What is the point of GM's notes?

[Emerikol]

Well I create a pretty high resolution campaign setting myself when I create one. That level of detail though is just to provide what I call world level background. When the PCs ask questions, the DM can give sensible consistent answers about rulers, trade routes, wars fought in the past, legends, etc... There is a method to the madness as they say.

Then I create a sandbox somewhere in the world. I often create new sandboxes but keep a campaign setting for a while. Perusing old maps of my old settings is a great nostalgia trip for me. I remember all the fun had in that world and it has a distinct flavor.

The sandbox is a deep dive. I write everything out in great detail. I make a lot of maps. I have many possible adventures. I have villains up to no good that are operating on a calendar. So there are what I call plot threads running through this sandbox. Lots of them. There are also usually a few long buried fairly static tomb like dungeons. There are some enemy tribes like goblins etc.. operating in the area so I detail out their lairs. Sometimes they may be led by some exceptional leader and as such they become a villainous plot thread. Sometimes they are there just to be encountered during wandering monster patrols.

So my PCs can do anything they want. They can stop or start and adventure. They are bound by nothing BUT the reality of the existing sandbox/world. So they can't decide a village isn't there when there is a village there. But they can burn the village down if they want. The group then has a lot of freedom AS THEIR CHARACTERS which is the style of play I prefer. I want my players to be a fusion of themselves and some fantasy archetype they think is cool. So yes player skill matters.

 

[Manbearcat]

The point of GM notes:

You are not as good at improvising as you think you are. It's good to have prep notes and lists to fall back on when caught off guard.

Your memory will fail you. GM notes should also be written after the game to keep a record of important stuff that happened.

I'd say the answer to this is 3-fold (one part topical!):

1) Develop efficient, thematically-provocative notes that can be used for improvisation. For instance:

The Paladin's Alignment statement says "I'll protect innocents from the inequities that beset them."

The Wizard has a Bond that says "I can't resist a magic trinket!"

So...come up with a couple of situations that will test the Wizard, endanger innocents, and hopefully some that intertwine those two (eg the Wizard failing to resist a magic trinket will endanger an innocent...or endanger an innocent in a way that the Wizard will be able to resolve by ignoring or sacrificing a magical trinket...or create an inequity besetting an innocent that is related to magic).

Frame a situation around that or use that as a complication generated by action resolution.

2) Offload overhead onto system or players. Players can help with continuity and keeping track of logistical stuff. Some systems are better than others with integrating and simplifying book-keeping into play (use those systems!).

3) Don't bother thinking "how good am I at improvising." Its irrelevant. Get better! How? Practice (like anything else)!

 

[Emerikol]

I'd say the answer to this is 3-fold (one part topical!):

I didn't realize he was asking a question.

1) Develop efficient, thematically-provocative notes that can be used for improvisation. For instance:

The Paladin's Alignment statement says "I'll protect innocents from the inequities that beset them."

The Wizard has a Bond that says "I can't resist a magic trinket!"

So...come up with a couple of situations that will test the Wizard, endanger innocents, and hopefully some that intertwine those two (eg the Wizard failing to resist a magic trinket will endanger an innocent...or endanger an innocent in a way that the Wizard will be able to resolve by ignoring or sacrificing a magical trinket...or create an inequity besetting an innocent that is related to magic).

Frame a situation around that or use that as a complication generated by action resolution.

These a good ideas for adding flavor to an NPC whether you prep or improv.

2) Offload overhead onto system or players. Players can help with continuity and keeping track of logistical stuff. Some systems are better than others with integrating and simplifying book-keeping into play (use those systems!).

Or just take a few notes. It's not a big deal.

3) Don't bother thinking "how good am I at improvising." Its irrelevant. Get better! How? Practice (like anything else)!

Well even in a well prepped campaign, there will always be moments where you have to improv something but hopefully the well laid out campaign world and sandbox will inform your decisions and make life easier. You know the answer to a lot more questions and can answer as opposed to just make it up. The improv might add that NPC's opinion about that information.

I agree that whatever style of play you choose that practice will make you better.

 

[pemerton]

The notes I was using last night were about the mission that the PCs (a spaceship crew) had been assigned by their superiors in the Royal Navy, the vessel they would be escorting to Vesta, who'd be travelling on said vessel, and names of people at the destination. I work these things up beforehand because it's easier than improvisation, especially for the names. I also had a list of groups that they'd be likely to run into.

Are you able to elaborate what the point of the notes was? Were you describing some events in advance, or the outcomes of some action declarations?

Or something else?

(For clarity: I understand the point of a list of names. It's the other stuff I'm curious about.)

The point of GM notes:

You are not as good at improvising as you think you are. It's good to have prep notes and lists to fall back on when caught off guard.

What do you mean by falling back on prep notes? What does this look like? What work do the notes do, in play, when a GM falls back on them?

 

[pemerton]

There is a Metaplot Imposition that actually dovetails with my # 4 in my lead post above. In this case, play should be looked at more like a CRPG game where the table is "keeping score" about how well the players "solve" the imposed metaplot. So its basically a form of Skilled Play.

Is there a RPG system you can point to that exemplifies this? Should I be thinking about the escape from Averoigne in X2 Castle Amber as an example?

 

[Manbearcat]

I didn't realize he was asking a question.

"You're not as good at improvising as you think you are" and "your memory will fail you."

My post = solutions for this.

These a good ideas for adding flavor to an NPC whether you prep or improv.

Agreed.

Or just take a few notes. It's not a big deal.

Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...one might do the things I wrote if they want to reduce their preparation overhead (only one of the benefits).

Well even in a well prepped campaign, there will always be moments where you have to improv something but hopefully the well laid out campaign world and sandbox will inform your decisions and make life easier. You know the answer to a lot more questions and can answer as opposed to just make it up. The improv might add that NPC's opinion about that information.

I agree that whatever style of play you choose that practice will make you better.

Quite true!

 

[Manbearcat]

Is there a RPG system you can point to that exemplifies this? Should I be thinking about the escape from Averoigne in X2 Castle Amber as an example?

I think that is absolutely the right place to start.

But taken further, I'd say when you look at the subculture that has accreted around Pathfinder Adventure Paths (and now 5e), and you see people recount their play, there is a clear element of (a) championing the efficacy of achieving the Win Con or (b) lamenting it I (if the GM thought the AP was poorly conceived/executed in terms of testing Skilled Play) or (c) lamenting it II (if the GM thought their players did a crap job of executing their Ops to achieve the AP Win Con...which...I'll note, often doesn't involve the GM reflecting on their own potential fault at executing their job in presenting the AP!).

There is a sort of "Abstract High Score" culture around this (akin to the 80s culture of Arcades and, of course, D&D dungeon crawling). I'm sure you're not familiar with it, but there is a "Speed Run" culture in modern Video Games that is another good analog.

The fact that play is a complete Railroad is irrelevant. What is relevant is "who can achieve the Win Con of the AP the best/quickest/with least resource expenditure or resource loss."

 

[Marc_C]

I think that is absolutely the right place to start.

But taken further, I'd say when you look at the subculture that has accreted around Pathfinder Adventure Paths (and now 5e), and you see people recount their play, there is a clear element of (a) championing the efficacy of achieving the Win Con or (b) lamenting it I (if the GM thought the AP was poorly conceived/executed in terms of testing Skilled Play) or (c) lamenting it II (if the GM thought their players did a crap job of executing their Ops to achieve the AP Win Con...which...I'll note, often doesn't involve the GM reflecting on their own potential fault at executing their job in presenting the AP!).

There is a sort of "Abstract High Score" culture around this (akin to the 80s culture of Arcades and, of course, D&D dungeon crawling).

The fact that play is a complete Railroad is irrelevant. What is relevant is "who can achieve the Win Con of the AP the best/quickest/with least resource expenditure or resource loss."

Reminds me of the behaviour during RPGA AD&D with tournament modules (scoring points at the end to evaluate the performance of the party).

 

[Marc_C]

What do you mean by falling back on prep notes? What does this look like? What work do the notes do, in play, when a GM falls back on them?

I don't have a method. I just read my notes, when stuck, and they trigger something not written in them. They act as conduit. It's intuitive.

 

[Emerikol]

The fact that play is a complete Railroad is irrelevant. What is relevant is "who can achieve the Win Con of the AP the best/quickest/with least resource expenditure or resource loss."

It's definitely a railroad but the AP is not necessarily at fault. It's perfectly fine to have linked scenarios. If that is all you have and the expectation is strong you go on to the next one then that is very railroady. If I took an AP and put it into a sandbox then the AP would no longer be a railroad. You could continue the AP or go do something else.

Also even in a railroad, there is some character decision making. Choosing to fight or run. Exploring one area before another. What you do between AP's in terms of stocking supplies and making preparations.

I see the AP approach as something popular with beginners. It takes very little DM work and the players can learn the basics of skilled play. It's just best if they can eventually go on to a sandbox as they'll enjoy it even more I think. I probably did the equivalent of an AP when I was really you. I'd do B2, then the Slavers A1-A4 and then the G1-3 Giants/D1-3 Drow/Q1 Demonweb series. Somewhere in there I might squeeze in White Plume mountain or at the end Tomb of Horrors. It's not what I like now but for beginners it's not a terrible way to learn the game.