Personally I feel it's not a good idea to say which sort of prepping is good or bad, because at the end of the day it's up to the DM to decide what works best for him and his table. For my 13th Age game, for example, I did zero pre-designing of the campaign, it just happened that all the stories of my players could easily be put together into one cohesive campaign, in spite of the fact that none of them spoke about what their character's background story and/or motivations would be beforehand. The fact that all their stories fit together, combined with the motivations that they developed themselves, allowed me to imagine an entire campaign in my head, with all other "preparations" done through the power of spreadsheets. This resulted in just about zero prep time needed for our sessions.
How about maps you say? Here's the thing: I practice collaborative mapping, wherein I have the players imagine what their characters are seeing, and then I draw it appropriately, giving my own suggestions here and there for good measure.
How about NPCs? Like I said earlier, I only note important NPCs, everyone else is the players' responsibility.
How about plot? Like I said, players created the plot themselves, and it's the journey (and the possibility of not completing their own plot) that makes the campaign interesting.
What about PC motivation? Players problem, not mine. I require players to make their own motivations to play, all I do is string those motivations into one cohesive adventure.
So I'm pretty happy to say that my 13th Age game is as collaborative in design as you could probably get.
- - - - - Prepping is good, and some DMs prefer to prep for multiple adventures, knowing that if those things aren't used now, they can be adopted for later. But lack of preparation isn't always bad, as some DMs are actually more liberated by the lack of structure (beyond what is given by the rules). Like I said earlier, the best advice given to me regarding the matter was to prep at most 1 adventure ahead, and expect that prep to go to waste (but keep it in file anyway).
So yeah, all this name-calling about improv DMs being lazy or prep DMs being railroady, isn't healthy for the hobby.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
So I'm pretty happy to say that my 13th Age game is as collaborative in design as you could probably get.
Sounds good. I dislike the mechanics of 13th Age, but I have respect for their relatively collaborative world-building approach, which fortunately seems as though it could be exported to any other system.
Regardless of the level of preparation anyone enjoys, people often come to this forum seeking advice for issues that stem, in part from their approach to preparation. If it seems as though they and their players could benfit from an approach that involves less upfront preparation, more collaboration with their players, or more "Yes, and..." I'm going to recommend that.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
I remember reading something long ago that said if you spend more than an hour preparing your game, you're doing something wrong (except for extreme cases like planning some fantastical final dungeon).
When you're initially planning your game and world, then yes, you can spend that long and longer planning your game, but beyond that it shouldn't take that long. What are you doing that's taking so long?
Honestly, if you're getting too bogged down in the details, buy a bunch of adventure modules and dungeon delves and just start taking encounters from those. Scale them to the appropriate level and you're good. Just because an encounter takes place in the pits of Hell in one module doesn't mean you can't reconfigure it for a spooky forest in your game. Give the enemies a different flavor, replace the terrain, and you're done. If you have story that you want to throw in, throw it in.
I'm running a campaign that's about to start it's 3rd year, so yes, there's a lot of notes. The PC's have met quite a few important NPCs, made friends and enemies, etc. Have you read Chris Perkins' DM Experience? How many pages of notes do you think he has on Iomandra and it's inhabitants?
When I sit down to DM, I usually have 2 pages of notes. One third of the first page lists important NPCs they might run into, and then about 6-8 possible encounters they might run into.
Then there's usually 2 pages of monster stats (about 5-6 per page). There's always one page of blown up pics for the monsters/npcs. (one of my players is visually impaired).
Additionally, I make all my paper minis by hand for every game. This usually includes making a few unique tiles, a couple of interesting objects, like runes or furniture.
Most nights will have between 1 and 3 maps. They are first drawn up digitally, and then reproduced on a battlemat or with tiles.
Also, of course, writing the actual adventure. All original, every time. I haven't run a printed module in decades. A typical night might have 3 combat encounters, 1-2 investigation, 1-2 exploration, etc.
This is a system I have modified over the course of thirty years, and it works very well for me and my group.
I'm running a campaign that's about to start it's 3rd year, so yes, there's a lot of notes. The PC's have met quite a few important NPCs, made friends and enemies, etc. Have you read Chris Perkins' DM Experience? How many pages of notes do you think he has on Iomandra and it's inhabitants?
When I sit down to DM, I usually have 2 pages of notes. One third of the first page lists important NPCs they might run into, and then about 6-8 possible encounters they might run into.
Then there's usually 2 pages of monster stats (about 5-6 per page). There's always one page of blown up pics for the monsters/npcs. (one of my players is visually impaired).
Additionally, I make all my paper minis by hand for every game. This usually includes making a few unique tiles, a couple of interesting objects, like runes or furniture.
Most nights will have between 1 and 3 maps. They are first drawn up digitally, and then reproduced on a battlemat or with tiles.
Also, of course, writing the actual adventure. All original, every time. I haven't run a printed module in decades. A typical night might have 3 combat encounters, 1-2 investigation, 1-2 exploration, etc.
This is a system I have modified over the course of thirty years, and it works very well for me and my group.
Good for you. That does not, however, justify telling people that their way of DMing is bad.
I don't particularly care how many inhabitants Iomandra has, and frankly the only people I'd mark off as "important" would be the people that the PCs are going to meet more than once in their adventuring lifetime, no matter how important they might seem to my story. The only encounters I've even bothered preparing for involve combat encounters, and they're often in the "maybe" category, as everything is up to the players to decide, and I run it as it happens. In fact, the only reason why I even bother with skill challenges in 4E would be those times when I run MYRE adventures, and only because it's part of the EXP budget.
As I mentioned earlier, I'm fond of going for collaborative mapping, which means pre-drawn battle maps are out of the question.
I have an Excel file for monster generation, and I sometimes just pull out creature stats from the Monster Manual/Vault.
Which means for every 2+ pages you use for your session, I'd probably need just one (assuming I don't have my computer at hand), with any additional paper used for HP and status tracking almost exclusively. And that one page would probably have just generic monster stats and powers, as well as as a bunch of NPC names (everything else about the NPCs I'd keep in my head), assuming those are NPCs that have had a strong enough impact on the PCs to actually bother remembering.
And although I have been DMing for only 3 years, it's worked for me so far.
Again, point is that less prep does not mean a DM is lazy.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
Generally, I only plan out the "IMPORTANT INFORMATION!" What counts as 'important' depends on what, specifically, I'm aiming for.
I always have all my monsters statted up well in advance of a session (usually two or three weeks early, so I can tinker with and streamline them as if necessary). I will also, usually, have preprepped encounters, such as # of X creature, # of Y creature, # of Z creature, total exp value, exp per PC, relevant treasure, etc.
I'll keep the highlights for the plot: Relevant information I need to keep in mind, the occasional quote I need to be sure gets mentioned so the party has necessary information to move the plot forward, that sort of thing. But I rarely plan out exactly what NPCs say.
The only times I prepare entire speeches in advance is if a major villain gets to stand on their soap box for a bit. For reference, in a story arc that lasted from level 2 (as starting characters) to mid level 5, only three villains had fully written speeches. Along with one allied NPC, but that was only because she was exchanging dialog with one of the villains. ALL of these villains were major, recurring enemies.
Furthermore, I still deviated from the script at times. Typically I'll have the villain give their grand speech one paragraph at a time, giving the players time to digest the information and possibly respond. So sometimes I feel it necessary to have the villain respond specifically to something a PC has said. (This is interactive story telling, after all.) Most dialog is adlibbed, though.
My current group of players (which is dwindling due to college courses and other time factors, unfortunately) are VERY easy going. They're far more likely to want to stay on the rails and expect very blatant "go do this" cues from NPCs. Which can be frustrating when I'm trying to get them to make decisions so they can feel like they have a hand in world events. (But that's off topic, my apologies.)
I also once ran an almost entirely adlibbed Mutants & Masterminds campaign. Before starting the campaign, I prepared a dozen factions with all the generic NPCs and key figures prepared in advance, with a dozen or so key plot events that 'will' happen, in some form, before the end of the campaign, but I didn't have the events or characters connected too concretely. I had a blurb or two for each faction's relation to the others, I had a map of their territory, but I didn't plan out anything strict. The key plot events were more along the lines of "The leader of X faction attempts Y action at Z location and time."
Then I just dropped the players in and let them do as they liked, frantically weaving plotlines together as we went. Sometimes I'd create 'elite' NPCs when one of the nameless background characters started developing a more distinct personality.
All in all, the approach was very enteraining and fun, for the most part, but there were a few serious drawbacks: For starters, since I didn't plan for SPECIFIC PCs being involved in specific events, only two players ever really participated in the plot. One wanted the game to be all about him, while the other... Firmly resisted the first. Several players only paid attention when initiative was rolled, which was disappointing.
Hence my switching to a more concrete approach to plot development. I still allow for players to surprise me and completely alter the plot, it's just that my current group isn't too quick to try. Plus I tend to plan major events to have two or three primary results by trying to guess what my players will likely attempt in the situation. (Such as which of two villains they'll try to capture, or if both villains escape, etc.)
Gunmage, a homebrew arcane striker. (Heroic Tier playtest ready.) GDocs link. (More up to date.)
I've got some experience in this realm and I hope this helps:
I start with a post-it note and a pre-written scenario. My sessions are 3.5 hours long on thursday nights and we have 4-5 players at every session (for 30 years).
I read my sceanrio and make written notes in the margin with a pencil (or on a post it on the margin if I feel by some miracle that I'll sell the scenario later for one MILLION dollars :P ).
When I'm done with that, I think about each character and how to involve each person in each major encounter.
Since most of the scenarios I run are /rarely/ for the game system or edition I'm actually playing, I WING the monsters or NPC's by simply marking pages to whatever is closest.
I never stat out non-combatants and ALWAYS have the names of 3 NPCs who aren't actually related to the scenario that can make an appearance as info-givers or red-herrings.
Here's some actual practicality: I'm currently running WFRP3rd edition, but playing the 1st edition scenario "The Dying of the Light." The plot doesn't change. The non-combatant NPCs don't need to be statted. The monsters are easily convertable (beastmen are beastmen afterall so I simply reference the Creature Guide). I UNDERLINE the skill checks. The margins all have a little "note" in the side. I have a post-it note with each of the characters on it so that I can emphasize something to make it special or relevant to each player. LASTLY, I make a note about how the adventure opens (last summary) and how it's supposed to go. This is essentially the same for D&D, Pathfinder, WFRP, Call of Cthulhu, or Dark Heresy games.
I've got my time down from what used to be 3 hours (before marriage, kids and small business) to 1.5 hours of prep.
We also sometimes start some "pre-scenario" banter/review on our group's YAHOOGROUP. Yahoogroups/Google Groups really are the greatest thing in the world. We schedule from there and do our out of character and some in character discussion there as well.
One important note and I'd summarize why this is an important topic: DM burn-out is a big problem. It's bigger than player shortages and it's bigger than someone forgetting their character sheet (for the 3rd time). There are certain things that I no longer do: I no longer "stat up monsters". I use the monster manuals and maybe alter a number or two..but instead try to focus on making the combat more interesting rather than just harder. D&D 4e emphasizes the concept of : Put more than one creature type in the combat', and I think that is one of the things that I still use from that game system in our current game systems.
Best of luck in your game,
jh
Gamer Chiropractor - Hafner Chiropractic 305 S. Kipling st,Suite C-2, Lakewood, Co 80226 www.hafnerchiropractic.com
Hey all, great thread. Many good ideas and conversation about exactly what is needed and how to get all that material together. I posted a blurb about my DM kit back on page 2 or 3; the further discussion inspired me to talk a bit more about that. I couldn't type anymore so I put it on youtube, its a quick 10 min vid if you have some time to kill. I talk about reusing old maps and material and how its good to keep track of your old stuff just for that reason, also about how you can save a lot of prep and organization by randomly creating some elements during the game and a few tools that I use to do that.
