|
|
Post by dmzinthos on May 14, 2015 15:38:23 GMT
I am building my world out, and constantly adding. Every time I go to clarify one tiny little part, I end up writing lots of story to go along with it, which leads more. This is great for the world building. The concern I am having is that the players have brought their characters to me. I am integrating them into my story and I am concerned I have overshot on the integration and gotten TOO deep into it.
So some quick notes (there is more to it than this, but for the sake of your sanity I wont burden you):
Player backgrounds (they came to me individually with):
Player 1 - dragonkin druid that is interested in searching out for why his kind is hated so much. His back story included that his tribe had a member go crazy during a meeting that went bad and kill a human so to protect the tribe, the elders moved them to isolation.
Player 2 - half elf Bard that traveled with his father as the primary merchant between elven lands and humans. In one of the towns at an inn, his father was murdered by someone - unknown who
My world notes:
Dragonkin are the former servants of the worldbreakers - a race of powerful dragons that every few thousand years, would awaken and demolish all civilizations. Sort of like when there are too many deer a virus kills a bunch.
There is a criminal organization that is fairly unknown about in the major trading town that is controlling the goods being transported.
The bard was going to be raised by a spy for the criminal org without knowing it. The dragonkin's tribe was going to have served the worst of the dragons (and stayed around post last cleansing as a form of penance to watch over civilization and ensure that the worldbreakers dont return).
I was SERIOUSLY considering having the bard end up being the son of a demigod of evil trickery which is why the organization is so well hidden, and why he is so good at charming people. I was also going to have the dragonkin be the direct descendant (and eventually the harbinger) of one of the worldbreaker.
And all this while my main story was going on which involved a god having gone bonkers and trying to demolish existence.
So am I doing TOO much? Is it possible to have TOO much going on? I dont want to detract from the main story or get the players distracted, but I want them SUPER invested in this world. I am also worried that by having the the bards father killed by one of the dragonkins clan mates, it could either put negative emotions in the room OR they wouldnt care and it would lose all impact of the discovery.
|
|
|
|
Post by friartook on May 14, 2015 17:36:17 GMT
I think this sort of backstory, session 0 investment is great. It doesn't hurt to have fun and interesting connections between the PCs and between the PCs and the rest of the world.
I have two words of caution:
1. Player backgrounds are great for setting up roleplay, but I have found that often the players find who their characters truly are by actually playing them. Using the background as a possible future plot hook is great, just be sure to allow the players to build on their backgrounds as much as possible.
2. I caution you against getting too attached to your worldbuilding. Or, to put it another way, be sure to leave room for the PCs to help build your world. Having background and context is great, but remember that the PCs are supposed to be the stars of the story. Don't go so far down the rabbit hole of worldbuilding that you forget to allow your players to affect the world. Nothing promotes investment with a setting than having a character that can, or does, change the setting drastically through their actions.
I guess both of those cautions can be summed up like this: Build your world and work with your players on background, but be sure to allow the world and the players to be dynamic. In D&D, the Boyscout motto could be revised from "Be Prepared" to "Be Prepared to Improvise". I got myself good and frustrated early on by spending a bunch of time on prep, only to have the PCs make choices that threw all my prep out the window.
|
|
|
|
Post by dmzinthos on May 14, 2015 17:58:12 GMT
I guess the struggle I'm having as a new DM (and something that I wonder if all new DMs face) is "have I built enough story to make it interesting? I know what my world has. It's in my head. I'm translating it down as best I can. What I would love to see sometime, maybe for future pod casts is a short play through: the DM posts same time as the pod cast the prep for that week. We listen to the pod cast and can follow along to figure out what was improvised and what was planned. Week two, same thing so we can see what the DM took from week one and how it evolved the story and evolved the world.
As someone that is not used to this, it's scary to think I haven't created enough, and listening to the podcasts I don't want to railroad my players, while still making it engaging and full of surprises.
|
|
|
|
Post by DMC on May 14, 2015 18:16:34 GMT
My suggestion is go light, and let your players help build the world. You don't need to be Tolkien and have thousands of years of history pre-set.
If you're in a general, not-too-much-detailed city and one of your players says "I want to go down Wyvern Way, past the Purring Manticore. All the while ignoring the harlots from the second window beckoning at me." You now have the name of an alleyway, and a brothel to work with. Have specific places and set pieces in mind and ready, but the rest of it? Let the players help you.
It's very much "Yes, and..." collaborative storytelling, and gives your players the satisfaction of helping world-build with you.
|
|
|
|
Post by friartook on May 14, 2015 18:16:47 GMT
As someone that is not used to this, it's scary to think I haven't created enough, and listening to the podcasts I don't want to railroad my players, while still making it engaging and full of surprises. There are many styles of DM. I veer toward the "fly by the seat of my pants", "make it up as I go along", "just wing it" school. Take my advice below with that grain of salt. This style may not be for you, and you may be more comfortable with a well planned, fully mapped, linear style campaign. I've found that an open-ended campaign is pretty much impossible without some improvisation. Here's my advice: create a well established area where your adventurers are located. Their starting place. Make sure you have that area down pat, either in your head, or on paper. If its a town, populate the town with few NPCs, and have a few NPC ideas ready for the ones you haven't planned. Have the quest(s) and surrounding countryside mapped out well; know what sort of monsters may be randomly encountered while travelling, what's the weather like, what sort of terrain is around, etc. In short, prep up a small area rather than the whole world. You say you have the world in your head. Great! Leave it there until the PCs get to a new area. Then map/plan that area out more thoroughly. That way if you change your mind, or have it changed for you by player actions, you aren't locked in. As far as quests go, have two or three options and a "main quest". Or multiple options leading toward a similar outcome; many hooks for the same adventure. Be prepared for whichever option your players end up choosing. If your players throw you a curve ball, go with it. Even if you have to make something up on the spot. If you have the monster/NPC stat blocks prepped, everything else can be on the fly. Also remember: your players have no idea what you have planned. If they deviate from your original plans, then make something up. But present everything as if you had planned for it all along. My guys never know what I have planned and what I am making up on the spot (unless I tell them, which I sometimes do, they are my friends after all). I know it can be nerve wracking, especially when you haven't done it. I was close to pissing my pants when my current group started up. It's my first group in over 15 years, so it was like the first time all over again. I used a premade campaign setting (Eberron) and a premade adventure. I found that I was still prepping all the wrong things, and that the info in the adventure answered all the wrong questions and none of the right ones. That's why I scrapped it for a homebrew campaign. Now, if I don't know an answer, I can just make it up and nobody is the wiser. |
|
|
|
Post by friartook on May 14, 2015 18:18:10 GMT
My suggestion is go light, and let your players help build the world. You don't need to be Tolkien and have thousands of years of history pre-set. It's very much "Yes, and..." collaborative storytelling, and gives your players the satisfaction of helping world-build with you. These two short paragraphs express everything I was attempting to express much more succinctly. |
|
|
|
Post by DMC on May 14, 2015 18:22:30 GMT
As someone that is not used to this, it's scary to think I haven't created enough, and listening to the podcasts I don't want to railroad my players, while still making it engaging and full of surprises. I know it can be nerve wracking, especially when you haven't done it. I was close to pissing my pants when my current group started up. It's my first group in over 15 years, so it was like the first time all over again. I used a premade campaign setting (Eberron) and a premade adventure. I found that I was still prepping all the wrong things, and that the info in the adventure answered all the wrong questions and none of the right ones. That's why I scrapped it for a homebrew campaign. Now, if I don't know an answer, I can just make it up and nobody is the wiser. Oh duuuuuuuuuude, you have no idea how badly I am suffering with this right now. It's like DM Stagefright. Imagination really is a perishable skill for me. When I was gaming twice a week for close to 10 years, I was pulling stuff out of my own head left and right. Now? I'm like a deer in headlights. Excellent advice brother. |
|
|
|
Post by friartook on May 14, 2015 19:51:45 GMT
I know it can be nerve wracking, especially when you haven't done it. I was close to pissing my pants when my current group started up. It's my first group in over 15 years, so it was like the first time all over again. I used a premade campaign setting (Eberron) and a premade adventure. I found that I was still prepping all the wrong things, and that the info in the adventure answered all the wrong questions and none of the right ones. That's why I scrapped it for a homebrew campaign. Now, if I don't know an answer, I can just make it up and nobody is the wiser. Imagination really is a perishable skill for me. LOL, I have the opposite problem. I have so many ideas all time, I have a hard time sticking to one and seeing it through. Confession: I am constantly fighting off the urge to kill my PCs so I can scrap the current campaign and go on to the next great idea I have. I have to remind myself all the time to spend time thinking and prepping for my current campaign, not future ones. When I don't have an appropriate outlet for my ideas, they back up in me like mental constipation. I can't pass any other thoughts through until I get all the ideas out somehow. I did a lot more drawing and writing during my D&D dry years  |
|
|
|
Post by DMC on May 14, 2015 20:26:20 GMT
Well let me clarify, and I think you hit it spot on. Imagination overload is probably a better term than a lack of. I've taken to jotting down notes in a "Family Tree" sort of way on Evernote. Even if I have NO idea how it would fit in my game, if inspiration hits me, I note it down.
It's like, too many choices is almost as paralyzing as no ideas. LOL
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2015 5:02:36 GMT
My current table has a knack for surprising me, so I just stopped preparing much material ahead of time. I've never been good at improvising, but I've been forced to do so, and you know what? It turns out it's a skill, and the more you practice, the better you get it. I'm still not at the skill level I aspire to be, but every session gets me closer. Two of the big theories on world building say start small and work your way up, or start big and work your way down. I prefer to start big and develop national borders, capitol cities, and major terrain features. But after that, it's too much work to start creating all the other cities/towns, minor terrain features, etc... Instead, I zoom into the immediate vicinity of the PCs and work on that. The advantage to this is having a framework for big picture politics and at least a vague idea of what the party will find if they unexpectedly leave the locality. At the same time, I only need to develop the next local area they will most likely encounter, not an entire nation. Also, it's cool to have a few "time filler" encounters prepared when the party goes off the rails, to carry you through end of session. This will buy you time to develop the next locality before the next session. Bandits, wandering monsters, etc... tools.goblinist.com/5enc has a handy generator if you're really lacking ideas. |
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on May 20, 2015 7:22:59 GMT
I think that the best plan of action can be summed up by the wise words of one Vanilla Ice "All right Stop, Collaborate, and Listen." Really I just wanted to use that because of how applicable it seemed, haha. I think that aspects that relate directly to player;s should be done with their input as much as possible to help create a greater level of investment for both you and the players.
When I think about world building I envision an example along the lines of the outside edge of the United States to start with, but flesh out the state the players are in with a decent amount of info, the county with a lot more info, and just about everything about the town and surrounding area that they start in.There is always the chance that players will go completely off the rails and stretch you as a DM, but that's half the fun! Then again they have no idea what the map really looks like and towns can just move on their own without their knowledge.
|
|
|
|
Post by DMC on May 20, 2015 15:22:03 GMT
I think that the best plan of action can be summed up by the wise words of one Vanilla Ice "All right Stop, Collaborate, and Listen." Ahhhhhhhhh, the wise Bard indeed. LOL |
|
|
|
Post by dmzinthos on May 20, 2015 17:53:20 GMT
And here I was thinking that he first vanilla ice reference would be "Go, ninja, go, ninja, go."
|
|
