D&D General Do I Have To Have Players?

[delericho]

I'm in the process of kicking off a new campaign, and for once I've actually managed to get well-prepared for running it - there's a solid beginning and middle, and at least some notion of how it's going to end, lots of encounters that I think should be fun, groups to interact with, mysteries to explore... basically, I'm very happy with it.

There's just one problem: now that I've done all this work, I find that I don't want to run it, because those crazy players will obviously wade in and promptly wreck it - they'll dash off in some random direction that I haven't thought of, or resolve the central conflict in one session, or something like that.

This is, of course, a case of "my precious campaign", but it's the first time I've been struck by it so strongly. And I fully intend to ignore it and get on with running the thing. But I thought it was amusing enough to post about.

Any other DMs out there run into something like that?

 

[TheAlkaizer]

Not to that degree. But I had a similar feeling a few times.

Can't say it's a solution for every instance of the problem, but once I actually used what I had prepared and turned it into the backdrop and lore of the world. So all the cool stuff I had planned became events that happened a few years ago and I built a new adventure building on it. Unfortunately, the campaign didn't last very long because of unrelated issues, but it worked well!

 

[payn]

I tend to build more snadboxy faction play style campaigns so its not really possible for the players to wreck it. Though, no campaign is proof against wreckage if that's what the players are looking to do.

 

[Stormonu]

I'm in the process of kicking off a new campaign, and for once I've actually managed to get well-prepared for running it - there's a solid beginning and middle, and at least some notion of how it's going to end, lots of encounters that I think should be fun, groups to interact with, mysteries to explore... basically, I'm very happy with it.

There's just one problem: now that I've done all this work, I find that I don't want to run it, because those crazy players will obviously wade in and promptly wreck it - they'll dash off in some random direction that I haven't thought of, or resolve the central conflict in one session, or something like that.

This is, of course, a case of "my precious campaign", but it's the first time I've been struck by it so strongly. And I fully intend to ignore it and get on with running the thing. But I thought it was amusing enough to post about.

Any other DMs out there run into something like that?

Sorta. It's why I write novels instead.

In D&D, you have to set the stage, but it's the players that drive the story. Often off the stage, out of the building and into the street onto an incoming car.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Me personally? No. Because I tend to run linear-like adventures and adventure paths and have no issue making the things that guide players down the path that has already been written out for me more enticing than anything else that might be out there. So they'll follow the adventure path because it's the most interesting thing they can accomplish.

I also have no problem re-inserting things into the path of the players that might have been written to be in one place in the book but which could be better reacted to in the place the players now find themselves. I don't find sandboxes that enticing or interesting to run, so if the players move away from a potential plothook by going over there instead of over here... I'll just pick up that plothook and place it over there now to see if they decide to act on it. At that point if they do see it but choose not to pick it up then that's cool we don't have to engage with it... but I'm not going to throw it out whole cloth just because the group decided to wander away from the location where the hook was originally going to be found.

 

[Laurefindel]

I'm in the process of kicking off a new campaign, and for once I've actually managed to get well-prepared for running it - there's a solid beginning and middle, and at least some notion of how it's going to end, lots of encounters that I think should be fun, groups to interact with, mysteries to explore... basically, I'm very happy with it.

There's just one problem: now that I've done all this work, I find that I don't want to run it, because those crazy players will obviously wade in and promptly wreck it - they'll dash off in some random direction that I haven't thought of, or resolve the central conflict in one session, or something like that.

This is, of course, a case of "my precious campaign", but it's the first time I've been struck by it so strongly. And I fully intend to ignore it and get on with running the thing. But I thought it was amusing enough to post about.

Any other DMs out there run into something like that?

Sometimes, although not to that degree. I used to however.

I've been doing this for a while now and I came to trust my players that they won't wreck my campaign for the sake of wrecking it, and that when I tell them what kind of campaign it is in the first place, they tend to make characters that fit the campaign and take decisions that match my expectations. It is facilitated by the fact that I keep to small groups however, which makes my game and the player's more agile.

I've also learn to love the curve balls that my players throw at me once in a while. So in a very Bob Ross way, I like to turn these "happy mistakes" into my advantage and pretend that was the plan all along ("it will be our little secret"). Or else it genuinely forces me to rethink the campaign (or segment) and oftentimes, I end up preferring it to the original idea.

In my last campaign, the PCs managed to save the NPC at the end of the first act and prevent him from becoming one of the main villains in the process. In retrospect, the story was made better and the players had a real feeling of acomplishement. I call that a win-win.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think it might really help to run the campaign with people you really care. No strangers, no 'friends of friends', just real close friends and family. You'll probably suffer less if they derail it, and they'll probably not want to derail it themselves if they care for you back.

 

[iserith]

I invite my players to try and wreck my games. It's the only way I'll learn.

 

[Krachek]

The Best way to avoid frustration is to make world building or campaign building as a collection of entity with tools and motivation.
Entity can be very wide, a single character, a king, a city, a guild, a band of trolls, a small inn.
As players take interest and interact with those, you refine their tools, their motivations and add more flavor.

Running a campaign is to allow PCs to interact with those entities, clash with opposite motivations, and find ally with some.

if you decide right from the start the faith of a given character or group, for sure you gonna be disappointed.

 

[Art Waring]

Just my way of seeing it, but I kind of enjoy it when my players tear my campaign worlds apart.

Sometimes they can instinctively find a exploit that you didn't anticipate for, and this can make things more exciting for me the GM. Not to mention, it helps your designing in the long run if your creations and your worlds are challenged to a greater degree.