D&D 5E Who Picks the Campaign? DMs, Players, and Choice

[overgeeked]

Well, that's kind of what I thought you were doing - analogizing between campaign and character generation.

And, I think what I suggested still sort of holds - You have two basic routes - pick themes, and pick mechanic to match, or pick mechanics, and then restrict yourself to the themes those mechanics support.

Or use a generic system and play whatever themes and genres you want.

 

[Malmuria]

How does everyone feel about "stars and wishes"? I like the stars part but not the wishes part

 

[dragoner]

Yes, it's like 10' polling, and who falls off their chair first yells "parkour!" And has to do the next round.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I know where you are coming from. One of the reasons I like running Adventure Paths and modules is I need a foundation under my feet. I need inspiration to kickstart my imagination so that I can start forming up my own campaign. I have never been able to homebrew up something from nothing. Every attempt is just a milk-toast offering the players dont engage with. I dont feel too bad, because I have seen others pour their hearts into making homebrew settings that the players just dont react to. I've come to the conclusion that hacking published stuff is the best way to go for anybody. Though, its encouraging to hear about your successes and player involvement. I am envious.

One thing that helps is that, of my initial players, three were long-term friends of many years, and two were more recent but about as close as we could be for the couple of years we'd known each other. Having a good familiarity with their preferences (and all of us being fans of FFXIV), I can draw on a common pool of references and information.

Another is that, while I did pitch the initial base idea ("Arabian Nights" adventures), I specifically worked with each player to draw out their interests and perceptions of various things. So the Wizard was a bit of a philosopher (player has a classics degree) who wanted to divine the higher mysteries. I've mentioned the Bard player many times, an anthropologist who finds religious topics distant but fascinating, so I made them personal and "uncomfortable," not in a "this is bad" way but in a "I don't know how to respond" way--meaning any choices made would necessarily be a revelation for character and player both. (It also meant I've kept an intentionally vague hand with most answers: this is a world where faith is ultimately always required, because the true answers to many deep questions are simply not accessible to inviolate, independent verification.) Our Ranger gave me an excellent, thematic story for why a half-orc would have a troubled family history without any of the usual ick, and brought in a vastly interesting tension between different lifestyles and evolving social groups, so I fed back into that with the temptations of city life for the man of the wild, and life-upending changes of moral behavior among family members. Etc.

Mostly, I've just been very lucky that I can make use of a lot of random facts I already know, or have just enough basic knowledge. Then at most a quick Google search during sessions (we play voice-only over Discord as we're all over the US) can get me the superficial expertise I need to make a vibrant situation.

One of the best things, though, is that I've been very blessed that my players really like the NPCs I've included. I had had fears that, for example, the "secretly a gold dragon" NPC they met would get a poor reception, e.g. DMPC type stuff. Instead he's a trusted mentor and powerful but secret ally, and his fiancee--a talented Wizard, linguist, and artificer, but no adventurer--is a vital source of help to the party. I don't do too many distinct voices, but I do try to give different characters some subtle shades of inflection, cadence, and diction--like the time I gave a Jinnistani nobleman a "30s New York businessman" accent and the party instantly took a shine to him.

Hopefully these examples can prove useful for your own games. Finding themes and concepts that your players value and exploring how they could be teased out in perhaps-surprising, and hopefully enlightening, ways is the key to my success. Well, that and apparently being pretty good at making likeable ally NPCs and hate-worthy arch-nemeses.

 

[guachi]

I've had terrible games with all sorts of Dungeon Masters. But the only great and transcendent campaigns of D&D I've played in had one thing in common- a DM that was truly invested in the game she was running.

Massive snippage because Snarf is wordy but at least he put the important part in italics. This is absolutely true for me. Had a great DM when I was in college and he was full of fun ideas for campaigns. I tried them all (he was my roommate so it was easy to do so) and the campaign he cared the most about was the best, a Harn campaign that was phenomenal.

 

[Maxperson]

Welcome to the occasional in a series of posts, Snarf Presents Hawt Taek Thursdays. Today's edition is brought to you courtesy of the number 6 and the day Monday, for reasons.

I've sometimes seen people discuss how they choose to start a campaign in D&D- not to mention seen it many times in my own life. And while I've seen a lot of different ways to make this initial decision, I've seen one comment that stuck with me- it was the idea of a DM polling the players to determine what setting to run their campaign in. And I thought to myself, "That is precisely the opposite of what I would do. In fact, if a DM polled my table to determine the campaign setting I would run away faster than if the DM said, 'Hey guys, how would you feel about an all-Bard campaign with the goal of helping the elves take over the world?'"

I get the impulse. Tables are necessarily collaborative. This isn't an issue of DM fiat, or a DM saying, "My way or the highway." People can, and should, discuss the type of game they want to play as well as their expectations for the campaign in 5e. There should be reasonable tradeoffs - maybe try X this time, and agree to try Y next time.

That said, for my personal preference, give me a DM with a point of view any day of the week. At the majority of tables, the amount of work that the DM puts in to the game is greater than that put in by the players, which means that I want the DM to be invested in what she is doing, and to be knowledgeable about her campaign; is there anything worse than a DM who is uncaring about the campaign setting, and less knowledgeable about the lore of her campaign than the players? Having a player that isn't invested in the campaign can be a tragedy, but when the DM isn't invested, that's a campaign-killer.

When I play, I want the DM to take ownership of the setting. To be honest, it doesn't even matter what the DM is running; it could be Greyhawk, Ravnica, Exandria, Theros, Eberron, Dark Sun, or some random homebrew where a Mindflayer/Flumph alliance has enslaved humanity. Heck, even things that sound absolutely terrible ("All my vampires are sparkly!" or "Forgotten Realms, but with even more Elminster!") will probably work out okay if the DM cares about the game they are running.

Now, I understand the counterargument to this- what about the DM that sucks? What about the DM that is so invested with telling the DM's story that the DM doesn't allow the players to breathe? What about railroading? And these are all good points- sometimes, you will find that a DM who is heavily invested in her campaign is the same DM who demands that the campaign play out a certain way - and that's no fun. No one wants to be a token in the DM's boardgame, or a character in the DM's creepy fiction. But the thing is- that can be true of any DM, even the uncaring ones. Or, to put it more succinctly-

I've had terrible games with all sorts of Dungeon Masters. But the only great and transcendent campaigns of D&D I've played in had one thing in common- a DM that was truly invested in the game she was running.

I completely agree with the bolded part there, and am one of those who basically polls the players for the campaign. We all(including me) pitch in ideas and then the players(not me) vote on the campaign ideas by ranking them. The top 3 or 4 ideas get a second vote and the winner is what we play.

In order to prevent anyone from not being invested, all 5 of us can just flat out nix one campaign idea. Since there are very few ideas that I am either uninterested in running or don't think I can do justice, I only use my veto occasionally. Probably once every 3 campaigns. That keeps me invested, while still letting the players choose the campaign.

 

[Maxperson]

Most DMs I know come with multiple campaign pitches.

I usually let the players rank my campaign pitches.

You know what is almost as bad as running a campaign you don't care for...

...having players who don't care for your campaign after you've invested work in.

Yep. That's why I use the method that I do. After we've all ditched the ideas that we wont invest in and the players pick the one they most want to play, everyone involved is guaranteed to be invested in the game.

 

[payn]

One thing that helps is that, of my initial players, three were long-term friends of many years, and two were more recent but about as close as we could be for the couple of years we'd known each other. Having a good familiarity with their preferences (and all of us being fans of FFXIV), I can draw on a common pool of references and information.

Another is that, while I did pitch the initial base idea ("Arabian Nights" adventures), I specifically worked with each player to draw out their interests and perceptions of various things. So the Wizard was a bit of a philosopher (player has a classics degree) who wanted to divine the higher mysteries. I've mentioned the Bard player many times, an anthropologist who finds religious topics distant but fascinating, so I made them personal and "uncomfortable," not in a "this is bad" way but in a "I don't know how to respond" way--meaning any choices made would necessarily be a revelation for character and player both. (It also meant I've kept an intentionally vague hand with most answers: this is a world where faith is ultimately always required, because the true answers to many deep questions are simply not accessible to inviolate, independent verification.) Our Ranger gave me an excellent, thematic story for why a half-orc would have a troubled family history without any of the usual ick, and brought in a vastly interesting tension between different lifestyles and evolving social groups, so I fed back into that with the temptations of city life for the man of the wild, and life-upending changes of moral behavior among family members. Etc.

Mostly, I've just been very lucky that I can make use of a lot of random facts I already know, or have just enough basic knowledge. Then at most a quick Google search during sessions (we play voice-only over Discord as we're all over the US) can get me the superficial expertise I need to make a vibrant situation.

One of the best things, though, is that I've been very blessed that my players really like the NPCs I've included. I had had fears that, for example, the "secretly a gold dragon" NPC they met would get a poor reception, e.g. DMPC type stuff. Instead he's a trusted mentor and powerful but secret ally, and his fiancee--a talented Wizard, linguist, and artificer, but no adventurer--is a vital source of help to the party. I don't do too many distinct voices, but I do try to give different characters some subtle shades of inflection, cadence, and diction--like the time I gave a Jinnistani nobleman a "30s New York businessman" accent and the party instantly took a shine to him.

Hopefully these examples can prove useful for your own games. Finding themes and concepts that your players value and exploring how they could be teased out in perhaps-surprising, and hopefully enlightening, ways is the key to my success. Well, that and apparently being pretty good at making likeable ally NPCs and hate-worthy arch-nemeses.

Unfortunately, I had to go outside my circle of best friends. They turned out to be the worst gamers.

Instead I started looking for gaming buddies and have made some good acquaintances and friends over the years. There are a few folks I never worry about. If they want in on one of my ideas, they are committed. I've a handful of other players that are reliable, but not very invested. So my games have been some variation of GM/Player interest and investment in the games. I'm still looking for that unicorn game where everybody is as enthusiastic as I am.

 

[Maxperson]

No....no. Some ideas should be excised by mind flayers with brain soap as soon as they occur, for the good of the hobby and the multiverse...

Like, "The Forgotten Realms, but with an even more sparkly vampire Elminster?"

 

[Maxperson]

Well, no. In order of the horror...

1. Bards.
2. Elves.
3. Root canals (without anesthetic).

Where do Elven Bards that do root canals rank?