An advanced technique: ask your players to make shit up.

Like, the players decided to go to the wizard university the wizard PC graduated from. So I ask him, “what’s their entrance hall like?” and let him just riff on it for a while. Players feel more engaged with the world, and it’s a little less work for me.

Warlock is trying to commune with his patron. I ask, “what is your patron usually like?” and the player is delighted to describe “the great sculpin” in detail. This then inspires me further.

Note that some players are very much “just tell me a story” and don’t want any input, and won’t like this. Some players are also shy and don’t think well on their feet. And some players are just really bad at staying on theme. But if you know your players , this can be a powerful technique.

I recommend players make their characters together. Fate’s rules for it are pretty good, and can be ported to many systems: https://fate-srd.com/fate-core/phase-trio . The whole “You all meet in a tavern for the first time” mode is a valid way to play, but I’ve had friends do that and then struggle with how contrived it feels to fight to the death for people they just met, or go on a whole dangerous sidequest for someone else’s hobby.

I also recommend reading other systems. Not everyone needs to know dozens of games, but if you always play d20 games spending some time in a different branch of the RPG family tree can really be eye-opening. Or if you’ve only really played really light games, looking at how something crunchier does detail can be insightful.

Musk seems like the kind of D&D player who would

• Build a horrible character (frankly impressive in 5e, which is pretty simple in terms of choices to make at the start). Like, a bard with 8 charisma, or a rogue with no dex
• Or, pay someone else to build their character, and then not know how to play it.
• And/or induce the other players to murder him (in the game)

I’ve found that when the players hit an outright failure, a lot of the time they just draw blanks or zero in on this one specific solution. It’s a weird tunnel vision.

Like, they want to talk past the doorman and he says no after they roll. Good players on their game will then think about other options. Sneak in the back. Set off an alarm. Impersonate someone who lives there. But i’ve just had so many players that just get stuck on this, and will try to spend 10 minutes on “What if I ask him nicely?”

I’ve started including a spiel about this in my session 0. “If an obstacle in the world has exactly one purpose in the story, and you attack it dead on, you may fail. Especially if it’s not also your strong suit. For example, there is a doorman of a fancy apartment building. His entire role in life is to look at people, and only let them in if they’re authorized. If you walk up to him, not authorized, and go ‘Hey bro let me in’, that will be a very hard check. That is shooting fire at the fire elemental. Disguising yourself will be easier, but still is in his domain of ‘Looking at people and only letting authorized folks in’. But going in a back door so he doesn’t see, setting off the fire alarm so he evacuates, calling on the phone and telling him his car has been towed, those ideas hit him where he’s weaker.”

Don’t put important details behind failable skill checks and just dead end it there.

Like if they find a book with ciphered text, you might be tempted to be like “make an intelligence + investigator check to decipher it”, and if they fail be like “you can’t figure it out”.

It’s better to do some sort of degree of success or succeed at a cost so the game keeps moving forward.

Like, on a bad roll they translate it but whoops awaken an angry spirit that’s now attacking them. Or they make some progress, but realize they need the key to fully crack it. The note in the margin says it’s at such-and-such flophouse, owned by the PC’s most annoying rival group.

I’ve done too many “you rolled … 0? Ok. Well you have no idea what this altar means” and then later regretted it because the players didn’t have a vital clue.

It was kind of wild going from D&D to games that don’t have tons of HP.

Players make different choices when they have a maximum of 7 health, and a random mook with a baseball bat hits for minimum 2, maximum “well if the dice keep exploding…”

I kinda like this idea that the players will be so responsible and active over their own entertainment that they’ll pick something to actively do to make something happen

This is the dream.

Sometimes I get players that have ideas, but then they’re like “oh that sounds too dangerous, nevermind”, and I’m like “it’s not going to be much of a game if we don’t take any risks”

It’s probably partly my fault for making the dangers clear to the players. I wanted them to have an understanding of the risks and factors!

Like one time, the players were told another faction would only help them with their problem if they dealt with a vampire that was in the local cemetery, and his little cult. This was a game of Mage, where even starting tier characters have a lot of strong options. One of the players just was like “you’re asking us to punch Cthulhu in the face! I don’t understand what you want us to do!”

I was like … there are so many options. Your character can literally control flame, a major weakness of vampires. You also have a strong alliance with a paramilitary group. You can go during the day. You have 3 other party members. One of them can open portals. Like, to places where it’s daytime. Trust me, you can win a 4 v 1 fight. Maybe deal with his cult first if you don’t want civilian casualties. Or maybe talk to him and see if you can negotiate.

But she just wanted to spin her wheels and complain. Worst player I’ve ever had, honestly.

This is a good policy.

I do movie nights sometimes, and I tell people similarly: “Doors at 6, show at 7.” It’s good expectation setting.

I usually just kept a list of what the various factions are up to. If the players were like “ok let’s go see if we can convince Priscilla to smuggle the uranium with her drug stuff” I have a rough idea of what she’s up to and if she’d help, or help at what cost.

I want to play again with a group that comes up with reasonable plans that play to their competencies.

I think a lot about how in a modern day magic game, the players wanted to contact another (NPC) group. They learned the NPCs were like double warded against magic, but spent a lot of time trying to punch through the wards to teleport to them. After two expensive, failed, attempts I was like “do you want a clue?”. They were like yes. I was like “if you just want to talk to them, why don’t you try calling them on the phone?”

I want to play again with a group that comes up with reasonable plans that play to their competencies.

I think a lot about how in a modern day magic game, the players wanted to contact another (NPC) group. They learned the NPCs were like double warded against magic, but spent a lot of time trying to punch through the wards to teleport to them. After two expensive, failed, attempts I was like “do you want a clue?”. They were like yes. I was like “if you just want to talk to them, why don’t you try calling them on the phone?”

Is there a written form for us old timers who prefer reading? I’m such a relic, I know.

Next you need player buy in

This is huge. I tried to do a horror game once and one of the players just wasn’t taking it seriously, and it ruined it completely.

I was fully prepared to be like “why on earth would you convert werewolf to D&D 5th edition”, but then I realized thankfully this is not that.

Some actual feedback: That font is real hard for me to read.

I imagine you’d either have no phone, or one of those prepaid with cash ones. You could also probably turn off the cell parts and only use wifi

I still want to play Fate. I just don’t have a group and don’t feel like doing the whole lfg+ interview people thing.

In my pandemic game, goblins were described as sort of perpetual teenagers. Some of them could be really smart, but a lot of them were impulsive, prone to going along with the group, and being kind of cruel.

They found a pack of goblins that had robbed some travelers… to steal their concert tickets. Most of them scattered, but they caught up with one. The monk decided not to punch this small humanoid in the face and instead asked “wtf are you all doing?”

The goblin told them they wanted to go to the show. the show! everyone’s going to the show! (The show turned out to be put on by an evil warlock, and the players had to intervene to stop the bands from summoning a lord of pandemonium into the world. Everyone loves a battle of the bands)

The players essentially adopted this goblin, Windy, for the rest of the campaign. Windy learned to play drums and flute, and I think they eventually got them enrolled in wizard school.

I think there can be some intra-group tension when half the group is going for “how can we win this fight cleanly with minimal resources spent?” and half is going for “what would my character do? What would be dramatic?”

It’s something to clear up in session 0, I think.

My personal fantasy right now is being part of a highly skilled and competent team. I’m tired of always being the three stooges.

Also bad: when part of the group wants to play for clean victory, and part of the group does but it really bad at it.

I don’t think DND or close relatives is as good a first system as people think it is. It’s very idiosyncratic. It wastes a lot of time with stuff like “8 is -1 and 14 is +2”. But mostly I don’t recommend it because at its core it is a resource management game, and that’s not what most people imagine roleplaying is about. It will teach people bad habits, or at least habits that don’t translate outside of DND + their group very well.

I like Fate. I think Fate is more intuitive and rewards creativity more consistently. You don’t need to read long lists of classes and spells. It does, however, ask for a lot more creative input than DND does. You can’t just be “Bob the fighter” and go. But it’s a lot more rewarding when it does sing, IMO.

I think people have radically different ideas about what “minimal background information” is.

Some people think the Silmarillion is a suitable primer for their setting.

Some people have like one paragraph for the big picture, and one paragraph for each major faction.

There are players that would say both is too much.

I think a couple short paragraphs should be enough for a quick start for a custom setting, but I’ve had players that just refuse to read anything at all. As someone else said, it’s makes it really hard to do some sort of stories if all the players are utter neophytes/amnesiacs/from-another-world/etc

I tried to do a game of Vampire once, but the players refused to read anything about the setting. All the political intrigue fell completely flat because they didn’t understand what the different factions were looking for, nor did they understand how vampires worked.

That group might have just been kind of bad players, but I feel like bad players are more common than good. By “bad” I mean “doesn’t think about the game very much, doesn’t retain anything about the story or rules”. They couldn’t really do anything more complex than a simple dungeon crawl.