DM Questionnaire and Campaign Prep

[Firos]

I'm looking for advice from experienced DMs out there. I hope I've come to the right place.

I'm about to begin a campaign for my group of players. A major difference this time is that I have a number of new players (new to the group, that is), and because of this and the change to a new system I am hoping to gauge player interests and prepare a better game by using a questionnaire in advance of campaign prep. "Better" in this case means, of course, "more fun for players."

I have a number of problems, though. With many kinds of questionnaire, the problem is that people can see through the questions, or are asked directly, and answer the way they think, when what they really want may not be what they asked for. For instance, if I ask a question like, "Do you prefer a game with a linear story or a wide-open experience?" many players might answer that they prefer the second just because of implications of the terms.

A second problem is that many questions can't (or shouldn't, in my opinion) be asked as dichotomies. Some, like the aforementioned question, might be more clear, but it makes little sense to ask "Do you prefer combat or role-playing?" as they are certainly not mutually exclusive.

With all this in mind, patient reader, I ask the following questions:

1. Do you have any examples of questions that are useful, based on my needs?

2. How might one go about asking questions that allow for a spectrum of player preference, while avoiding asking players the "meta-question"? In other words, how can I get players to answer without necessarily knowing they are answering, if it is possible?

3. For those of you who have used a questionnaire in this way, has it been valuable? Does it help produce a better game?

4. For those of you who may have answered such a questionnaire before a campaign as players, does this seem like a valuable process, or an onerous distraction?

The game will be a 4E game, if that matters to your responses. So I suppose that all questions would be asked with an unspoken, "given the strengths and limitations of D&D 4E." Though, even if this is not your system of choice, I'm sure your answers would be helpful.

Thanks in advance.

 

[kitsune9]

I'm looking for advice from experienced DMs out there. I hope I've come to the right place.

I'm about to begin a campaign for my group of players. A major difference this time is that I have a number of new players (new to the group, that is), and because of this and the change to a new system I am hoping to gauge player interests and prepare a better game by using a questionnaire in advance of campaign prep. "Better" in this case means, of course, "more fun for players."

I have a number of problems, though. With many kinds of questionnaire, the problem is that people can see through the questions, or are asked directly, and answer the way they think, when what they really want may not be what they asked for. For instance, if I ask a question like, "Do you prefer a game with a linear story or a wide-open experience?" many players might answer that they prefer the second just because of implications of the terms.

A second problem is that many questions can't (or shouldn't, in my opinion) be asked as dichotomies. Some, like the aforementioned question, might be more clear, but it makes little sense to ask "Do you prefer combat or role-playing?" as they are certainly not mutually exclusive.

With all this in mind, patient reader, I ask the following questions:

1. Do you have any examples of questions that are useful, based on my needs?

2. How might one go about asking questions that allow for a spectrum of player preference, while avoiding asking players the "meta-question"? In other words, how can I get players to answer without necessarily knowing they are answering, if it is possible?

3. For those of you who have used a questionnaire in this way, has it been valuable? Does it help produce a better game?

4. For those of you who may have answered such a questionnaire before a campaign as players, does this seem like a valuable process, or an onerous distraction?

The game will be a 4E game, if that matters to your responses. So I suppose that all questions would be asked with an unspoken, "given the strengths and limitations of D&D 4E." Though, even if this is not your system of choice, I'm sure your answers would be helpful.

Thanks in advance.

I really wouldn't bother with a questionnaire other than just asking players if they have any particular preferences for playing. Just provide a campaign that is prepared and run with it. Most players are fairly easy-going and open to a range of styles and play and I'm sure you'll do fine.

Happy Gaming!

 

[Mr. Wilson]

1. Do you have any examples of questions that are useful, based on my needs?

I'd simply ask the players to describe their perfect gaming session and see what it is they say. Listen to what they describe; it will tell you about what parts of the game they enjoy most.

2. How might one go about asking questions that allow for a spectrum of player preference, while avoiding asking players the "meta-question"? In other words, how can I get players to answer without necessarily knowing they are answering, if it is possible?

Again, I think if you allow them to describe their favorite session, or their favorite character you're more likely to learn about that players preferences.

3. For those of you who have used a questionnaire in this way, has it been valuable? Does it help produce a better game?

I haven't used a questionnaire, but I do ask people I haven't played with what style of games they like best so I know what they find fun, and so I can make sure I keep them engaged.

4. For those of you who may have answered such a questionnaire before a campaign as players, does this seem like a valuable process, or an onerous distraction?

N/A.

Hope that helps.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Hello Firos,

Before sending a questionnaire, I'd possibly get them to send you a character (made-up to the rules or just described) that they would like to play with, a little background, and where they think the character is headed. In this way, they are offering you their thoughts and ideas, rather than rebounding off of your questions. You can give them a one page blurb of your campaign world if you think this would assist or if it is different from the generic points of light fantasy that 4E assumes.

The hope is that this should give you a good idea what the players are looking for from the game. In turn, it gives you a really nice foundation to work off of in threading these backgrounds into the central plot. In this way, you're avoiding the leading question style questionnaire too. After you may like to ask specific questions to a particular player, but again if it is bouncing off of what they send to you, it will not seem as contrived or intrusive or whatever issue it is people seem to have with questionnaires.

Perhaps another thing to consider is that as a DM, there is going to be a particular groove or style that works for you. If you stray too far from it, you may find that your enjoyment suffers and thus the group's. In terms of DMing, do what suits you first, rounding out the edges to cater for the players second.

Once you've done this and run your first session, then you can send out a specific questionnaire that's going to be of more value and targets any perceived issues or points of interest from that first session. In your situation, that's most probably what I would look at doing. Personally, I'm not that big on questionnaires. I prefer either a phonecall or face to face discussion. A more back and forth one on one style of interaction allows both sides to qualify what they mean and get a little enthusiastic about things. It will give you more ideas too.

Anyway, best of luck with what you're planning and hope you all have fun.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Aus_Snow]

Nope, I've never done the questionnaire thing (for RPG campaigns). If I did though, I'd be tempted to keep it to two simple questions: 1. 'Is there anything you would like to be a feature of the campaign?'; and 2. 'Is there anything you definitely *do not* want to feature in the campaign?'

But that's the cheat answer, prob'ly.

 

[green slime]

These days I try to focus on a couple of things:

I explain my expectations as a DM for the campaign I'm running.
I list the house rules, and motivate them.
I describe the campaign world in a two to three page blurb.

I ask the players to provide a description of the character they want to play, in non-gaming terms, prior to character creation. I ask specifically for the players to provide some motivation for their character, and to connect their character in some way to the campaign world, through associates, peers, organisations, family, etc. There is no character creation session: I don't want players feeling they didn't get to play the character they wanted to, because of peer pressure. If they are all tanks, that only becomes my problem, not theirs.

Together with the player, I try to make unique goals for each character, the achievement of which provides bonus story XP for the character. These goals of course can change over the course of the game. An example of such goals: Captain a ship. Turn Pirate. Free the Windward Isles.

These goals remain personal, and are up to the player as to how important and fervently they should be pursued. It is also up to the player to convince his fellow players how important they are, or whether they should be revealed at all. Furthermore, some of the other players' goals may be directly or indirectly counterproductive to their own. So blabbing about your piratical goal to free the windward isles may not go down too well with the faithful Imperial Knight.

 

[steenan]

1. One of the most important things is getting the players together to talk about the campaign instead of asking each of them separately. Otherwise you'll get several different ideas and when you find a compromise between them, nobody will be satisfied.

2. When people give you answers, dig deeper. Find what they really like in what they describe. Find what it means for them. It is possible for all your players to like "heroic fantasy" while it means completely different things for each of them. Get them to give you specific examples of what they'd like to see in game.

3. Some general areas that are good to explore in your questions:
- How much predefined plot, how much player control? Some people want to be pointed to where the action is, some perceive any GM-authored story as railroading.
- How much "sandbox", how much consequences? Some people (eg. me) need to see that each decision matters to immerse in play. Some do not find the game fun if it hits them with bad results of their choices.
- How much exploration, how much social interactions, how much combat? How the game time is divided between these activities? Exploration-based campaigns usually contain much travel, while social-based ones play better when limited to a few locations. Stories with much combat typically require more defined allies and enemies, while social ones have shifting and ambivalent alliances.
- How much optimization, how much immersion, how much theater, how much laughing? While the previous question explored game time distribution, this one explores where player attention lies. Do they concentrate on game mechanics? On characters' feelings and decisions? On expressing their character concepts? On drinking beer and exchanging jokes? If they care about having optimized characters, give them strong enemies to defeat. If they care about emotions, give them reasons for joy and anger, despair and hope; have them make hard choices. If they want to play expressively, frame scenes where they can do it and roleplay your NPCs as well. If they just want to relax, don't push them strong with what happens in game.
- How hard should it be? Some people like challenges with real chance of defeat, others like to win. Some accept their characters dying, others prefer to be captured and robbed, but keep playing, others still take loosing anything they cared for as ruining their character concept. Some like bold action, others prefer careful planning and tactics.
- How dark and how optimistic? Some like surviving in a world falling apart, others want to make a difference, to make the world better. Some like a "realistic" worlds where good people may suffer and good causes may fail, other want evil to be defeated and punished. It's also a question of how much responsibility your players want to take. Some prefer being adventurers out for themselves (with any background ties being only a flavor), some want their families, their towns and their planets to be put in danger so that they may defend them.
- What kind of cultures, environment and creatures would they like to see in game? It is a good starting point and inspiration for you for creating the campaign.

Hope that helps!