A caveat for me is that whatever game you are running has to be able to facilitate Failure without Losing. Games where failure = death, means the PCs aren't ever meant to fail (even if it's really easy to roll badly and fail). I read once: if every PC that fails dies, it means that no PC ever fails at anything.
I always say there are 20 sides to the measure of success and fail, and an infinite number of stories to be told within the framework of the same space.
Once, I had a group that consisted of 5 psychologists. When they reached the grand finale, the big bad boss! They decided to talk sense into the boss, I was pleasantly surprised. Their RP was wonderful, their dice were even better. The final boss "fight" ended up the big bad, coming into realization that he is in the wrong. Let players try, they might surprise you.
That's freakin awesome..... I had setup one game where the PCs got an audience/had a chat with one of the big bads and they convinced them to convince the other big bads to stand down, and find another solution to the conflict. The player who facilitated this felt such an excitement of victory that they ended a conflict without even one person getting hurt. That player is an extremely intelligent player, by the way. It was a good victory all-round.
I love that. It reminds me of the much maligned, but I'd argue actually kinda great (if flawed), Star Trek V, where (spoilers for a nearly 35 year old movie) in the finale, the film's villain Sybok is made to realize that he's made a huge mistake, his whole villainous plot was misguided and wrong & then he actually takes responsibility for it and does the right thing.
Its a good idea for GMs to play as a player in other groups, or to let someone else in their group GM. Another good thing for a GM is to be a player in a group at a convention. By playing with new GMs, the GM can pick up things that the other GMs do that could improve their game. Everybody has a piece of the puzzle, and if you play with enough other GMs, you can add those pieces to your own GM toolbox.
I totally agree with your fifth principles, but from my experience I can tell you I encountered two types of players that make this principle difficult from time to time: 1. players who are enjoying ttrpgs like a TV show - really these exist and they enjoy being in the group but not working on their characters agenda. As long as they enjoy being in the backseat this is fine, but once you start integrating their characters into the story it turns to a bumpy ride. 2. players who have agendas which slowly disassemble the group - this one is hard to describe and can be anything from NPC agencies (becoming dull quickly) or agencies against the groups goal to whole different mentallity to the setting (D&D character in Cthulhu). The obvious solution is communication, but this is easier said then brought to fruition. Just my feedback and I really enjoy your GM principles. Its a school of lessons learned the hard way at the table :D Keep up the great work!
I'm pretty sure I'm a Number 1 type. Been greatly dissatisfied with my current campaign because there's no sense of anything going on in the world. There's no sense of wonder or excitement, and all that's happened is the other players fooling around. When the DM tried to incorporate my character's backstory, I disliked it even more. I view my character as a vessel to interact with the world-its story and its inhabitants. I don't *want* to incorporate my character into the world. I'm here to go on an adventure, not waste all my time listening to bargaining or basebuilding prices. I've (kinda passively) tried to tell my DM my gripes with the campaign, but it's pretty evident what I look for just isn't what the DM wants to run (or even is particularly capable of running). Ironically, my favorite session I've played so far has been with this same DM running a oneshot on the trainride back from our regular session. He ran Oubliette of Fort Iron but super condensed (cut out the initial RP section). I loved it-I loved the brevity, the structure, the linearity, the variety of obstacles, the feeling of diving into adventure. DM's later said he doesn't like running prewritten/structured games, so I doubt I'll ever get anything even remotely close to that level of fun in our campaign.
Trevor, I love going back to videos like this from 1-3 years ago, and viewing them again, and considering how it has impacted your The Broken Empires efforts. Fascinating ❤.
The best "How to be a great GM" video ever. So many good points. If i want to run a story i play solo. Otherwise im rooting for the PCs but not giving it to them for free, just like you declared. Great stuff
Playing these games as long or longer than you :) great advice. I would add that having some kind of overall theme or mood to the tale you want to see spun helps with things like npcs and improvising off the plot outline. You can use symbols to communicate mood, which adds a subtle and often mysterious cohesion to whatever happens, and if you also know the theme is "death and rebirth" you can slip in, say, an ourouborous tattoo on an npcs arm. Small details that symbolically connect speak to the unconscious of your players, adding a depth of realism. My number one tip is to always provide meaningful choices to both players and characters.
Totally agree with a LOT of points here, Trevor. Yes, give players agency, Yes set-up the situation and NPCs and let the players go nuts with the NPCs there, for sure! And it sounds like I prepare the same as yourself; you setup the situation, make NPCs, give the NPCs personalities, etc but then the outcome is (most of the time) as surprising for you as it is for the players. I had setup a situation where the PCs encountered a group of alien hippy-types and they had in their possession a magical weapon which was sustaining them and helping them and I'd set it up so an evil NPC would come in and steal the weapon (or try to) and have a big battle from there. But instead, one of the Players decided to steal it (actually staying in character for this) and proceed to kill some of the hippy leaders and make off with it. It took us ALL by surprise (even the other players) and made for a memorable experience. So yeh, players DEFINITELY have agency!! :) Thanks again Trevor. Love this mini-series you're doing, and loved the Blade Runner series....that was really great! May your games be awesome. :)
Yes Trevor! I’m a Conflict Manager. “Stories” are NPC backgrounds. It’s up to the players to decide if that’s compelling enough to pursue. They develop the future and I love that! Absolutely appreciate your thoughts 💭
That's what I call an excellent sequel. Great thoughts. I really appreciate your ideas and simple explanations. All these concepts, revelations, and what's behind the curtains made my GMing much better. Thank you.
Love the advice. I just finished my first campaign ever and I had in my head two endings depending on what the players chose. But lo and Behold! The found a third ending that way miles better than what I had planned and made it very exciting. This next campaign I just want to set up strong story elements and see what the players do with them.
Tip No5 was especially helpful for Solo role playing in my experience. It always took me by surprise who would show up where and when and led to some really interesting scenarios!
Love your comment about the GM story thing. Immersion and interesting stories come from what the players do not let the GM has planned. I wonder why so many people find that hard to understand. GM: Baron Evil is conquering the world! Player: I enlist in his army. GM: Whhhaaattt??!??
These videos are great, Trevor! I would appreciate more of these GM tips. Maybe even campaign retrospectives? Would love a breakdown of an entire session and how you apply principles like these.
Excellent points here! I wholeheartedly agree with #5. I've always said that its not the job of the GM to tell the story, but rather its the GM's job to provide the framework we ith which the players tell the story. And yes, improv is key. Had the first session in a new campaign yesterday and it took all of about 30 seconds for one of the players to completely surprise me! 😂
Honestly, I feel like the fifth principle is something I needed to hear. I was drawn to the hobby because I wanted to tell stories but didn't have the gall/discipline to write them out. And while sure, I had -some- success with doing the whole storytelling approach, I did always run the risk of getting in GM burnout because I always knew where things were going to end up. Thanks for this great video Trevor!! It put things into perspective for me!
You can write a story, know its path, and know all the ways in which it can reach conclusion while still allowing agency and direction. The approach to it is to measure "what is" and allow that path to be reached by "any means". They do not instruct as it isn't instructional. There is no one way to adventure, and even the same adventure or story can yield a multitude of results all in favor of the story being told. It requires a different process in writing is all, and how you write within the system you are using. All paths and any paths will and can lead to more adventure. If you need help in writing spaces that carry forward and help you eliminate the burn derived from using spaces, places, and people permanently, there are people that can help you do that. It can be taught.
I think ultimately its finding your preference in the railroad to sandbox ratio. Both have their pros and cons. Its obviously a group thing too. I cannot imagine a group lasting long if theres too much difference in the play styles
As always, really great advice, especially the part about not having a set outcome. My GM prep involves setting the stage from wherever we left off last session, but as for what is actually going to transpire? I never set expectations. Lately every two or three sessions I do a CHECK IN: "what do ya'll want more of/less of? I also ask players to LET ME KNOW the vision they have for their character's arcs, so I can work with that and throw things at them to help them along this path.
I don't have a lot to say about your last three videos other than I agree. I think you're teaching people a lot of valuable things here. Top tier content! It's very digestible, too.
Great advice, as always (both here and in the previous video). I love concise and functional advice like this. Of course people have different styles, and that's awesome, but for me at least this is exactly where I'm trying to get. While starting to GM more frequently a few years ago I felt more and more constrained by not only knowing everything, but for HAVING to know everything. So I started a GURPS campaign in a Cyberpunk of my home city in Brazil and I only had the main idea sketched in my head. I wanted to focus more on populating the setting and creating a challenge than mapping how to solve it. At first I was a bit worried that the challenges would not be solvable, but the players ALWAYS find a way. And it’s brilliant because I was surprised every time! Then the Me, Myself and Die series started, and I watched all seasons. I became a fan of the Mythic GME and other tools that help me generate ideas and answers on the spot. I’m getting to the point where I feel I might be ready to start playing 100% prep-free, let’s see what happens, haha.
That last one is something I’ve been seeing a lot of. It’s the GMs job to lay out a world, at whatever size that is, and give the players interesting things in that world. After that it’s the player’s who decide which parts they want to engage with.
This is so timely!! I'm running my first game tonight! Thank you so much for the info. The 1 characteristic thing alone is gold! Love the last point. We are telling the story together. It's not my story or theirs. It's the party's story! Heh counting the humble gm in that crowd of course.
This is a GEM!!! I love the ideas and I love that you cover the player agency meaning that it isn't just a story, but that THEY make the story as they go. But the idea that you just make the world the NPCs & obstacles. That even makes DMing sound a bit easier! The pushing and pushing back just happens!! I have always loved this part of DMing and have found it funny when I see the confusion of players when they realize I don't have an 'end' to funnel them to. So much fun to watch your works!!
On improvisation ... I like to think of it as springboarding. It goes hand-in-hand with not planning too far ahead. If you don't have everything planned to the Nth degree, you're free to pivot in an instant. So, I like to listen to the players' banter in-session--their wild speculations about what's going on, their jokes, their "far out there" paranoid what-ifs--and often I'll hear things that I hadn't thought about, or things that I know would freak the players out if it came true. I can then decide to stoke their fears and speculations by either allowing things to go down that path, or twisting what they said/thought/feared into something different: bait and switch them. Make them think that their speculation was correct only to have the truth manifest itself in some other unexpected direction.
A story teller narrates, directs, and assigns actors to positions through narration and direction. Story tellers determine scene transitions, placement of and within environments as well as its cast of characters, decides capability and limitations of those roles, dialogue moments, descriptors where necessary to paint visual and physical spaces. Reaching outwards through emotional connections, and reflections, through moments of action, interaction, and success and fail measures of conflict, resolution, and growth. All things a DM and GM do. Multitudes of stories happen simultaneously as does roles, dialogues and descriptors. We aren't talking about Audible story reading here as some think. Story teller has been very improperly defined and assigned in the spaces due to misunderstanding of the definition, range of the role, and the products of the market decided (modular defined). You can use "Story element designer", "director", and such if it helps but you are in that role a "story teller". A line by line predetermined story reader... of course not. You simply narrate what is known and unknown and the multitude of things mentioned which by definition proper is "story teller". Not "story participant". Not "story reader". Teller is an active and ongoing role that is paired with randomocity, mechanical measure, and role allowance and assignment. Whether you are using only a handful of actors from participants coursing a story through its motions, being all the actors in a self derived and orchestrated space, or a single actor in the space while another takes larger role scopes, You are all telling stories. The DM/GM will be a story teller, as will the players. Not one above the other. All inclusive. Agency works on all sides of the table. Audible is not the job description on a prewrote narration printed finalized to its end, but the market and space leads you to believe that is. No conductor hats here. But think about it for a moment... isn't that how they write their modules. I've always said they have been doing it wrong. I write and create a much different way. I prefer a story foundation of what could happen with a compass that passes around from person to person within a framework of design, in a world designed or being actively evolved. But it still requires verbal components of story to tell what happens next, or where you are, what's around you, or happening. "you know nothing" pops up primarily without story pieces filling in the blanks. Its just a dark void of nothing without existence if nothing is made known. Everything is unknown until the story begins being told from every side of the table. From the beginning every time. Never did like the assumption of the definition and its lack of clarity. We write and tell stories with the audience and they participate in those stories being told. Theater of the mind would be pretty dark without the elements of story, and someone to tell them to the participants and audience. Players could not be part of the story, cause it wouldn't exist, and could not tell their role in it. It very much exists. I prefer defining it more clearly and write my modules that way. Its a space, with things in motion, what is done, could be done, will be done, isn't done, is all happening as the story unfolds through narration. No one telling what is happening... what a silent space it would be.
I think point 5 is something every DM goes through. My first campaign was very railroady, and while I wanted everyone to have fun, I wanted them to have fun -within my story.- Since my first DMing years ago, I've learned a lot (in part thanks to UA-cam, plus experience in and of itself). It's a lesson all DMs will struggle with at some point, until it clicks I feel like.
Anther good one, Trevor. I like the idea of giving NPCs one trait to focus them. I will definitely add this to my arsenal. A similar thing that I like to do with NPCs is to give them one piece of canned dialogue that allows secrets and clues to be worked into the game at the appropriate time.
I agree massively on 3 players & 1 GM being the magic number. We lost 2 players a couple months back in the game I'm running now, and were sad about that until we all realized the games now run smoother.
+1000 for point #5... on my own channel I have called it the "Emergent story" - that the story emerges out of all of the interactions among the players and between PCs and NPCs. However, I think this often arises because the pre-planned story is how nearly every published adventure from every game company is written. Even SWADE, with its vaunted plot-point campaigns, still has this. Each "act" or plot point is a "short story" and if you're still kind of railroading the players, or else going completely off-script and doing a lot of improv. I am fine doing that, but I think a lot of newer GMs struggle... I've heard people say, "If I wanted to make up all my own stuff, why would I spend all this money on a published adventure?" And they have a point. There are very few models out there (other than Free League's stuff) that provide examples of how to prep an adventure without making it "the GM's story" (or more realistically, the publisher's story that the GM is now going to try and run).
I'm one of those that almost every gamer I know is D&D-only. I think nowadays, esp. post-pandemic, people are always just so tired they don't want to put anything more on their plates. Time is so precious they don't want to risk anything but the game they know they like.😢
Your point five: IMO, the story should be emergent. The GM's role is to set up the systems of conflict, and the story comes into being organically by the players choosing how to act in those conflicts.
I’m a young father with 2 toddlers and recently found ttrpgs. I learned how to play savage worlds through your season 1 of MMS&D and I have only played solo because I have 0 time on my hands but I do GM for my 10yo son who only plays as orcs and his go to move is chopping heads off lol. The player agency tip is big bc my 10yo comes up with some wild stuff and I’ve had to learn not to push my narrative.
I feel like the best advice I got recently, which dovetails into the "GM is not a story-teller" point, is to only plan one session ahead. That way, you never have a ton of prep time wasted on the things the party decided not to do, and you won't be tempted to force them down a track. You can maneuver around their shenanigans. The other piece of advice I got was purely GM quality of life, which is no rule-books at the table. Make a ruling in the moment, keep the game flowing, lookup mechanics after the game.
Great video as usual. I agree with your principles but I found out that some groups need "wrong" approaches. There was a small D&D group that was more on the "tell me a story" side of players to the point that their characters didn't have any prepared motives or ambitions. They still did what the players do, as in do whatever they want, but liked gradual progress towards what they considered a main plot. In that case I did the following: I've written main antagonists and a vague plan for final confrontation and then worked the story beats in as campaign went on. There are too many risks, some of which you touched upon in previous video. The antagonists could be killed (if you want to do them right, the players should meet them one way or the other) early or players (or even you) could get bored of them. But the main principle here is the third one from this video: it's up to players how they would approach to resolve the conflict or even if they're going to do that. Story hooks should (usually) invite, not demand a participation. Anyway, thank you for MM&D, it's great not only to get an advice, but to see it in action.
Great video! Making the story about the players is something I always preach about One thing I came across a few times is that a lot of players get stuck or freeze if they have too many options. I worked as a game designer on a couple of sandbox MMOs, and I remember having this long discussion with people on the team every time they said the players should "be able to do anything they want" Sure, but without an initial guide, they just freeze. Too many options. What I try to do is slowly introduce opportunities. Start slightly guided (but not too much), then slowly let go of the reins. Preferably this guided start is more about what the players told me about their characters that anything I thought of on my own, and I weave it into the game world. I recently go back to GMing in the Veiled Space universe for a few people at work, and I want to see how this works out, but having them be a part of the creation from the start, even in a setting with published novels and games, seems to make a world of difference in this working out.
Agree this is a pretty well known design principle in both video gaming and tabletop Miniature/boardgaming: you have to limit the options available at any given time, or in any given situation. The design space is found in letting the characters choose the situations they get themselves into.
@@Thepaintedmini whats that phrase or saying? no choice is dictatorship, two choices is a dilemma and 3 choices is real choice. You honestly do not need that many choices. I think the brain cannot handle more than about 3 different ideas at a time so going beyond that is not really useful
Trevor Devall's 10 GM Commandments 1. There should always be active conflict. 2. As characters push on the world, the world pushes back. 3. Take advantage of downtime. 4. Find opportunities to make combat personal to the characters through personal connections. 5. Be organized - names, descriptions, special abilities 6. Give each npc a defining trait. 7. Learn to improvise - say yes or roll the dice. 8. Respect the players' agency. Players know they won't get everything they want, but they should feel free to try to get everything they want. 9. You are not the Storyteller. You are the story facilitator. Your job is to set up situations that provide obstacles for the player characters to overcome. The world should surprise both them and you. 10. Find ways to shake things up once in a while. If you break any of these Trevor won't game with you and I won't either.
Yep. Story = railroad. I've done it as a teenage GM. Now if there is a decision for me to make as a GM...I often farm it off to the mythic emulator..it just feels so much more honest and authentic to do that, rather than settling on something that is convenient as a GM
Honestly I totally agree on your point of not giving what they want for free. kinda ruins the sense of achievement if its all wishy washy. the danger of failure is what makes success sweet. I want things to feel significant and cohesive, this doesnt necissarily mean hard or easy really, but warranted in the situation. That a dangerous jump is indeed dangerous. That something outside of character doesnt inform my character’s decisions. That things seem real and impactful in their turn and I have to respond accordingly. preventing things from feeling detached and clinical.
My 2 cents. I've been hearing a lot in the past years the GM is not a storyteller. Well, i think that, as persons are, games are, so: - Sometimes the game will be the GM storytelling and players reacting and confronting and changing the world, but still driven to that story the gm is telling ( example the god-epic-end of the world kind of game. You can lose yourself a bit creating, as a player, your sheep emporium, but the world is bigger than you ) - Sometimes the world is at peace and players destroy or/and create a new order. ( Example, sandbox game, where the GM is a facilitator of the story that the players are creating ). - Sometimes the Game is a mix of the two previous points, where the world, the gods or the epic story don't exist from the point of the GM, but a story is evolving independent of the players and they can choose to react to it and get involved or do their own thing and be adaptative to the world that is changing around them. So, in summary, the GM, as the players, do many different rols depening on the game played, including be a storyteller sometimes. Players change playing different character in different games, GMs creating different settings and types of worlds. Just my two cents.
I would argue that if you are a player and you are playing a created scenario and campaign then the GM is the MAIN storyteller (well technically the scenario/campaign writers are) as a player you re expecting them to help tell THAT story and almost deal with any quirky ideas the scenario writers had not thought of in a fair and reasonable way
I feel like the running of Mysteries is a really good test of how well youre balancing all the competing needs of a good game. Like the way Jazz tests a musician, gotta know your scales and theory dead to rights, and be able to swing.
I both agree and disagree with your 5th point. You are correct. A Game Master is NOT a Storyteller. They are ALSO a Storyteller, in tandem with being an Adjudicator, and a handful of other things. Which to me, means that because of the multi-faceted role the GM has, also means the focus on being a storyteller is not as... Stringent? As it's made out to be. At the core of it, the GM is a player just as much as the Players are. They are there to play, and have fun, destress, goof around, hang out. In my mind, the GM needs a general outline (having GM'd myself) but not one so... Rigid that it effectively, and forgive the terming here, railroads the game and the players by taking away their agency. Having a narrative IS good. Sticking to it singularly without allowing it room to expand or contract based on external choices, is, less good.
I would suggest the railroad is a poor metaphor for heavy story based games - I would say its more like a motorway/highway ...youre going in a general direction and can change lanes and even take little detours off the main road. its degree of agency and IMO less agency is better than far too much - a bit like melodies in a chord structure - keep to simple rules and its great too much deviation and its a racket. Probably a music improv jazz metaphor is better
I totally agree with principle 5. My other big principle is Chesterton's fence: Do not destroy something until you understand it. This is for rules, I always run a game RAW for at least the first few sessions before I implement house rules. In many cases the rules exist how they do for a reason, and it's easy to look at a rule and say "that's stupid I'm going to ignore that," but you might find later that everything breaks down without out! Think about ad&d demi-human level restrictions, people hate them and ignore them, but they don't understand they exist because without them humans are strictly worse than the other races. And then the only person playing a human realizes that hey wait a minute the elf is just better than me, and there's nothing to close that gap.
Completely agree with your last point (not that I disagreed with any of the others). The storytelling is the process. The story itself is emergent. As the DM/GM, my job is to create problems. It's the player's job to figure out solutions. That process, that interaction between the GM and players is how the story emerges and progresses. The whole process is interactive storytelling. It's not just me blathering. Obvious, there are some things, like puzzles, riddles, traps, etc. that have defined solutions. But the story arc itself is TBD during play. Sorry I won't be able to make GenCon this year. It would have been nice to say 'hi' in person.
I would argue unless you are playing a homebrew scenario the story has already emerged through a module and the GM is giving player agency within that context
I must say, I am one of those "afraid" to depart from 5E (and having to learn a whole new system - oly played my first game in 2016 at age 30) and we are trying PF2E now, but since watching all three seasons of MMaD, I must say that these other systems have cool concepts!
Another excellent and very useful video. I hope you do more of these. I have been guilty in the past of railroading and suppressing the players' agency in my eagerness to tell a story. I do believe a GM can be a storyteller to a certain extent, but definitely that's not my style. It hasn't worked for me in the past and it's certainly not what I want. I prefer to create situations and NPCs and let the players interact with them. I love not knowing what's going to happen next.
The GM should have NPCs, a setting, and monsters/obstacles ready to go, or to improvise them, when it comes time to play the game. Even though you want players to have agency, if you dont have content to provide to them, they will flounder because they need content to push against. Its good when the players come up with content and ideas, to drive the direction of the game. But its ultimately up to the GM to provide content when the players dont have anything in mind.
I agree with most all you said. I would like to add that i as a DM dont tell players how to roleplay, but i can create dramatic npcs that reflect their classes and give an interpretation on what is possible. For instance, i have a war cleric of tyr as a player who is shy when it comes to RP and dont really know what a cleric of tyr can be. So i have planned to introduced at an opportune time a vengance paladin of tyr who will be totally fanatical to justice. If they venture to the right location he will be found captured by orcs and used as a gladiator in their fighting pits. Just as an example of what Lawful good fanatical belief CAN be. His hatred for orcs and evil will be significant to say the least 😂
About improvising. Recycling existing ideas and work can be easier than making up new on the fly. So yeah, know the setting and NPCs like the back the hand.
About rolling dice. Roll mostly happen during "zoomed in" time and space. Long stretches of time doing one task may go unrolled. But when doing repeated tasks in shorter time frame, now it makes sense attempts have chance of fail.
Was getting butt hurt when you said GMs are not storytellers, but you went into detail and "ok, I know what he means now." lol ya totally agree, just set the stage with all the pieces, and the characters make the story. If you wanna tell a story, write a book.
Coming back to the hobby after a very extended, not entirely by choice, break, I find myself leaning much, much further into the "facilitator" of stories than I used to. That's sort of odd, because I feel way less skilled at improv than I used to be. I think I used to have "a story," but also I was very willing and able to let PCs push that story in other directions. These days, I try not to have a story, but I feel very sluggish in my reactions. So, I try to have a bunch of planned encounters & events, then let the players find or interact with the ones they want, as opposed to doing much on the fly. However, I've also been wanting to run the newer edition of Masks of Nyarlathotep, while trying to balance player agency, the nature of that campaign, and the reality of life's time constraints. Part of me wants to set up the campaign events and the world, and let the players go where they will, including having a lot of various side adventures and NPCs for them to interact with, etc. But the idea of taking a campaign many say takes as much as two years of regular gaming to finish, and opening it up to the possibility of side quests and the like seems daunting. Do I then look at a game that will take three, four, or even five years to complete? I'm having a hard time finding players who are willing to commit to three or four sessions. Three or four years seems unlikely. I know the nature of Call of Cthulhu, as a mystery and investigative game, doesn't necessarily work as much as a totally open ended game. I mean, X god is trying to enter the world, Y cultist is trying to open the door, and Z actions must be taken in order to delay the ultimate end of all things. Clue A, will eventually lead you to knowledge B, which will allow you to use defense C to thwart their alien schemes. But even within that more structured by necessity framework, I do want players to have "agency." That's a tough balance I don't really have to face when I'm running Dungeon Crawl Classics.
Its mentioned several times in the video but I would say the best piece of advice for GMs is to take classes in improv and storytelling - yes I know point 5 dismisses storytelling but its ALWAYS going to be part of a RPG.
I think a "story" as a backdrop works fine but more as "this is what happens without the player" to make the world feel somehat alive And have the players basically changing destiny (you have to be able to adapt all the cogs and pieces though)
The "Say Yes" needs a little fleshing out. I go with "Yes and..", "Yes but...", "No and...", "No but..." and it works for almost every situation, almost.
Nothing controversial on the last point, at least not for me. TTRPGs are COLLABORATIVE Storytelling... Collaborative, because EVERYONE arround the table participates, not just the GM! If you want to tell youe own big story... well go write a book, as others might say! :D
Im more of a railroad/story kind of person. In a game as a player for me I would expect there to be an overarching story and that the GM is the main storyteller and that players have SOME agency in affecting things. Its why people buy campaigns/modules and scenarios - they want to experience the story and it unfolding. I think there is a certain amount of expectation that a GM IS the storyteller as they have pretty much perfect information. It is however personal taste
Interesting aside you made briefly about World of Darkness not being a Storytelling game, I think I know what you mean. Would be cool to see you pick that tangent back up if you do a WoD Sage's Library
I would say this video is better than the last one, which in my opinion was just a single principle. My only nitpick is the word spectator, since our hobby is not visual, I would replace that when used i the video with audience. But that is just word games and of no importance to the points made.
@@LeFlamel I left a comment on the other video, the single principle I explained there is theme. Also, discord sounds good, shoot me an invite, since I cannot find one for it here.
One of my principles is don't wrench things up for players. I was this guy who thought I am obligated to count every spellslot, every use of abilities for my players. Turns out I will do a better job not focusing on that as a GM. I already have a world to run, it's not my duty to calculate for the players. And if the player says he had one use of his ability left, maybe he did have it after all? It's not groundbreaking, just roll with it, be more chill about such things. Beware, this principle doesn't work with chaotic players that try to abuse the game or the Game Master. I just don't let these players at my table more than once
I love your focus on agency but how do you do horror? Sometimes horror removes a lot of player agency, to the point when players may feel like they are reduced to spectators. I haven't really found a good balance for that yet.
i love player agency but not completely... i usually run things 80/20 (agency/guide)... also depends on the game, in delta green for example there are things that are just completely out of the players control, and sometimes mine :)
It's really hard to let players "take over" your game, but there are always creative ways to mitigate the "damage" and get them back on track while still letting them roam free.
Essentially point 5 is emphasizing that RPGs can be every players game and that everyone is contributing to the story. Ive seen many playthroughs online and some are absolutely great being almost railroads while others are far looser far more sandbox or even simulation
I agree totally. Your job is not to tell your own story. If you want to do that, write a novel. You are to write the world in which the story takes place. That is spot on. People get obsessed with telling their stories. There are a lot of video games that make that mistake as well. John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (KJV)
I would guess that most people in the hobby use pre written scenarios or campaigns and tbh you ARE expecting a strong element of storytelling by the GM
Re: the last point: I think the story should emerge from play rather than being created by the DM. I randomly roll about everything, let the players telegraph what they want from the game through their reactions to the randomizer, and build more fairly impartial guided randomness from there. The players create the story then through their actions, not from my planning. It is my very favorite way to play by an extremely large margin.
There may be lazy players who expect the GM to railroad them, and maybe there's a transition for both a controlling GM to become a facilitator and for players who expect to be railroaded to take back their agenda & agency.
Monogamy isn't for RPG's! You need to know your players, to know how to DM/GM! DM stories are WWE(Followers), while Player stories are AEW(Self Starters)!
I was a little bemused by the lack of variety in games. Just find another group to play that game. I mean you dont join a tennis club and get uppity because they are not playing golf you go and find a golf club
I think theres nothing wrong with writing a story after all are you going to dismiss EVERY single scenario written for every RPG? Where would RPGs be without those created by WRITERS? It would be like the computer game Minecraft before it added a big bad boss
I try to instill the philosophy that failure is where the fun happens. Drama comes from overcoming hardship rather than succeeding without fail.
A caveat for me is that whatever game you are running has to be able to facilitate Failure without Losing. Games where failure = death, means the PCs aren't ever meant to fail (even if it's really easy to roll badly and fail).
I read once: if every PC that fails dies, it means that no PC ever fails at anything.
I always say there are 20 sides to the measure of success and fail, and an infinite number of stories to be told within the framework of the same space.
Your section on "Don't be a story teller" was impactful and insightful. I really appreciated it.
Once, I had a group that consisted of 5 psychologists. When they reached the grand finale, the big bad boss! They decided to talk sense into the boss, I was pleasantly surprised. Their RP was wonderful, their dice were even better. The final boss "fight" ended up the big bad, coming into realization that he is in the wrong.
Let players try, they might surprise you.
That's freakin awesome..... I had setup one game where the PCs got an audience/had a chat with one of the big bads and they convinced them to convince the other big bads to stand down, and find another solution to the conflict.
The player who facilitated this felt such an excitement of victory that they ended a conflict without even one person getting hurt.
That player is an extremely intelligent player, by the way. It was a good victory all-round.
I love that. It reminds me of the much maligned, but I'd argue actually kinda great (if flawed), Star Trek V, where (spoilers for a nearly 35 year old movie) in the finale, the film's villain Sybok is made to realize that he's made a huge mistake, his whole villainous plot was misguided and wrong & then he actually takes responsibility for it and does the right thing.
Its a good idea for GMs to play as a player in other groups, or to let someone else in their group GM. Another good thing for a GM is to be a player in a group at a convention. By playing with new GMs, the GM can pick up things that the other GMs do that could improve their game. Everybody has a piece of the puzzle, and if you play with enough other GMs, you can add those pieces to your own GM toolbox.
I totally agree with your fifth principles, but from my experience I can tell you I encountered two types of players that make this principle difficult from time to time:
1. players who are enjoying ttrpgs like a TV show - really these exist and they enjoy being in the group but not working on their characters agenda. As long as they enjoy being in the backseat this is fine, but once you start integrating their characters into the story it turns to a bumpy ride.
2. players who have agendas which slowly disassemble the group - this one is hard to describe and can be anything from NPC agencies (becoming dull quickly) or agencies against the groups goal to whole different mentallity to the setting (D&D character in Cthulhu). The obvious solution is communication, but this is easier said then brought to fruition.
Just my feedback and I really enjoy your GM principles. Its a school of lessons learned the hard way at the table :D Keep up the great work!
I'm pretty sure I'm a Number 1 type. Been greatly dissatisfied with my current campaign because there's no sense of anything going on in the world. There's no sense of wonder or excitement, and all that's happened is the other players fooling around. When the DM tried to incorporate my character's backstory, I disliked it even more. I view my character as a vessel to interact with the world-its story and its inhabitants. I don't *want* to incorporate my character into the world. I'm here to go on an adventure, not waste all my time listening to bargaining or basebuilding prices.
I've (kinda passively) tried to tell my DM my gripes with the campaign, but it's pretty evident what I look for just isn't what the DM wants to run (or even is particularly capable of running).
Ironically, my favorite session I've played so far has been with this same DM running a oneshot on the trainride back from our regular session. He ran Oubliette of Fort Iron but super condensed (cut out the initial RP section). I loved it-I loved the brevity, the structure, the linearity, the variety of obstacles, the feeling of diving into adventure. DM's later said he doesn't like running prewritten/structured games, so I doubt I'll ever get anything even remotely close to that level of fun in our campaign.
I feel like we would share a table very well together. I 100% agree with this set of advice.
Trevor, I love going back to videos like this from 1-3 years ago, and viewing them again, and considering how it has impacted your The Broken Empires efforts. Fascinating ❤.
The best "How to be a great GM" video ever. So many good points. If i want to run a story i play solo. Otherwise im rooting for the PCs but not giving it to them for free, just like you declared. Great stuff
Playing these games as long or longer than you :) great advice. I would add that having some kind of overall theme or mood to the tale you want to see spun helps with things like npcs and improvising off the plot outline. You can use symbols to communicate mood, which adds a subtle and often mysterious cohesion to whatever happens, and if you also know the theme is "death and rebirth" you can slip in, say, an ourouborous tattoo on an npcs arm. Small details that symbolically connect speak to the unconscious of your players, adding a depth of realism. My number one tip is to always provide meaningful choices to both players and characters.
Again a great vidéo and great advice ! Thank you for all this.
For me, you still remain undefeated on the scale of TTRPG actual play
What you describe here is what I understand the OSR playstyle to be, and that is very much my jam! Emergent narrative is awesome!
Totally agree with a LOT of points here, Trevor. Yes, give players agency, Yes set-up the situation and NPCs and let the players go nuts with the NPCs there, for sure!
And it sounds like I prepare the same as yourself; you setup the situation, make NPCs, give the NPCs personalities, etc but then the outcome is (most of the time) as surprising for you as it is for the players.
I had setup a situation where the PCs encountered a group of alien hippy-types and they had in their possession a magical weapon which was sustaining them and helping them and I'd set it up so an evil NPC would come in and steal the weapon (or try to) and have a big battle from there. But instead, one of the Players decided to steal it (actually staying in character for this) and proceed to kill some of the hippy leaders and make off with it. It took us ALL by surprise (even the other players) and made for a memorable experience.
So yeh, players DEFINITELY have agency!! :)
Thanks again Trevor. Love this mini-series you're doing, and loved the Blade Runner series....that was really great!
May your games be awesome. :)
Yes Trevor! I’m a Conflict Manager. “Stories” are NPC backgrounds. It’s up to the players to decide if that’s compelling enough to pursue. They develop the future and I love that! Absolutely appreciate your thoughts 💭
"Conflict Manager".... love that title. :)
That's what I call an excellent sequel. Great thoughts. I really appreciate your ideas and simple explanations. All these concepts, revelations, and what's behind the curtains made my GMing much better. Thank you.
Love the advice. I just finished my first campaign ever and I had in my head two endings depending on what the players chose. But lo and Behold! The found a third ending that way miles better than what I had planned and made it very exciting. This next campaign I just want to set up strong story elements and see what the players do with them.
Tip No5 was especially helpful for Solo role playing in my experience. It always took me by surprise who would show up where and when and led to some really interesting scenarios!
Love your comment about the GM story thing. Immersion and interesting stories come from what the players do not let the GM has planned. I wonder why so many people find that hard to understand.
GM: Baron Evil is conquering the world!
Player: I enlist in his army.
GM: Whhhaaattt??!??
Totally agree.
I am thinking about implementing the Mythic GME system of chaos factor and interrupted scenes for my games.
These videos are great, Trevor! I would appreciate more of these GM tips. Maybe even campaign retrospectives? Would love a breakdown of an entire session and how you apply principles like these.
Excellent points here! I wholeheartedly agree with #5. I've always said that its not the job of the GM to tell the story, but rather its the GM's job to provide the framework we ith which the players tell the story.
And yes, improv is key. Had the first session in a new campaign yesterday and it took all of about 30 seconds for one of the players to completely surprise me! 😂
Honestly, I feel like the fifth principle is something I needed to hear. I was drawn to the hobby because I wanted to tell stories but didn't have the gall/discipline to write them out. And while sure, I had -some- success with doing the whole storytelling approach, I did always run the risk of getting in GM burnout because I always knew where things were going to end up.
Thanks for this great video Trevor!! It put things into perspective for me!
You can write a story, know its path, and know all the ways in which it can reach conclusion while still allowing agency and direction. The approach to it is to measure "what is" and allow that path to be reached by "any means". They do not instruct as it isn't instructional. There is no one way to adventure, and even the same adventure or story can yield a multitude of results all in favor of the story being told. It requires a different process in writing is all, and how you write within the system you are using. All paths and any paths will and can lead to more adventure. If you need help in writing spaces that carry forward and help you eliminate the burn derived from using spaces, places, and people permanently, there are people that can help you do that. It can be taught.
I think ultimately its finding your preference in the railroad to sandbox ratio. Both have their pros and cons. Its obviously a group thing too. I cannot imagine a group lasting long if theres too much difference in the play styles
As always, really great advice, especially the part about not having a set outcome. My GM prep involves setting the stage from wherever we left off last session, but as for what is actually going to transpire? I never set expectations.
Lately every two or three sessions I do a CHECK IN: "what do ya'll want more of/less of?
I also ask players to LET ME KNOW the vision they have for their character's arcs, so I can work with that and throw things at them to help them along this path.
I don't have a lot to say about your last three videos other than I agree. I think you're teaching people a lot of valuable things here. Top tier content! It's very digestible, too.
Great advice, as always (both here and in the previous video). I love concise and functional advice like this. Of course people have different styles, and that's awesome, but for me at least this is exactly where I'm trying to get. While starting to GM more frequently a few years ago I felt more and more constrained by not only knowing everything, but for HAVING to know everything. So I started a GURPS campaign in a Cyberpunk of my home city in Brazil and I only had the main idea sketched in my head. I wanted to focus more on populating the setting and creating a challenge than mapping how to solve it. At first I was a bit worried that the challenges would not be solvable, but the players ALWAYS find a way. And it’s brilliant because I was surprised every time! Then the Me, Myself and Die series started, and I watched all seasons. I became a fan of the Mythic GME and other tools that help me generate ideas and answers on the spot. I’m getting to the point where I feel I might be ready to start playing 100% prep-free, let’s see what happens, haha.
That last one is something I’ve been seeing a lot of. It’s the GMs job to lay out a world, at whatever size that is, and give the players interesting things in that world. After that it’s the player’s who decide which parts they want to engage with.
These two are excellent. UA-cam TTRPG Hall of Fame material.
This is so timely!! I'm running my first game tonight! Thank you so much for the info. The 1 characteristic thing alone is gold!
Love the last point. We are telling the story together. It's not my story or theirs. It's the party's story! Heh counting the humble gm in that crowd of course.
This is a GEM!!! I love the ideas and I love that you cover the player agency meaning that it isn't just a story, but that THEY make the story as they go. But the idea that you just make the world the NPCs & obstacles. That even makes DMing sound a bit easier! The pushing and pushing back just happens!! I have always loved this part of DMing and have found it funny when I see the confusion of players when they realize I don't have an 'end' to funnel them to. So much fun to watch your works!!
On improvisation ... I like to think of it as springboarding. It goes hand-in-hand with not planning too far ahead. If you don't have everything planned to the Nth degree, you're free to pivot in an instant. So, I like to listen to the players' banter in-session--their wild speculations about what's going on, their jokes, their "far out there" paranoid what-ifs--and often I'll hear things that I hadn't thought about, or things that I know would freak the players out if it came true. I can then decide to stoke their fears and speculations by either allowing things to go down that path, or twisting what they said/thought/feared into something different: bait and switch them. Make them think that their speculation was correct only to have the truth manifest itself in some other unexpected direction.
A story teller narrates, directs, and assigns actors to positions through narration and direction. Story tellers determine scene transitions, placement of and within environments as well as its cast of characters, decides capability and limitations of those roles, dialogue moments, descriptors where necessary to paint visual and physical spaces. Reaching outwards through emotional connections, and reflections, through moments of action, interaction, and success and fail measures of conflict, resolution, and growth. All things a DM and GM do. Multitudes of stories happen simultaneously as does roles, dialogues and descriptors. We aren't talking about Audible story reading here as some think. Story teller has been very improperly defined and assigned in the spaces due to misunderstanding of the definition, range of the role, and the products of the market decided (modular defined). You can use "Story element designer", "director", and such if it helps but you are in that role a "story teller". A line by line predetermined story reader... of course not. You simply narrate what is known and unknown and the multitude of things mentioned which by definition proper is "story teller". Not "story participant". Not "story reader". Teller is an active and ongoing role that is paired with randomocity, mechanical measure, and role allowance and assignment. Whether you are using only a handful of actors from participants coursing a story through its motions, being all the actors in a self derived and orchestrated space, or a single actor in the space while another takes larger role scopes, You are all telling stories. The DM/GM will be a story teller, as will the players. Not one above the other. All inclusive. Agency works on all sides of the table. Audible is not the job description on a prewrote narration printed finalized to its end, but the market and space leads you to believe that is. No conductor hats here. But think about it for a moment... isn't that how they write their modules. I've always said they have been doing it wrong. I write and create a much different way. I prefer a story foundation of what could happen with a compass that passes around from person to person within a framework of design, in a world designed or being actively evolved. But it still requires verbal components of story to tell what happens next, or where you are, what's around you, or happening. "you know nothing" pops up primarily without story pieces filling in the blanks. Its just a dark void of nothing without existence if nothing is made known. Everything is unknown until the story begins being told from every side of the table. From the beginning every time. Never did like the assumption of the definition and its lack of clarity. We write and tell stories with the audience and they participate in those stories being told. Theater of the mind would be pretty dark without the elements of story, and someone to tell them to the participants and audience. Players could not be part of the story, cause it wouldn't exist, and could not tell their role in it. It very much exists. I prefer defining it more clearly and write my modules that way. Its a space, with things in motion, what is done, could be done, will be done, isn't done, is all happening as the story unfolds through narration. No one telling what is happening... what a silent space it would be.
I think point 5 is something every DM goes through. My first campaign was very railroady, and while I wanted everyone to have fun, I wanted them to have fun -within my story.- Since my first DMing years ago, I've learned a lot (in part thanks to UA-cam, plus experience in and of itself). It's a lesson all DMs will struggle with at some point, until it clicks I feel like.
Anther good one, Trevor. I like the idea of giving NPCs one trait to focus them. I will definitely add this to my arsenal. A similar thing that I like to do with NPCs is to give them one piece of canned dialogue that allows secrets and clues to be worked into the game at the appropriate time.
Nice videos these two. Nice presentation and energy as usual. And I like your expressiveness.
I agree massively on 3 players & 1 GM being the magic number. We lost 2 players a couple months back in the game I'm running now, and were sad about that until we all realized the games now run smoother.
+1000 for point #5... on my own channel I have called it the "Emergent story" - that the story emerges out of all of the interactions among the players and between PCs and NPCs. However, I think this often arises because the pre-planned story is how nearly every published adventure from every game company is written. Even SWADE, with its vaunted plot-point campaigns, still has this. Each "act" or plot point is a "short story" and if you're still kind of railroading the players, or else going completely off-script and doing a lot of improv. I am fine doing that, but I think a lot of newer GMs struggle... I've heard people say, "If I wanted to make up all my own stuff, why would I spend all this money on a published adventure?" And they have a point. There are very few models out there (other than Free League's stuff) that provide examples of how to prep an adventure without making it "the GM's story" (or more realistically, the publisher's story that the GM is now going to try and run).
I'm one of those that almost every gamer I know is D&D-only. I think nowadays, esp. post-pandemic, people are always just so tired they don't want to put anything more on their plates. Time is so precious they don't want to risk anything but the game they know they like.😢
Your point five: IMO, the story should be emergent. The GM's role is to set up the systems of conflict, and the story comes into being organically by the players choosing how to act in those conflicts.
I’m a young father with 2 toddlers and recently found ttrpgs. I learned how to play savage worlds through your season 1 of MMS&D and I have only played solo because I have 0 time on my hands but I do GM for my 10yo son who only plays as orcs and his go to move is chopping heads off lol. The player agency tip is big bc my 10yo comes up with some wild stuff and I’ve had to learn not to push my narrative.
I feel like the best advice I got recently, which dovetails into the "GM is not a story-teller" point, is to only plan one session ahead. That way, you never have a ton of prep time wasted on the things the party decided not to do, and you won't be tempted to force them down a track. You can maneuver around their shenanigans. The other piece of advice I got was purely GM quality of life, which is no rule-books at the table. Make a ruling in the moment, keep the game flowing, lookup mechanics after the game.
Great video as usual. I agree with your principles but I found out that some groups need "wrong" approaches.
There was a small D&D group that was more on the "tell me a story" side of players to the point that their characters didn't have any prepared motives or ambitions. They still did what the players do, as in do whatever they want, but liked gradual progress towards what they considered a main plot. In that case I did the following: I've written main antagonists and a vague plan for final confrontation and then worked the story beats in as campaign went on. There are too many risks, some of which you touched upon in previous video. The antagonists could be killed (if you want to do them right, the players should meet them one way or the other) early or players (or even you) could get bored of them. But the main principle here is the third one from this video: it's up to players how they would approach to resolve the conflict or even if they're going to do that. Story hooks should (usually) invite, not demand a participation.
Anyway, thank you for MM&D, it's great not only to get an advice, but to see it in action.
Great video! Making the story about the players is something I always preach about
One thing I came across a few times is that a lot of players get stuck or freeze if they have too many options.
I worked as a game designer on a couple of sandbox MMOs, and I remember having this long discussion with people on the team every time they said the players should "be able to do anything they want"
Sure, but without an initial guide, they just freeze. Too many options.
What I try to do is slowly introduce opportunities. Start slightly guided (but not too much), then slowly let go of the reins.
Preferably this guided start is more about what the players told me about their characters that anything I thought of on my own, and I weave it into the game world.
I recently go back to GMing in the Veiled Space universe for a few people at work, and I want to see how this works out, but having them be a part of the creation from the start, even in a setting with published novels and games, seems to make a world of difference in this working out.
Agree this is a pretty well known design principle in both video gaming and tabletop Miniature/boardgaming: you have to limit the options available at any given time, or in any given situation. The design space is found in letting the characters choose the situations they get themselves into.
@@Thepaintedmini whats that phrase or saying? no choice is dictatorship, two choices is a dilemma and 3 choices is real choice. You honestly do not need that many choices. I think the brain cannot handle more than about 3 different ideas at a time so going beyond that is not really useful
As always, very inspiring advices, many thanks.
Trevor Devall's 10 GM Commandments
1. There should always be active conflict.
2. As characters push on the world, the world pushes back.
3. Take advantage of downtime.
4. Find opportunities to make combat personal to the characters through personal connections.
5. Be organized - names, descriptions, special abilities
6. Give each npc a defining trait.
7. Learn to improvise - say yes or roll the dice.
8. Respect the players' agency. Players know they won't get everything they want, but they should feel free to try to get everything they want.
9. You are not the Storyteller. You are the story facilitator. Your job is to set up situations that provide obstacles for the player characters to overcome. The world should surprise both them and you.
10. Find ways to shake things up once in a while.
If you break any of these Trevor won't game with you and I won't either.
This was really useful!
Yep. Story = railroad. I've done it as a teenage GM. Now if there is a decision for me to make as a GM...I often farm it off to the mythic emulator..it just feels so much more honest and authentic to do that, rather than settling on something that is convenient as a GM
I love your Carol Burnett reference!
Honestly I totally agree on your point of not giving what they want for free.
kinda ruins the sense of achievement if its all wishy washy. the danger of failure is what makes success sweet. I want things to feel significant and cohesive, this doesnt necissarily mean hard or easy really, but warranted in the situation. That a dangerous jump is indeed dangerous. That something outside of character doesnt inform my character’s decisions. That things seem real and impactful in their turn and I have to respond accordingly. preventing things from feeling detached and clinical.
My 2 cents. I've been hearing a lot in the past years the GM is not a storyteller.
Well, i think that, as persons are, games are, so:
- Sometimes the game will be the GM storytelling and players reacting and confronting and changing the world, but still driven to that story the gm is telling ( example the god-epic-end of the world kind of game. You can lose yourself a bit creating, as a player, your sheep emporium, but the world is bigger than you )
- Sometimes the world is at peace and players destroy or/and create a new order. ( Example, sandbox game, where the GM is a facilitator of the story that the players are creating ).
- Sometimes the Game is a mix of the two previous points, where the world, the gods or the epic story don't exist from the point of the GM, but a story is evolving independent of the players and they can choose to react to it and get involved or do their own thing and be adaptative to the world that is changing around them.
So, in summary, the GM, as the players, do many different rols depening on the game played, including be a storyteller sometimes.
Players change playing different character in different games, GMs creating different settings and types of worlds.
Just my two cents.
I would argue that if you are a player and you are playing a created scenario and campaign then the GM is the MAIN storyteller (well technically the scenario/campaign writers are) as a player you re expecting them to help tell THAT story and almost deal with any quirky ideas the scenario writers had not thought of in a fair and reasonable way
Advice 5 is gold !
I feel like the running of Mysteries is a really good test of how well youre balancing all the competing needs of a good game. Like the way Jazz tests a musician, gotta know your scales and theory dead to rights, and be able to swing.
I both agree and disagree with your 5th point.
You are correct. A Game Master is NOT a Storyteller. They are ALSO a Storyteller, in tandem with being an Adjudicator, and a handful of other things.
Which to me, means that because of the multi-faceted role the GM has, also means the focus on being a storyteller is not as... Stringent? As it's made out to be.
At the core of it, the GM is a player just as much as the Players are. They are there to play, and have fun, destress, goof around, hang out.
In my mind, the GM needs a general outline (having GM'd myself) but not one so... Rigid that it effectively, and forgive the terming here, railroads the game and the players by taking away their agency. Having a narrative IS good. Sticking to it singularly without allowing it room to expand or contract based on external choices, is, less good.
I would suggest the railroad is a poor metaphor for heavy story based games - I would say its more like a motorway/highway ...youre going in a general direction and can change lanes and even take little detours off the main road. its degree of agency and IMO less agency is better than far too much - a bit like melodies in a chord structure - keep to simple rules and its great too much deviation and its a racket. Probably a music improv jazz metaphor is better
I totally agree with principle 5. My other big principle is Chesterton's fence: Do not destroy something until you understand it. This is for rules, I always run a game RAW for at least the first few sessions before I implement house rules. In many cases the rules exist how they do for a reason, and it's easy to look at a rule and say "that's stupid I'm going to ignore that," but you might find later that everything breaks down without out! Think about ad&d demi-human level restrictions, people hate them and ignore them, but they don't understand they exist because without them humans are strictly worse than the other races. And then the only person playing a human realizes that hey wait a minute the elf is just better than me, and there's nothing to close that gap.
Completely agree with your last point (not that I disagreed with any of the others). The storytelling is the process. The story itself is emergent. As the DM/GM, my job is to create problems. It's the player's job to figure out solutions. That process, that interaction between the GM and players is how the story emerges and progresses. The whole process is interactive storytelling. It's not just me blathering. Obvious, there are some things, like puzzles, riddles, traps, etc. that have defined solutions. But the story arc itself is TBD during play.
Sorry I won't be able to make GenCon this year. It would have been nice to say 'hi' in person.
I would argue unless you are playing a homebrew scenario the story has already emerged through a module and the GM is giving player agency within that context
#5, great food for thought. I really enjoyed that.
Love this video. So many well stated points.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge, great video.
Completely agree with the 5th principle
I must say, I am one of those "afraid" to depart from 5E (and having to learn a whole new system - oly played my first game in 2016 at age 30) and we are trying PF2E now, but since watching all three seasons of MMaD, I must say that these other systems have cool concepts!
Another excellent and very useful video. I hope you do more of these.
I have been guilty in the past of railroading and suppressing the players' agency in my eagerness to tell a story. I do believe a GM can be a storyteller to a certain extent, but definitely that's not my style. It hasn't worked for me in the past and it's certainly not what I want. I prefer to create situations and NPCs and let the players interact with them. I love not knowing what's going to happen next.
The GM should have NPCs, a setting, and monsters/obstacles ready to go, or to improvise them, when it comes time to play the game. Even though you want players to have agency, if you dont have content to provide to them, they will flounder because they need content to push against. Its good when the players come up with content and ideas, to drive the direction of the game. But its ultimately up to the GM to provide content when the players dont have anything in mind.
Such useful work, loving these thanks
I agree with most all you said. I would like to add that i as a DM dont tell players how to roleplay, but i can create dramatic npcs that reflect their classes and give an interpretation on what is possible.
For instance, i have a war cleric of tyr as a player who is shy when it comes to RP and dont really know what a cleric of tyr can be.
So i have planned to introduced at an opportune time a vengance paladin of tyr who will be totally fanatical to justice. If they venture to the right location he will be found captured by orcs and used as a gladiator in their fighting pits. Just as an example of what Lawful good fanatical belief CAN be. His hatred for orcs and evil will be significant to say the least 😂
About improvising. Recycling existing ideas and work can be easier than making up new on the fly. So yeah, know the setting and NPCs like the back the hand.
About rolling dice. Roll mostly happen during "zoomed in" time and space. Long stretches of time doing one task may go unrolled. But when doing repeated tasks in shorter time frame, now it makes sense attempts have chance of fail.
Was getting butt hurt when you said GMs are not storytellers, but you went into detail and "ok, I know what he means now." lol ya totally agree, just set the stage with all the pieces, and the characters make the story. If you wanna tell a story, write a book.
For a sec I thought you shaved your head, I was like damn Trev looks good shaved down. Hahah
Love the channel
Coming back to the hobby after a very extended, not entirely by choice, break, I find myself leaning much, much further into the "facilitator" of stories than I used to. That's sort of odd, because I feel way less skilled at improv than I used to be. I think I used to have "a story," but also I was very willing and able to let PCs push that story in other directions. These days, I try not to have a story, but I feel very sluggish in my reactions. So, I try to have a bunch of planned encounters & events, then let the players find or interact with the ones they want, as opposed to doing much on the fly.
However, I've also been wanting to run the newer edition of Masks of Nyarlathotep, while trying to balance player agency, the nature of that campaign, and the reality of life's time constraints. Part of me wants to set up the campaign events and the world, and let the players go where they will, including having a lot of various side adventures and NPCs for them to interact with, etc. But the idea of taking a campaign many say takes as much as two years of regular gaming to finish, and opening it up to the possibility of side quests and the like seems daunting. Do I then look at a game that will take three, four, or even five years to complete? I'm having a hard time finding players who are willing to commit to three or four sessions. Three or four years seems unlikely.
I know the nature of Call of Cthulhu, as a mystery and investigative game, doesn't necessarily work as much as a totally open ended game. I mean, X god is trying to enter the world, Y cultist is trying to open the door, and Z actions must be taken in order to delay the ultimate end of all things. Clue A, will eventually lead you to knowledge B, which will allow you to use defense C to thwart their alien schemes. But even within that more structured by necessity framework, I do want players to have "agency." That's a tough balance I don't really have to face when I'm running Dungeon Crawl Classics.
Its mentioned several times in the video but I would say the best piece of advice for GMs is to take classes in improv and storytelling - yes I know point 5 dismisses storytelling but its ALWAYS going to be part of a RPG.
I think a "story" as a backdrop works fine but more as "this is what happens without the player" to make the world feel somehat alive
And have the players basically changing destiny (you have to be able to adapt all the cogs and pieces though)
The "Say Yes" needs a little fleshing out.
I go with "Yes and..", "Yes but...", "No and...", "No but..." and it works for almost every situation, almost.
Great advice.
Nothing controversial on the last point, at least not for me.
TTRPGs are COLLABORATIVE Storytelling... Collaborative, because EVERYONE arround the table participates, not just the GM!
If you want to tell youe own big story... well go write a book, as others might say! :D
Im more of a railroad/story kind of person. In a game as a player for me I would expect there to be an overarching story and that the GM is the main storyteller and that players have SOME agency in affecting things. Its why people buy campaigns/modules and scenarios - they want to experience the story and it unfolding. I think there is a certain amount of expectation that a GM IS the storyteller as they have pretty much perfect information. It is however personal taste
I love this channel❤️
much appreciated
Interesting aside you made briefly about World of Darkness not being a Storytelling game, I think I know what you mean. Would be cool to see you pick that tangent back up if you do a WoD Sage's Library
To be fair to Chris, feeling like everything is trying to kill you is a reasonable conclusion in Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay
These are excellent!
I would say this video is better than the last one, which in my opinion was just a single principle. My only nitpick is the word spectator, since our hobby is not visual, I would replace that when used i the video with audience. But that is just word games and of no importance to the points made.
What do you mean by single principle? Also wouldn't mind picking your brain on discord :)
@@LeFlamel I left a comment on the other video, the single principle I explained there is theme. Also, discord sounds good, shoot me an invite, since I cannot find one for it here.
One of my principles is don't wrench things up for players. I was this guy who thought I am obligated to count every spellslot, every use of abilities for my players. Turns out I will do a better job not focusing on that as a GM. I already have a world to run, it's not my duty to calculate for the players. And if the player says he had one use of his ability left, maybe he did have it after all? It's not groundbreaking, just roll with it, be more chill about such things.
Beware, this principle doesn't work with chaotic players that try to abuse the game or the Game Master. I just don't let these players at my table more than once
I love your focus on agency but how do you do horror? Sometimes horror removes a lot of player agency, to the point when players may feel like they are reduced to spectators. I haven't really found a good balance for that yet.
11:50 "If you got D&D 5e problems I feel bad for you son, I got 99 problems but switching systems ain't one!" 🤣
i love player agency but not completely... i usually run things 80/20 (agency/guide)... also depends on the game, in delta green for example there are things that are just completely out of the players control, and sometimes mine :)
My table has an agreement, once every three months we run a one shot with either a different game, setting, or GM.
It's really hard to let players "take over" your game, but there are always creative ways to mitigate the "damage" and get them back on track while still letting them roam free.
Essentially point 5 is emphasizing that RPGs can be every players game and that everyone is contributing to the story. Ive seen many playthroughs online and some are absolutely great being almost railroads while others are far looser far more sandbox or even simulation
I have a new group of new players. I set the scene and sent invitations to be explorers, what they do I let them do. Only occasional nudges,
What is your “go-to” game or mechanics? Or your favorite system?
Not sure he will respond, but like me, he will probably say Hârnworld and Hârnmaster.
Gaming is fantasy and the one in control rules 😜. But 😮.
I agree totally. Your job is not to tell your own story. If you want to do that, write a novel. You are to write the world in which the story takes place. That is spot on. People get obsessed with telling their stories. There are a lot of video games that make that mistake as well. John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (KJV)
Mr. Devall's based take on so-called story "gaming" is 100% correct. Change my mind. :3
*quietly slithers back to troll-cave* :3
I would guess that most people in the hobby use pre written scenarios or campaigns and tbh you ARE expecting a strong element of storytelling by the GM
part 2 of 9 tips for solo??
Bump
Re: the last point: I think the story should emerge from play rather than being created by the DM. I randomly roll about everything, let the players telegraph what they want from the game through their reactions to the randomizer, and build more fairly impartial guided randomness from there. The players create the story then through their actions, not from my planning. It is my very favorite way to play by an extremely large margin.
There may be lazy players who expect the GM to railroad them, and maybe there's a transition for both a controlling GM to become a facilitator and for players who expect to be railroaded to take back their agenda & agency.
Monogamy isn't for RPG's!
You need to know your players, to know how to DM/GM!
DM stories are WWE(Followers), while Player stories are AEW(Self Starters)!
I was a little bemused by the lack of variety in games. Just find another group to play that game. I mean you dont join a tennis club and get uppity because they are not playing golf you go and find a golf club
Ahh yes, Carol Burnette, I wonder how many Zoomers have heard of her? lol
If you're wanting a story, GM's, try a soloing/writing RPG and get it out of your system.
I think theres nothing wrong with writing a story after all are you going to dismiss EVERY single scenario written for every RPG? Where would RPGs be without those created by WRITERS? It would be like the computer game Minecraft before it added a big bad boss