Approaches to prep in RPGing - GMs, players, and what play is *about*

[Hand of Evil]

I start with a session 0, that is player creation, backstory and what my players want from the game. This is mostly asking general questions of them and asking more questions based on their answers, giving them a basic map with locations they would hear about and then, a number of plots that they hear of in the local tavern (example: raids along the border, missing people, monster sightings, treasure hunters, etc.)

From that I will provide the adventures that tie into whichever thread they follow. I also have a rude I always follow, for every action, there is a reaction, thinking about what can happen when the party does something.

As far as Party getting together, that is the players problem. I expect them to provide a story during character creation of how they met and became an adventuring party. Some of them become hooks in the game.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yes. Many are describing that the game is only for the players, not the GM. Each player makes up stuff for the GM to use, and the GM has to use it. So, does the GM get to make up stuff to use: I have not seen anyone say that.

The GM still has plenty of input. Yes, they draw on the details and cues offered by the players, but they still have a lot of ways to bring that to bear. How those details come into play, and what other details get added, are up to the GM.

Not sure how a player being a "gottca" to the GM is a surprise.

I don't know what you mean here. Are all your GM-player relationships this fraught?

As I've said, these games are meant to be collaborative.

Well, limitations are always bad.

For the GM you mean? Or for everyone?

No, don't know what your talking about here.

The freedom of players is limited, right? Those limits are what make a game require skill, right? They can't just solve a problem however they wish, there are only certain resources available to them to do so, and so on. The limits are a big part of what creates the challenge.

Would you agree with that? If not, why not?

If so, why do you apply it to players, but not GMs?

It takes no skill to follow rules that limit your freedom.

So is does player skill exist?

I ask because the players' freedom is limited.

There are many types of freedom.

Right, see it's that overly positive viewpoint right there.

I mean, the games I play in and run have flaws and low points, of course. But we've been talking about prep and how it can be shifted from the GM to the players. These games tend to do that well in my opinion, so of course I speak highly about that. Why wouldn't I?

Not all games need to be some kind of struggle.

I understand that few around have ever played a Pure True Random Hexcrawl. Even many over in the Old Days thread have said they never existed, although they were not there. They do exist.

I don't know if I have or not, to be honest. I've played plenty of hexcrawls, but it's been a long time, and I don't know if any of them were ever generated entirely at random. I don't expect they were.

I get that, like you have said here, a BIG part of these games is how much fun it is to get together and talk about playing the game. And I'm sure the talking about the game play mini game is load of fun for you and many others.

It's amazing how quickly you move to caricature.

 

[bloodtide]

For the GM you mean? Or for everyone?

The GM.

The freedom of players is limited, right? Those limits are what make a game require skill, right? They can't just solve a problem however they wish, there are only certain resources available to them to do so, and so on. The limits are a big part of what creates the challenge.

Would you agree with that? If not, why not?

Yes.

If so, why do you apply it to players, but not GMs?

They are two different things.

I mean, the games I play in and run have flaws and low points, of course. But we've been talking about prep and how it can be shifted from the GM to the players. These games tend to do that well in my opinion, so of course I speak highly about that. Why wouldn't I?

It just seems like it's being over stated as being too perfect.

I don't know if I have or not, to be honest. I've played plenty of hexcrawls, but it's been a long time, and I don't know if any of them were ever generated entirely at random. I don't expect they were.

It's a common way to play an Old School style game.

 

[hawkeyefan]

The GM.

So you don't think there should be limits to the GM's authority? Why not?

Yes.

They are two different things.

Sure, I agree that they're different. But why do you think that limits or constraints make for skilled play, but not for skilled GMing? You think it takes more skill to do whatever you want than to work within some constraint?

Why are playing and GMing different in this aspect to you?

It just seems like it's being over stated as being too perfect.

There are flaws with any game, whether they come from the rules or the participants. Some games are better at parts of RPGing than others. None are perfect.

 

[bloodtide]

So you don't think there should be limits to the GM's authority? Why not?

Not really sure we should side track the thread with this.

Sure, I agree that they're different. But why do you think that limits or constraints make for skilled play, but not for skilled GMing? You think it takes more skill to do whatever you want than to work within some constraint?

A player of a single character needs the limits or they could just alter reality and end the game. The GM, with no stake in the game, won't do that.

There are flaws with any game, whether they come from the rules or the participants. Some games are better at parts of RPGing than others. None are perfect.

I'm saying that when ever someone describes some other game, it's all positive.

 

[Golden Bee]

You run 11 games? How? Like, PBP, live, a mix? Annually, monthly, weekly?

 

[pemerton]

This thread seems to have sidetracked from the actual topic, which is prep for RPGing and what happens when that prep is based around player-built PCs rather than GM-built setting.

But in case anyone is curious as to whether I look at the RPGs I play in a positive light - yes, I do. That's why I play them. If anyone reading this finds that they don't enjoy the RPGs they are playing, I encourage them to look around for some that they do enjoy!

 

[amethal]

Oh did they redo Spirit of the Century in Fate Core??

Pretty sure they didn't, unless they meant Shadow of the Century, which does use Fate Core.

 

[Umbran]

Threads about non-trad games always wind up in this territory—demanding that people who like those games present, for some reason, a full accounting of what they also don't like about those games.

Nobody is "demanding" anything. So please don't push that narrative.

The point has merit, in that it speaks to what you're trying to do - sell someone on a game, or teach them about a game.

Interesting that that's not the case with trad games, right?

Wrong. I mean, nobody need to "demand" it, because the D&D forum is loaded with folks discussing problems they have with the system, that it doesn't do well for them.

So, yeah, wrong. Sorry.

But also, if that's going to happen anyway (given enough posts), do you really need to accelerate that digression?

Again, what's the goal? Selling someone on a game, or teaching them about a game? If the latter, then it isn't a digression.

 

[pemerton]

what's the goal? Selling someone on a game, or teaching them about a game? If the latter, then it isn't a digression.

I think the goal of this thread is set out fairly clearly in the OP. It's to discuss what happens when prep for RPGing is based around player-built PCs rather than GM-built setting.

The OP does take as a premise that this is possible, for the simple reason that it's been done, by me and by many other RPGers.