When myself and a group of friends played dungeon world, we would typically have a collaborative "creative" session that would then drive the next three game sessions. We would get together over a day and do some creative and improv style activities to develop the material for the DM to then facilitate. These would be like "come up with three people who live in this universe" or "what is a historical event that has occurred in this timeline, what about a future event?". We had shared ownership of this world and we then were all interested in moving it forward!
Totally agree with you, and i have only played 5e, but i know how the "style of play" used to be. I wish i could find players who are more active, instead of re-active.
Such a well written essay! I keep hoping the current owners of D&D will make adventures designed to make the DM’s role easier and more fun. I look forward to hearing your next video.
I really want to adopt an emergent story style of play where I create a world and the players explore. I've had precisely one chance to do so, and it failed hard... I put them in a town, gave them rumors about bandits and described all these distant ruins as they walked up to this town, and then they just... Did nothing. They bumbled around until I had an NPC approach them and ask them directly to investigate rumors about the bandits. Then it didn't help that someone said they wanted to join, so there was more procrastinating, and week after week, this person swore they were going to make it this session. But then, once the bandits were killed, there was a message in their pocket. A clue that their might be more going on... So what do they do about it? Go back to town, sit in the tavern, and wait for something to happen. I again had an NPC show up and bring up the note and tell them they should investigate. They do, they kill cultists, a demon is summoned, they flee, they wait a few days and return... But the demon left. Why would the demon be in the same place? There were zombies (as that was the demon's whole gimmick) but no demon. Then they quit. It was really disheartening. There were issues with trying to buy time, so the guy who never showed could join... But it was mostly the players expecting, as you sort of implied, me to just be the entertainment monkey for the evening while they passively ate what was spoon fed to them. And then I leave feeling as if I was just really bad at pacing. But is it my job to make *adventurers* *adventure*!? Shouldn't they already want to do that!?
Yeah I think this is an unfortunate side effect of the conditioning new players in the hobby have received. It's strange to me that in an open world RPG video game people immediately understand how to engage with everything going on but with Tabletop RPGs there's this weird hesitancy. I think it might be because there's a lot of DM advice about set pieces, "how to make sure your players don't break the campaign or encounter" type of stuff and the players are looking for the next "moment". Meanwhile if they just approached it the same way they play open world RPGs they'd immediately get "IT". Sorry to hear about your experience, honestly just be real selective about the players you take on. In some cases I understand where that's super limited but these days it feels like the DM to Player ratio is heavily skewed so unless you're in an extremely unlucky scenario you should be able to filter for people that get it.
@TrillTheDM Yeah, the choice of players was a real issue. But something I didn't mention was that this was a favor to a friend who was one of the players. He didn't want to DM but wanted to have a group with his coworkers, so he asked me to run the game. In that case, the player pool was already set. That game was also online, though, too... Which, personally, I rather dislike. The next game I run, the hope is that it I get a game in person.
It sounds like you'd like Forbidden Lands, the game presents a world with adventure sites where there are intrigues and schemes taking place but how your players interact with these sites, if they do at all, is entirely up to them. The point of the game isn't for them to be heroes, it's for them to survive and hopefully achieve their goals, whatever they may be.
Nice! yeah Free League has a few really good games. I've never tried out Forbidden Lands but I am familiar with Twilight 2k, Vaesen, and a few others. Appreciate the suggestion.
That is about the same thing I experienced. I am playing DnD and some other rpg since the 1980s, paused for about 10 years, came back abd realized how playing changed. I am DMing a campaign for 3 years with one grognard and three younger players. The expectation from the younger players is indeed listening to a story from the DM. I tried to find out what their characters want, gave the rumours, mysterious magic items, lots of money, asked what they want to do next, even made suggestions, but I got only reactions from the veteran player. It it sometimes very frustrating.
I really like the rules for 5e at least as they were when they first came out, I have not updated my books and still play as it was at the beginning but I have been GMing Rifts for 30+ years so I am a huge open world GM where the players must decide where they go. The players must make all the decisions and I will mold the game world to their decisions, this is a must to run rifts and I apply it to all my games.
I agree, I may not like them now with the overload of supplemental material but I think the base rules for 5e aren't as bad as people claim them to be. They're not perfect by any means but the ease of creation within the rules is very nice. Very cool!
great talk! 37-year veteran DM here... building a reactive world real-time during game based on whatever the team decides to focus on really feels like Jazz. I talk about that stuff when I stream art or game design. Would love to riff with you sometime. :)
Totally on board with the views and insight expressed in this video. Subbed hoping for more insights. Let's redefine play expectations one video at a time. Cheers!
Yeah, I mean personally speaking I don't really think it's the system as much as people say. I really do think it comes down to what WOTC and modern campaigns/D&D Media has done to the expectations that players have for DMs. The rat race to keep up and try to perform up to those expectations is just burning people out badly.
I have only played (and GMed) ttrpgs for about 4 years now, starting with 5e. I've had largely the same experience as you. There is so much bad advice on youtube and different forums that foster the sort of railroady, "story heavy" approach that I've realized just doesn't work well. It feels just not satisfying to the DM nor the players.
Well, I do prefer the pro-active style. I don't like railroading or 'story' as well. However, the 'story arc' style is not modern and not 5e fault. Some groups were playing in this wy from the begining and it got steam in the 80ths with Dragonlance. Well, to be more subtle, we should distinguish between Adventoures style play in which the players decides what their goals are, Heroic style play in which there is an external threat and the players react to it (the DM sets the goal, the players try to resolve it) and a full fledge story campagin / railroading. Now, as someone that started at BECMI, I haveto supress my nostalgic tendencies and look at the past with critical eyes. Railroading and bad design existed in TSR products even back there alongside the good ones. Today we have the prominent OSR movement to inform new designers about good design. I'm more concered about the codinfication and gamification of 5e 2024 which hints on 'rules over fiction' style of play.
I don't disagree. Trust me I don't think EVERYTHING TSR put out is quality especially when you get to the later years. It absolutely started with them, Dragon Lance and possibly even earlier. The issue I have is with "Planned" Story Arcs. I think the story should be the result of play, not a preplanned structure for play. I don't think I put the blame on 5e distinctly with my video but maybe there's some miscommunication on my part. I acknowledge that this style of play has been pushed for 30-40 years so it certainly starts within TSR. I just think these days it's only getting worse as the main powerhouse within the hobby (WOTC) largely sets the precedent for expected play with newcomers through the material they release. Appreciate the comment!
I think you've pointed out why I have such a big issue with DND currently. I've always heard lots of these stories of grand adventures, funny and crazy things happening, etc. and then when I finally play the game I'm bored out of my mind. I describe the problem as "liking the idea of DND but something doesn't compute right when I actually play as if I'm playing a completely different game then as described by others" because how I picture DND in my mind hasn't completely connected with my previous dm's(which has been mostly the same dm due to me having trouble finding other games) interpretation. its like reading a book but when you go to someone else its as if they read a completely different one with the same name, not the same book just they got something different out of it, I'm talking I read something steampunk-ish fantasy while they read a noir mystery set in post ww2 japan, two completely opposite books and that's not to say I don't like the worlds that people create its that I've kind of thought it'd be a lot more involved in these ideas, maybe not necessarily where the world starts out, but the way the world builds and shapes and how my character is involved or maybe not involved. either that or I just wanna hear more about this style of play so I can attempt to implement it because it does sound a lot better then what ive been trying to do.
Absolutely. It seems like a lot of people have this issue of expectations where what they've heard about DND and what they experience are completely different. Putting agency and control back into the players hands is absolutely necessary for better campaigns that actually last more than 6 sessions.
Well there are some issues with DMs typically wanting to control the world. And that is something you just have to enjoy as a style. TLDR: If you let the players help you with elements of the world at the start then they will be more willing to help with the world building and invest in game mastery a bit more. I think you are correct when you say it is not a D&D issue. Having played many other Euro-Pseudo medieval fantasy games that were not D&D from Palladium to Betas of RPGs that you never have heard about 5the game was fundamentally very different because of the style. I will point out TSR very much was a company and very corporatist but the game then about 30 years back was more simulation based. The world was the world and the players tried to make fun and survival in it. You knew you were in such a world when you rolled dice and then decided what you wanted to play or if you would choose another character. When we shifted to the current meta game it happened because of three major things that shifted the style. - Dragonlance original series introduced character focused stories - E 3 and 3.5 introduced making party dynamics front and center so much so that player choice became more important the initial roles and then - The rise of Pathfinder and the relative failure of D&D 4e showed that players wanted more fun then mastery of the game system. I could add Stranger things and Critical role as solidifying the ideas from the three before but they just solidified it. The first nd game was a meta that said each player had to be happy, the dm made the story and you fit into it and you as player were intended to make choices not drive the narrative. 5E is a fine system but yeah this can burn out the dm because like 0E it is DM decision focused. This leads to a followed the DM mindset were the players will ask questions and not make creative choices unless asked. If you want to set out a new path I can recommend that we add one more thing to the system of starting a complain that the DM can do IF they want to reverse that trend. Have the players help make core aspects of the world! Now you will still add a lot to it but is you use a system like *“Dawn of Worlds”* then the players are more primed to help make creative choices because they have investment in the game world. This system lets you and your player make a gaming world. This system and ones like it let DM and players get onboard the idea of it being a shared world. It sets an expectation that they will make things in the world. With that expectation set it means that at times in the game it will feel more natural for the players to say make up things about the world (you still have to make sure it does not make them more powerful but this should be easy) but does make the world more flavorful. Just keep notes because it is likely they may forget but you shouldn’t. This game supplement is system agnostic so you will have to add some of that but as you do it will require them to be more understanding of the world you all made. Now this is just my take and ideas that I think work for this kind of thing (if I understand the burnout you are seeing). Maybe it will help. But it is all free advice and worth what you paid for it.
Very insightful! Appreciate the post. I definitely agree with much of what you said. Especially starting at Dragonlance and each subsequent edition and media basically reinforcing that. One thing I'll push back a little on is I don't necessarily think that DM Decision Focused games lead to burn out, unless you mean it differently than I understand it. Rulings not rules and all that. Ultimately though I think it's the modern expectations of extremely prepared character focused games with an inherent plot that was preconceived before the game began. To me the best antidote to this poison is total player agency and allowing character decisions to create all the "narrative" of the campaign. Basically a full departure from the overly prepared story that seems to be the modern expectations. Appreciate the words!
This narrative, which I agree with, perfectly fits with the pbta and osr rising as a response. Play other games. Play Ironsworn. Play Knave. Play stuff with random tables you roll in front of players. Minimal prep.
I agree. I'm not one for the PBTA games but I do think returning to the older editions and playing them outright or at the very least embracing the lessons that they impart is the way to go. These days prep for me is nothing like it used to be. Instead of focusing on the "story" or next encounter or whatever I just spend a couple minutes thinking about the game state and what all the factions and stuff have going on and the magic is created at the table. Low to no prep is the way to go.
OSR, where the DM has to roll a lot more often for the players? And constantly refer to tables? That's just putting more on the DM's plate. Also PBTA is hot garbage lol
I don't think one should advertise any approach to TTRPGs as "the best one", as if I tried to make a sandbox OSR game for my gaming group they'd just not join up to play, it's not fun for them, and it wouldn't be fun for me either. Different styles of play fit different gaming groups. In my experience modern players want to live an exciting narrative impacted by their decision, but a narrative nonetheless; they don't want to "become a lord" or "become rich", they want to "discover what happened to my lost wizard brother and what is this trinket he left me about", so you can't just serve them a bunch of quests that are not even remotely connected to this mystery, the trail of breadcrumbs has to start from that thing ideally from session 1. This doesn't mean that the game is on rails, it means that the DM is creating hooks that are just so clearly connected to what the PC wants to do that the player will just go do it. Is the entire story planned? No, we just know the NPCs and factions before-hand; what the party does, the choices they take and wether or not they encounter failures will create the "history book" of this campaign.
I disagree. While I'm not a firm believer of the "One True Way" to playing TTRPGs I do think there are best practices when engaging with the hobby. The fact that you won't have players to join up just because you aren't making the game all about them says a lot about your and your friends approach to the hobby and where we differ. That's fine that that's your experience. My position is that this exact approach to the game is what drives creators to burnout. Having to appease every single player at the table for their backstory considerations and interweaving it all with some grand narrative that ties it all together. It absolutely does mean the game is on rails, because from the very start you are creating with the condition that they WILL follow what you intend for them to consume.
@@TrillTheDM They will most likely follow what I crafted for them, but the output of the adventure is not in my hands. There must be open-ended choices at every turn, which the DM can then ponder on after the session or arc to have the world react in a consistent way. Rail-roading on the other hand is predetermined, like a videogame RPG where the developers can't offer the players total freedom, they still have to program events and possibilities else they don't exist. There is no more Rail-roading than a generic adventure might have, cause it is a practice applicable to any play style. What you do in a PC-first game is create the adventure setting the same way you would a generic one, but you flavor it to the PCs you have. If someone wants to become a dragonlord, you have to put something about knights and dragons in the adventure, else you are just spitting in their face. There is more risk of burnout when playing this way, but only if you are not enjoying it and only doing it because "you must". One should only go about this style if it comes natural to them and they enjoy the effort.
@@DiamondarrelYou're just describing a narrative heavy game. Although it can be ran a number of ways, they are notorious for tending to be railroads. Often a DM approaches it like their own personal novella.
@@TA-by9wv Of course but that's a mistake on their part, it's not an inherent property of the style. Also a PC-first is a bit of an improvement over the vanilla narrative game, cause instead of being thrust into a narrative your PC might not care about or be forced to tackle because "the world is ending", you make it actually personal. The gameplay is the same but the enjoyment and engagement is higher.
@@DiamondarrelI don't think it's entirely a mistake though. Narrative games lend themselves to being rail roads or limited in choice because the DM is expected to incorporate backstories, foreshadowing, defined arcs or acts, etc. For this to work options tend to be limited, outcomes sometimes have to be forced or kinda contrived, and character death can become rare or nonexistent to facilitate all this. This is common thing with story heavy games. When you have a sandbox that dosent care about an 8 page back story, and the story is derived from the adventure itself, it creates a different feel. I prefer my game time to revolve around navigating dangerous and uncaring wilderness/dungeons where monsters can be tougher than you and your resources dwindle vs spending time caring about the hopes and dreams of the druids terminally ill step brother. I play to emulate awesome sword and sorcrey stories not do improv club or write an amateur fan fiction.
@@TrillTheDM That is what I heard but you would need to research to find out how true it is. My main point is that old school DM did prep as well. What I think happened is they been cutting out the gameplay elements that would create gaps in the story adventure. You could have had an hours of adventures just getting to the dungeon before but those rules are gone.
You show pics of old D&D modules while talking about how adventures where different back then. Not too long ago we played the old dragonlance modules and they where incredibly railroaded. Not much has changed since then. Bought adventures are and have been almost always more or less railroaded. So I can't really support your opinion there. As for newer approaches to playing I also disagree. In my experience now it is expected from GM to run much more free-form adventures that are tailored to the characters. That means that the players have to think about their characters and their backstories. This style of game is stongly encouraged by most online advice and actual plays. All in all I'm getting the impression that you are just unlucky in the people you play with... or maybe I'm just very lucky. Just do yourself a favor and throw out any published adventures and just make your own. And if the players are not proactive, just have there be consequences for them (just don't be an ass about it).
Yeah Dragonlance is quite literally seen as the starting point to the degradation of modules and adventures. When we talk about older modules we're definitely not talking about Dragonlance lol we're talking about Keep on the Borderlands, Isle of Dread etc. Open sandbox modules that allows the players to interact with the world, that has competing factions etc. I fundamentally disagree and while I do agree that this style of game is strongly encouraged by most online advice I think that is for the worst. Yes players these days do think about their characters and backstories, stuff that players from other generations did, what players these days rarely do is actually engage with the campaign beyond just playing their character. Your impression is incorrect and it seems like maybe you've taken the video title at face value and the point of the video is lost on you. The point I am making is that the majority of new DMs come into the hobby and pick up modules and adventurers from the company that makes it. Then when it comes time for them to create their own campaign, adventures or what have you it is influenced by the media that has been provided. WOTC is very deliberately pushing for this style of game, evidenced by the modules they release. So put 1+1 together. They are influenced by railroaded adventures or campaign modules + Influencers and actual plays online tell them to tailor the adventure or campaign to the characters = Railroaded adventures/campaigns tailored to the player's characters. The secondary problem is that the majority of NEW players come into the hobby and experience this. They have only experienced railroaded and customized games meant specifically for their characters so when you do drop them into a sandbox game they are completely lost as to what to do next. They've thought about their characters, they've thought about their backstory but they haven't thought about how to approach a game that lets them do whatever they want to achieve those goals. Something that coincidentally enough is not a problem whatsoever with older generation players. You could be lucky, especially if you're in a group that has gone on forever. I've seen both sides of this. I have AMAZING players that go all in and I've tried to onboard a lot of newer players who have had major issues with breaking away from the railroad and expectations of modern D&D play. There's a reason that a huge portion of new campaigns only last for a few sessions before fizzling out. Even if we disagree, thanks for your thoughts!
Old DM now GM here. Here is a crazy take that I have noticed playing with people my age (52) and running a group for a younger generation (late 20's). Books. The players who are all avid readers are much more likely to run with their characters, using their background and the personality they created and engage with the world actively. Those who don't read, who experience stories via movies, games and anime had little to no clue on how to interact, even with a fairly railroad adventure as Hoard of the Dragon Queen. Even the one group of twentysomethings who read vs the ones that didn't impressed me with their character portrayals and ability to engage with the world I presented them. My friends and I were all voracious readers back in high school btw. Also the two younger groups were both new to ttrpgs. The non-readers played D&D 5e and the readers played Vaesen. My observations all took place during the course of 5 years approx. among three groups. Is it conclusive? No, but I think it is telling on how beneficial reading can be towards unlocking the imagination and thereby helping in a RP setting and may show the problem is bigger then just the game design, or how it's presented, itself.
@@DaVeO52 This is an excellent point. Just being familiar with the literary influences on D&D can immediately open up your brain. Appendix N is often cited and it truly does open your eyes to the type of game that AD&D was made to emulate. Once you have that mental library of references and inspiration to draw from it is absolutely invaluable. I completely agree with you and appreciate the post.
It's 2024, and you CAN enjoy a great game of 'D&D' even if not the current over priced too many books edition. Basic Fantasy Role-playing Game, is a 30 dollar hardcover that is fully complete. The game is NOT going to over load the DM. It's one of several offerings out there. I can't really understand HOW the market manages to promote top heavy book intensive editions. The under 30 crowd are NOT that incapable of finding out about all the alternatives. Are people buying D&D 5th 2024 suckers? Hey, wanna buy a bridge?
Brand capture is a very real thing unfortunately and people have spent a lot of money into their edition whether it be physical product or D&D Beyond, sometimes both. WOTC is also definitely outspending everybody else with maintaining that image. It's a shame because there's a lot of systems out there that do D&D better than 5th edition by far.
I've never needed the DM to hold my hand making a character in 5e. None of these issues are unique to 5e. You and I are very similar in playstyles, but not everyone want to do "homework" There's this mentality with older players that back in the day we had more choices, but ypu really didn't. Random encounter tables didn't mean you were choosing the rivals. I've seen all types of players, and my current group would never have played the way we did 25 years ago. There's a type of fantasy escapism that involves "checking out" because we spend 40+ hours a week in the pressure cooker of life. Final point about back stories, they are too often used as crutches. You know "it's what my character would do" I see the backstory (background) as the past prior to taking up the life of an adventurer not as a way to dictate the future in a certain campaign.
There was much more on a DM's plate back then than there is now. There was entire character mechanics controlled by the DM (Turn Undead anyone?). Older modules were much, much more railroaded back then, merely camouflaged by random tables and blank spaces where *YOU*, the DM, would fill out. You're pampered with tools to streamline everything. VTT calculating rolls automatically, some even allowing actions and descriptions with the press of a button, tons and tons of play aids, entire adventures laid out step by step. This is merely a skill issue from your side, through and through. Burnout is to be expected when you're playing for *years* .
Wow youngling, 30-40 years of fifth edition. Your generation really has no clue. Now I have to add, time is completely foreign to you as well. I grew up on FIRST and SECOND editions. The change that happened was Change of ownership. WotC wants to turn roleplaying into a “have to buy the NEW books every year” style of play. Think Magic The Gathering w/out the cards. What changed was corporate trying to maximize profits. That will always come at the expense of the consumers/players. Wait until you hit the workforce, your mind will be blown.
@@TrillTheDM only weed. Tis good medication. And nah youngling, I was there. I even worked for WotC for a bit. Was forced to be a Pokemon Gym Leader by corporate. I wore that shirt at so many desert raves. I kind of skipped 5th edition.
