How to be a Better GM

[Clint_L]

The same things that @Darth Solo noticed, I noticed too.

You tell your GM to start with an idea of the final scene, and then work backwards to a plot hook. Frankly I don't know how to reconcile that with the bit about "not writing in stone", as it looks pretty stone-like to me.

Now as you say this is a fairly traditional approach to RPGing, and a lot of published modules exemplify it. I would suggest giving your prospective GM advice on how to actually do it. For instance, if players ignore the hook, or misinterpret what it is inviting them to do, what is the GM expected to do? Or if the players look like they are going to sidestep or avoid or simply miss the envisaged final scene, what is the GM expected to do?

Rather than leaving the answers to those questions as an exercise for the GM to work out, I would spell them out. If you're anxious about spelling them out because they look like instructions on how to "railroad" the players, that might suggest some revision of the other stuff is i order; but if you're genuinely happy with the other stuff then I would spell out those answers.

My best advice is: be open to being wrong. If the players make good faith choices that your prep didn’t account for, or dice rolls really go sideways, then you just gotta be open to it.

My other advice would be: don’t get into arguments during the game. Make a ruling, if there are objections hear them out and be ready to admit you were wrong, but then make a decision and move on. You can always revisit later, perhaps in private.

 

[pemerton]

My best advice is: be open to being wrong. If the players make good faith choices that your prep didn’t account for, or dice rolls really go sideways, then you just gotta be open to it.

My other advice would be: don’t get into arguments during the game. Make a ruling, if there are objections hear them out and be ready to admit you were wrong, but then make a decision and move on. You can always revisit later, perhaps in private.

In the context of my reply to @Sacrosanct, my advice would tell the players what the PCs are required to do in order for the planned story to work. Don't pretend that the range of action declarations from A to Z is open, if in fact anything but A, B or C will break the planned story.

 

[Larnievc]

I’d say always have a back door to any encounter so if it goes completely tits up like an npc dies or something irreversible happens you can carry on without having to through out the whole adventure.

My players sometimes worry that they are going to do something to derail the adventure but if you have a back door to each encounter your players will think you’re a creative genius who can wing sessions without pause.

I dunno about starting at the end and work back. I’ve done that but the players always go through so many back doors that the final encounter never looks like my original vision.

I’m sure I got the concept of a back door from Babylon 5.

 

[Haiku Elvis]

I’d say always have a back door to any encounter so if it goes completely tits up like an npc dies or something irreversible happens you can carry on without having to through out the whole adventure.

My players sometimes worry that they are going to do something to derail the adventure but if you have a back door to each encounter your players will think you’re a creative genius who can wing sessions without pause.

I dunno about starting at the end and work back. I’ve done that but the players always go through so many back doors that the final encounter never looks like my original vision.

I’m sure I got the concept of a back door from Babylon 5.

I think this indirectly brings up a point that gets missed when there are discussions about railroading and adventure planning. If players have signed up for an adventure they usually want to complete the adventure and for want of a better word "win" at the end so they want to stick to the path. They usually want it to be clear what direction they should be taking next what players don't usually want is their immediate actions to be nerfed or blocked when they are dealing with the how.
I think of it like a cruise, the players know the main ports of call are decided barring something dramatic and have signed up for that what they do want is the freedom to do what they want at each stop and not be stuck on a coach for a guided sightseeing tour planned by the GM.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

The thing about DM advice I have read and including the above. It assumes that the DM is home brewing a campaign. So one of the things you should include is the elevator pitch for the premise of your campaign.
What is it about? Exploration of dungeons, wild land never trod by your people? Espionage?

The second is published material. There is almost no advice out there on running published adventures and in particular Adventure Path type modules.
This stuff involves railroads? There is almost no avoiding it.
This need to engage with the published material should be made clear at session zero. This type of material often hands a mission and to not take the mission is to not play the adventure. Are you OK with this?

If you pop out Keep on the Borderlands and the party never goes to the Caves of Chaos then you have not played Keep on the Borderlands. You have played a homebrew sandbox that starts at the same location.
If there is a railroad element do not give the party choices they cannot make.
To take and example, if the campaign is Frodo goes to Rivendell then the campaign starts leaving Buckland in media res.
If it starts at the Council of Elrond they can choose to accompany the ring to Mordor but they do not take part in the Council of Elrond.

As for home brewing, do not start with the final scene of the confrontation of the Big Bad. You do not know who the Big Bad will be.
Offer 3 Bads and see what hook the players bite at. Then make them the catspaw of a Bigger Bad.
For each bad as they near confrontation, then design that encounter to be approximately memorable. Give the bad an escape plan, determine a trigger for that attempt. If the pull it off, they become a bigger bad.

 

[pemerton]

If you pop out Keep on the Borderlands and the party never goes to the Caves of Chaos then you have not played Keep on the Borderlands. You have played a homebrew sandbox that starts at the same location.

It's a sidepoint, but over the years I've had a lot of fun running games where the action occurs in the Keep itself, and the Caves are mostly a backdrop.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

It's a sidepoint, but over the years I've had a lot of fun running games where the action occurs in the Keep itself, and the Caves are mostly a backdrop.

I have no issue with that, nor do I think it is a bad thing. I am making the point that at that point you are really not playing classic Keep.

 

[pemerton]

I have no issue with that, nor do I think it is a bad thing. I am making the point that at that point you are really not playing classic Keep.

Perhaps the module would be better named B2 The Caves of Chaos?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Perhaps the module would be better named B2 The Caves of Chaos?

Realistically yes, since that is the focus.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Based on some really good feedback, I'm made some changes. Of course I couldn't appease everyone, because people like different things and sometimes the advice would be contradictory. But I tried to cover those areas I had missed.

Rather than paste images here, here is a direct link to the WIP project. Feel free to ignore everything except the GM section, as it's all rough drafts and not finalized. Also, I go through updates roughly weekly, so who knows how long that link will be valid