really shit prince and he never expected to be next in line?
>Oooh, and he's always been kind of a useless layabout so he has a lot of scoundrely friends! That borrow money from him and gets him out of trouble!
>And a drug dealer!
>And favourite whore!
>And they all follow him when he decides he wants to get out there and see the world before they put him on a throne or something!
Boom, instant campaign and pc group. Of course it doesn't always happen that smoothly (and didn't that time either) but it tends to work a lot better than everyone showing up for session one with completely different characters and different desires for the scope of the stories.
It's like old /tg/. Actual content, OC advice, specific and from experience. I love it!
>>44382976
I would have no idea as to what old /tg/ is but, I generally try to avoid putting up too many memes. It's one of the reasons I've been avoiding my home board recently.
>>44383414
'Old /tg ' Is just that. What the board used to be years ago. Before it became mired in the meme of the week, shitposting and the mods cracking down on everything. It was still a shithole. but it was a helpful shithole that wasn't just regurgitated pap, 40K and teh errant /k and /pol thread shitting up the place.
>>44383414
/tg/ used to be so slow, 2 bumps a day would keep cranial threads floating for weeks. People used to post only in threads they had something to say to, not in every thread about things they didn't like. There used to be one thread per system, with exceptions for DnD and 40k, which were easy to ignore, and people complained when there were 3+ quests at any given time. The topic were much more sophisticated and much less repetitive. You could ask complex questions and get considered answers. People worked on things on the board, not post results. It was a much more productive place for GMs to share.
And this thread, its combination of GM appeal and lack of appeal to other posters, kind of reminds me of the good old days.
>>44380022
>Always focus the story around the PCs and let their choices drive it. No one plays to hear about your novel and be observers.
I would go further and state that all story should derive from relevant and informed decisions that the players make.
>"Player agency"
>>44381048
>Yeah it's a good way to ensure that you don't end up with 4 characters that just flat out don't fit together.
OP again, I think I will add this to my own games at some point. Usually, we take a module and kick some vibrancy and life into it.
I like to hook my players with something exciting, that challenges them and takes them out of their comfort zone. While, most of the time they begin at a tavern (cliche, I know) something unpredictable or crazy happens that either forces the group to work together or gives them a large amount of duress for an preexisting group.
For example, from one of my own games...
>Hoard of the Dragon Queen opens up with a generic intro with the group already established and run into a town being raided.
Instead, I started them out a local tavern, let them gamble and drink and converse with each other, free of any goal for ten minutes and then the blue dragon from the encounter attacks and blows up the goddamn place, with the PCs in it.
They then woke up barely alive, far from the ashes of the building, find that they are the only survivors and that the entire town is in flames, with citizens rushing to the nearby keep and the place surrounded by kobolds and mercenaries for the cult of the dragon (they didn't know who at the time) Every player had half of their health and lost almost all of their adventuring gear immediately.
It was a shit show but they loved every damn moment of it, with an eventual fight atop the battlements with the dragon. A dwarf PC embedded his battleaxe so deep into the wing of it that it couldn't be pulled out. There was even a duel with the recurring bland "muscle" character of the game who eventually became a psychologically complex and beloved character among the group.
It's amazing what a little tension and excitement can do to make a great session.
>>44383611
Sorry for poor grammar, it's fucking late where I live and I'm somewhat busy too.
I have some tips.
Players are asshole that know nothing about anything and so it is more than fine to fuck with them becasue they deserve nothing good in their fucking life at all.
>>44380022
>>44380341
Have any advise on trying to run a Investigation/Detective/Noir style game?
>>44383574
If you're still on or come back later, I'm curious as to why you view complete player agency that way. I am not attempting to criticize it, in fact I somewhat support it, but I just believe it may be interesting.
>>44383735
Yeah, OP here, I've run a few murder mysteries before and just rewatched Bladerunner so this question strangely fits for me right now.
First off, I would pay attention to the way you describe practically everything. Uncertainty should find a way to linger in the minds of all PCs and doubt an ever-present thought. On the GM side, never quite give away the details of a setting and be sure to use phrases such as "You think" or "From what you know" before introducing information.
Also be sure to hit the atmosphere on the head by effectively nailing the mood of your adventure or campaign on the head by showing some deceitful or mysterious event in the world to the players and perhaps try to make them have personal stake in the issue.
Keep a sensible amount of grit in each character, depending on the game you play in. Try and amplify differences in wealth for setting details and make the players feel isolated and alone inside their environment, or even feel like they are mortal peril.
I could go on about specifics if you want, but I think you get the idea so far.
>>44383735
Not OP, but I do.
Unless you made the thread the other day. In that case you already have it.
>>44383740
It is essential for players to feel like part of the game for them to have power over the story.
That doesn't mean fulfill each of their wishes. But it means that you take your impulses from them, and use that momentum to propel them forward.
In a sandbox that is all you have. In a structured story it means that there should be points in the story where the characters must choose, the players must be aware that they are choosing, and the choice they make has to matter. It does not mean they have to know what it entails.
>>44383914
Couldn't have said it better myself.
>>44383929
Well thank you.
Run pic related one every few months.
>>44383553
I mean there's probably a different website with that stuff, but it'd be off the grid so...
>>44383969
Paranoia is a powerful tool in the hands of a seasoned high programmer. But it is also a game that can completely decay into PvP without rhyme nor reason if they don't know what they're doing. And the setting is complex, it requires quite a few conceptual shifts.
>>44383914
>for them to have power over the story.
Correction: For them to FEEL LIKE they have power over the story. Whether they do or not is irrelevant, it's all about what they think they have.
>>44384005
Yeah, it's a great way to scratch the PvP itch. Throw it out every one in a while to keep everyone a little more sane in other games...it's a great pressure relief.
Also, can easily be refluffed into an alternate history of Discworld with Hex as FC.
>>44384007
This is an extremely narrow path to tread. I would advise against listening to this anon unless you are EXTREMELY confident in your ability to pull this kind of thing off.
What you're suggesting is a sort of phantom-railroading. And you're not actually wrong about this technique not making a difference unless the players notice it. The problem with this, however, is that you're banking the player's satisfaction -- and your own reputation as a GM -- entirely on the gambit that the players never realize what you're doing. You can phantom-railroad your players all you want, but the instant this illusion has been broken, they will likely become disillusioned with your game because they will suddenly feel as though none of their choices matter.
>>44380022
Have a plot but use it sparingly.
Dont hold to some insane timeline only you know about, mold it to your players but do not let them fuck around with nothing to do.
They want to spend 7 sessions fixing small problems around town? Move back the date an ally send for them for help.
They sit slack jawed, glass eyed stares while you wait for them to act? The goblins attack at that moment from hiding or someone hears a scream in the distance.
For the love of yourself, mold to your players or find another group.
>>44384214
OP here, I would have to agree with this anon, I used to unwittingly take part in this practice and it almost made a player leave my group until I got my shit together. Thankfully though, I learned my lesson and everyone's satisfied now. I had to learn how to incorporate actual choice in my game. It didn't help when I was running a game set in a homebrew world I made for an old novel idea I had, hence my initial advice. I had to live it in order to learn it for this one, unfortunately.
>>44384268
I couldn't agree more.
>>44384214
>This is an extremely narrow path to tread. I would advise against listening to this anon unless you are EXTREMELY confident in your ability to pull this kind of thing off.
It's really not. It's pretty easy to have set pieces that are independent of what choices are made.
All roads lead to Rome and likewise, your plot hooks link one set prefer to the next. You might have to change who is there based off of who the party kills and such, but this isn't like a video game where they'll replay it again and again to see every iteration.
That said, have this over arching thing serve something the players are interested in (no intricate court intrigue for a party who wants nothing more than goblin killing who would be well served by some orc becoming a warlord and wants to invade the kingdom while the party is screwing around saving chickens). Litter the smaller bits with hints at the big picture and generally players will happily swallow the hook.
>>44384214
>tfw my players just kind of rail road themselves into following the main story and don't ever search for other things.
It's not like it is a horrible problem, but it feels like every time I stop and ask them "Alright, what do you guys want to do now?" it hits the brakes kind of hard and I have to kind of push them in the direction of the plot. So I end up just putting up routes how to get to the end of the objective. They could take more encounters, more fighting, and learn where they need to go from that and then get a plot storm when shit hits the fan or through social interactions and investigations, learn the plot in moderate successions and fight a light encounter or one bad ass.
>>44384426
In something like DnD this is very destructive. In Fate it is the primary mode of creating the story. But it is done openly, and managed by an economy of plot. You can sometimes get away with doing it secretly to stay flexible and salvage plot the players went around. But if this deception of agency becomes your primary mode of conception it will drag the whole game down and repel any players from your games in the future.
My tip is don't get hung up on the rules. When something comes up that would require some time to look up, make a ruling then and there and look it up after the session. When you realize the group has been handling a rule incorrectly, note it for the future and don't worry about how it would have affected past games. Keep the game running at a steady pace, and don't let rules or minutiae trip that up.
>>44383854
How do you treat crime scenes? A problem I have is that players keep thinking they have missed something. Long after all the evidence was found they kept looking in the fudge thinking that the leftover sandwich was the key to the murder.
>>44384658
>In something like DnD this is very destructive.
>mfw WG7 outright says that if your players ignore the plot-starting orphan who wants them to look for his 'dad' in the dungeon, the DM should pack up and stare at them until they get the hint
>>44384827
A lot is conveyed with meta communication. The players will realize when you have nothing prepared and are coming up with it on the spot. A more experienced GM might outright tell them that they have found all there is to find, or disrupt the scene with a chase or a threat. If you are having trouble structuring this, there is a system built entirely around avoiding this. But it does so by basically removing the investigation and turning it into a sequence where the players just have to say "next". It's Gumshoe (shoegum) and their marketing/fan scene have made them very unlikeable around these parts. But maybe it'll help you. With a little experience a system like that will hinder more than help, but without - why the hell not?
>>44384658
If you're talking about dealing with lolrandom players, sure, you're right.
Otherwise, you couldn't be further from the truth.
>>44385495
No, anon. It has nothing to do with player experience. Even the most seasoned veteran will get bored and feel like their contribution is pointless is the GM can be expected to fake everything behind the scenes according to his railroad,
This goes back to player agency. Player choice has to matter.
>>44384449
>every time I stop and ask them "Alright, what do you guys want to do now?" it hits the brakes kind of hard
Don't do that. This is why you want to have a living world, whenever the PCs finish an arc and seem to run out of steam you start indicating the results of the NPCs' actions (which have all been in turn affected by the PCs) until they encounter something they want to go DO something about. Which should happen quickly, because you should be making sure the NPCs areas of interest coincide with the PCs as much as possible, and often in antagonistic ways.
>>44384214
>>44384007
My beef with the phantom-railroad is that I find the best RPG moments come from collaborating with other players and working their ideas into your own. If as a GM you never do that you miss out on the opportunity for a story to go in a direction you never expected and be absolutely delighted in where it ends up instead.
>>44383414
Ignore everyone who reminisce about the old days, they're always butthurt nostalgiafaggots mad that change exists.
>>44386456
That's how I do it, really. Shit keeps happening, and I never give the players any real breathing space. If they're running out of steam, one of their contacts needs their help.
>>44380022
Shouldn't newfags browse 1d4chan before they start posting?
>>44387322
>>44387329
>>44380022
Here you go OP.
Alright guys, I need some advice, because I might have fucked up. I'm a relatively experienced DM and I've managed to run games with 7 or 8 people effectively, I've run sandboxes, I've done all sorts of stuff. And recently, some friends who are less RPG-ish have been asking me to run a game. Now, despite not being /tg/ they're all smart and interesting people, and the first session was an absolute blast because they actually engaged with the story, and they rp'd damn fantastically. However, as time has gone on, they spend more time just talking to each other and not playing. At the end, they always apologise and say that they really do want to play but just get distracted, and at one point I tried to let the game die but they pulled it up because they were enjoying it. However, at one point, to keep them focused, I dropped the cogent narrative in favour of a stupid sandbox. I fucked up. But getting them off that track, and getting them to focus, means railroading. I don't think they'll mind too much, partly because they're inexperienced, but what's my move here?
> Railroad back to serious story
> Develop current sandbox into serious narrative
> Retcon away silly bit and return to seriousness
> As above, but with a light-hearted plot
>>44387683
I think you probably wanna sit down and talk with them outside the game informally and ask 'em what the fuck they actually wanna do.
Not those words literally, but bring up the problems you're seeing and ask them what they're enjoying and if they actually want to play some tabletop game or just get together to socialise. Because if it's the latter, Smash Brothers or some shitty reality tv will serve as the social lubricant just as well as getting around a table and fucking about instead of playing in a game.
This thread is gold, thank you all so much
>>44387683
>overthinking it
It doesn't sound like the game has a problem. Stop trying to fix it.
My regular group meets an hour before we start. That way we get the social stuff out of the way before we focus on the characters.
Try playing different games. You don't have to roleplay every time you meet. When people feel verbose, have an evening of 7 Wonders. There are also many different roleplaying games to try out different pacing and focus. Lasers & Feelings might give them the leeway to also chat, it's not that complex or immersive. Dread on the other hand uses tension in the room as a game device,. and characters die because of it, making a lapse in concentration very dangerous. Fiasco is a story game where you talk about your plot and really work on a common story. See what sticks.
>>44383633
Too much salt is unhealthy.
>>44380232
A balance of proactive and reactive has worked wonders for me and my group.
For every action they take, there's a reaction. They take enough actions, and they'll reap what they've sown.
A lot of new groups don't quite understand what that means, since they've secretly been playing in railroads where everything they do has them hailed as heroes and every encounter ends with them getting more or less what they want. And that's fine, too- they learn pretty quickly not to make powerful enemies or burn bridges behind them.
>>44389920
100% support this.
My group has learned ( finally) that just because the mage is level 5 and can cast fireball; that it will have consequences if they burn down the inn. Those low level guards they kicked the shit out of will send word to the capital, and a bigger group of guards will show up.
>>44380022
Three rules:
1 - Choices must matter.
2 - Reward daring, punish stupidity.
3 - When in doubt get the dices rolling and say "Suddenly..."
>>44389983
At the same time. NPCs aren't all dickheads. They don't try to be rude or start shit with the PCs. I hate DMS that make every NPC autohate the PCs.
>>44385550
>No, anon. It has nothing to do with player experience. [snip] Player choice has to matter.
>>44386456
>>>44384007
>My beef with the phantom-railroad is that I find the best RPG [snip] where it ends up instead.
Why do you two think that the players haven't had a hand in constructing the "railroad"? Further, I love the assumption that player choice somehow doesn't matter. You have to have some reactivity no matter what. Players kill guy who was supposed to do X...alrighty, what are the consequences of X not happening? That'll make the third set piece be one of blah instead of bleh.
But I want to go back to Mr. Player Agency. No, it's the appearance of player agency that matters, not the reality of it. The word you keep using ("feel") is you admitting it even though you don't want to. Non-lolrandom players tend to highly appreciate a living world. You can't have a living world if you don't have some aspects of that world marching on with or without the party. You have to know what's going on in your world and that knowledge allows you to point the party toward decisive moments where they can affect the direction the world takes...but then you need to know how the world will react to the various outcomes. Definitely, always take into account player preferences and if they contribute ideas, fold them in where you can. Also, as someone mentioned earlier, you can speed up or slow down what the rest of the world is doing so the party has a chance to do whatever before getting to whatever is going on.
You need to get out of your head that having a planned plot/setpieces equals inflexibility. Yes, 100% you will not deviate is bad, but at no point have I ever come close to suggesting that.
>>44387322
I did.
>>44390349
OP is back.
Yeah, that feels far too unrealistic and almost hostile for the players. It seems like that'd be a case of the GM vs PCs mentality. I can't stand that shit.
>>44390349
Well there could be some reasons for that, if the PCs are doing whatever they want and being the assholes of the story that's probably why the NPCs are being dickheads. Could also be an interesting plot hook though either NPCs cheering PCs no matter what they do or NPCs being assholes to PCs no matter what they do, turns out to be some magic spell or something.
