Seeking advice; DMing

[Xuldarinar]

Within the next couple of weeks, i will be attempting to get a group together to start running a 3.P campaign. As things stand I lack a setting, class/race choices, choice of alignment system, everything. But what is most important here, as all prior things depend upon the tastes and input of the would be party, is this; Experience. I've never run a campaign before. (save for a two session thing where no combat took place and everyone died at the start of the second session with a couple of really bad rolls and a ship crash. It had to end anyways).

So, to that end, what advice do you have for running a campaign?


Starting levels are not yet determined, though I'll likely start the group at either at 1st, or at '0' (Everyone starts with an NPC class, then retrains after the a session or two).

[dascarletm]

I would suggest starting at level 1 instead of 0. That way players can start doing their classes thing right out of the gate.

Also, while input from the players can be good, running a campaign theme that you are interested in is paramount. I'd say come up with some campaign ideas that you think are interesting, and present them to the players individually. Take their responses and pick something that will please the most people, and is at least interesting to everyone.

As far as setting, I have always made my own, so I can't help much. I like world building, so I would suggest doing that (if you like that sort of thing).

[BWR]

If you look for them you will find dozens of threads on the subject of new DM help. Lots of good stuff to find there. I recommend Pathfinder's "Game Mastery Guide" which has a lot of useful tips and explanations in a much easier to find and use format than thread-dredging.


Short answer:

0. People are there to have fun. If people are having fun, you are doing it right. The rules are there to help the fun, not hinder it. If the rules are in the way of having fun, get rid of them. If you want to add rules to make things fun, do so.

1. stick to the rules. Even if they seem silly or broken or bad, stick to the rules first time around just so you know how it was designed to work. You may waive this step if you are already comfortable with the system.

2. Start small. You may have visions of grand plots and epic enemies, but start small with issues of minimal importance. Things can easily get out of hand if you try to juggle too many things at once. It is better to let the game grow gradually rather than to make it big at the start. On the one hand it is easier for you to handle the smaller it is, on the other it is easier for the players if they do not have to memorize hundreds of details at the start of the game rather than learning it. This applies to mechanics as well as plot. Combat, for instance. Big combats are a pain for everyone because there is a lot to remember and every extra combatant makes things harder for you and takes more time to resolve. Gradually introduce new elements and NPCs as both you and the players feel you have a handle on what is already in the game.

3. You will make mistakes. Bad calls, misread rules, miscommunication around the table, being overly permissive or overly restrictive regarding certain elements in the game and what players are allowed to do, badly designed encounters: the list goes on. If you're lucky it will be minor things that are at worst an annoyance. If you're unlucky it will lead to PC death, derailed of destroyed games and maybe worse. Learn from your mistakes, apologize to your players when you mess up, correct where you can (sometimes a reload is actually a good idea in a tabletop game), give some sort of compensation etc.

4. Gaming is a group activity. Everybody is there to have fun. Your primary job as GM is to make sure people have fun. It doesn't matter how good a GM you are, how much you've prepared, how fun the setting is, how interesting the NPCs are: if your players aren't having fun, it's your responsibility. Now, I'm generally strongly in the camp that it is the responsibility of players to play well with each other and try to fit in with whatever game the GM is running but this is dependent on the GM trying to make things fun for everyone. At some point there may simply be irreconcilable differences in preference and expectation and at that point you will just have to either run something else the players want, or find new players who want what you offer.

5. Show, don't tell. Or put another way: don't show, play it through. Info dumps are at some point necessary but don't get too impressed with your own writing. Some description is of course necessary and finding the right balance is sometimes difficult and context is everything, but the more the players are told what happens the less they get to interact with what happens.

PCs are actors. Not in the sense of stage actors but in the the sense that they Do Things. Let the players act, let the PCs interact with the world. Sometimes they have to act, sometimes they have to react. Sometimes they cannot or will not act. But they should not be nothing but witnesses to everything else that is happening. PCs are not, despite what some people seem to think, necessarily the most important people the the game world and should be allowed to do whatever they want. Neither are they, as some others seem to think, supposed to just shut up and do and think what the DM thinks they should at any given time. PCs are the most important characters to the game, even if they are not necessarily the most important in the game. They are how the players interact with the plot and the setting and how they have fun. PCs should have options, they should have the ability to effect some change in the game world, the players should feel that their actions matter to at least some degree.
Remember that your game is an opportunity for the players to affect the outcome of the situations you set up, even if their actions upset what you had planned. The game isn't a computer game with predetermined ends that depend on a few limited choices you make. The game isn't a book where you decide everything in advance and the players basically just read lines they are given. The only truly predetermined thing in a game should be the state of something at the time you introduce it to the players. From that point on it is up to you to determine how the game world reacts to the PCs.

[martixy]

If you have RPing players, there is a nifty little technique you can use: take cues from your players when fleshing out your world.

They will ask questions or make inquires or speculate, feel free to make things pop into existence in response to that. Kind of a creative feedback loop.
It's satisfying for them, makes your job easier and creates a vivid world.

[Toilet Cobra]

I've never run a campaign before.

I find that rather shocking!

How basic of advice are you looking for? Even if you've never run a game, you strike me as somebody with a solid grasp of rules and I figure you've probably picked up plenty of the fundamentals of GMing along the way.

When it comes to picking a setting, I definitely agree that you should go to your players with a few ideas you like and let them pick. "How would you guys like to do a space-themed adventure? Or a pirate-themed one?" etc. That'll tell you a lot about what classes and races, if any, need to be encouraged or restricted. So start with what inspires you and then see where it intersects with your players' excitement.

As for the world, Golarion has suited all my needs for a while now. It can be as deep or as shallow a setting as your game needs.

[Bobby Baratheon]

0. People are there to have fun. If people are having fun, you are doing it right. The rules are there to help the fun, not hinder it. If the rules are in the way of having fun, get rid of them. If you want to add rules to make things fun, do so.

I second this. If you know your players well enough, you'll be able to figure out what they want from the game. If you don't know them, just play through a few basic sessions with them and pay attention to what each of them wants.

In my current group, there's a money grubbing Duskblade that wants to rule the world (through insanely impractical means), a roleplaying bard that craves plot, and a freewheeling Fighter that just wants to have fun with the other two. As DM, I need to cater to each of their individual expectations, and temper them so they don't interfere with the others. The Duskblade wants to go to the other end of the continent, ignoring the rather urgent story needs, and get an army of bulettes with cannons mounted on them, the Bard thinks that's a stupid idea (which it is, admittedly) and wants to get on with the story. I let the Duskblade keep a bulette the party captured, pay to have it trained and equipped, and told him it will at best be marginally useful, and that he wouldn't be able to use it in a lot of situations. He seemed pretty content, and was fine with spending a large amount of money to get a bulette with howdah-mounted swivel cannons. The bard was happy (or at least, less annoyed) that the story didn't get derailed, and the Duskblade and the Fighter are looking forward to shooting a cannon at things from on top of a bulette.

[Toilet Cobra]

The bard was happy (or at least, less annoyed) that the story didn't get derailed, and the Duskblade and the Fighter are looking forward to shooting a cannon at things from on top of a bulette.

Nicely played. Sounds like you have a fun group!

[Xuldarinar]

Thank you all for the advice you've given, and advice to come. I greatly appreciate it.


I find that rather shocking!

How basic of advice are you looking for? Even if you've never run a game, you strike me as somebody with a solid grasp of rules and I figure you've probably picked up plenty of the fundamentals of GMing along the way.

When it comes to picking a setting, I definitely agree that you should go to your players with a few ideas you like and let them pick. "How would you guys like to do a space-themed adventure? Or a pirate-themed one?" etc. That'll tell you a lot about what classes and races, if any, need to be encouraged or restricted. So start with what inspires you and then see where it intersects with your players' excitement.

As for the world, Golarion has suited all my needs for a while now. It can be as deep or as shallow a setting as your game needs.


I know it may be shocking, but to really get a sense of things, here are my table top RPG experiences. These are in order, and only include at the table interactions, not reading various RPG books and discussing ideas;


D&D 3.5 (two sessions, nearly a decade ago); I played a 1st level sorcerer, we also had a paladin, another sorcerer who left after session 1, the player taking on a druid for the second session. I fell down a pit filled with snakes and the other spellcaster was knocked unconscious, the paladin saved us with bow and sword. Session 2 went a bit better, but we just never picked up again.

Ring World (one session, also nearly a decade ago); I managed to set off a self-destruct mechanism inside a general products hull (thankfully we got out just in time), destroying almost all of our supplies. Dismembered a kzinti's corpse, who had pissed me off on the ship, and later managed to upset a couple of local farmers. Almost gotten eaten by an alien carpet via bad rolls. Stopped after that.

And... the most recent one. (GM'd. two* sessions, last year): Rolled up eccentric characters using heroes of tomorrow. Escaped onto a docked ship from a sort of space station colony as it started to fall from orbit (Think B5's babylon stations and you have the right idea). Session two started, the last day one of our players would be there, did some rolls to determine if they got to their destination and if fuel was that big of a deal.. Ran out and everyone died. We agreed it was for the best.

[Toilet Cobra]

Dang, that's harsh. Sounds like you might be sick of space by now.

I think you might have better results with a bit more structure and a slightly more tame opening. I know it's fairly played out, but based on your past experiences I think you might enjoy running the classic Pathfinder group (like actual members of the Pathfinders organization). The settings can be whatever you like- no reason you can't have a similar group in a radically different world- but it's a good compromise between keeping the players on course with specific missions and letting them pick and choose which they want to pursue. It also keeps things fairly calm before and after missions and lets them establish themselves a little.

[johnbragg]

Advice: Do not do Level 0 until you and the players both have experience. Level 1 is lethal enough, it is a huge challenge to make future-rogues and future-wizards bumble around as Experts.

SEtting: Don't worry too much. Go generic fantasy kitchen-sinky.

Get a module. I still recommend Keep on the Borderlands, available through DriveThruRPG. Yes you have to convert everything to 3.5 or PF, but that's still easier than starting from scratch. It's designed as an introduction to play and to GMing, and I don't know of a better one.

[Xuldarinar]

Update: I have time before the campaign starts. For everyone's schedules to clear, its likely going to be a little bit more than a month prior to starting, so I have time to get things together.

I've discussed with three individuals who will be a part of things, and so far there seems to be a lean towards a horror/dark fantasy campaign. This isn't set in stone, of course, but thats what people are interested in.

[Bobby Baratheon]

I've discussed with three individuals who will be a part of things, and so far there seems to be a lean towards a horror/dark fantasy campaign.

Got to admit, I love me some dark fantasy/horror. If you're strapped for source material, you can't go wrong with a little Cthulhu mythos. I mean, the stories kind of tell themselves. Unspeakable cosmic horrors machinate in the shadows while brave men try to delay, however briefly, the end of the world and stave off their own inevitable mental degradation. Throw in some crazed cultists, with a dash of ineffable cosmic horror, and you've got yourself a campaign, baby.

[Florian]

Update: I have time before the campaign starts. For everyone's schedules to clear, its likely going to be a little bit more than a month prior to starting, so I have time to get things together.

I've discussed with three individuals who will be a part of things, and so far there seems to be a lean towards a horror/dark fantasy campaign. This isn't set in stone, of course, but thats what people are interested in.

Tough luck, then. Those two themes and the core Pathfinder framework don´t mesh all too well. The reason for this is simple: Both themes work pretty well with systems that give a lot of control/power to the GM and force the players to be more on the defensive, showcasing real heroics by overcoming the odds despite what´s stacked against them. PF is geared towards being "high fantasy", in this case meaning the players have a lot of leeway on how to handle things.
To give you a simple example, there´s the 1st level spell "Remove Fear" that´s on nearly any spell list
Heck, buy a cheap wand and repeat the Space Marine credo "And They Shall Know No Fear".

If you want some simple beginner-gm advice: Don´t do "Roadblock"-style encounters. They don´t work, are frustrating and people tend to circumvent them using creativity, leading you to adopt "house rules" on the fly that you might not be comfortable with in future sessions.

Don´t enforce "Drama" as plot or story points the same way. That will mostly backfire on you. "You rescue him, but he is dying, with his last breath, he tells you to ....", "I cast Cure Moderate Wounds on him...". "Eff..."

Rather, design a very straight scenario with a clear path from A to Z, no special class features or spells necessary to go along that route and incorporate bonus encounters or secrets along that route for people using their class features/spells the right way to gain a significant advantage.

[dascarletm]

Don´t enforce "Drama" as plot or story points the same way. That will mostly backfire on you. "You rescue him, but he is dying, with his last breath, he tells you to ....", "I cast Cure Moderate Wounds on him...". "Eff..."


To fix that I use a "last word" house-rule. Basically if someone dies, the player (or GM in case of important NPCs) will get to dictate the circumstances of the characters death/any final words. If a player is dying they deserve that much at least. I highly recommend doing the same.

[Florian]

To fix that I use a "last word" house-rule. Basically if someone dies, the player (or GM in case of important NPCs) will get to dictate the circumstances of the characters death/any final words. If a player is dying they deserve that much at least. I highly recommend doing the same.

Actually, you don´t have to. We´re talking about a certain cliche that doesn´t have to exist because there is no actual need for it to exist.
It is widely used in literature, yes, and has a place there, but said literature isn´t as interactive as a RPG can be.

[Xuldarinar]

To fix that I use a "last word" house-rule. Basically if someone dies, the player (or GM in case of important NPCs) will get to dictate the circumstances of the characters death/any final words. If a player is dying they deserve that much at least. I highly recommend doing the same.

Im reminded of a situation that I heard of once that happened in a campaign. Long story short, someone had to throw someone else their weapon, and there was a sleeping dragon close by. One unfortunate roll later and the weapon impaled the individual, and they took one last action to scream.

[dascarletm]

Actually, you don´t have to. We´re talking about a certain cliche that doesn´t have to exist because there is no actual need for it to exist.
It is widely used in literature, yes, and has a place there, but said literature isn´t as interactive as a RPG can be.

Of course it doesn't need to be there, but It's more for the benefit of players than anything. It gives them the chance to give their PC a proper death. You also need not give characters a cliche death.
Either way this rule doesn't affect the interactivity of the game at all, if anything it allows for more interaction, but if that's not your preference hey it's not your preference.
De gustibus non disputandum est

[Florian]

De gustibus non disputandum est

Actually, you can and you should. Taste is always an acquired thing that can be worked and improved upon. It´s not set in stone. That doesn´t mean someone is "right", tho.

I´m just avoiding any advise that will lead to heavy doses of "gm fiat" in the long run, dramaturgically sound as that advise might be. Stuff like that is for the experienced gm that actually knows his players and their reactions an that is an "acquired" thing.

[dascarletm]

Actually, you can and you should. Taste is always an acquired thing that can be worked and improved upon. It´s not set in stone. That doesn´t mean someone is "right", tho.

I´m just avoiding any advise that will lead to heavy doses of "gm fiat" in the long run, dramaturgically sound as that advise might be. Stuff like that is for the experienced gm that actually knows his players and their reactions an that is an "acquired" thing.

I agree with you, I just suppose I don't see this specific concept as "heavy doses of gm fiat."

[Florian]

I agree with you, I just suppose I don't see this specific concept as "heavy doses of gm fiat."

That´s more or less a thing how using the rules/system as is interacts with actual storytelling. You do have a staggering amount of options there and the results can be surprising to even the most experienced gms.

A dramaturgic "right" death scene can lead to the players utilizing a "Breath of Life" spell and then you´re forced to improvise, totally "ruining" that scene but satisfying the player.

That´s why I´m against using certain dramaturgic tools in RPG, as you do have shared control and you can´t foresee the final outcome.

[johnbragg]

Actually, you can and you should. Taste is always an acquired thing that can be worked and improved upon. It´s not set in stone. That doesn´t mean someone is "right", tho.

I´m just avoiding any advise that will lead to heavy doses of "gm fiat" in the long run, dramaturgically sound as that advise might be. Stuff like that is for the experienced gm that actually knows his players and their reactions an that is an "acquired" thing.

Advice for newbie DM: HEavy doses of GM fiat are not ideal, but they are way better than stopping the game to look something up.

[Florian]

Advice for newbie DM: HEavy doses of GM fiat are not ideal, but they are way better than stopping the game to look something up.

You can even improve on that: Make it simple, make it count. Do not ramp up the drama because that happens by itself. Do not leave one trail to follow but three, have the "heroes" stumble upon a lot of sources and don´t rely on "that one core clue". Hand out enough information that the players are "knowledgeable" about a situation and avoid "Red Herrings" as much as you can, because players invent them by themselves.

[Bobby Baratheon]

Advice for newbie DM: HEavy doses of GM fiat are not ideal, but they are way better than stopping the game to look something up.

I'll second this. If a quick and dirty DM fiat ends up annoying a player (which, in my experience, they rarely do if you do it well) you can always make it up to him some other way. Maybe favorably interpret a roll for him next session, or a little extra loot. If it really bothers them, they tend to bring it up out of game and it's pretty easy to resolve.

[Xuldarinar]

Update: With the advice of an old D&D veteran, and with some input from the players, I am in the process of putting together the content for the first session(s) for the campaign.

Im going to be using for a reference model, though properly tuned to horror and the party and expanded upon, the module called Treasure Hunt.

[Xuldarinar]

Putting an update and then just letting this fall, provided no further discussion occurs;

I've made several decisions based on the tastes and input of the group and thus I've a more cohesive sense of what will be at the table. Here is really what I got, save for what the first session(s) entail and the world details.


Starting Level: "0"

Hp: 6+Con mod (Additional HP if appropriate upon attaining a class).
Skills: 1 rank of Profession appropriate to the character. +Int mod skill points to flavor and diversify the character.. (+1 or more skill points based upon class.)
Proficiencies: One simple weapon of the character's choice. Usage of weapons at level 0 will grant proficiency after a two combats (may fine tune). Additional proficiencies added as appropriate.
Feats: First feat is acquired upon attaining a class level. Bonus feats by merit of race, however, may be obtained.
Traits: Two traits or three traits + one drawback.


Characters will be rolled up using the Random Background Generator. One already has been due to an opportune moment and the player is ecstatic with the results.


Races: Dwarf, Elf, Gnome, Half-Elf, Half-Orc, and Human. If a random generator lends itself to a more exotic race, than other may be used; A dwarf or elf who rolls on the Unusual Homeland table and gets Subterranean may be a duergar or drow respectively. One with the Energy Infused birth may instead be an ifrit, oread, slyph, or undine. So on.

Classes: Kineticist, Medium, Mesmerist, and Psychic. The class itself, and the specifics (archetype in most cases, specific discipline in the case of the psychic) are determined by their conduct during the session as well as their input. If they present a case for something other than what they get, Im not going to hold them to play a class or archetype they really don't want to play.

Multiclassing: Im blocking traditional multiclassing for simplicity's sake, but there is something I am going to offer. At 3rd level, or rather leading up to it, the choice will be made if they want to take on a secondary class. If someone wants to pick up one then, and it isn't too much trouble at the time to do so, then they are more than welcome. The specific options will similarly depend upon their prior conduct, though less strictly, but also where in the world they are. I have access to the Genus Guide to Variant Multiclassing Rules so there is an even greater abundance of options there (Core classes, Base classes, Hybrid Classes, and Alternative Classes). Leading up to 5th level, there will be another choice. If they already picked a secondary class, they can choose to make it their Devoted Secondary Class (rules exist in the book for this). Conversely, if they qualify for any and they want to, they may utilize VPC (Variant Prestige Classing, discussed in the same book).



Setting: While Im not presenting an info dump in terms of the fluff of the whole campaign, given theres a chance a player of mine may stumble upon this thread and I don't want them to know everything out the gate, there has been a request they have all made and I am willing to abide by. They want the campaign to be waterborne. Not underwater, but on the preverbal high seas.



Considerations: Im contemplating utilizing my own taint system in the background, with perhaps some adjustments (or at least a clean up of language). No one will start with such a score, but we'll see how far they get before the number starts to gradually climb.


As before, Im simply looking for opinions and advice on how to handle things. I appreciate all the input thus far, I really do, whether or not I utilize it.