Don't write every part of your adventure in advance. Unless you and your players are OK with some strong railroad tracks or agree to follow plot hooks, it's a recipe for wasted content.
That doesn't mean write an adventure or campaign, it means write an outline and the next session or three of content and then see where the party starts to go. A good thing to get in the habit of is ending a session right after a major decision has been made, especially if it pertains to traveling. Try to align the end of a session with the party's decision on what cave, cellar or town to travel to next. Then you can prep it as needed.
Something interesting that Matt Mercer mentioned on their latest talkback was how often times he just creates problems but not a solution. Seems like a really great way to ensure the players are able to have freedom in how they approach things and you as a DM aren’t forced into ensuring a specific outcome
That's good advice. Unless everyone agreed to run a prewritten module, expecting the players to do too specific things and go to too specific places is ill-advised.
Pre-planning too far, even with collaborative players, can fail to provide what they want. Only as the campaign progresses it will become clear what the players gravitate towards and what are their dispositions.
The GM can keep some general ideas for the future events and potential conclusions, but fleshing them out before they are imminent will only lead to wasted effort and disappointment. Being able to think on your feet is very important for a GM too.
Conversely, players should understand that GMs also have ideas of what they want to see, so they should at least try to pick up on some cues.
Everyone should remember that the core of TTRPGs is collaborative storytelling.
Honestly even if everyone agreed to a linear story, they can jump the rails without even knowing unless you have clear and explicit communication. DMs should be willing to say "hey, you can do this, but just so you know I never considered this action and might need to make up some nonsense on the fly or take a break to do some new prep" if they think it's necessary. Clear communication beats hiding behind the curtain for the sake of immersion every time.
I was a player in a campaign a while back where this basically happened - we all knew the DM had plans and thought we were following them, but he revealed at the end that pretty much the last half of the campaign had been panicked improvisation of material that he wasn't happy with, because at one point the NPCs we'd been traveling with got on a boat to a new continent and invited us along, and in absence of other clear plot hooks we said yes. Apparently all the prep was on the previous continent and he riffed a ton of interactionless filler descriptions, a random dungeon, and a half-baked new plot, rather than saying "you can go with them but to be clear you'd be leaving my prep". In our particular group's case, we would have happily changed our mind on that basis, but even if we'd gotten on the boat we would have been in a position to understand and enjoy the new adventure better knowing that everyone (including the DM) was venturing into the unknown together.
Why have I never had that issue?
Do people really just write their adventures as a list of predefined conditions and consequences and if players dont meet the condition, the consequence just never happens?
I would go mad. Just write what you want the PCs to learn, who the bad guys are and what they want to do, and what the players get as a reward for stopping them.
All the rest just flows from there?
If your players walk away from your hooks then they don't want story, just throw random encounters from a table at them.
As a GM of exclusively pre-written content, I find this terrifying but intriguing. I would love to be able to totally homebrew an adventure, but the amount of planning and prep beforehand seems daunting (which feels ironic, given my experience as a GM lol). Is it often an illusion of choice, where you may lay out a handful of hooks that, over time, lead to the same destination?
I don't like the term "illusion of choice" or "railroad" for my style, even though I can see how people might think that's what's going on. The players don't get a choice in what major story beats are going to happen, which NPCs they meet and what set-piece encounters they experience. They do get a choice in what context they meet these people, where they are when they experience the major story beats and how to engage with the set-piece encounter.
For example: In my last session I wanted three things:
- the PCs to get some face time with the BBEG of the next little arc (a Dr. Mingel), (meet an NPC)
- have a chase scene through the busy streets of London during the day and (set piece encounter)
- have Dr. Mingel attempt to obduct an NPC (Mr. Fairstyle) that could become a major source of power to the PCs (story beat).
So a regular questgiver gave the PCs the task to find and protect this Fairstyle character (hook). How they go about this is their choice. But whatever they do, once they rolled two or three times successfully to find Mr. Fairstyle (be that through asking around amongst their contacts, using divination magic, or digging through the church register to find Mr. Fairstyle and his antecendants), they will get a solid clue to his location. He can be found in a public place where scandal is to be avoided. Once there, they find Mr. Fairstyle and Dr. Mingel already engaged in polite conversation, which they can join. They observe behaviour in Dr. Mingel that reveals him to be a bad guy. When leaving the public place either Mr. Fairstyle or Dr. Mingel will attempt to flee from them (depending on context and who they try to chase).
All of these things will happen. All of the details are up to my players. E.g. I did not know ahead of time that Mr. Fairstyle and Dr. Mingel would be in a Casino playing a rare card game that is only offered in this one place. It was a casino with a specific card game because thats what the trail of clues led the PCs too and the 3rd successful roll was when talking to a gambling guy who had met Mr. Fairstyle before (I hadn't fixed the number 3 before either, that was purely based on how much time they spent searching and what the mood was at the table, if we had gotten caught up in throwing back Monty Python quotes for half an hour a single roll would have sufficed and if the players were really into the investigation bit it would have taken them 5 or 7). The players decided to chase down Dr. Mingel when exiting the casino and leaving Mr. Fairstyle to fend for himself. So while they caught Dr. Mingel, his henchmen caught Mr. Fairstyle and while they try to get him back, (spoiler alert) Dr. Mingel will escape in their abscence.
Edit: Btw, they had killed a previous incarnation of Dr. Mingel without learning his name or talking to him. So the dead guy is now Dr. Mingels dear but insignificant assistant, for which he also wants to kill the players (long term). The story beat they hit there was "disrupt one of Dr. Mingels operations", and the set piece encounter was a fight in a warehouse full of chemicals. I would have liked it if "Dr. Mingel" had gotten away from that fight (in which case they would have recognised him in the casino), but "learn the BBEGs name" was not on the agenda for that session so they don't even know that they 1st turn killed the BBEG of an entire story arc. Because they didn't because that wasn't Dr. Mingel because that's not the context the players created.
Not who you responded to, but I can't follow a pre made campaign as a DM. My current campaign started as a pre made, but prepping for it felt too much like homework so we hopped the rails and I've been my own story.
To answer your question from how I operate, I have a rough idea of what the conclusion of the campaign looks like and a rough odea of how the party might get there. I only really know the specifics of what the party is currently doing or what they might encounter in the next months. At this point in the campaign the the players know who the big baddie is, what they're up to, and know of means to stop them. It's up to them to figure out a plan to stop the big bad. The party has taken some of my hooks to solve their problems and have gone completely off the rails at some points to solve their problems. There are some points in the campaign that are pretty linear (like right now, they need a macguffin from a particular place) and some where they're given set pieces, a location, and a good luck slap of the ass.
As it pertains to the meme up here for me personally, sometimes I'll build an encounter/boss/set piece and the party will completely fucking skip it. That's okay though, now I have a partial idea for later. I hope that gives you some insight into the other side. I'm also interested in other DMs that make their own, what methods they use.
Have a read of Fate core, there's an SRD online for just the rules but the core book is great for GM advice, even if the system is way too meta for my taste now. Blades in the Dark also has some excellent GM advice and is currently my favourite game system. I'm running a Fate game currently with nothing pre written and Very minimal prep week to week.
Session zero players make characters and decide what elements they want to see in the world, vampires, Wizards, cults, werewolves. This gives me themes and factions to work with.
Between session 0 and 1 I did a fair bit of prep (like a couple hours) but only so far as main factions, key characters, goals and some aspects. Once you know who the key people are and what they want it's pretty easy to plan, they will follow their goals unless the players get in the way somehow.
Then between each session all I need to do is think how the world reacts to the last session. Usually all that means is that someone now wants to kill the PC's as top priority. My usual planning time is like 15 to 30 minutes, often less. Though I'm happy running a very improv heavy game and think I'm pretty good at coming up with interesting scenarios off the cuff. Some people benefit from having more groundwork laid out.
Regarding illusion of choice, I started like that: do you go left or right? It doesn't matter I've made one map and it's a circle so your going to the end whatever you do. I find my current way more fun, it's less work and I get to be surprised by what happens as well. Yeah it's frustrating if I have a cool idea and the players decide that the faction it translates to isn't that exciting and don't interact but given all ove done with that facton is named the leader thought about their resources and goals if it's not used yet it's not really a waste of my time.
Just to reassure you that you can run games without a module and with very minimal prep but the improv muscles need lost of practice.
I have run games in a few different styles, sometimes with a list of enemies and monsters and story on the fly; other times with a few sessions well planned
Right now I'm running a pretty cheap story, with procedurally generated landscape and dungeons, and stories inspired by the https://d20srd.org random adventure generator
Once years ago I wrote a plan for my group that ran to forty pages, but I knew them well and felt I could predict how they'd go - they were led around by the temptation of riches
Me, a player: "So my options are the left door or the right door?"
You, the DM: "Yes."
Me, a player: "I choose the left door."
You, the DM: "FUCK!" tears up 300 pages of notes
Do such idiot GMs really exist or are they just made up for the memes?
I once had a campaign that had such a scripted ending, the GM took over one of the PCs to control what they would say and do in the finale.
It's mostly a joke, but there is a kernel of truth.
A lot of us forever DMs secretly want to be writers, but we haven't really thought our plots through. Reading advice from The Alexandrian and Angry GM really helps.
Yeah, but I actually have a DM like this. He put a giant, ominous, spectral raven on a passenger boat with us, and we all said, "uh, fuck that, let's walk away." So the session ended about 5 minutes later as he "got a call" about a very important excuse he needed to take care of.
You were clearly supposed to choose the right door! Don't you remember the cryptic mumblings of the old man six sessions ago? And the song the dwarves sang when you went to the tavern in session 1? Do you even take notes?
DM: "Ahem! Stanley went through the redd door."
Can't break what isn't there. My fogged, weed-addled mind is perfect for creating the loose structs needed to comform to the destructive tendencies of players. Whose that guy they just killed with the village leader's head dress? I dont know either.
Who's that guy they just killed with the village leader's head dress? I dont know either.
He certainly has a son who was out hunting at the time, who now has a grudge
He gas a daughter. His death shattered her mind to survive, the pieces made a pact in the depths of despair. They rationalize his death as being set free. She now roams the land liberating the needy, with her ultimate goal being the liberation of the great party who turned her to this realization
This is why I only give plot hooks, not planned out plots. I figure out how things would go without intervention, then see how the players fuck it up by their actions.
My sister DMs but before she got really into it she asked me to play a practice game and got extremely frustrated with me. I managed to pick literally every option/choice that continued to push the story so far outside its intended narrative she had to shut the game down because she an out of material to make up on a whim 😅
She told me later that she writes a few extra side quests for players like me in the future that literally like to go rogue 🤣
I used to build my stories out of glass, but my players broke them and it hurt. Now I make them out of clay and we can all build it together.
"Yes, that would completely bypass the dungeon I spent the last 2 months building. So I guess uh...I take 1d6 psychic damage and we'll move on."
Maybe you shouldn't have made the campaign so easy
