DM'ing on the fly

[SlashRunner]

Hello there everybody!
I see many people saying that 90% of DM work is preparation. People constantly say that preparation is one of the most important things to do as a DM. However, I do not prepare at all.
I find that, with preparation, the players will do something that will absolutely wreck what you've prepared. My current method is to just randomly brainstorm concepts, characters, and locations in between sessions and to just keep them in my head. When it comes time to actually play, I just have a loose collection of concepts in my mind that I can pretty much just throw together on the fly.
Now, I'm wondering if anyone else does this. Is preparation really THAT necessary? Am I shooting myself in the foot by not preparing in between sessions?

[Zonugal]

Because I have a background in improv comedy I tend to do a good deal of improvising and loose preparation. I'll jot down where the players are and some scenes I want them to go through with a planned conclusion but beyond that most is off the top of my head.

But with that said I still have to prepare with what traps/monsters I'll be using as I can't pull stats straight out of my mind.

[aart lover]

that's...actually more or less what i do:smalltongue:. because, lets face it, anything you planned is just going to be completely wrecked by your players.

[SlashRunner]

I just pull monsters off the internet while the players are discussing how to get past an obstacle or deciding what to do with their turn. Also, I'm not a big fan of traps, unless I think of something really clever that I just NEED to put in the game.

[Knaight]

I can't operate 3.5 mechanics entirely by improvisation, but when I'm using systems I actually like, all of which are much lighter mechanically, improv is standard.

[Remmirath]

I used to improv my campaigns almost entirely, but I found that the story tended to suffer when I did that. I can pull monsters, traps, floorplans, descriptions, treasure, and characters out of nowhere just fine, but (probably because I have a more difficult time with it in the first place) not plot or how the plot moves forwards.

Now I plan all of my campaigns out fairly meticulously, but with the knowledge that I can still improvise like crazy if it has to happen. It works better for me this way, but I certainly have seen DMs who can just improvise everything on the spot and have it work for them.

[SamBurke]

I set up a lot of stuff before hand, but nothing crunch-related. Characters, scenes, etc.

Now, bear in mind a few things. 1. This is a game with only one rule: Rule #0. Very simple system, dat. So, I really only need the characters and locations and plot, all of which are my strong(er) suits.

2. My players let the story happen to them, they don't create it. Usually they just sit around, and I have to prompt them to act. They're fine with this, and I'm fine with this, so it works. Basically, I get to tell a story with a few hitches from the occasional random stabbing.

[Kylarra]

I think it really depends on your system mastery. If you know the basics or have prepared enough quick cheats for what you need to make a game go, then yeah you can go full improv. I find it best to at least suggest to people to create their stuff ahead of time so they can get more familiar with the system and so forth, and then be able to wing it more effectively in the future.

[WinWin]

Sandbox games require an amount of improvisation ability. Like anything, it takes practice to make work.

I feel it gives a campaign more depth than running totally pre-organised encounters or explicitly detailed modules. I don't have a problem with these tools, but I can't rely on them to provide the type of game I want either.

[Zonugal]

I think another strong distinction is if your doing a campaign or a one-shot.

Because my best friend and I have done one-shots with ten minutes of prep time provided to us by some friends who want to play that very night (instead of just drinking whiskey like some people would enjoy doing....)

[Ozreth]

Heres the nice thing about preparation though. Even if the players DO completely avoid what you had planned, that dosen't mean it can't be dropped elsewhere.

The more you prepare the larger your portfolio of truly well designed things is to drop on players.

[SlashRunner]

My players are very sporadic in their amount of motivation. One session, they'll be running around, investigating things I don't expect them to, and generally doing ****. The next session, they'll be sitting around and doing nothing until I give them some kind of prompt.
The thing I like about my on-the-fly style is that you can have EXACTLY what you need, when you need it. If you have prepared stuff, it becomes difficult to change it based on your current needs. Even if you can tweak it, it still keeps its basis in something that might not be appropriate for the situation. With this on-the-fly style, you can pretty much build everything as it becomes necessary, giving you just the right tool for the task at all times.

[Darth Stabber]

I tend to run a very sandbox game that I improvise a lot, but when in a dungeon, I have that mapped out. I still lots of prep time because there are actions going on behind the scenes, political deals being made, assassinations happen, and relationships develop, that and my players find ways to do things the rules aren't written for and I have to adjudicate them fairly (necromancers really are good at violating the laws of nature, including the codified ones on these books we spent so much money on). To have an organic, and "real" world, stuff has to happen when the pcs aren't there, people don't just sit around and wait for people with floating green diamonds over their head to act. If my players think that, they are in for many a painful surprise.

[Zaydos]

3.5 I usually have a loose framework for IRL games, some basic plans. I was (un)lucky enough that for several years I had a fairly predictable group that I could extensively plan out; I actually have a few sessions still planned out that we didn't get to do (different colleges).

I have on two occasions done an off-the-cuff one-shot, but I've started to dislike doing that. Not because they aren't fun, but because they have both led to a rather disconjointed campaign. So for a campaign I'd suggest some preperation or at least a good idea of what will happen if they do X and the natural interconnectiveness of the campaign world (where country X is and what monsters live there, etc).

PbP I generally don't plan as much, and try and leave a fairly open sandbox knowing I can, if necessary, take a while to make an encounter before responding. That and the longest running one I've done (a solo pbp) I've made up monsters as I went (I've fudged attack bonuses before so that they have reasonable chance to hit while maintaining reasonable hp/saves and damage; giving something 1 more to hit than it ought with the damage it's dealing for example). They have the advantage that you can look back on what's happened. Then there are times I switch it up and bring something back from 2 threads ago which I'd been planning for the last ~3000 posts.

Other games... I've only DMd D&D and a Marvel Role-Playing game (used the adventure in the book) so that would just be other editions.

4e: I've done it off-the-cuff. It's enjoyable that way. Stats are what I feel won't kill the players (I keep them consistent once chosen, but I've never had more than the PHB before me while DMing it), and I'm a little loose with the rules but everyone has enjoyed it the two times I've done it.

2e: I've done it off-the-cuff once. I was 8. The players refused to play unless they were psychic dragons. We didn't have the Complete Psionics Handbook. Council of Wyrms didn't to my knowledge exist. It was a disaster. I think I could do it now.

[Bob the DM]

I'm a big fan of the underwear gnome philisophy of dming.

Step 1: Put the characters somewhere
Step 2: ?
Step 3: profit

If you know where you start and your eventually going to end, you don't need a middle as long as you can role play you npc's who are behind the scenes.

The more that the players are in the dark about what's going on by the people who are really in charge, who they almost never meet, the less scripted the whole game feels, which makes the pc's happier and you can really role play their antagonists as they will have to react to real people which makes that game for fun as a dm as well.

Point form notes of major plot points are key, and only dungeons/lairs need to actually be laid out in advance as well as key npcs.

[Choco]

I basically do the exact same thing as the OP. I have a general outline of the world, important players, and "story" in my mind, and just go from there. I try to get the PCs into taking more charge, and I THINK I succeeded nicely last session when they were telling a player in another group of all the awesome things they did in my campaign, and I pointed out "see, all that stuff is what YOU took the initiative to do, NOT something I presented to you!"


I just pull monsters off the internet while the players are discussing how to get past an obstacle or deciding what to do with their turn. Also, I'm not a big fan of traps, unless I think of something really clever that I just NEED to put in the game.

Same here. Sometimes I don't even use the internet, I just "create" a custom monster right there on the spot...

[big teej]

I prep encounters and stuff based on the party's actions last session

I.E. if the party decides to persue "hunting down the dragon"

well dun duh da! I know where they're going, and can plan accordingly.

so I prep out that session, they are going to be traveling -here- so -insert encounter- -prepare description of trip etc.-

party says "we wanna go see the sorcerer when we get back"
hudah! I can now plan a few "conversation paths" if you will.

so I prep "extensively" which basically means I have an overarching plan to last the campaign arc, but it's so nebulous it's malleable enough to be shoehorned into whatever I need, or something I can abandon on a whim.

in my experience, the closer we are to an event, the more prep I have for it.

for instance, lets say I've got a 1 - 20 arc.
that plotline, is barely defined. (I.E. save the world)
the major events leading up to it, have been labeled, but not detailed (betrayl zomg!)
where the party will be when they discover they're the only ones that can handle it is simply stuck in a slot somewhere around 10th level
whats happening next session?
I have planned down to the last detail where I can, and have left myself tons of room where I can't.

[valadil]

Hello there everybody!
I see many people saying that 90% of DM work is preparation. People constantly say that preparation is one of the most important things to do as a DM. However, I do not prepare at all.

I think 90% of DM work is figuring out what you need to prepare. If your background is in prewritten modules you might write a similar amount of text without ever realizing that you can just improvise speech. Once you learn what work needs to be prepped and what can be improvised, you can pare down on preparations and save a ton of time. If you've figured out that everything can be improvised, congrats! No prep time for you.

I like to prep to organize my thoughts. I can run an improvised session around the players, but then the world reacts to them. I like to run a game where plots interrupt the players. Or if the players aren't around, plots bump into each other and the players later sort out what happens. Basically I like having a big moving world. Bigger than I can keep in my head. So it ends up on paper instead.

Combat is another thing that I can't quite improvise yet, at least not for 4e. In 3.5, I generally knew what HP, defenses, and damage could be used at a given level. I could do that with 4e, but the powers vary too widely for me. I can cobble together a fight in < 10 minutes though.

[Kansaschaser]

I will prepare treasure and encounters. Other than that, I don't prepare.

I normally do what you do. I have a "concept" of what I want to do, but how it gets done is up to the players.

The reason I always roll my monsters and treasures before hand: Characters take on a Red Dragon. After they defeat the dragon, I begin rolling for the treasure. Low and behold, I rolled a Potion of Red Dragon Control and a Dagger of Dragon Bane.

All my players argued that if they were wading around in the dragons horde, they would have liked to have known about the possibility of getting and using these items on the dragon.

[Forbiddenwar]

I will prepare treasure and encounters. Other than that, I don't prepare.

I normally do what you do. I have a "concept" of what I want to do, but how it gets done is up to the players.

The reason I always roll my monsters and treasures before hand: Characters take on a Red Dragon. After they defeat the dragon, I begin rolling for the treasure. Low and behold, I rolled a Potion of Red Dragon Control and a Dagger of Dragon Bane.

All my players argued that if they were wading around in the dragons horde, they would have liked to have known about the possibility of getting and using these items on the dragon.

I do the same but for different reasons. Roll up treasure and find that the encounter had a +1 longsword? Ditch the club he is stated for and give him the longsword.

[opticalshadow]

i have almost a novels worth of lore backround for my homebrew setting, with all importent locatiosn people events and the like noted

i generaly point teh characters in the direction of a quest, but leave it up to them to do what they want, i have entire campaigns and quest lines planned out if they follow them, but if they just decide to walk west, i have that whole area ready for spontatnous.


bsically i did enough planning, that i dont plan before sessions, all my sessions are on the fly, but the world is fully prepped for that gameplay.

[Kansaschaser]

i have almost a novels worth of lore backround for my homebrew setting, with all importent locatiosn people events and the like noted

i generaly point teh characters in the direction of a quest, but leave it up to them to do what they want, i have entire campaigns and quest lines planned out if they follow them, but if they just decide to walk west, i have that whole area ready for spontatnous.


bsically i did enough planning, that i dont plan before sessions, all my sessions are on the fly, but the world is fully prepped for that gameplay.

That's..... a lot of work. :smalleek:

I applaude you on your preparedness.

[Herabec]

I find that I improvise a lot. I know what the overarching storyline is. I know who the major players in the game's plot are, and I know when and where the final battle of the primary campaign will occur.

Just about everything else is spur of the moment. Of course, some of my group's favorite NPCs are simply beings I made up on the fly...like the Orc Barbarian that turned out to be the ONLY monster they had ever spoken to without attacking first... And became, to date, the only NPC they've gone out of their way to get restored to life.

When it comes to encounters...I really only plan out a few set piece battles against important villains, otherwise, I just throw at the group what I feel to be appropriate to the situation.

... Does brainstorming and plotting and such the whole week without writing anything down count as 'preparation'?

[Elrihm]

Something I ran into when a friend of mine was DM'ing and improvising most of it was the incredible level of frustration in trying to solve things creatively. It sounds counter-intuitive, but structure allows for cracks in it that players can fall into, delighting in solving a problem creatively, sometimes with less effort than you expected. This isn't a bad thing at all. When he improved, every move I made felt opposed, like I couldn't win because there was no system to beat.

For instance, I usually play mages, I really like casters and crafting thematically. Well, we had bought out a house that we were setting up as a magic shop, and a base of operations, and next door were some minions of the BBEG, though we had to play nice because of the laws of the city. Well, after enough provocation (our shop got cursed day after day with increasing difficulty to get rid of) I got really pissed off at them, and devised a devious plan. I created several "bombs" (simple fireball necklaces, they explode when they take fire damage), one exploding spike, and an effigy of an ankheg (for burrowing). Well, I blew their house to smitherins, and laughed the whole time. A few days later a couple of guards came by to arrest me, without any kind of proof, or any motive. It was entirely bull****, and it only happened because he was improving everything. Let's just say it didn't end well, as he really took offense to me blowing up his NPC's (i guess they were important), and constantly tried to mess with me after that....yay improv.

[Herabec]

Something I ran into when a friend of mine was DM'ing and improvising most of it was the incredible level of frustration in trying to solve things creatively. It sounds counter-intuitive, but structure allows for cracks in it that players can fall into, delighting in solving a problem creatively, sometimes with less effort than you expected. This isn't a bad thing at all. When he improved, every move I made felt opposed, like I couldn't win because there was no system to beat.

For instance, I usually play mages, I really like casters and crafting thematically. Well, we had bought out a house that we were setting up as a magic shop, and a base of operations, and next door were some minions of the BBEG, though we had to play nice because of the laws of the city. Well, after enough provocation (our shop got cursed day after day with increasing difficulty to get rid of) I got really pissed off at them, and devised a devious plan. I created several "bombs" (simple fireball necklaces, they explode when they take fire damage), one exploding spike, and an effigy of an ankheg (for burrowing). Well, I blew their house to smitherins, and laughed the whole time. A few days later a couple of guards came by to arrest me, without any kind of proof, or any motive. It was entirely bull****, and it only happened because he was improving everything. Let's just say it didn't end well, as he really took offense to me blowing up his NPC's (i guess they were important), and constantly tried to mess with me after that....yay improv.

That sounds less like an issue with improv than it does with having a retributive dungeon master... not to mention, I'm sure a high level wizard investigating the scene could have figured things out, what with the hole in their floor and having things blow up.

[Elrihm]

Trust me, I covered my steps, and there wasn't anything left to investigate. Regardless though, the point is that if you never establish anything, you become able to counter anything the PC's do, often without thinking about it. "Oh, you enchant him? Well, it just so happens he has protections from x". I could bet you that two seconds ago he didn't have that protection, and only gained it because a spell was cast at him that could be countered by that. It's an exaggerated example, but it is an easy trap for DM's to fall into. It gives players the feeling that nothing they do matter's, as something will happen that wasn't there two seconds ago. One of the best feelings as a PC is thinking up something and it working not because the DM "lets" it happen by not countering it, but because that eventuality wasn't planned for before hand.

[Doughnut Master]

I think it just depends on how good your DM is at improv. In our campaign, mine just thinks of logical possible consequences for PC actions and then rolls the dice to see if it happens. In one session, that's how I fought a bunch of city guards, ran from the law, beat up a drunk guy, and got attacked by a shark in the span of 2 hours. Good times.