Campaign Opening Advice

bluFish

First Post
Hey all,

So I'm a very inexperienced DM that's about to start a new campaign. I have an idea about how I want to start it, but I'd like some advice from more experienced DMs to make sure I'm not missing anything.

The idea would be that the party starts in media res, but I would ask them to explain why they're in the position they're in.

For example, the party starts next to a turbulent river standing about 20 feet away from another group of people. That second group is holding someone with a sword to their throat (or maybe they're going to throw them in the river off of a bridge, something like that) while facing the party. I would then ask the party "Who are these people? Who is the person they're holding? Why do they want them?" I fell the answers they give would help me tie the characters into the world and create meaningful adventures.

Is that a good plan? Is there anything I should change?

Thanks all!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I've started or tried to start a lot of campaigns in my time, and I've learned that the #1 rule is 'Go Big or Go Home'.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with starting in medias res, and there is nothing at all wrong with asking the players to build connections to your world, but...

You cannot rely on the players to tell the story. Your primary job as a GM is to be the "secret keeper", in that you know things about the world that they don't. The "secret keeper" hat is in many ways as important than your "referee" hat, and every bit as important as your "chorus" hat and your "antagonist" hat.

As a GM you are always making it up as you go, but as the GM you also (at the same time) need to have a pretty good idea about the main story threads you'll be offering up to the players. It's vastly more important for the players to tell you why they are there, and why they are with the other players, than it is for them to tell you anything about the plot.

As a general rule, there is a wall of separation between you and the PC's, and between the players and NPC's. You never try to play the PC's or never force the PC's to be anything the players don't want them to be, and the players never try to play the NPC's or force the NPC's to be anything you don't want them to be. That's how you share the story. And it's your job to make it an equal sharing by making the story be about the PC's - the story's protagonists. But the players are also your audience, and as with any audience of a story they don't want the story spoiled before it is time.

So good questions won't be about the NPC's. Good questions will ask about the PC's. Tell them what they know about the NPC's, and then ask them about their connections. If the person being held is a PC's 'True Love', that's fine and if you can work with that, run with that. It's ok for player answers about themselves to create new vistas of your world. If a player says, "I'm a part of a secret order of good aligned assassins, and I was sent to kill the man holding the person hostage", you can run with that and try to imagine how that would work, who its patron is, why its tolerated (or not tolerated), what the rules of the organization might be and so forth. But don't let the players create new vistas about the NPC's by asking them who the NPC's are or what they want or what they are trying to achieve, because that spoils the story. Discovering the twists and secrets of the NPC's is at least half the fun.

As for "Go Big or Go Home", the pacing of the first part of the story should be fast, and it should open up a major conflict. I've got to the point that I basically open with a disaster of massive scale. The current campaign opened with in first 5 minutes real time, a 20' high tidal wave sweeping into a city while the players were standing on the docks. Opening the game with an asteroid blasting away a good portion of the landscape, or an great wrym red dragon burning the city the players are in to the ground and turning them into refugees would be fine. Don't open the game with hunting rats in the basement, at least not in the first few sessions, unless you are planning to deliberately subvert that trope in a huge way.
 
Last edited:

The idea would be that the party starts in media res, but I would ask them to explain why they're in the position they're in.

..Please clarify what you mean by 'media res'. I am unfamiliar with that terminology.

..I don't know that trying to get the players to explain your adventure hook is the best way to get them involved in your world or to shape your adventures.

..I usually have the players come up with a brief backstory for their characters which includes goals and aspirations. That usually produces plenty of material to use in creating interesting adventures tied to the PCs.
 

..Please clarify what you mean by 'media res'. I am unfamiliar with that terminology.

He means "in medias res". It's a literary and cinematic term. It means "in the middle of things". Like when you start a TV show and then flash back to show how they got to that point. Often referred to in TV and movies as a "cold open".

So he's saying they'd start, say, in the middle of a bar fight, and then afterwards the GM would explain (or ask the players to explain) how how they got to that point.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InMediasRes
 
Last edited:

He means "in medias res". It's a literary and cinematic term. It means "in the middle of things". Like when you start a TV show and then flash back to show how they got to that point. Often referred to in TV and movies as a "cold open".

So he's saying they'd start, say, in the middle of a bar fight, and then afterwards the GM would explain (or ask the players to explain) how how they got to that point.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InMediasRes

..Thank you for the explanation.
 

So, a bit more on how I typically start a campaign:

1) Three or four weeks before launching a campaign, I'll send everyone that has signaled they want to be involved a questionnaire about their past experiences with D&D, what modules they've played, what they enjoy in an RPG, and what sort of story they might want to be involved in. This gives me an idea if I should be leaning toward the more sandbox end of the scale, or to the more adventure path end of the scale. It also tells me whether I can mine published modules for ideas. It also helps me decide as a group whether they want to play a more heroic group, or a more villainous group.

2) About 2-3 weeks before we start play, I'll try to decide on what I want my major conflict to be about and what I want my starting hook to be. This is a basically a one sentence statement of the campaigns theme. It might be something abstract like, "Do the ends justify the means?" or "Are the gods worthy of worship?" Or it might be something straight forward like, "Defend the kingdom from the invading goblin horde." or "The Drow have returned to the surface!" I then try to imagine a huge compelling hook to start the game forward that sets the stage for that theme. I won't necessarily stay at that epic scale, but I want to start their so that the players are well and hooked into the game. In the past I've tried to do slow builds where I slowly unfold the central theme Les Miserables style, but players often get bored before they realize everything is tied together and what's really going on. It's best to open like a Summer Blockbuster. You don't want to wait 40 or 80 hours of play to get the player's involved.

3) During this period I'm also trying to get players to make PC's. A PC is a character sheet and some sort of background. The character sheet has to use approved chargen elements, has to be correct, and has to be at least viable. Basically you help the players without system mastery make the sort of character that is either what they want or which can become what they want, and you make sure the players with system mastery aren't getting so excited that they cheat. You also at this time need to start helping the player integrate the character with the campaign world and with the party. The biggest questions here are, "Why might you become a hero?", and "Why would you stay with these other characters?" You want to sure you have some basic motivation or compulsion to be an adventurer. At this time you can also start working on secrets, hooks, and nemesis you might want to work into the game. Often the player's desires will suggest elements to your campaign world that you've never thought about or which exist only as rough sketches that need to be detailed. The aforementioned "good aligned assassin" example was one of those for me. Assassin cults were invariably evil. When I first heard the player I wanted to just reflexively say "No". But I spent about 5 minutes thinking about it, and managed to come up with a heretical cult of one of the good aligned deities that had decided necromancy was such a completely evil thing that it justified rough vigilante justice to stop, and used the tenants of the main cult to justify that belief. So they went around assassinating necromancers, which fit with the story - since the main villains were heavy into necromancy and other black magic. Getting all the PC's made and approved is usually a two week process. It's best to do it before starting play. Don't ruin the first session by making it a PC making session, and do not expect to have a game work with players that have never played together just showing up with PCs you've never seen before.

4) If you are going to run a more adventure path sort of game, you need to come up with the broad story arc - who the BBEGs are, what they want, what they plan on doing to achieve that goal, how you anticipate the story is probably going to go, and what the main locations are going to be. If you are going to run a more sand box game, you need to decide on a suitably small scale setting that you can actual fill up with the time you plan on investing each week, and make a list of 16-20 conflicts that exist in that setting, and then get to the hard work of making a highly detailed map with as many cool features as you can imagine. You'll never have it detailed enough, and every week will find you making new granularity, but you have to start somewhere. Sandboxes are more work than adventure paths, with the basic difference being how much work you do that you know you'll probably never use (paths not taken). Don't try to sandbox a whole world. A thousand square miles should do it to start.
 

Thanks a ton for the responses guys. Really helpful.

I suppose I wasn't too clear on the point of that kind of start. I would have tons of adventures and an overarching campaign plot already designed, it would just be a way to get a few initial ideas about hooks and see into the mind of the players a bit. But you have made me realize that, depending on their response, it very well could lead into something longer and more in-depth than I planned. I'll rethink it a bit.

Seriously, thank you guys!
 

I would love to be in a campaign like that, but how well it works depends on the players. Some people are not comfortable with improvisation. One thing I like to do instead of just handwaiving long periods of travel (or, worse, slogging through a bunch of random-encounter rolls) is to ask the players what happend during their travels. Each player has to add one thing to it.

DM: "You spend two weeks travelling from Medevimetro to the Temple of Fantastical Danger. Your journey takes you from the familiar fertile lands of Sortaeurope across the northern desert and into the jungles of IndoMesoAmeriafrica. You each get X amount of XP. Explain what your character did to earn that experience. The player with the best story, voted by other players (I'll only vote as a tie-breaker) gets inspiration."

PLAYERS: *moan* "This sucks." "Let's just play the game."

DM: *sigh*

What seems fun for the DM is not always received well by the players. You have to know the group you play with. But don't be shy, always experiment.

As a wise Chief Warlord once said: "We try things. Sometimes we succeed." (Parson Gotti)
 

Remove ads

Top