Advice on Session 0 and Player Surveys (+)

[Retreater]

As I've recounted many times here, my group and I have struggled to bring our tastes together in a satisfying game experience.

This time, I'm trying to get us started on the right foot and plan for the game, including them in a more major role. (In the past they've usually said "we trust you to run a good game" - which is nice - but in practice it's frustrating.)

I need some good questions to ask. However, most of the advice I've seen have been about X Cards and such - which isn't especially relevant because we've had those kinds of discussions already.

So how do you go about finding a good system and campaign style for your groups?

 

[payn]

So how do you go about finding a good system and campaign style for your groups?

Trial and error. I dont start a long campaign until I know the group likes the system and actually wants a campaign in it. So, I start with one shots and trial runs first. Iron out the wrinkles and be sure its what everyone wants.

I came about this epiphany when I realized I care way more about this than the average gamer. I thought maybe folks were being untruthful at session zero when later it was revealed they did not want the things they said they did. I realized a few things afterwards. First, folks often have similar, but sometimes disagreeable definitions of things like sandbox, political intrigue, skill play, etc.. Folks also change their minds during play when they are unsure, but assumed they had to be sure at sesh 0. Also, some folks just want to play, but never GM, and will humor a GM just to get a game going.

Long story short, sesh 0 is a good practice, but its not going to all by itself put folks on the same footing. Things change once dice hit the table and role play starts happening. You dont know entirely, until you do know. A session final about collective thoughts on the game might actually be more helpful then a sesh 0. YMMV

 

[Jolly Ruby]

A thing I tend to do before and after a campaign is asking about the most memorable moments of past campaigns and things they didn't like. It helps to see what they value most. Recently I found out that while I love a huge dungeon half of my players think my dungeons would be better if they're half the size (they don't know how to appreciate my art)

 

[Reynard]

As I was putting together my current 5E 2024 sandbox game, I asked the players (all of whom I know in person and have played with, some of which had played with each other) to rate the following categories on a scale of 1 to 5 (individual score, not ranked) for their personal interest:

Tactical Combat
Dungeon Delving
Wilderness Exploration
NPC Interactions
Politics/Faction Play
Building things in-game (businesses, keeps, etc)
Families, Romances, etc
Treasure and Loot

For myself, if a player put a 1 in a category, i struck it from the list of stuff to do. If a player put a 5 in, it defintiely went on the list. Luckily I did not have any opposing views.

Most everyone rated most things 3 or 4, which to me means "sure, why not?" and I will include them as I see fit. There were a couple 2s, which means I will use sparingly.

Obviously, this is all in the context of everyone already in to play a 2024 5E D&D sandbox game. If I had to start with "what are we going to play" I would pick 3 or 5 games or campaigns I would be happy to run, and have the players rank them in order, then tabulate the results and find the one with the best median score. You can't please everyone, after all.

This did not happen, but I was prepared to have a player come up with wildly different results than the rest of the group, and was ready to ask them to sit this one out.

 

[thullgrim]

I typically pick 4-5 things I’m interested in running. Then I put together an elevator pitch for each one with system, plot stuff, big ideas etc. I then have them rank their choices and send me their tallies privately. I don’t want one person driving the train.

9 times out of 10 I take the pitch that had the most votes, or the most first place votes.

Once that piece is done we do Session 0. I don’t have to deal with X card and stuff, I’ve been playing with the same group for years and we’re pretty familiar with boundaries and what we’re comfortable dealing with.

During the Session 0 I’m very upfront about what I want to get out of a given campaign and very transparent about things like advancement pace, gear, power level, playstyle for both system and narrative.

If we’re all on the same page we’ll create characters as a group and go from there.

 

[Wolfpack48]

"What kinds of genres and settings are you guys interested in right now?" I know when we introduced Glorantha, people really got caught up in the magic-is-everywhere and everyone is a representation of their god. It's trying to discover what is really going to hook them in the campaign, but then also finding out after that what is important to them. Setting weirdness? Combat? A bit of plot and intrigue? Investigation? It's sprinkling all the right elements in which is freaking hard as hell, I know.

 

[KYRON45]

Make sure the opening party has a vested interest in the opening plot/premise/story.
I don't mean they are all just happy to play. Have the PCs be directly related to the premise.
If little Timmy fell in the well and wandered into the caverns under the village....make sure they know Timmy personally and care that he's in danger.
If you are going to rescue the princess make sure the party isn't all anti-monarchy and don't care if the trolls eat the whole royal family.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

As I've recounted many times here, my group and I have struggled to bring our tastes together in a satisfying game experience.

This time, I'm trying to get us started on the right foot and plan for the game, including them in a more major role. (In the past they've usually said "we trust you to run a good game" - which is nice - but in practice it's frustrating.)

I need some good questions to ask. However, most of the advice I've seen have been about X Cards and such - which isn't especially relevant because we've had those kinds of discussions already.

So how do you go about finding a good system and campaign style for your groups?

C.A.T.S.!!

Start with this simple set of steps =
Before playing a game, or even introducing the rules, there needs to be a conversation at the table to set expectations. A game runs smoothly when all players understand what the group is striving for. But how do you do it? You use the CATS method! Everyone loves CATS.

Concept
Pitch this game. At a high-level, what’s it about? What is this game's primary adventures like? (missions, emotions, combat, adventure, zero-prep, etc)

Aim
Explain what the players are trying to accomplish. Can someone win? Can everyone lose? Are we trying to tell a specific type of story? (is this storybook? four color heroes? emotional bonding with NPC and others? etc etc etc)

Tone
Have a quick conversation about the tone of the game. What is the default? Are there different options for gameplay? (Serious vs. Gonzo, Action vs. Drama, etc.). Come to a consensus on what the group wants.

Subject Matter
Explain what ideas might be explored during gameplay. Do they make anyone uncomfortable? Discuss what boundaries need to be set, if any. (This is about stuff like PvP, or non-consensual actions like vampire feeding, or are characters expected to be exceptionally cooperative, or are we the baddies, etc etc )

........

THEN .... be honest with the game system you pick for this. No, D&D can't do everything... so don't force it to be a emotional melodrama
Try out new systems, and really try to get good at playing them. There are gems out there that need a little extra learning time, so be patient with new systems.

.......

Some personal IMHO mappings of systems to best-fit game styles =

D&D / Pathfinder: "I want to play Diablo but with with more interactions as my highly supernatural/magic character."

OSR/RuneQuest: "I want to play down-to-earth people who can die easily, thus heroics and magic are a big dangerous deal!"

PBTA: "I want to play a genre and have the game feel like a movie!"

FitD: "I want a game where the tactics are mostly Ocean's 11 heist and gang/world building instead of highly specific combat mechanics!"

2d20: "I want the game to feel like I have rules that the player can use to control their danger level, but the GM still gets to whollop us from time if we build too much Heat."

Cypher: "I want to play D&D but make it more like final fantasy/jrpg where players make all the rolls."

Vampire/Werewolf/Mage: "I want to play as the monster, but only as dark/evil/monster as I feel like being!"

Dread: "I don't want rules, I want danger and drama and death and jenga!"

 

[KYRON45]

If you are doing player surveys ask definitive but not leading questions.
This is a "bad pizza is still pizza" type thing. Often I have found that some players are just happy to be playing so if you ask them if they had fun they will say yes. This is encouraging of course but not as valuable as getting them to tell you what they did and didn't like about the session or what you could do to improve.

 

[KYRON45]

Don't lean too heavily on Session 0. Everything about the game will change as you play.
Be clear about the tone you are planning to set.
Be clear about what is and is not allowed. Be in charge but also be flexible.
Lead the group but let the players lead the party.
Don't let the group expect more from you than they are willing to give of themselves.
Admit mistakes. No DM knows all of the everything and be leary of those who claim so.
"Because i'm the DM" is a fun joke, but not a good way to keep a group together.
Explain things.
Learn from every experience. Players will surprise you.
Be the parties biggest fan. This is from @SlyFlourish and it's invaluable.
Most importantly....bring cookies.