One-shots and short arc campaigns are my favourite ways to play RPGs. Mostly because big campaigns usually have a tendency to collapse due to scheduling issues. I also enjoy having the opportunity to play different characters and become more antagonistic as a character
One shots are an ideal way to try out new systems, new character concepts in familiar systems and to find out if you enjoy playing with new groups of players without an initial long-term commitment!
I run DCC every other weekend in my local game shop. I tell all the players who sign up to bring characters or they can pick from the Pre Gens I bring. This helps speed up our start as we usually try to be done within 4-5 hours. I have never had anyone complain and they usually look at the sheet and figure out their own quirks and details.
One shots and short campaigns have greatly expanded my exposure to different systems and play styles, but have also allowed me to experience playing with a much larger group of players and GMs. I've even learned things from systems/styles I ended up not liking that I can apply to things I do like.
I've played a mix of long campaigns and one-offs/shorter runs and I really think it's like TTRPG nutrition where you ideally have a balanced diet. Having some characters with longterm goals scratches a sort of itch that one-off play simply can't, but the diversity and range afforded to me from playing short games is undeniably a wonderful addition to my gaming life. Great video as always!
I do one-shots regularly primarily targeting onboarding new players but I also have changed almost all of my tables to a focus on time-boxed campaigns with good results. I also start all my potential mini-campaigns as a few one-shots to recruit the table. I have switched up my strategy to primarily plan and run campaigns that are time-boxed to 3-6 months that are scheduled at a weekly or bi-weekly cadence just like you advocate. Session duration is 3 hours which is a total of 12-24 sessions to execute a story. I have had great results, satisfactorily finishing all 4/4 of those that I started with different tables composed of mostly different players over the last year. I don't get burned out being locked into 1 system/theme indefinitely. Players have a clear idea of the commitment and timeline and are more reliable. Pacing of the game stays good to meet the timeline. We have even planned to revisit one of these campaign threads later on. I plan to try running long running campaigns as a string of broken up episodic/phasic mini-campaigns. I firmly believe this format is a great framework for regularly playing and finishing satisfying entertaining games. Long running campaigns with a dedicated crew of committed players is great in concept, but they are definitely an exception not the rule. I play with busy adults, getting a 35 year old with a family to commit to weekly 6 hour sessions until the end of time is a hard sell.
Yeah my Reach of the Roach God game I run every two weeks is only 2-3 hours and we get a bunch done and after we are done we don't feel like death. I look back on my early 20s playing 8 hour D&D 5e sessions fondly but those just aren't viable these days for my friends and I and it has been so nice knowing we are going to finish this story. Thank you for your insight!
I have found much of the same benefits with pre-gens, both playing and judging. I think most of those benefits come not from the crunch being pre-done (stats, skills, spells, etc.) but the fluff (backgrounds, class, etc.) being pre-done. After that, the crunch don't really influence players as much in my experience. Though I am also a huge proponent of short spell lists so maybe I'm lying to myself.
Hell yes! Love this take so much. As someone who started a reoccurring public event for short campaigns I'm fully onboard with this vibe. I've found that even longer campaigns can benefit from a "seasonal" approach, effectively breaking it into smaller chunks to bring in more of those check-in points. It's kept my Masks game feeling really fresh, especially with a cheeky one-shot in between seasons.
I just discovered you today and wanted to say thanks! I played way back (starting with the boxed sets and Advanced D&D in the 80s) and stopped playing around 1990 because of real life (law school, my own business etc) but kept collecting Rpg sets just to read the rules. I got sucked back into playing with the release of Old Gods of Appalachia. I’m now planning a bunch of one shots just to introduce people to other rules and genres. If we find something we like we will see where it goes. On my list are most of the Free League Publishing games including Vaesen, Symbaroum, Aliens and Blade Runner. Plus a bunch of the Cypher System games. I like the simplicity and both publishers have amazing genres and content. The FLP starter boxes are beautiful and great for one shots. Enough rambling
I exclusively have run one shots (primarily DCC) and I'm a huge fan. We have multiple groups at my church who play 5e. So when they're in between campaigns or have a week off here and there, I hop in and run a 1-2 shot scenario. I think the cool thing I've heard from them is that it gets the creative juices flowing for them after playing one character for so long in the campaign and gives them some fresh thoughts of what to take back to their big campaign. I feel like everyone should try a one shot at some point. I think it's a really cool way to find something new that you may prefer to what you normally play. Thanks for the good work Wasabi!
My friends and I, have table top club along side our long term campaign I dm. Where we each take turns dming for 5-8 sessions and we always play a different system. Since we’ve been playing 5e since 2019. Its a great way to do short campaigns and find news games.
One of nice things with one shots is that they generally have an overt victory condition (or something that you can call a win or a loss). It's quite nice to effectively "win" a game, especially when you can compare performance in the one shot. This is especially true with competitive tournament games, where you run different groups through the same adventure (which are a lot of fun). We used to run a lot of these games in the local communities (including an inter-varsity league). [And it's great way to get experience with different play styles as a gamemaster. Since every group plays the game differently.] And for added, pressure, consider a time limit on the sessions. It also means that they have a defined objective from the start (even if it isn't the one the players originally think it is). It means there is not a lot of fluffing about getting the players there. And they can easily have their own reasons for being there. One interesting approach is to have a hybrid game where the game setting is your typical sandbox style setting, but you reverse the downtime and uptime by actually having a job, and having to pan their expeditions to specific Places of Mystery within the game, which are pretty much one-shot adventures, but drawing from a stable of available characters/players. So slots in the adventure are generally on a first-come, first-served basis. As for pregens, I never really feel that a pregen is me. They are a lot easier to write adventures for, but a good GM should be able to modify any adventure so it is at least somewhat applicable to the characters that are going into it. And yes, play lots of different games. It's fun. And there are so many great games to experience.
Even while playing a campaign interrupting it for a oneshot or a short adventure is fun (far better than to stop playing if someone is missing), for example you could do flashback or explore something in your setting you can't explore right now and things like that
Great points on one-shots. I have wanted to try new systems for some time but not been sure how to approach it. One-shots seem like a great answer to this. Thanks
Your point about picking up things from other systems is great too. My style has been significantly influenced by my time running PbtA systems and I think it's great. I got into Trophy Dark last year and the "Paint the scene" style questions have also been a great addition to the toolbox.
We play so infrequently (like max 6 times a year) so we are doing shorter stuff by default. You can also have short stories AND bring in characters from previous stories. So if you really want to develop and level up a character - that is possible.
Great video! I love shorter games to try new RPG systems. It was the 13th Age RPG that opened my mind to this with its 10 level/10 session campaign, with time skips and montages to fill in the story gaps. It works wonderfully, so fast paced. These days, I think 4-6 sessions is a sweet spot.
Thank you! I had no idea 13th Age did the same thing as Shadow of the Demon Lord for the 10 level/10 session thing. I may have to grab it just to see what other design elements it has because I have heard 13th Age has some great ones.
@@wasabiburger3047 They mention it in a tiny 1/2 page section, but it was enough to intrigue me to try. The idea is 100% in keeping with 13A's style of aggressively trimming the fat and sprinting for the good stuff. I love 13A, just beware that a lot of the game's design sensibilities I feel are antithetical to old school gaming like DCC.
Yeah. My favorite use for one shots is trying out new systems. The novelty of trying new systems is something I never get tired of because I'm always borrowing ideas and mechanics. Game design itself is something I love to look at and explore. But, it's also a great low commitment way to get my players to try new things in the first place. I think that might be one of the biggest benefits. I run a bunch of one shots between campaigns, in different systems. See what resonates with my group, build a campaign around that.
2.5 years ago I reluctantly agreed to run a game for my family and a friend and his son. I started with a simple one-shot and figured that’d be it. Well, the first session was so much fun I then had to scramble for other one-shots to keep things going and eventually rolled everything into LMoP. So yeah, aside from everything mentioned in this video, there many reasons to run a one-shot.
"Get busy *learning* or get busy dying." When I started playing 1e in the 80's, I had some friends in a group that played regularly for a while, and I had some friends not in the group who only played now and then. And there were no one shots; that wasn't how the game was played. Heck, we spent several months getting thru I6: Ravenloft. But I wish I'd had the one shot concept. It would have made our gaming in general easier and more successful, and it would have helped me, and others maybe, learn to DM. Plus all those non D&D games we tried might have gone better too. If you're new, if you wanna DM but you're not sure, or if you don't have much time or a stable group, one shots are the best way to go. AND they work great in big campaigns, too, especially for focus on smaller stories or character arc moments. Oh if I only knew then...
If you're running a long format game you should plan for one-shots to break it up. Even better, like you suggested, to plan the one-shots to take place in the current campaign. Maybe a group of adventurers dealing with the fallout of events that have recently happened from the main PCs?
A lot of my "campaigns" are One-Shots and short adventures that get linked together. I've had a player change out characters and revisit an old character after many of the adventures.
I run a lot of different games, but probably half of them are Call of Cthulhu, and that's a game that really leans toward one-shots or short campaigns. The rest of the time, it's usually one-shots of other games. I've been trying to get a long-term game going for a while, because it's super difficult to find players for longer term games (for me, at least). But as frustrating as that is, I still love one-shots.
@@wasabiburger3047 on a more serious note, I have really been thinking about running a short Call of Cthulhu campaign like Shadows Over Stillwater, and this is reminding me to get off my ass and do it.
As a game master, I prefer short campaigns and one-shots, mostly because I like lots of game systems and short campaigns let me go through different games and styles. far too many players I know just want to jump straight into a level 1-20 multi year campaign.
I have an assumption based on information provided around the players reaction to pre gens and your evaluation of the quality of the game. Your point has a lot of merrit. But for some people they think having control over the character they have in the world and that is more important than the overall story. I think if you have established a type of game with your players where they pick the person who they want to be in the story, then a prevent may not be the best option, one thing I found works but takes a bit of prep is to understand the adventure and find the elements of the story that tie into the pregens and offer those roles like character classes. This guy is the leader, this guy is the tough ect. Ok guys for this story two of your characters are smuggling booze, who would like that in your background. Ok with the adventure you start out looking for a lost sibling who would like to have that in their background as a motivation? Ok what is your siblings name? Brother or sister? This can also allow you to prepare the player for the type of campaign. It’s the difference between running Dragonlance and saying who wants to run Raistlin? To taking the spell caster aside and saying “as part of this world to use magic you have to pass a test that can kill you. You took the test and failed, you failed so bad you were dying when a figure that all you remember was it was an old man garbed in black, who’s voice you will never forget, offered to save you and give you a chance at ultimate power if you would magically bind yourself to him. You accepted and woke up changed -hand them a note detailing how they are different in game.
With pregens people aren't invested in the character. That's probably why your game was so fun. With your main gain they do not want to let go of their characters
The more I’ve played & run these games the more I’m drawn to one-shots and mini campaigns. Epic sprawling campaigns often end up being more for the benefit of the GM than the players. Unless the GM is extremely intentional with pacing, and sometimes despite them being intentional, you typically find yourself in a glacial-paced narrative with entire sessions dedicated to what might equal a 2-minute scene in a movie. I don’t believe the majority of players find this to be an optimal use of their gaming time, even if they’re onboard for it and enjoy moments of it. You can have a complete and very satisfying experience, even one that feels “epic”, in just a few sessions. It’s far easier to coordinate and sustain with a group, to avoid the risks of fatigue and burnout, and to maintain a nonstop sense of fun and progression.
I just discovered your channel and started binging some of your older videos since I'm slowly getting into DCC. I heard you mention that you don't like clerics at some point and I was curious as to why that is so?
Hey there! I actually plan to do a video on that at some point but to keep it short, I essentially like how in DCC, every class is about the same level of complicated. They all have their "thing", some are a bit more complex than others such as wizards being more complex than warriors but only marginally so. And then clerics come in with like 4 different things that they have and even though they are fitting for the fiction and all that, I just find them clunky. DCC Lankhmar's healing system fixed a lot for me by not having them and allowing healing that works really well for Sword & Sorcery fiction imo. But this is also from a perspective of somebody who runs a lot of DCC one shots vs campaigns with the same characters every week and I can explain pretty much every other class to a new person in about a minute but the cleric every time I need to explain the turn unholy table, the healing rules, the disappointment or whatever it's called lol (forgetting it off the top of my head) and one or two other things. That is the short answer anyway so hope that clarifies it a bit more for you! :)
I think it depends on the system. Some games are meant for or tend towards one shots, examples include Call of Cthulhu, Troika, Paranoia. Other games are good for meant for shot campaigns like 5E(which sucks as a system) and Call of Cthulhu. I do however want an ongoing sandbox game and this is where OSR specifically BX(The best edition) shines, you can always have story arcs within a long campaign and based on the lethality dome campaigns end up being short but it has a lot more going for it. Also BX can do one shots, short campaigns and long campaigns but it is best at the latter two. The main problem I have is that a lotmof modern people tend to have no attention spans because they don't exercise their mind, playing short or ome shots is just catering to laziness and apathy in some cases. So while occasionally a one shot is good I don't like it becoming the norm, I am looking forward to getting my copy or the Monty Python RPG which seems like a one shot/short campaign system but that is something to be used as a break between my main BX campaign. Oh and by the way 5E is horrible and nobody should play it. It is the epitome of everything wrong with modern game design. It's encouraging entitled narcissistic players and making them worse as people.
In a One Shot the referee can easily justify dropping a bunch of good loot. A hard time limit gives players a cue for the whereabouts of a conclusion. An all or nothing attitude drives for reckless behavior, which doesn't present itself in a campaign.
