Do your PCs begin their campaign in their first settlement as visitors and wanderers, or as its citizens?

I

Immortal Sun

Guest

• May 23, 2019

• #11

"How" the players got here is less important to me than the "why" the players got here.

But since both of these things seem difficult for many players, I now just assign them all to a group, throw them in the government job lines and assign them a quest.

 

log in or register to remove this ad

5

5ekyu

Hero

• May 23, 2019

• #12

Nickolaidas said:

When you begin a new campaign, do you prefer the PCs to be visitors in their very first settlement, or do you prefer them to have been born and raised there? Are they the wandering heroes who stumbled upon a city and witness its troubles, or are they longtime citizens who finally decide to make a name for themselves in this city/village/kingdom?

Click to expand...

I leave it to them. They get told the where early in chargen and have to provide a "how or why are you there at this time" as part of their setup. It can be as simple as "was guarding caravans" or more.

 

N

Nagol

Unimportant

• May 23, 2019

• #13

The start is chosen to complement each campaign, but the most common starting point is as some form of newly arrived visitors. It makes it simpler for both the players and me.

 

aco175

Legend

• May 23, 2019

• #14

I have done both and find that PCs that are local need to know more information. They should know the NPCs already and I allow them to make up stuff as they go about their day. Some players are good at things like picking flowers to bring to his aunt who raised him when traveling back from the haunted crypt or helping the 'grandmother' neighbor who needs her wagon fixed.

Strangers are fine as some of the campaigns start by saying that they all find themselves along the road to a frontier town looking for adventure, gold, or even having some goals of their own.

 

S

Shiroiken

Legend

• May 23, 2019

• #15

Depends on the campaign. My first 5E campaign required the PCs to explore the village to get clues, so the party had to be strangers (otherwise the hometown PCs would likely know most/all the clues). My last campaign the players were from wherever they wanted, so long as they had a reason to be in the town. My next campaign (Saltmarsh) might be a mixed bag, but it will depend on how they set up the 1st adventure (I haven't gotten my copy yet).

The big thing I do whenever starting a new campaign is to tell the PCs they know each other. They're supposed to figure out how and why, but I don't like dealing with the PC introductions in the first session. Not only does it take up a lot of time, but a lot of players don't really get into it, and would rather get on with the action. Sometimes I'll do a hidden game (usually a one-shot) where the party is mysteriously pulled together into a strange situation, and meeting each other is important (I also discourage players from discussing characters until the 1st session starts).

 

Oofta

Legend

• May 23, 2019

• #16

With most of my recent campaigns, most of the PCs started as locals but it's up to them. The only requirement is that they come up with reasons to join up with the group, it's something we discuss during our session 0. In more than one campaign, we even started the PCs as pre-teen kids growing up together.

PCs introduced later in the campaign can be from any background that makes sense as long as there's a reason to integrate them into the party.

 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens

Supporter

• May 23, 2019

• #17

It's all about what the campaign needs. Visitors is probably easier, especially for the players, but if the game needs some local connects then that's how it is. So I guess unless there's a reason for them to be local then go with visitors.

As for interwoven character background, I can go either way. Sometimes its cool, but sometimes its just extraneous and complicated. Depends on the players. If players want to go that route I usually suggest broad strokes rather than an epic novel worth of story, that way the relationship can develop organically at the table.

 

S

S'mon

Legend

• May 24, 2019

• #18

Nickolaidas said:

When you begin a new campaign, do you prefer the PCs to be visitors in their very first settlement, or do you prefer them to have been born and raised there? Are they the wandering heroes who stumbled upon a city and witness its troubles, or are they longtime citizens who finally decide to make a name for themselves in this city/village/kingdom?

Click to expand...

Good question! This has major implications for the tone of the campaign.

In my Primeval Thule game the PCs mostly arrived in Quodeth as wanderers looking to make their names, but include some natives. It tends to a Three Musketeers tone at times.

In Princes of the Apocalypse the PCs were sent to Red Larch by their superiors to investigate the goings on.

In Heroes of Modron the PCs serve the king of Modron. This follows from a previous campaign where the PCs started as wanderers and ended up serving the king.

In my Runelords game it is so high level the PCs are from all over but the game start 4 years ago was per Shattered Star 1 with the PCs novice Pathfinders in Magnimar being sent on missions. Now it's an epic struggle to save the world.

 

S

S'mon

Legend

• May 24, 2019

• #19

I did local citizens and nobles in my Nentir Vale game, a mix in my Loudwater game. I am planning to run Red Hand of Doom with the PCs in service to the Lord of Brindol.

In general I find natives works best for limited scope games about protecting the community, and an open start works best for long term games that can go anywhere. The latter - wandering adventurers - tends to bring more energy to the game since the dynamic is less stable. However some kind of safe home base location is very important for long term play. It needs to be reasonably detailed and feel real to the players.