So kind of a personal question for anyone/everyone who wants to answer. Do you all prefer stories where you enter into the narrative BEFORE the inciting incident (you arrive in the sleepy village in the middle of nowhere, and it just so happens that during THAT night, something happens to pull the party together)? Or do you prefer to enter into the story AFTER the inciting incident (you roll into town about a week after Old man McGregor was killed and his house set on fire. The mayor wants to know who did it and why)?
The first session sets the initial tone for the campaign (though it can always change), so I tend to choose which option to use based on that and based on what my players might need.
An urgent, “something big just happened!” start is great for campaigns where there is some kind of global threat the party will be racing to start - even if the threat itself does not manifest until later in the campaign, the sense of urgency from the very first seconds of the campaign give them that first taste. This type of start is also good for players who are more action focused or who tend to play more chaotic characters, so need a big old stick to poke them in the right direction.
Starting the campaign in medias res is great for a more sandbox type game where the party is going to spend the first act or so wandering around exploring, solving problems as they discover it. It gives them the impression they are living in a world where things are always happening and where they might stumble across events already occurring. This is great for more RP focused players, since it lets them start the game at their leisure, getting to know one another in their own time, as, if the threat waited a week, it can wait a little longer.
I would think that starting after the event would lend itself more to an investigation, whereas starting before the event would make players feel on edge, and could feel more like an action adventure.
My preferred start has been, since I first saw it used, to open on a brief solo scene for each PC, establishing their "normal day." This doesn't work so well for one-shots, but for longer adventures it's great. You could do something like, "the guard captain finds you in the early afternoon, asking for your assistance with a case. Where does she find you, and what are you doing?" That way it's clear from the start, what's going on, but you still have room to backfill character setup.
So kind of a personal question for anyone/everyone who wants to answer. Do you all prefer stories where you enter into the narrative BEFORE the inciting incident (you arrive in the sleepy village in the middle of nowhere, and it just so happens that during THAT night, something happens to pull the party together)? Or do you prefer to enter into the story AFTER the inciting incident (you roll into town about a week after Old man McGregor was killed and his house set on fire. The mayor wants to know who did it and why)?
I would ask my players that question, I reckon. Then, I'd DM a game along what's suggested.
For example; the game I DM, I designed for my friend's wife (Twas she who started all this!). She wanted a straight up, D&D, like the old days, game. So, I began by telling the players their characters meet on a caravan going to The Keep on the Borderlands. At the tavern, they get the local flavour and find out about raids from orcs and goblins on the road. There is a gold piece for each orc tusk one can bring to the Castellan. Off to the races!
I prefer to roleplay the introductions. But, that can be a lot more work for the DM and can take a lot of time. For my last campaign, I had the players come up with individual reasons why they were coming to the heart of a large city for a festival. They all had different reason, which was cool. Then I had them roleplay the meeting while on the road to the city. So, they enter the city already knowing each other and know what each other is there for, then I used plot points to get them to the NPCs that move the story along.
Both options are good and nothin says you can't do both.
The party shows up a few days after the last attack by unknown forces. Then in the middle of talking to the barkeep, a townsperson rushes into the tavern with an arrow in her back.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
I've seen campaign arcs use either method: Trouble happens after the party arrives, trouble is already happening when the party arrives, and as a bonus, the party causes trouble when they arrive (usually unintentionally but, depending on the group, not always unintentionally).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
So kind of a personal question for anyone/everyone who wants to answer. Do you all prefer stories where you enter into the narrative BEFORE the inciting incident (you arrive in the sleepy village in the middle of nowhere, and it just so happens that during THAT night, something happens to pull the party together)? Or do you prefer to enter into the story AFTER the inciting incident (you roll into town about a week after Old man McGregor was killed and his house set on fire. The mayor wants to know who did it and why)?
The first session sets the initial tone for the campaign (though it can always change), so I tend to choose which option to use based on that and based on what my players might need.
An urgent, “something big just happened!” start is great for campaigns where there is some kind of global threat the party will be racing to start - even if the threat itself does not manifest until later in the campaign, the sense of urgency from the very first seconds of the campaign give them that first taste. This type of start is also good for players who are more action focused or who tend to play more chaotic characters, so need a big old stick to poke them in the right direction.
Starting the campaign in medias res is great for a more sandbox type game where the party is going to spend the first act or so wandering around exploring, solving problems as they discover it. It gives them the impression they are living in a world where things are always happening and where they might stumble across events already occurring. This is great for more RP focused players, since it lets them start the game at their leisure, getting to know one another in their own time, as, if the threat waited a week, it can wait a little longer.
I would think that starting after the event would lend itself more to an investigation, whereas starting before the event would make players feel on edge, and could feel more like an action adventure.
My preferred start has been, since I first saw it used, to open on a brief solo scene for each PC, establishing their "normal day." This doesn't work so well for one-shots, but for longer adventures it's great. You could do something like, "the guard captain finds you in the early afternoon, asking for your assistance with a case. Where does she find you, and what are you doing?" That way it's clear from the start, what's going on, but you still have room to backfill character setup.
I would ask my players that question, I reckon. Then, I'd DM a game along what's suggested.
For example; the game I DM, I designed for my friend's wife (Twas she who started all this!). She wanted a straight up, D&D, like the old days, game. So, I began by telling the players their characters meet on a caravan going to The Keep on the Borderlands. At the tavern, they get the local flavour and find out about raids from orcs and goblins on the road. There is a gold piece for each orc tusk one can bring to the Castellan. Off to the races!
I prefer to roleplay the introductions. But, that can be a lot more work for the DM and can take a lot of time. For my last campaign, I had the players come up with individual reasons why they were coming to the heart of a large city for a festival. They all had different reason, which was cool. Then I had them roleplay the meeting while on the road to the city. So, they enter the city already knowing each other and know what each other is there for, then I used plot points to get them to the NPCs that move the story along.
Both options are good and nothin says you can't do both.
The party shows up a few days after the last attack by unknown forces. Then in the middle of talking to the barkeep, a townsperson rushes into the tavern with an arrow in her back.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I've seen campaign arcs use either method: Trouble happens after the party arrives, trouble is already happening when the party arrives, and as a bonus, the party causes trouble when they arrive (usually unintentionally but, depending on the group, not always unintentionally).
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
But hey, if your party just gets rip-roaring drunk and burns down the tavern, don't worry about it. We loose so many taverns this way.