Playing D&D without study or preparation.

[dren]

I am a world builder type of DM. I run a home brew and know it inside and out, throwing in background details ad naseum without hesitating. The cities are detailed, but most smaller towns are not, I have created tables to determine what is in each town (churches, military groups, races, etc), and usually use tables in the DMG for non-written npcs.

As for adventuring, I use stat blocks and random wandering tables, the ony thing I truly plan is the final confrontation, but will often not know it until half way through the adventure. Micro-managing is so hard because you have to be prepared for anything the players will do, if you limit them, you lessen their fun...be flexible, play on the fly.

dren

 

[Fenes 2]

I can (and used to) run games without any preparation but for a vage idea of a plot, back in the days when our group met for a session first and then decided who was to be DM that evening.

Nowadays 10 years of Dming at least once a week, often thrice a week does lend me some experience that helps a great deal with winging it, but I usually prepare at least one page of notes for a game session, mainly a short synopsis of the background of the adventure, loose ends form previous adventures, how to start the adventure with the party, what problems the PCs will face and what possible solutions they have, and short descriptions of the major NPCs. I also have a detailed campaign sourcebook covering the main locations and the NPCs used so far, a more or less detailed log of the campaign's adventures and a sketchy outline of the current and future main plot(s) (very sketchy).

I still wing it regularly, especially if the PCs go off on a tangent, and get into trouble. I have come to sessions prepared as detailed before, and then "improvised" for the whole session when the PCs started an adventure of their own, or a problem turned out to be harder than expected, or the dice had a bad evening, resulting in a TPC (Total party capture).

All in all I give the nod to moderate preparations instead of micro-managing. I neither like wasting hours of work on an NPC or encounter that was not used not forcing the PCs on a certain path just to make sure all my work will pay off. I try to remain very flexible towards the PCs ideas. If they want to break in a mansion I do not make up detailed defenses for the walls, the lawn, the park and the fireplace. I wait and see what the players decide, then improvise and add the details. F.e., usually I will have notes like: "possible means of entry: Disguise as servants for a ball, old escape tunnel mentioned in chronicles or bard song, sneak in over wall (dogs, wards, guards), enter as traveling foreign dignitaries" and then add the neccessary details (Ball guests, butler, servants etc., cranky scribe/flighty bard and the dangers underground, or guards, dogs and wards) to the option chosen on the fly.

IME this way of preparing worked out fine, and I prefer it to the "module style", which is often a bit railroaded and stat-heavy (I can come up with stats for most NPCs, even in battle, on the fly).

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

When I plan a series of adventures, I first try to get a clear image of the villains, their motivations, and the resources they have at their disposal. Then I try to figure out how the PCs can stumble over his schemes. Mayhem ensues.

When it comes to individual sessions, I rarely plan more than one or two sessions ahead. Since the PCs will go their own way anyway, planning further ahead is just a waste of time. Preparation for each session takes one or two hours, and most of that is scribbling down some rough maps, enemy stats, and a couple of names (I suck at making those up on the fly)...

All in all, it works pretty well.

 

[Li Shenron]

As a DM, i usually take an evening (2-3 hrs) to design the next adventure, or learn it from a source, and review rules for specific situations. Then I often keep thinking of it for example during bus trips or under the shower (sometimes while asleep...), usually for a week before we actually meet to play, and add details here and there. Sometimes, if I have time, I take another evening to test the adventure by myself, although it has proven to provide not a great help to me.

OTOH, my players don't own the rulebooks, never read the PHB, and probably never even read the 2-3 pages about their PC's class I have given them. They learned to play "on the battlefield". It is possible, but you need a very patient DM, and it's very slow the first sessions.

 

[seasong]

For most of my campaigns, I prepare a fair amount. Since I like broad story arcs, I usually work from the top-down, determining stuff like pacing first, and then filling in all of the major NPCs, places and things. That usually takes me a few weeks. I only run homebrew settings, so I usually create those beforehand, too. The amount of preparation required depends on the setting, of course - a thoughtful Victorian steampunk takes more effort than a stylized fantasy trope.

And then I usually spend 0.5-2 hours each week ahead of the session, working out the details and how they'll fit into the broader story arc, plus another hour afterward making sure I have all my ducks in a row.

With all that said, I'm currently running a 2020 superhero campaign where I've given the players story tokens, which they can spend to rewrite background elements, story direction, and personal character development (anything which has already been stated in game is 'canon' and can not be changed, but everything else is malleable). It's been a blast so far (3+ months).

I also run occasional one-off campaigns for 3-4 weeks, which are completely off the cuff - I make up the setting, story, NPCs, everything, as we play. Those can be really fun, even though I have to lower my standards for intricate plots a bit .

Since we're talking about D&D3E, improv is a bit harder, but there are some tools you can give yourself to help. The Monster Manual is one; but you can also just establish some standard attack/damage bonuses, 'typical' skill rolls, and so on, which you can then draw on for NPCs, modifying slightly on the fly to fit.

 

[0-hr]

Gads I hate it when a DM just makes stuff up as we go along.

 

[seasong]

Originally posted by Ki Ryn
Gads I hate it when a DM just makes stuff up as we go along.

Thanks for the laugh .

 

[CTD]

I ran an entire campaign off the cuff, and it went fine.

Was playing in a 1 DM 12 player group and decided that the group was too big and the DM was trumping us too often with super NPC's that he favored.

So I announced that I was starting a game the next week.

Half the players came along (resulting in two fair sized groups) and we went for it. The only prep work I did was to make a one sheet pencil and paper map of the region, which I spent 10 minutes on and threw down terrain.

As the players made their (2nd edition) characters I said "You are from here (pointing to the map) because that is where the elves come from. It's called Abber Lyth (just made it up)." and did the same for each character/race as needed. Then I showed them the regional map pointed out their nations again, and showed them the known hostiles ("Goblins to the north, gnolls and dragons to the south, etc.").

I had them make up their own faiths down to the name of the deity in quesiton and ran with it.

Everyone had a good time and we spent on year of college in that world. It worked, quite well. I made zero plans between sessions. I might have thoguht about the game from time to time and decided on a few potential plot turns or twists, but I didn't even pen out a stat block. I just rolled with it.

Nobody seemed to notice, and if they did, they were having enough of a good time not to care.

A key to running an entire game off the cuff is to know the rules. I knew 1E with sickening detail (thankfully adult years of drinking have worked out most of those brain cells). 2E was pretty easy to master until they put out 100000 option books; so it worked.

All that being said, even with a successful campaign or two under my belt and off the cuff, it's much better to prepare even a little as a DM than it is to come to the table with your dice, scratch paper, and a rulebook. Even if it's just one sheet of notes/ideas, having something to spring forward from is better than nothing by a long shot.

 

[Henry]

I'll say that it's no harder to prepare for than any other RPG.

The hardest thing for me to prepare is an instance of an in-depth mystery or plot. I can work one up, but with great difficulty, since I find it hard to strike a balance between an absurdly simple mystery, and one that is so scant in clues the players have no idea what's going on.

As for prepping game stats, which is the most common complain heard, I give advice exactly as I gave the last person to ask this question, about 7 or 8 months ago:

NPC's - the most important thing to remember about these NPC's is (1) distinguishing characteristics, (2) what they know or COULD know of use to the PC's, and (3) what are they GOOD at. Unless the players are being especially contrary, these guys and gals don't need base attack bonuses, every stat score worked out, and every skill point and feat allocated. I know their names, classes and levels, exceptional stats (above 13 only), and their characteristics. All this takes one row in a printed spreadsheet.

FOES - Almost the opposite. If the Players are in an adventure against a goblin tribe, let's say, or facing a natural beast like an owlbear - I need to know hit points, BAB, attacks, and damage. They don't need to know that goblin #12 secretly practices macrame when not near his peers. If a skill comes up, I assume that they will have ranks in that equal to their hit dice, with no exceptional bonus points. Frankly, the players will NEVER know nor care if a monster has one or two more points or less points in a given skill than they could have. Why? Because of all the unknowns. Said monster COULD have a slightly exceptional ability, or a skill focus - all these things are unknown until they become important.

I have NEVER found a player who was concerned if a monster or NPC had a +3 or a +2 to his jump skill. If the player is concerned about minutiae like this, then I.M.O. they are not enjoying the game enough to focus on what's happening, rather than what's NOT happening. It's not anyone's fault that they are not focusing - just that it's a sign that something needs to change.

BIG FOES - if you have a recurring villain, such as a noble or a wizard, or a necromancer with his own barony - these people need to be fully fleshed and statted out. In fact, I find the most fun in statting out these beings, because they are the closest thing I as a DM have to playing an PC in the game. I try to play them by the rules, I do not cheat on their stats, or in no other way give them undue knowledge or story immunity - But I play them dirty, I play them to the fullest, and I play to win. The PC's, when they win the day, feel that they have won a major victory, as opposed to simply following along in the story.

If the Players play their characters simply, and do not play to win, they they can LOSE. I do not take exception to this. They can always run in the face of losing, they can most always get resurrected at a level penalty (certain churches are always willing to resurrect adventurers, assuming they sign the standard indentured service contracts), and they could always roll up new characters at one level lower. The feel they get when they win against the foes is pretty qood, or so they tell me.

In summary, prep is what you make it. I do not see D&D, any version, as any harder or easier to prep than any other RPG. Anytime you are playing a consistent world with continuity, there is prep involved. And if continuity is not required (what I rather snarkily and unfairly call the "Voyager" style of campaign), then almost NO prep time is needed.

 

[alsih2o]

Re: !

I always DM without prior preparation.....(since I design them)

um, designing a world is preperation to me