The first question to me is whether you want the party to start the campaign as a party, or as individuals who become a party during the first adventure.
In both cases, provide them with plot hooks & world information.
In the first case, let them work out (with your help, so you can note down hooks and make sure they're not going too far off the deep end) why they're a party together. How did they meet, why do they work together, so on. Something like this can be a bit jarring at 1st level, unless they're all from the same village or something like that.
In the latter case, make sure they don't create antisocial loners, and begin the campaign with an adventure that hits a bunch of strangers who happen to all be in the same general area (probably a town), and forces them to cooperate to survive.
The beginning of Rise of the Runelords is a good example of this, though I intend to take it further. In the adventure I've sketched out (for a campaign setting that I still need to write the rules system for), the individuals are all in a town that is hit by a heavy orc raid. I intend to make sure each of them is motivated to join the force that pursues the raiders back (vengeance, recover a taken item or relative), and press-gang them otherwise. By "chance", the players will all end up grouped together when the "posse" is organized, and over the course of the pursuit, they have ample opportunity to bond (and realize that each of them is pretty above average as well).
What approach works also depends on the players; how much do they care about having a coherent party relationship, as opposed to "well, we're all the players, so our characters are a party"?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For Rise of the Runelords, we started as a travelling band. Bard on the bagpipes, Fighter on the guitar, Wizard on the Drums and Rogue was vocals.
Was pretty awesome actually.
I personally like the approach of telling the party to make up the background of how then all ended up together. I think I'll use it for the start of the next game I run with a little difference. I'll tell them they are doing it that way before they even make characters. In this case it will be kingmaker that I am doing so I will also be doing a random roll off or some game of chance to decide which member or members of the party have some noble blood in them =) I must say I am looking forward to seeing how my party handles the challenges and issues I've read thru sofar.
Asta
PSY
|
I may be sorry for asking, but what movies are you folks talking about?
What Mikazi said. But, since you're going to look it up anyways, be prepared to gouge your eyes out and shove an ice pick through your chest. Forward any associated medical bills to James Jacobs, as I blame him for my introduction to this work of art.
In one campaign I gave the players a basic overview of the lands and kingdoms within that we would be playing in. I then asked them to craft their backstories, each player should write at least 250 words with no requirements as to how they met or where they were currently at as those details I would in fill at first game. From those words of each player the campaign was born.
It was really challenging but quite rewarding to run a game based solely on somebodies backstory idea.
Now, as far as to how the game started, well I had just read a list of ten things to never do and starting a campaign with "roll initiative…." was on that list. I thought what an interesting way to start a campaign, and with that I knew how it would start.
They rolled, giggling and joking around as they mostly thought it a jest until I described the first scene. The sorcerer of the group on his back in a full grapple fighting to keep the assassin from finding his throat with his blade. The room got quite silent as everyone immediately realized that this was no joke. As the turns went on I interjected little bits of the missing backstory chronologically working forward. By battles end the party was completely read in and the campaign kicked off with a furious start.
It worked out to be a very memorable game.
I think GMs spend way to much time stressing out about how to get the party together. Afterall it really only ends up mattering very little to the overall campaign and in the end the characters are all together.
I usually just brush right past this, my players rarely balk at it. In fact most don't even notice.
I think the best way to get past this is start the entire campaign with combat. The most recent game I said:
"You have run across a group of kobalds who seem to have caught a man in the middle of the highway, they are roughly 30' away from you and have just taken notice that you are approaching."
Bam. The whole group is there, combat is about to get going. They care a lot more about the situation they are looking at than why they are together. After that things go smooth.
My opinion is just brush past it, start in a situation to get the ball rolling and make your life a lot easier
Some people love backstory.
The "BLAM! COMBAT!" tactic does not always work.
I never said they don't get backstory. I just don't have to serve as the device through which it is delivered at the start of the campaign. They have a number of adventures to exposit their backstory.
BLAM! COMBAT! does work because afterwards they can figure out why they are there. If they are like "oh well convenient we were all on the road together!" then okay. Really we are just asking for some suspension of disbelief from our players. Maybe it will bother them for 15 minutes, but then when the game gets going you have people there. Really all I need as the GM is for the party to be together for a little bit at the beginning of the game, everything else will work out.
I like the idea someone had to give them a choice of common bonds so that they decide as a group.
I must add though that there is plenty of room to role play without being a jerk saying "why would my character adventure with you?" The simple answer is that the others characters' players are at the table with you. You are responsible for coming up with your character's reason, like an adult. My patience for players throwing wrenches into games lessens with each year.
Hi, guys
My thoughts at this point are:1. During character creation, work in a hook into each character's background where a PC is at least related/friendly/a colleague of another PC.
I've done this before and it works well. Usually I have my players write up a background and if I happen to notice things in common, I'll use that to tie them together.
The last time players did this, they did it pretty easily for me. I had two characters who did know each other and were based out of the same place. I had another character who based on his interests would be a local hero to the same place, and yet another character who was also spending time in the region as it was close as she could get to observing the darker nation next door. I had an NPC conveniently at the place of residence where the first two characters were who was a historian mage who would know of and take interest in the other two characters (for background reasons too lengthy to go into) and could bring them all together.
You can also make it easy by saying, "You are all from or frequent visitors to X village," which gives them some room to build their own background while still having an easy link.
2. Mutual survival: The PC's start shackled and rowing on a slave galley far from home (their starting equipment is essentially stored in a storage hold of some sort), when the galley is attacked by a third-party - in the ensuing chaos, they have the opportunity to deal a blow to the slavers and escape to a distant shore. Or the city where they were all located is aflame, and they've all managed to escape the inferno via the city's long-abandoned catacomb network... something along those lines.
I've seen this in a lot of modules and APs and it can also work well. One thing is if you are going to start a scenario where the characters begin at a disadvantage/without equipment/etc. MAKE SURE THEY KNOW THIS rather than surprise them with this detail at the start of the game. Some players strongly object to being told their character is "helpless" from the start and there's nothing they can do about it, whether it's rational or not.
Other things I've done or other GMs I've known have done:
1. You all work for X organization or work together in X scenario (adventurer's guild, thieves' guild, artifact hunter society, Pathfinder Society, crew on the same ship, classmates at the same academy, guards on the same caravan, quilting bee)
"Guards on the same caravan" is particularly classic and easy to do.
2. As noted above, you are all from X region and have an attachment to it because [include this in your character background]. Similar but broader to 1, the PCs may only vaguely know each other but they still have something in common. If the town they live in/trade in/hid their favorite teddy bear is burned down by a dragon, they all have a reason to seek out the dragon before it hurts others or comes back for the teddy bear.
3. As Gorbacz noted, put the onus on the players: "please talk to each other and come up with how you know each other." This works best if you all get together and create your characters together.
4. Even the cliched tavern scenario can work if you just come up with a good enough hook that is a reason for them to work together. I started a game once with a bar brawl; the PCs turned out to be the most competent at not losing in the brawl, and then the tavern owner--noticing they were the most competent in the fight--promised each character payment if they chased after the hooligans who stole something from him in the midst of the fight.
5. One time my GM said to me, when I was playing a cleric (who also had the highest charisma in the party), "Your church has hired you to escort a priest carrying reliquary to the city. They've given you money to hire three more caravan guards; you're in town now looking for three people. You ideally need someone who has good wilderness survival skills, someone good with magic, and someone who is good with keeping things quiet in case you need to hide the priest and the reliquary. Then conveniently enough, she ran into the PC ranger, mage, and rogue respectively. It's more of a clever take on "you look like a trustworthy adventurer!" but it gives background motivation and a common purpose for the party to have.
TL;DR: What it all comes down to is this: The PCs need a common goal to work toward that the players can agree upon.
Tell the players: "Now, as a group, please come up with a story on how you all met each other and why are you all adventuring together. I'll start running the game once you folks have figured that out."
Works every time.
Damn, that's such a simple idea, it's hilarious.
Things I have used:
1. Everyone wakes up in a dungeon with no idea how they got there. A magic mouth tells them they've been selected for testing
Resisting urge to make the magic mouth sound similar to Cave Johnson. Also resisting urge to make magic item that can create targeted persistent dimensional doors.
Nick's crazy cliche to making people work together
-You are all employees of a trade organization/criminal cartel
-You all grew up in the same village when the black riders kill everybody except you...or goblins...or whatever
-You all come to the same tavern because said tavern is where caravan guards get jobs...You don't want to be a carvan guard? make a new character!
-You are all in the army, war is over, and you are going home together
-You got shipwrecked
-You all go to the professor's funeral in Ustalav (ooops I didn't make that one up)
-You are all bit by darkspawn and recruited into the Grey Wardens.
-You are all strangers, who meet in prison
... your mentors stagger through the doors, vomit vital fluids upon hapless NPCs nearby before expiring. Those they hwarfed on twitch, thrash and generally make a mess of things before their drumming heels upon the floor suddenly ceases.
<cue pregnant pause>
The <however many hwarfed upon NPCs> gurgle, cough and jerk to their feet, grappling whomever's adjacent and start nomming faces! Roll initiative monekyboys, things just got serious!
|
Interestingly, BLAM, COMBAT! works well at the table but is a rubbish starter in pbp.
Anyway, you're all indebted in different ways to a kindly old herbalist (he saved one player's life, cured another's wife's depression, healed another's mother, etc.).
This herbalist lost his legs a few years ago, he became depressed and withdrawn, even contemplated suicide, the only thing that helped him embrace life again was a cute puppy called Fluffles.
Someone has stolen Fluffles.
Go!
Actually, the first words of the message were "I want to play a game..."
I thought it was "Welcome to the Enrichment Center".
The "I have no past" always works a chuckle out of my DM.
If you have no past, our DM will slowly create one for you.
Guilty of this on both sides of the screen. Though I have to admit when I do it as a player I'm doing it specifically so the DM can just throw anything at me and surprise me. When I have to do it as a DM it tends to be about 50/50 because the player in question either wanted the same or because they were lazy.
Tell the players: "Now, as a group, please come up with a story on how you all met each other and why are you all adventuring together. I'll start running the game once you folks have figured that out."
Works every time.
+1 to all the many +1s already scattered through the thread. I really try to nudge most of my campaigns this way. At the very least, I inquire as to why they wouldn't join up with other party members, then nudge various players to adjust one way or the other - being more flexible on the part of the people not willing, or perhaps dropping that trait on the part of the one to be refused.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fluffles will, of couse, eventually be revealed as the BBEG of the entire campaign.
Ahhh... the evil power of puppies. A power you haven't seen till your adorable puppy gets into your closet and chews apart one of each pair of shoes you own.
Fluffles will, of couse, eventually be revealed as the BBEG of the entire campaign.Ahhh... the evil power of puppies. A power you haven't seen till your adorable puppy gets into your closet and chews apart one of each pair of shoes you own.
Fluffles' megalomaniacal plans for world domination began small you see ... that, and his teeth really hurt those days.
On the shipwreck / similar idea, an Eberron game I'm in starts essentially like this:
All four of us were moderately known and influential people, and all invited to the same event. By "coincidence", we were all seated at the same table as each other (along with a few other people), and when things went wrong, well, it so happened that we were at the table that got framed for it. The other person framed at the table was killed in front of us, and we had little choice but to work together to escape, and prove our innocence.
I can roll with most punches after all its not about only what I want we are all there to have fun. My preference is to RP through the first meeting of characters. For a number of reasons. I only know in character what I have played through none of those "we're old friends so I should know X," conversations. Second it gives everyone a chance to make a real first impression. Also it allows for evolution of relationships. Through playing there are just relationships that work better among the characters than one chosen before play is made.
In one of our recent games our GM told us that we were all slaves captured by the Drow. After having been owned for 10 years, the PC group were the only slaves that had survived the entire tenure and had grown to trust each other completely.
The campaign started with us being transported through a desert in a drow caravan to get from one underdark portal to another when our caravan was attack by surface raiders.
In the confusion we were able to make our way out of our slave wagon and get some weapons and free ourselves.
Gave us a nice start. Good RP relearning how to be people again instead of slaves and made sure we all had a valid reason to trust each other even if our otherwise diverse backgrounds would have made that difficult.
A interesting thing about my campaign is that not only does the campaign itself begin in a tavern, every/most adventures do as well. You see, I'm experimenting with the very old school idea of the "adventuring party" being a temporary construct, reformed every session, possibly with new characters.
I once used an orphanage as the link for the players. There was a mother superior there that raised each one of them. She would ask them for help.
I like this one. Good start for a city-based adventure.
-You are all in the army, war is over, and you are going home together
Oooh, that's not cliché to me! Gank.
Two most recent reasons for putting party together:
Friend's Game: You all are in the same Casbah and and each have reasons why "The Fat Man" wants to hire your services to retrieve an item for him.
My Game: You all were either crazy, stupid, or brave enough to board the first voyage out to discover a new land. You spend 6 months at sea together, then you are shipwrecked with the rest of the crew missing, and you are apparently the only survivor(s).
I've had bad experiences with the "we're old friends" start. Character's personalities tend to develop in play into not quite what was originally expected or described. I've seen characters described as old friends turn out to have no reason to ever have been friends after a couple of sessions.
I prefer new or casual acquaintances.
Me too. I used 'she's my adoptive sister and we're close' and ran into problems where people don't want to play up the family aspect at all. leaving me with even less ways to properly react. A lot of character development happens in the first few session after your ideas have been put to paper
I think GMs spend way to much time stressing out about how to get the party together. Afterall it really only ends up mattering very little to the overall campaign and in the end the characters are all together...
Problem is that I have seen several gaming groups where if the players make their characters in isolation and don't have a strong reason to be together, they end up just bickering between each other. Because, of course, "It is what my character would do."
Then it is somehow my fault that they didn't have a reason to be together and the campaign fell apart.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think GMs spend way to much time stressing out about how to get the party together. Afterall it really only ends up mattering very little to the overall campaign and in the end the characters are all together...Problem is that I have seen several gaming groups where if the players make their characters in isolation and don't have a strong reason to be together, they end up just bickering between each other. Because, of course, "It is what my character would do."
Then it is somehow my fault that they didn't have a reason to be together and the campaign fell apart.
It kind of is.
Playing a game of D&D and telling everyone to write their charactors in isolation is kind of like trying to write a book with 5-8 authors in isolation. As a GM, you are responsible for the direction of the story - you're like a head writer. If you don't give the authors enough direction, then it IS your fault when the story doesn't make sense.
Adding: it is a common enough mistake.
I think GMs spend way to much time stressing out about how to get the party together. Afterall it really only ends up mattering very little to the overall campaign and in the end the characters are all together...Problem is that I have seen several gaming groups where if the players make their characters in isolation and don't have a strong reason to be together, they end up just bickering between each other. Because, of course, "It is what my character would do."
Then it is somehow my fault that they didn't have a reason to be together and the campaign fell apart.
It kind of is.
Playing a game of D&D and telling everyone to write their charactors in isolation is kind of like trying to write a book with 5-8 authors in isolation. As a GM, you are responsible for the direction of the story - you're like a head writer. If you don't give the authors enough direction, then it IS your fault when the story doesn't make sense.
I never tell them to write their characters in isolation. I've always tried real hard to get them to not do that. I almost always try to get them to write them together as a collaborative(sp?) work. And unless it is very sandbox-ish, I try to give them quite a bit of info on how the campaign is intended to begin.
However what I think happens, is many people (including me) spend alot of time thinking about their next character way before the campaign begins. (This often seems to be hugely influenced by whatever movie, video game, or book they enjoyed.) So when we get to actually talking about a new campaign, their character is mostly already built.
If I don't tell them, "YOU have to find a reason that your character is willing to work with the others," then no reason seems to be sufficient. If they come up with the reason it is sufficient by default.
Playing a game of D&D and telling everyone to write their charactors in isolation is kind of like trying to write a book with 5-8 authors in isolation. As a GM, you are responsible for the direction of the story - you're like a head writer. If you don't give the authors enough direction, then it IS your fault when the story doesn't make sense.
It's doable if you add in some rules for character creation that include the hooks that will bind the party together. Paizo's campaign traits are very good for this, for example, or you can set out other ideas in advance.
What I say is: "Make whatever you want, but they must be the type of character who can answer the call to adventure and work in a group."
Basically this.
Before character creation, I tell the players about a job/mission, and then I say "please create a character that would be selected for the mission / would choose the job".
