Need help being less stringent

[whisperwind1]

Hi all

Like all DMs, I have my strength and weaknesses, but it happens that my biggest weakness is something that causes arguments and (sometimes) costs me a campaign. I've had it explained to me by my players that I don't enable them. I'm far more interested in the stuff that I come up with for a game than what the players create or work towards. As a result they ask me for stuff, and I either downplay it or need to be convinced to give it to them (usually after some irritation).

One of my players told me something that really stuck. I see the relationship between my plot and their desires in terms of US and ME. If they want to pursue their personal plots in addition to what I give them, I tend to consider it less important (and thus something to be endured) to what I consider the "main plot". Even when I DO make stuff people ask for, I don't devote enough time to it for a player to be satisfied. Simply put, I think that i'm working FOR or AGAINST the player, when I should be working WITH them.

That being the case, what's the best way for me to buck these tendencies of mine? I've been told discussion with players is key, working with them to make what they want. But I was curious what advice you guys could provide.

Thanks in advance!

[OldTrees1]

Have you considered running a campaign only around the PCs' pursuits? Not only will it blur your perceptions of "their" plot vs "my" plot but it might help your subconscious come to like what it has been considering "their" plot. Then when/if you return to a main plot + player pursuits you might find your thoughts closer to what you want them to be.

[Geddy2112]

Second running a campaign based entirely on the party's pursuits.

That said, if the party of five wants to go do 5 different things and can't agree to work together and splits up, well that is a problem too.

The easiest way is to not have a main plot. Or, don't make it required that the players interact with it. The setting and world should be real enough that if nobody intervenes, it should play out on a more or less predictable path. If the party interacts, it can change the course of this path. It could be minor, or they could unmake the threads of fate.

Once players get on a plot hook/story arc, they usually ride them. If these are just a means to their personal ends, make sure their personal goals are easily solved along the way, or once they complete the mission. Make their personal pursuits go hand in hand with whatever their current quest is, or let them strike out one by one to solve more personal quests. Events can happen and the PC's can respond and delay their main goals, or ignore them and carry on.

Learn to say yes and be ready to improvise. Don't be dead set on the players playing the encounters you thought. In campaigns I run, I only use about one fourth of the total material I ever prepare-the PC's either ignore, bypass, or make obsolete the rest of it.

[JenBurdoo]

The best simple advice I've heard for this is:

Be a fan of your players' characters. Root for them. Be pleased with their successes and disappointed with their failures. Give them "outs." Look for ways to help them succeed. Put obstacles in their way, of course, but if they have an idea that would be cool but isn't in the rules, let them do it anyway.

I'm very new to GMing myself, but I run a very loose campaign. My players are also very new and I want them to enjoy the game, so I let them do what they want, not within reason, but with consequences. As a recent example, I let one of them go right ahead and break down the door of the hospital room and fight the nurses. Then I made him aware that they've dealt with insane patients before and are entirely ready for it!

[tensai_oni]

I will suggest a modification of other peoples' advice of running a campaign based only on the PCs' pursuits. Don't make their agency necessarily in-character ("here are your characters, what do you do?"). Make it out of character.

What I mean is: Ask your players what they expect from the campaign. Not just in terms of general feel. If they have a story arc for their characters that they hope to see - incorporate it into the campaign. Build your campaign based on the players' input, and add in some of your own as well if you want to. But don't treat your own input as either more or less important than the other players'.

And to solve the "five players want to do five different things" dilemma, don't do them all at once. Run short arcs, each dedicated to a different part of the story. One arc could be advancing a PC's search for a long lost relative, yet another them trying to stop an evil warlord's rise to power, and so on. Just make sure to share the spotlight instead of making several arcs in a row based only on input of one player (or yourself). As I said before, spread it around and treat everyone as equally important.

[RazorChain]

The players always want to do what is important to them, if you force them to do your plot then you are railroading them.

I usually ask my players after a finished adventure what they want to do next and plan next sessions accordingly. That way I dont use my time on plots and places the players dont have interest in. Of course I throw in plothooks here and there but it is their choice to pursue.

Often I just plot my things into their agenda.

They want to build a castle and while surveying or digging a foundation stumble upon a hidden underground ruins with an evil artifact.

That way I just tie my things into their agenda

[Darth Ultron]

You might try to have one plot. Just take ''your'' plot, add in each ''players plot'' and get one plot. So there is no ''us'' or ''them'', just ''we''.

Now a great many players like really silly stuff. The best thing you can do is dump the bad players. But if you keep them, you must ignore the silly stuff as much as possible and ''like'' it.

And the one I don't see yet is: don't have any player plots. The DM makes the plot, and the players go through it. If a player wants to make a plot, they should DM their own game.

[OldTrees1]

I will suggest a modification of other peoples' advice of running a campaign based only on the PCs' pursuits. Don't make their agency necessarily in-character ("here are your characters, what do you do?"). Make it out of character.

What I mean is: -snip-

Great modification. Your modified version will work for a much broader variety of players and will have the added benefit of increasing their appreciation for the DM's plots.

[Vitruviansquid]

Well, when you put it this way, OP.

I would first seriously consider the option of not listening to my players on this. Unless you specifically set out to make a sandboxy campaign where the players determine their objectives, the players' goals need to take a back seat to the campaign's plot. If it doesn't actually make sense for the players' characters to follow the campaign plot, then you should have a "session zero" with your players for the next campaign so that you can supervise how they set up their characters in order to be sure that the characters will naturally follow the campaign plot.

[goto124]

And to solve the "five players want to do five different things" dilemma, don't do them all at once. Run short arcs, each dedicated to a different part of the story. One arc could be advancing a PC's search for a long lost relative, yet another them trying to stop an evil warlord's rise to power, and so on. Just make sure to share the spotlight instead of making several arcs in a row based only on input of one player (or yourself). As I said before, spread it around and treat everyone as equally important.

One thing I've always wondered - why put all the players in the same game? Why not make solo campaigns for each player?

[icefractal]

One thing I've always wondered - why put all the players in the same game? Why not make solo campaigns for each player?YMMV, but for me two things:

1) Five solo campaigns is a lot more time and effort to run and prep than a single five-player campaign. As well as a scheduling difficulty if you're playing face-to-face.

2) It's hard to be creatively "on" non-stop. When playing, I'll hit a creative block from time to time and need a few minutes to think about what to do next. In a campaign with several players, that's no problem, the spotlight just goes to someone else and I can step back in later with some fresh ideas. In a single player campaign, it brings things to an awkward halt.

[kyoryu]

Don't write your entire game before the players make their characters.

Take their backstories, and look for elements that seem interesting or key. Work them into your plot. This can be either by taking their things and replacing things you already have (oh, I've got a dangerous cult, but they want the Followers of Night stalking them, so I'll use that instead) or by finding a way to insert their ideas into your plot/story (oh, they want the Followers of Night stalking them? Cool, I can use them as a puppet of Mr. Evil).

Think of it like Iron Chef, only with GMing.

[Honest Tiefling]

Don't make plots. Make scenes.

The characters are faced against a trio of amored ogres! What do they do? The characters are faced with the return of their loved one, turned into a unholy creature of the night! What do they do? The characters are caught up in a deadly murder mystery! What do they do? And so forth.

Focus less on your story. If you got a great story, go write a novel, I mean that. Focus more on giving the characters fun scenes and expecting cool and/or funny responses. The fun should be seeing how the party gets out of the mess that you, as the DM, have created based on the game world and the choices they have made within it. Let their choices matter, even in small ways like having a barmaid who was initially cold to them because they were landless vagabonds try to shyly indicate her interest once they have become heroes only to be literally knocked out of the way by a more beautiful gold digger. Now, if you only hand out small rewards/consequences, that's a problem, but it's a place to start.

[DRD1812]

That...very self aware of you. GJ.

Maybe you could try Dresden style world building? Here's a quick summary:

rickneal.ca/?p=599

In short, the system allows everyone to sit around and jointly build the campaign. It's a strategy that can be implemented in any system.

[kyoryu]

Yeah, I didn't want to go all the way into "Fate-like setting creation", but in general, I do think that running things a little more iteratively and incorporating player actions and input is a great way to go.

If you really want to jump down the collaborative world-creation rabbit hole, I'd recommend this:

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/117868/A-Spark-in-Fate-Core?term=spark+in+fate+core

It's for Fate Core, but can really be used with any system.

[ImNotTrevor]

I can also recommend running Apocalypse World at least once, EXACTLY how it says to be run.

That means no prep before the first session other than ideas, and your players will feed you everything else. (And they WILL feed you problems. Or at least, there will be obvious gaps that they didn't consider but your First Sesson Sheet did.)

Apocalypse World is good for one-shots and very brief campaigns (Typically 5-10 sessions is more than enough,) so it should be pretty easy to convince your players to give it a try. It is very different, but I've only had one player in my group decide he didn't like it enough to play another run of it. Now I'm on my fourth campaign and I've managed to get several people involved who never liked tabletop before. I don't mean to gush, but the system is really good for stretching your improvisation/GM instinct/narrative muscles. 10/10 would recommend that everyone invest 10 bucks and at least try it out. Cheaper than a movie.

[RickAllison]

How about you start with something smaller. Trying to implement character arcs into an existing story can be rather difficult. Instead, why don't you finish up an arc and set a break between the two. Evil settles down, regrouping its forces in preparation for the next arc, which leaves the PCs rather... Unemployed. Don't give them a plot hook (and I've then warning ahead of time), see how they direct it. Once you have character arcs going that the PCs are interested in playing out, it makes it much easier to figure out how you can throw those plot hooks into your own story.

A PC hoping to establish a merchant empire might be interested in seeking out new resources or merchants to get a corner on a unique market. A religious PC might go out as a missionary, trying to convert new people, or he could attempt to establish a mission for further attempts. Let your players get their arcs started, then figure out how they can continue those established arcs in your story.