Armor is an issue, and I already partially addressed that. Since I've started playing 5e I have rarely seen anyone wear heavy, and I have been through many campaigns including two level 1 through 20+ games. I keep thinking on other ways to address armor.
If I could make a suggestion -- rather than having them all "permanently" trapped in one body (until they solve that particular puzzle, presumably) with limited ability to project themselves out of it for a short time, maybe treat the body as something like a magic jar? Give each player the ability to try and possess another body when they're in proximity to one, so they have some autonomy, can get equipment better tailored to their class, etc. As with magic jar, killing the host body wouldn't necessarily mean the PC is dead -- they might be able to get back to the original body and rejoin the collective
In a narrative-driven campaign, this would open up some tough moral choices too -- who is "OK" to possess, that sort of thing
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
You are an eternal champion, a paragon. Your soul has been born again and again. Only fragments of your past lives remain, but a driving need to destroy fiends always surfaces.
Like a moth to flame you are drawn forth to combat fiends and the arch fiends that rule them. A seemingly never ending cycle, an endless war. An endless war you sought to end.
Again and again you have fought them back. Again and again the archfiends returned, stronger. Like you they too were trapped in this cycle, but they remembered every life and every defeat.
A cage was built to trap the worst of the worst. Thirty-one of the most heinous and evil archfiends. Trapped in a cage. A cage powered by your eternal soul.
You sacrificed your body, power, and eternal soul. You have become a warden, trapped in a cage, of the very fiends you swore to defeat. And for a time… there was peace.
The caged fiends whispered promises of power and threats of vileness in exchange for their freedom. You learned to block them out in a meditative trance. Time becomes meaningless as you become lost in the fragments of your past.
Until now…
Your eyes open. You’re sitting in a chair at a rough hewn wooden table. On the table is a one foot long polished heartwood rod, with arcane carvings on its handle. You’re dressed in simple rough linens, leather shoes, and a belt.
A large silver ring is on your left hand. Six empty spots circle a diamond, which sits in its center. The ring itself is covered in arcane glyphs.
The room is a simple cabin, wooden counter and cookware built around an open hearth in front of you, a shuttered glassless window is open to your left, an open door is on your right, and there is bedding and a trunk behind you.
Sunlight filters in through the open door. Beyond the door you can glimpse a golden wheat field swaying in the wind. The rustle of wheat in the wind, sun, and temperature tells you it’s late spring early summer.
Armor is an issue, and I already partially addressed that. Since I've started playing 5e I have rarely seen anyone wear heavy, and I have been through many campaigns including two level 1 through 20+ games. I keep thinking on other ways to address armor.
If I could make a suggestion -- rather than having them all "permanently" trapped in one body (until they solve that particular puzzle, presumably) with limited ability to project themselves out of it for a short time, maybe treat the body as something like a magic jar? Give each player the ability to try and possess another body when they're in proximity to one, so they have some autonomy, can get equipment better tailored to their class, etc. As with magic jar, killing the host body wouldn't necessarily mean the PC is dead -- they might be able to get back to the original body and rejoin the collective
In a narrative-driven campaign, this would open up some tough moral choices too -- who is "OK" to possess, that sort of thing
Information that the players won't have at the beginning but will figure out along the way...
The mind of the body that they are in is trapped inside the ring. He is a modern guy and will act as an unreliable narrator and guide. He has had a psychotic break and the players are actually figments of his imagination based on characters he use to play when he was younger.
The fiends that they are fighting are actually organized crime members that he use to work for. He now sees them as demons.
So multiple bodies and wandering off to do your thing won't work. This is a goal focused story, an actual campaign, not a series of random one shots or mini adventures. Every encounter will directly lead into the next as more pieces of the puzzle are revealed.
Armor is an issue, and I already partially addressed that. Since I've started playing 5e I have rarely seen anyone wear heavy, and I have been through many campaigns including two level 1 through 20+ games. I keep thinking on other ways to address armor.
If I could make a suggestion -- rather than having them all "permanently" trapped in one body (until they solve that particular puzzle, presumably) with limited ability to project themselves out of it for a short time, maybe treat the body as something like a magic jar? Give each player the ability to try and possess another body when they're in proximity to one, so they have some autonomy, can get equipment better tailored to their class, etc. As with magic jar, killing the host body wouldn't necessarily mean the PC is dead -- they might be able to get back to the original body and rejoin the collective
In a narrative-driven campaign, this would open up some tough moral choices too -- who is "OK" to possess, that sort of thing
Information that the players won't have at the beginning but will figure out along the way...
The mind of the body that they are in is trapped inside the ring. He is a modern guy and will act as an unreliable narrator and guide. He has had a psychotic break and the players are actually figments of his imagination based on characters he use to play when he was younger.
The fiends that they are fighting are actually organized crime members that he use to work for. He now sees them as demons.
So multiple bodies and wandering off to do your thing won't work. This is a goal focused story, an actual campaign, not a series of random one shots or mini adventures. Every encounter will directly lead into the next as more pieces of the puzzle are revealed.
If you're doing a Fisher King/Mazes and Monsters sort of mashup here, the storyline you just proposed is actually sidelining the PCs. They are not the main characters -- the guy "trapped in the ring" is
If you're confident your group will be OK with that though, then you really need to go all in on it. Hand them pregen characters. The more investment they have in creating their characters, the less satisfying that "oh, you don't really exist or matter and are just a product of some guy's psychotic break" resolution is going to be
If you pregen the characters (because they're the guy's own PCs, after all), you can also seed clues into them via their backstories and such. If the PCs are part of the puzzle the players are trying to solve, I think the buy-in will be easier. "Oh wow, so that's why my familiar is a ferret!", that sort of thing
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Armor is an issue, and I already partially addressed that. Since I've started playing 5e I have rarely seen anyone wear heavy, and I have been through many campaigns including two level 1 through 20+ games. I keep thinking on other ways to address armor.
If I could make a suggestion -- rather than having them all "permanently" trapped in one body (until they solve that particular puzzle, presumably) with limited ability to project themselves out of it for a short time, maybe treat the body as something like a magic jar? Give each player the ability to try and possess another body when they're in proximity to one, so they have some autonomy, can get equipment better tailored to their class, etc. As with magic jar, killing the host body wouldn't necessarily mean the PC is dead -- they might be able to get back to the original body and rejoin the collective
In a narrative-driven campaign, this would open up some tough moral choices too -- who is "OK" to possess, that sort of thing
Information that the players won't have at the beginning but will figure out along the way...
The mind of the body that they are in is trapped inside the ring. He is a modern guy and will act as an unreliable narrator and guide. He has had a psychotic break and the players are actually figments of his imagination based on characters he use to play when he was younger.
The fiends that they are fighting are actually organized crime members that he use to work for. He now sees them as demons.
So multiple bodies and wandering off to do your thing won't work. This is a goal focused story, an actual campaign, not a series of random one shots or mini adventures. Every encounter will directly lead into the next as more pieces of the puzzle are revealed.
If you're doing a Fisher King/Mazes and Monsters sort of mashup here, the storyline you just proposed is actually sidelining the PCs. They are not the main characters -- the guy "trapped in the ring" is
If you're confident your group will be OK with that though, then you really need to go all in on it. Hand them pregen characters. The more investment they have in creating their characters, the less satisfying that "oh, you don't really exist or matter and are just a product of some guy's psychotic break" resolution is going to be
If you pregen the characters (because they're the guy's own PCs, after all), you can also seed clues into them via their backstories and such. If the PCs are part of the puzzle the players are trying to solve, I think the buy-in will be easier. "Oh wow, so that's why my familiar is a ferret!", that sort of thing
The story isn't "sidelining" the characters, as their actions and choices will be what drives the story forward. The guy in the ring will be more of a clue box. As he gets his memories back he will be able to provide more clues and information to the party. He will be no different than a sentient weapon/item with a mission/purpose (you know the ones most modern players and gamemasters completely forget is sentient and has a mission).
And I will be doing the opposite by picking up clues from their characters and seeding them in the real world portion of the story.
Players in my experience hate pregen characters, especially for a long campaign. Pregen are only okay for a oneshot or short adventure, in my experience.
By the way, thank you for the debate and feedback. It is actually very helpful in fleshing out my approach.
The story isn't "sidelining" the characters, as their actions and choices will be what drives the story forward. The guy in the ring will be more of a clue box. As he gets his memories back he will be able to provide more clues and information to the party. He will be no different than a sentient weapon/item with a mission/purpose (you know the ones most modern players and gamemasters completely forget is sentient and has a mission).
Except that these PCs are just products of the sentient weapon's mental illness
Which is why I made the Mazes and Monsters reference, only in this case, the PCs aren't even individuals in the end. They're all figments of one Tom Hanks brain
Players in my experience hate pregen characters, especially for a long campaign
They hate having their agency taken away, including as part of character creation. You're still doing that with this plotline, just on a different level. Any motivations beyond general "adventuring for money or fame" gets tossed out the window. Make a character who left home to avenge their parents' deaths? Too bad. Your parents never even existed. You're telling the players that the characters they created -- and whatever family, friends, enemies, communities etc. they came up with as part of their backstory -- don't truly exist even within the story of the campaign. Pregens would at least set the tone for that from the jump, and avoid some of those pitfalls
I'm assuming that part of finishing the quest will be helping the guy "escape the ring" and regain his faculties? What do you do if the players figure out the basic plot and decide their characters don't wantto undo their own existence by helping him, and try to abandon the quest? Which would be an entirely reasonable reaction to figuring that out. Really, what incentive do they have to finish it at all, once they discover that they, and their entire world, don't really exist?
Part of the fun for a lot of people when it comes to TTRPGs is creating a character that you get invested in, that you grow and develop as the campaign progresses. You're yanking the rug out from under your players on that front
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It looks like the only feedback you listened to was “maybe multiple worlds might be difficult” while ignoring everything that folks said about the DM forcing themselves into player agency and the DM pulling the rug out from under the players in the first session. Those elements - where you problematically force yourself on the sphere of the player not only remain in your new idea, but are objectively worse, as you have now seemingly added a DM PC into the players’ body.
I am going to be honest, I think your new idea is even more problematic than your first one - your first one was very much a “this is my story, not our story” kind of D&D game… this one has that exact same problem, but also seems to strongly indicate a DM with main character syndrome.
It is very clear every person on this thread is skeptical-at-best about your - even the most positive feedback you have gotten is “have you considered fundamentally changing your idea to be this?” You maintain that this is something your group might like - you should be talking with your group about this, not strangers on the internet. Particularly if you are going to disregard the primary concerns multiple folks have raised on the thread.
After all, it is your players who are going to have to live with this, and your players who are going to have their agency taken away from them. They should at least know about that before they waste time creating a character they do not get to fully play, and they should at least get some agency in creating the world in exchange for what you are taking from them.
It looks like the only feedback you listened to was “maybe multiple worlds might be difficult” while ignoring everything that folks said about the DM forcing themselves into player agency and the DM pulling the rug out from under the players in the first session. Those elements - where you problematically force yourself on the sphere of the player not only remain in your new idea, but are objectively worse, as you have now seemingly added a DM PC into the players’ body.
I am going to be honest, I think your new idea is even worse than your first one - your first one was very much a “this is my story, not our story” kind of D&D game… this one has that exact same problem, but also seems to strongly indicate a DM with main character syndrome.
It is very clear every person on this thread is skeptical-at-best about your - even the most positive feedback you have gotten is “have you considered fundamentally changing your idea to be this?” You maintain that this is something your group might like - you should be talking with your group about this, not strangers on the internet. Particularly if you are going to disregard the primary concerns multiple folks have raised on the thread.
After all, it is your players who are going to have to live with this, and your players who are going to have their agency taken away from them. They should at least know about that before they waste time creating a character they do not get to fully play, and they should at least get some agency in creating the world in exchange for what you are taking from them.
1. The NPC is just that. This NPC was always part of plan. I have many other notes that I have not shared on here, such as the campaign outline. It's not a DM PC that will be swinging a sword or saving the day or taking actions in combat. The player's goal should ultimately be freeing the NPC from the cage by defeating the last demon. Which is like saving the princess from the dragon's lair by defeating the dragon. In this case the princess can occasionally give you clues and hints of how to save them.
2. "This is my story"... yeah. "not our story" huh? Have you never played an actual campaign? I'm not talking about an off the cuff multi session sandbox do whatever you want game. I'm talking about an actual campaign that is outlined from level 1 to level 20? For example Rise Of The Runelords and Return Of The Runelords. The only difference between that and this is that I'm writing it instead of someone else writing it. Your choices as a player are focused within the context of that storyline. And unless you've actually read through the adventure path you're not really going to have an idea what is going to happen anymore than the intro i detailed. And if you do read through the adventure path as a player you're basically removing any sense of surprise and wonder from the encounters.
3. "a character they do not get to fully play," uhm... they do. They will still be in charge of their own actions and choices. And they will have just as many actions per turn as a normal character would.
4. "have their agency taken away from them" I will mildly concede this one. A players will not be able to just go off and become a cleptomaniac murderhobo just for the lulz. I'm actually telling a story that I want the players to engage with and get to the end of. There are other games that restrict or force player agency in certain directions. Call of cthulu games for example. One minute you think your gonna be the hero and the next you fail to many sanity checks and you're trying to hide another character's body in a washing machine. Heck... There are multiple spells and abilities within the game that remove player agency such as charm, slow, paralyze, frighten, restrain, and banishment. These all have a greater effect on a character's agency than my shared body idea does. I have actually had combats where my character was not involved in a single round after the first due to being paralyzed.
5. "the only feedback you listened to" is not true. Most of the feedback has been to run a different story, not how to run this story. It's like saying I want to run terminator and everyone saying run madmax. What I have taken, from multiple people, is giving a little more information up front. Which I did with the new intro. No I'm not going to give the whole premise away because I want my players to figure it out in the game. The new intro section will be what I give to my players to announce the new game.
1. The NPC is with them always that chimes in whenever you want. That’s a DM insert NPC, and can lead to problems. Even without swinging a sword, that constant presence, even when not actualised means the party constantly feel the weight of that DM NPC breathing down their neck - inherently different than a distant princess. The fact you do not see that difference and think your analogy was on point is a massive red flag.
2. I have run multiple homebrew campaigns to level 20 and beyond. They work because I, the DM, set the world, but the players get to influence it and tell a story with me - at the end of the day, we have a story we wrote together an can call ours, not simply mine. The fact you don’t see D&D as a collaborative story is a massive red flag.
3. Wrong again. You literally have said you want them to design a character and then will spring this nonsense on them. So, at the very start of the campaign, you are saying “sorry friends, your character you invented? I, the DM, am forcing you to change something foundational about it.” Massive red flag.
4. There is a big difference than the player having consequences for in game actions and having their agency taken away. Consequences are part of the game and happen at a character level. Loss of agency is when the DM steps past character level and starts to interfere with what the player can do at a player level. That you do not realize this difference, or do not seem to care that you are doing the latter, is a massive red flag.
5. The feedback on this thread is less, to use your analogy, “you should make Mad Max instead of the Terminator” and more “it looks like you are trying to make Battlefield Earth, and do you really want to do that?” The totality of users on this thread addressing your core concept have said that your idea is flawed at a foundational level. You keep getting the exact same feedback and keep doubling down on “everyone else is wrong.” “I am right, everyone else is wrong, I should ignore them” is not a great mentality for a collaborative game - one might call it a massive red flag.
I truly wish you success if you honestly believe your players might enjoy this, but, as I said previously, you probably need to be getting feedback from them. I am not sure you are going to get any different feedback here than what has already been provided, and what you have already discarded.
The players' first instinct is not going to be to 'save the princess', no matter how you try to push them into doing it
It's going to be, "How do we get our own bodies back?" -- because that's the puzzle you've presented them with from the opening scene. And, frankly, it would logically be the best way they could effectively help them guy in the ring too, even if they fully embrace the "we are an order of Forever Demon Hunters" bit
You don't seem to have left any room in your campaign for them to have any other goals -- i.e. player agency -- and you've also given them little reason to pursue the goal you want them to pursue, other than a throwaway line in your intro
Just off the top of my head, what do you do if:
instead of killing the demons, they try to cut a deal with them -- they'll cut off the finger with the ring and trade it for their own bodies? (It may not be what a Forever Demon Hunter should do, but they're in desperate straits -- and remember, you let them make their own characters, not handed them pregens, so they may not really see themselves as Forever Demon Hunters, or truly committed ones)
they decide the guy in the ring must be the BBEG for the campaign -- why else would the demons want the ring so bad? So under no circumstances can they help him or let him escape that ring, or even listen to him. If that means they stay trapped in one body together, so be it. You told them in the intro they were already trapped in a prison for what was supposed to be eternity, after all, so this isn't very different
they ignore the demons entirely and start looking for magical means to split themselves?
they figure they're cool with sharing one body, like the end of the second USS Callister episode of Black Mirror, and just decide to open a bar in the modern world?
Railroad campaigns -- which is what you're creating here -- aren't inherently bad. They need legitimate stakes, though, like "you're in a race against time to stop the BBEG from destroying the world, so you have no time for side quests or dilly-dallying". You have to make sure the players are motivated to stay (mostly) on task on their own, so it doesn't feel like you're shutting them down every time they threaten to get off track
You haven't given them that. Instead, you're giving them demons that (presumably) threaten a world and a time that isn't even their own, in order to save a guy in a ring that they don't know and probably won't have a particularly friendly relationship with. You've created a scenario where the players will be actively incentivized to deviate from the plot you have in mind. They won't want to go demon hunting. They won't want to help the guy in the ring, at least not right away, They will want to solve the puzzle of why they're trapped in the same body, then they'll get back to that other stuff once they're fully functional and in their own forms
It's like a campaign that starts with the characters in a jail cell with no equipment. Their first priority won't be to follow up on whatever story hook the person in the next cell is babbling about -- it will be to escape and get their gear. Then they can go pick up that quest. They aren't going to go running off to save the princess with no weapons or armor
You're handicapping the characters to begin the campaign, but then never giving them a way to restore themselves to full power and utility, and still expecting them to just dutifully trudge up the mountain to face the dragon anyway. That's a recipe for disaster
As Caerwyn noted, this kind of story in general can work in a medium with one author -- I've cited examples, and there's plenty more in movies, books, comics etc. D&D isn't a story with only one author, though. Ideally, everybody at the table should be contributing to the direction it takes, and you're trying to take that element away. You decried the players becoming murderhobos above, but in reality that seems to be exactly the role you're forcing them into. They'll just be murderhoboing for reasons you approve of
You are going to need to seriously re-think your approach to this if you're going to pull it off, because what you've got now simply won't play out the way you seem to think it will
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The players' first instinct is not going to be to 'save the princess', no matter how you try to push them into doing it
It's going to be, "How do we get our own bodies back?" -- because that's the puzzle you've presented them with from the opening scene. And, frankly, it would logically be the best way they could effectively help them guy in the ring too, even if they fully embrace the "we are an order of Forever Demon Hunters" bit
You don't seem to have left any room in your campaign for them to have any other goals -- i.e. player agency -- and you've also given them little reason to pursue the goal you want them to pursue, other than a throwaway line in your intro
Just off the top of my head, what do you do if:
instead of killing the demons, they try to cut a deal with them -- they'll cut off the finger with the ring and trade it for their own bodies? (It may not be what a Forever Demon Hunter should do, but they're in desperate straits -- and remember, you let them make their own characters, not handed them pregens, so they may not really see themselves as Forever Demon Hunters, or truly committed ones)
they decide the guy in the ring must be the BBEG for the campaign -- why else would the demons want the ring so bad? So under no circumstances can they help him or let him escape that ring, or even listen to him. If that means they stay trapped in one body together, so be it. You told them in the intro they were already trapped in a prison for what was supposed to be eternity, after all, so this isn't very different
they ignore the demons entirely and start looking for magical means to split themselves?
they figure they're cool with sharing one body, like the end of the second USS Callister episode of Black Mirror, and just decide to open a bar in the modern world?
Railroad campaigns -- which is what you're creating here -- aren't inherently bad. They need legitimate stakes, though, like "you're in a race against time to stop the BBEG from destroying the world, so you have no time for side quests or dilly-dallying". You have to make sure the players are motivated to stay (mostly) on task on their own, so it doesn't feel like you're shutting them down every time they threaten to get off track
You haven't given them that. Instead, you're giving them demons that (presumably) threaten a world and a time that isn't even their own, in order to save a guy in a ring that they don't know and probably won't have a particularly friendly relationship with. You've created a scenario where the players will be actively incentivized to deviate from the plot you have in mind. They won't want to go demon hunting. They won't want to help the guy in the ring, at least not right away, They will want to solve the puzzle of why they're trapped in the same body, then they'll get back to that other stuff once they're fully functional and in their own forms
It's like a campaign that starts with the characters in a jail cell with no equipment. Their first priority won't be to follow up on whatever story hook the person in the next cell is babbling about -- it will be to escape and get their gear. Then they can go pick up that quest. They aren't going to go running off to save the princess with no weapons or armor
You're handicapping the characters to begin the campaign, but then never giving them a way to restore themselves to full power and utility, and still expecting them to just dutifully trudge up the mountain to face the dragon anyway. That's a recipe for disaster
As Caerwyn noted, this kind of story in general can work in a medium with one author -- I've cited examples, and there's plenty more in movies, books, comics etc. D&D isn't a story with only one author, though. Ideally, everybody at the table should be contributing to the direction it takes, and you're trying to take that element away. You decried the players becoming murderhobos above, but in reality that seems to be exactly the role you're forcing them into. They'll just be murderhoboing for reasons you approve of
You are going to need to seriously re-think your approach to this if you're going to pull it off, because what you've got now simply won't play out the way you seem to think it will
1. The NPC is with them always that chimes in whenever you want. That’s a DM insert NPC, and can lead to problems. Even without swinging a sword, that constant presence, even when not actualised means the party constantly feel the weight of that DM NPC breathing down their neck - inherently different than a distant princess. The fact you do not see that difference and think your analogy was on point is a massive red flag.
2. I have run multiple homebrew campaigns to level 20 and beyond. They work because I, the DM, set the world, but the players get to influence it and tell a story with me - at the end of the day, we have a story we wrote together an can call ours, not simply mine. The fact you don’t see D&D as a collaborative story is a massive red flag.
3. Wrong again. You literally have said you want them to design a character and then will spring this nonsense on them. So, at the very start of the campaign, you are saying “sorry friends, your character you invented? I, the DM, am forcing you to change something foundational about it.” Massive red flag.
4. There is a big difference than the player having consequences for in game actions and having their agency taken away. Consequences are part of the game and happen at a character level. Loss of agency is when the DM steps past character level and starts to interfere with what the player can do at a player level. That you do not realize this difference, or do not seem to care that you are doing the latter, is a massive red flag.
5. The feedback on this thread is less, to use your analogy, “you should make Mad Max instead of the Terminator” and more “it looks like you are trying to make Battlefield Earth, and do you really want to do that?” The totality of users on this thread addressing your core concept have said that your idea is flawed at a foundational level. You keep getting the exact same feedback and keep doubling down on “everyone else is wrong.” “I am right, everyone else is wrong, I should ignore them” is not a great mentality for a collaborative game - one might call it a massive red flag.
I truly wish you success if you honestly believe your players might enjoy this, but, as I said previously, you probably need to be getting feedback from them. I am not sure you are going to get any different feedback here than what has already been provided, and what you have already discarded.
1. No the NPC is stuck in the ring "the cage". He can only talk with them when they "submerge" into the cage. So the only knowledge that he has about what is going on in the outside world is what they tell him.
2. I do see RPGs as collaborative storytelling. What I specifically asked was if they had run any actually professionally produced campaigns INSTEAD of purely homebrew sandbox ones. Your answer is clearly no. Running a homebrew sandbox game is different than running an actual scripted outlined goal focused campaign. I have run both. My teddy ruxbin based one was the best. And I really love Rise Of The Runelords. I personally think it's Paizo's best adventure path.
3. This is part of the cooperative storytelling. If I say I want to run a game about space cops and you say cool I want to play a sheep herder, then as a player you're not being a cooperative participant in the story. And maybe reread the intro. In the new intro I added, that will be told to them before they ever make characters or we start playing, it specifically tells them that they have sacrificed their bodies. It doesn't tell them exactly what that means but most of my group is going to start asking immediate questions.
4. "Player agency is the capacity for players to make meaningful, independent decisions that directly influence a game's world, narrative, and outcomes." Nothing that I am doing changes that. Being stuck in the same body is a part of the story. They will still be able to make their own independent decisions. Those decisions will be meaningful within the game. those decisions will directly influence the games setting. None of that is being removed. I want my players to surprise me with how they go about interacting with and solving the puzzle that is presented.
This is more like running a game with a low magic setting where there is only one magic item and the goal is to use that magic item to beat the BBEG. If the players say **** it and go become bouncers on the coast then, because they chose not to be cooperative participants in the story presented, the BBEG starts winning. I've only had two games fall apart because of that. One because people didn't like the harshness of the setting, Dark Sun. The other because ONE player really wanted to play spelljammer while I was running planescape.
5. “it looks like you are trying to make Battlefield Earth, and do you really want to do that?” fair. But they are doing it by saying i should do madmax instead of terminator instead of suggesting ways to do battlefield earth better. Again the suggestion to give my players more heads up I have taken and added more information than I was originally going to. And I will probably try to add more without giving the base premise away.
6. Not every setting is for every group. Not every DM is for every player. Not every player is for every story. I love playing body horror cthuluesque stories. I hate running body horror cthuluesque stories. I have a love hate relationship with running cyberpunk because most people lack any kind of basic technical or mechanical knowledge and don't know how to ask the right questions. Try explaining stable state magnetic locks for the five thousandths time
I hate murderhobo games where players play to kill stuff get loot and treat life as disposable. I think it's great when players figure out non or less violent ways to achieve goals. If you need to get to the top of the building do you climb, fly, tunnel, sewer, bribe, sneak, or fight your way in? I'm not taking their choices away. I am adding a story element that player will have to learn to work with and around. Dark Sun uses the sun, lack of metal, and restrictions on magic and the fact that everything is actively trying to kill you or enslave while the other half of them are willing to eat you as an active story element. I'm using the single body as a story element while still allowing near full character autonomy.
3. This is part of the cooperative storytelling. If I say I want to run a game about space cops and you say cool I want to play a sheep herder, then as a player you're not being a cooperative participant in the story. And maybe reread the intro. In the new intro I added, that will be told to them before they ever make characters or we start playing, it specifically tells them that they have sacrificed their bodies. It doesn't tell them exactly what that means but most of my group is going to start asking immediate questions.
Maybe you should re-read it. The very first sentence is "You are an eternal champion, a paragon. Your soul has been born again and again. Only fragments of your past lives remain, but a driving need to destroy fiends always surfaces."
The fact that their last body, and their soul, was used to fuel the fiend cage -- but now here they are in a body again -- just means something went wrong. Of course your players will have questions in Session 0, but nothing about that intro says they need to limit their character concepts to a narrow range of Forever Demon Hunter types. Quite the opposite, in fact. If something went wrong and the cycle's re-started or even been derailed somehow, it gives them more latitude to play around with the expected tropes
4. "Player agency is the capacity for players to make meaningful, independent decisions that directly influence a game's world, narrative, and outcomes." Nothing that I am doing changes that. Being stuck in the same body is a part of the story. They will still be able to make their own independent decisions
Except any decisions they make about who their character really is, or who they wanted their characters to become, will be completely erased by your planned resolution to the story. That's the agency you're taking away
You seem to be only listening to a very narrow range of concerns being expressed here -- you still haven't explained why you think the players will be interested in sticking with this puzzle and quest, other than that they "should", for instance -- so I'm tapping out
I expect your players will get very frustrated very quickly by your seemingly arbitrary movement restrictions (if the one body they all share can take multiple actions in a turn and effectively has multiple characters' worth of HP, why doesn't it get extra movement too?) and the general finickyness of the switching process, who's in "control" of the body at any time, etc., and the payoff you want at the end of the campaign will not be satisfying to anyone. If you even get there
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The players' first instinct is not going to be to 'save the princess', no matter how you try to push them into doing it
It's going to be, "How do we get our own bodies back?" -- because that's the puzzle you've presented them with from the opening scene. And, frankly, it would logically be the best way they could effectively help them guy in the ring too, even if they fully embrace the "we are an order of Forever Demon Hunters" bit
You don't seem to have left any room in your campaign for them to have any other goals -- i.e. player agency -- and you've also given them little reason to pursue the goal you want them to pursue, other than a throwaway line in your intro
Just off the top of my head, what do you do if:
instead of killing the demons, they try to cut a deal with them -- they'll cut off the finger with the ring and trade it for their own bodies? (It may not be what a Forever Demon Hunter should do, but they're in desperate straits -- and remember, you let them make their own characters, not handed them pregens, so they may not really see themselves as Forever Demon Hunters, or truly committed ones)
they decide the guy in the ring must be the BBEG for the campaign -- why else would the demons want the ring so bad? So under no circumstances can they help him or let him escape that ring, or even listen to him. If that means they stay trapped in one body together, so be it. You told them in the intro they were already trapped in a prison for what was supposed to be eternity, after all, so this isn't very different
they ignore the demons entirely and start looking for magical means to split themselves?
they figure they're cool with sharing one body, like the end of the second USS Callister episode of Black Mirror, and just decide to open a bar in the modern world?
Railroad campaigns -- which is what you're creating here -- aren't inherently bad. They need legitimate stakes, though, like "you're in a race against time to stop the BBEG from destroying the world, so you have no time for side quests or dilly-dallying". You have to make sure the players are motivated to stay (mostly) on task on their own, so it doesn't feel like you're shutting them down every time they threaten to get off track
You haven't given them that. Instead, you're giving them demons that (presumably) threaten a world and a time that isn't even their own, in order to save a guy in a ring that they don't know and probably won't have a particularly friendly relationship with. You've created a scenario where the players will be actively incentivized to deviate from the plot you have in mind. They won't want to go demon hunting. They won't want to help the guy in the ring, at least not right away, They will want to solve the puzzle of why they're trapped in the same body, then they'll get back to that other stuff once they're fully functional and in their own forms
It's like a campaign that starts with the characters in a jail cell with no equipment. Their first priority won't be to follow up on whatever story hook the person in the next cell is babbling about -- it will be to escape and get their gear. Then they can go pick up that quest. They aren't going to go running off to save the princess with no weapons or armor
You're handicapping the characters to begin the campaign, but then never giving them a way to restore themselves to full power and utility, and still expecting them to just dutifully trudge up the mountain to face the dragon anyway. That's a recipe for disaster
As Caerwyn noted, this kind of story in general can work in a medium with one author -- I've cited examples, and there's plenty more in movies, books, comics etc. D&D isn't a story with only one author, though. Ideally, everybody at the table should be contributing to the direction it takes, and you're trying to take that element away. You decried the players becoming murderhobos above, but in reality that seems to be exactly the role you're forcing them into. They'll just be murderhoboing for reasons you approve of
You are going to need to seriously re-think your approach to this if you're going to pull it off, because what you've got now simply won't play out the way you seem to think it will
Yeah, I'm gonna stop you right there. The players' first instinct is not going to be to 'save the princess', no matter how you try to push them into doing it
Yeah... we have different players. The group I play with is goal focused, personal, and then loot.
You don't seem to have left any room in your campaign for them to have any other goals -- i.e. player agency --
That's not what player agency is. Player agency is making your own decisions within context of the story. In this story I am (figuratively) asking my players to show up with paladin style characters (regardless of what their actual class is) who already have a prescribed goal. Walking in they know they are the good guys, not the ambiguously grey free lance mercenaries. This doesn't mean that they can't/won't pick up other goals along the way that I haven't accounted for.
and you've also given them little reason to pursue the goal you want them to pursue, other than a throwaway line in your intro
You call that a throwaway line I call it the point of the game. This game is for people that want to be demon hunters. There characters are demon hunters who sacrificed everything to hunt demons and have been brought forth once again to hunt demons. If a player does not want to play this demon hunting game they can go play another game. It would be like playing Rise Of The Runelords and saying I don't want to fight liches mummies and undead that are going to take over the world if nobody fights liches mummies and undead. It would be like playing a sandbox vampire hunters game and not wanting to hunt vampires. They are demon hunters. That's the campaign.
instead of killing the demons, they try to cut a deal with them -- they'll cut off the finger with the ring and trade it for their own bodies? (It may not be what a Forever Demon Hunter should do, but they're in desperate straits -- and remember, you let them make their own characters, not handed them pregens, so they may not really see themselves as Forever Demon Hunters, or truly committed ones)
Already thought of this. Bound Object. Ring only comes off if the wearer is dead or the final demon is trapped. Any attempt to remove the ring such as cutting off the finger result in the finger instantaneously reattaching. In the real world this will appear as the hand refusing to stay still. I did think about making it a necklace or torque because of this but opted not to because it didn't fit aesthetically. May revisit.
they decide the guy in the ring must be the BBEG for the campaign -- why else would the demons want the ring so bad? So under no circumstances can they help him or let him escape that ring, or even listen to him. If that means they stay trapped in one body together, so be it. You told them in the intro they were already trapped in a prison for what was supposed to be eternity, after all, so this isn't very different
This is a very good question. And I do have one player that is always three levels past the paranoid he should be. The cage actually houses more than just the BBEG. it actually houses 31 total demon. I have a big ass map i made for it. So insight checks, Paladin divine sense, and the spell Detect Evil and Good. Starting at level 0 will give this a little speedbump but not much.
they ignore the demons entirely and start looking for magical means to split themselves?
Combat will mostly take place in the fantasy setting. Most of the wandering about clue hunting and storytelling will take place in the mundane world. Example; you follow the drug dealers to a back alley underground gambling house. When you sneak in what should be the basement of a tenement building appears to be a torch lit medieval dungeon. There will be some non combat fantasy stuff but this isn't a I have ten thousand gold let me go to the magic shop and buy a flaming sword game.
they figure they're cool with sharing one body, like the end of the second USS Callister episode of Black Mirror, and just decide to open a bar in the modern world?
The criminals want the ring because the diamond set in it opens an electronic lock. So even if the players just say **** it the demons will be coming after them.
You haven't given them that. Instead, you're giving them demons that (presumably) threaten a world and a time that isn't even their own, in order to save a guy in a ring that they don't know and probably won't have a particularly friendly relationship with. You've created a scenario where the players will be actively incentivized to deviate from the plot you have in mind. They won't want to go demon hunting. They won't want to help the guy in the ring, at least not right away, They will want to solve the puzzle of why they're trapped in the same body, then they'll get back to that other stuff once they're fully functional and in their own forms
This part is mostly answered above. Again, we have and are different kinds of players. The core group I play with is very cooperative with storytelling and staying on goal. The fact that i will be asking them to show up with character concepts of characters that HUNT DEMONS means they know that they should be hunting demons. And they have already be told that they sacrificed THEIR body and power to power the ring. And the fact that there is a guy trapped in the ring who is not a demon will scream that this guy is a clue to what's going on, which is what conversational NPCs are in games with any sort of mystery.
You're handicapping the characters to begin the campaign, but then never giving them a way to restore themselves to full power and utility, and still expecting them to just dutifully trudge up the mountain to face the dragon anyway. That's a recipe for disaster
No. I am in no way hampering the characters. In fact, I'm giving them a bunch of inherit advantages. As one body they will have an easier time sneaking and hiding. As one body they will be able to engage with NPCs with out looking like a mob of people trying to browbeat an answer out of someone. As one body they'll be able to defend each other easier or pull themselves out of combat. And knowing the core group of my players I'm sure they'll figure out other ways to use this unique situation to their advantage.
Railroad campaigns -- which is what you're creating here -- aren't inherently bad.
There's a difference between a linear campaign and being railroaded. Yes this will be a linear campaign which is what a vast majority of campaign modules are. In fact, the only actual sandbox level 1 to 20 campaign that I know of is Kingmaker and even that has set linear elements. This will not be a sandbox campaign. Just because this is a linear campaign doesn't mean that player choices won't matter and that there will only be one way to approach each situation.
They need legitimate stakes, though, like "you're in a race against time to stop the BBEG from destroying the world, so you have no time for side quests or dilly-dallying". You have to make sure the players are motivated to stay (mostly) on task on their own, so it doesn't feel like you're shutting them down every time they threaten to get off track.
Absolutely agree with this part. But I also think this is true of any linear printed campaign. But how the players approach those task are still up to them.
You seem to have your mind made up so that begs the question as to why continue belaboring the point. Almost everyone in this thread has told you its a bad idea, yet you're doubling down. So it seems you're doing it regardless, so maybe just do it rather than dragging this discussion on?
Sorry, I know I said I was out, but for the sake of your players I want to say one more thing, because it really doesn't seem like you have thought about your idea from this perspective and you really, really should before you get to Session 0:
What are you doing to set expectations for your players that the body-sharing conceit will last for the entire campaign, and isn't simply an initial puzzle they need to solve and get out of the way before the "real" campaign begins?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
You seem to have your mind made up so that begs the question as to why continue belaboring the point. Almost everyone in this thread has told you its a bad idea, yet you're doubling down. So it seems you're doing it regardless, so maybe just do it rather than dragging this discussion on?
Because there has been some good feedback that I have integrated. The feedback I was more concerned about was more about the mechanics I presented. And many people have an incorrect interpretation of what player agency, linear campaigns, and railroading are. I'm also realizing that most people that have replied have only ever played sandbox games and have never actually played a full fledged 1 to 20 campaign module like Rise Of The Runelords.
This video explains the difference between a linear campaign and railroading.
Sorry, I know I said I was out, but for the sake of your players I want to say one more thing, because it really doesn't seem like you have thought about your idea from this perspective and you really, really should before you get to Session 0:
What are you doing to set expectations for your players that the body-sharing conceit will last for the entire campaign, and isn't simply an initial puzzle they need to solve and get out of the way before the "real" campaign begins?
Good question.
1. They know that their bodies and power (class levels) were sacrificed (destroyed) so that their souls could power the cage (the ring)
2. They know that in order to keep the demons caged they will once again have to use their souls to power the cage.
3. It's not a puzzle to be solved, it's the only way that they can operate outside of the cage.
4. Their souls are bound to the ring. By rules, bound souls can't be unbound by anything other than a wish or destroying the object they are bound to. Destroying the ring would be an artifact level quest. Destroying the ring would destroy the cage which would make it impossible to defeat and cage the demons. Using wish to unbind their souls would render the ring useless which would make it impossible to defeat and cage the demons. AND... you can't cast wish until 17th level at which point they will have already defeated most of the demons.
You seem to have your mind made up so that begs the question as to why continue belaboring the point. Almost everyone in this thread has told you its a bad idea, yet you're doubling down. So it seems you're doing it regardless, so maybe just do it rather than dragging this discussion on?
Because there has been some good feedback that I have integrated. The feedback I was more concerned about was more about the mechanics I presented. And many people have an incorrect interpretation of what player agency, linear campaigns, and railroading are. I'm also realizing that most people that have replied have only ever played sandbox games and have never actually played a full fledged 1 to 20 campaign module like Rise Of The Runelords.
This video explains the difference between a linear campaign and railroading.
Sounds exhausting. I don't think it would be fun for me, since I want an individual experience with my own body.
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
REVISED INTRO BASED ON FEEDBACK (02/28)
You are an eternal champion, a paragon. Your soul has been born again and again. Only fragments of your past lives remain, but a driving need to destroy fiends always surfaces.
Like a moth to flame you are drawn forth to combat fiends and the arch fiends that rule them. A seemingly never ending cycle, an endless war. An endless war you sought to end.
Again and again you have fought them back. Again and again the archfiends returned, stronger. Like you they too were trapped in this cycle, but they remembered every life and every defeat.
A cage was built to trap the worst of the worst. Thirty-one of the most heinous and evil archfiends. Trapped in a cage. A cage powered by your eternal soul.
You sacrificed your body, power, and eternal soul. You have become a warden, trapped in a cage, of the very fiends you swore to defeat. And for a time… there was peace.
The caged fiends whispered promises of power and threats of vileness in exchange for their freedom. You learned to block them out in a meditative trance. Time becomes meaningless as you become lost in the fragments of your past.
Until now…
Your eyes open. You’re sitting in a chair at a rough hewn wooden table. On the table is a one foot long polished heartwood rod, with arcane carvings on its handle. You’re dressed in simple rough linens, leather shoes, and a belt.
A large silver ring is on your left hand. Six empty spots circle a diamond, which sits in its center. The ring itself is covered in arcane glyphs.
The room is a simple cabin, wooden counter and cookware built around an open hearth in front of you, a shuttered glassless window is open to your left, an open door is on your right, and there is bedding and a trunk behind you.
Sunlight filters in through the open door. Beyond the door you can glimpse a golden wheat field swaying in the wind. The rustle of wheat in the wind, sun, and temperature tells you it’s late spring early summer.
Information that the players won't have at the beginning but will figure out along the way...
The mind of the body that they are in is trapped inside the ring. He is a modern guy and will act as an unreliable narrator and guide. He has had a psychotic break and the players are actually figments of his imagination based on characters he use to play when he was younger.
The fiends that they are fighting are actually organized crime members that he use to work for. He now sees them as demons.
So multiple bodies and wandering off to do your thing won't work. This is a goal focused story, an actual campaign, not a series of random one shots or mini adventures. Every encounter will directly lead into the next as more pieces of the puzzle are revealed.
If you're doing a Fisher King/Mazes and Monsters sort of mashup here, the storyline you just proposed is actually sidelining the PCs. They are not the main characters -- the guy "trapped in the ring" is
If you're confident your group will be OK with that though, then you really need to go all in on it. Hand them pregen characters. The more investment they have in creating their characters, the less satisfying that "oh, you don't really exist or matter and are just a product of some guy's psychotic break" resolution is going to be
If you pregen the characters (because they're the guy's own PCs, after all), you can also seed clues into them via their backstories and such. If the PCs are part of the puzzle the players are trying to solve, I think the buy-in will be easier. "Oh wow, so that's why my familiar is a ferret!", that sort of thing
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The story isn't "sidelining" the characters, as their actions and choices will be what drives the story forward. The guy in the ring will be more of a clue box. As he gets his memories back he will be able to provide more clues and information to the party. He will be no different than a sentient weapon/item with a mission/purpose (you know the ones most modern players and gamemasters completely forget is sentient and has a mission).
And I will be doing the opposite by picking up clues from their characters and seeding them in the real world portion of the story.
Players in my experience hate pregen characters, especially for a long campaign. Pregen are only okay for a oneshot or short adventure, in my experience.
By the way, thank you for the debate and feedback. It is actually very helpful in fleshing out my approach.
Except that these PCs are just products of the sentient weapon's mental illness
Which is why I made the Mazes and Monsters reference, only in this case, the PCs aren't even individuals in the end. They're all figments of one Tom Hanks brain
They hate having their agency taken away, including as part of character creation. You're still doing that with this plotline, just on a different level. Any motivations beyond general "adventuring for money or fame" gets tossed out the window. Make a character who left home to avenge their parents' deaths? Too bad. Your parents never even existed. You're telling the players that the characters they created -- and whatever family, friends, enemies, communities etc. they came up with as part of their backstory -- don't truly exist even within the story of the campaign. Pregens would at least set the tone for that from the jump, and avoid some of those pitfalls
I'm assuming that part of finishing the quest will be helping the guy "escape the ring" and regain his faculties? What do you do if the players figure out the basic plot and decide their characters don't want to undo their own existence by helping him, and try to abandon the quest? Which would be an entirely reasonable reaction to figuring that out. Really, what incentive do they have to finish it at all, once they discover that they, and their entire world, don't really exist?
Part of the fun for a lot of people when it comes to TTRPGs is creating a character that you get invested in, that you grow and develop as the campaign progresses. You're yanking the rug out from under your players on that front
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It looks like the only feedback you listened to was “maybe multiple worlds might be difficult” while ignoring everything that folks said about the DM forcing themselves into player agency and the DM pulling the rug out from under the players in the first session. Those elements - where you problematically force yourself on the sphere of the player not only remain in your new idea, but are objectively worse, as you have now seemingly added a DM PC into the players’ body.
I am going to be honest, I think your new idea is even more problematic than your first one - your first one was very much a “this is my story, not our story” kind of D&D game… this one has that exact same problem, but also seems to strongly indicate a DM with main character syndrome.
It is very clear every person on this thread is skeptical-at-best about your - even the most positive feedback you have gotten is “have you considered fundamentally changing your idea to be this?” You maintain that this is something your group might like - you should be talking with your group about this, not strangers on the internet. Particularly if you are going to disregard the primary concerns multiple folks have raised on the thread.
After all, it is your players who are going to have to live with this, and your players who are going to have their agency taken away from them. They should at least know about that before they waste time creating a character they do not get to fully play, and they should at least get some agency in creating the world in exchange for what you are taking from them.
1. The NPC is just that. This NPC was always part of plan. I have many other notes that I have not shared on here, such as the campaign outline. It's not a DM PC that will be swinging a sword or saving the day or taking actions in combat. The player's goal should ultimately be freeing the NPC from the cage by defeating the last demon. Which is like saving the princess from the dragon's lair by defeating the dragon. In this case the princess can occasionally give you clues and hints of how to save them.
2. "This is my story"... yeah. "not our story" huh? Have you never played an actual campaign? I'm not talking about an off the cuff multi session sandbox do whatever you want game. I'm talking about an actual campaign that is outlined from level 1 to level 20? For example Rise Of The Runelords and Return Of The Runelords. The only difference between that and this is that I'm writing it instead of someone else writing it. Your choices as a player are focused within the context of that storyline. And unless you've actually read through the adventure path you're not really going to have an idea what is going to happen anymore than the intro i detailed. And if you do read through the adventure path as a player you're basically removing any sense of surprise and wonder from the encounters.
3. "a character they do not get to fully play," uhm... they do. They will still be in charge of their own actions and choices. And they will have just as many actions per turn as a normal character would.
4. "have their agency taken away from them" I will mildly concede this one. A players will not be able to just go off and become a cleptomaniac murderhobo just for the lulz. I'm actually telling a story that I want the players to engage with and get to the end of. There are other games that restrict or force player agency in certain directions. Call of cthulu games for example. One minute you think your gonna be the hero and the next you fail to many sanity checks and you're trying to hide another character's body in a washing machine. Heck... There are multiple spells and abilities within the game that remove player agency such as charm, slow, paralyze, frighten, restrain, and banishment. These all have a greater effect on a character's agency than my shared body idea does. I have actually had combats where my character was not involved in a single round after the first due to being paralyzed.
5. "the only feedback you listened to" is not true. Most of the feedback has been to run a different story, not how to run this story. It's like saying I want to run terminator and everyone saying run madmax. What I have taken, from multiple people, is giving a little more information up front. Which I did with the new intro. No I'm not going to give the whole premise away because I want my players to figure it out in the game. The new intro section will be what I give to my players to announce the new game.
1. The NPC is with them always that chimes in whenever you want. That’s a DM insert NPC, and can lead to problems. Even without swinging a sword, that constant presence, even when not actualised means the party constantly feel the weight of that DM NPC breathing down their neck - inherently different than a distant princess. The fact you do not see that difference and think your analogy was on point is a massive red flag.
2. I have run multiple homebrew campaigns to level 20 and beyond. They work because I, the DM, set the world, but the players get to influence it and tell a story with me - at the end of the day, we have a story we wrote together an can call ours, not simply mine. The fact you don’t see D&D as a collaborative story is a massive red flag.
3. Wrong again. You literally have said you want them to design a character and then will spring this nonsense on them. So, at the very start of the campaign, you are saying “sorry friends, your character you invented? I, the DM, am forcing you to change something foundational about it.” Massive red flag.
4. There is a big difference than the player having consequences for in game actions and having their agency taken away. Consequences are part of the game and happen at a character level. Loss of agency is when the DM steps past character level and starts to interfere with what the player can do at a player level. That you do not realize this difference, or do not seem to care that you are doing the latter, is a massive red flag.
5. The feedback on this thread is less, to use your analogy, “you should make Mad Max instead of the Terminator” and more “it looks like you are trying to make Battlefield Earth, and do you really want to do that?” The totality of users on this thread addressing your core concept have said that your idea is flawed at a foundational level. You keep getting the exact same feedback and keep doubling down on “everyone else is wrong.” “I am right, everyone else is wrong, I should ignore them” is not a great mentality for a collaborative game - one might call it a massive red flag.
I truly wish you success if you honestly believe your players might enjoy this, but, as I said previously, you probably need to be getting feedback from them. I am not sure you are going to get any different feedback here than what has already been provided, and what you have already discarded.
Yeah, I'm gonna stop you right there
The players' first instinct is not going to be to 'save the princess', no matter how you try to push them into doing it
It's going to be, "How do we get our own bodies back?" -- because that's the puzzle you've presented them with from the opening scene. And, frankly, it would logically be the best way they could effectively help them guy in the ring too, even if they fully embrace the "we are an order of Forever Demon Hunters" bit
You don't seem to have left any room in your campaign for them to have any other goals -- i.e. player agency -- and you've also given them little reason to pursue the goal you want them to pursue, other than a throwaway line in your intro
Just off the top of my head, what do you do if:
Railroad campaigns -- which is what you're creating here -- aren't inherently bad. They need legitimate stakes, though, like "you're in a race against time to stop the BBEG from destroying the world, so you have no time for side quests or dilly-dallying". You have to make sure the players are motivated to stay (mostly) on task on their own, so it doesn't feel like you're shutting them down every time they threaten to get off track
You haven't given them that. Instead, you're giving them demons that (presumably) threaten a world and a time that isn't even their own, in order to save a guy in a ring that they don't know and probably won't have a particularly friendly relationship with. You've created a scenario where the players will be actively incentivized to deviate from the plot you have in mind. They won't want to go demon hunting. They won't want to help the guy in the ring, at least not right away, They will want to solve the puzzle of why they're trapped in the same body, then they'll get back to that other stuff once they're fully functional and in their own forms
It's like a campaign that starts with the characters in a jail cell with no equipment. Their first priority won't be to follow up on whatever story hook the person in the next cell is babbling about -- it will be to escape and get their gear. Then they can go pick up that quest. They aren't going to go running off to save the princess with no weapons or armor
You're handicapping the characters to begin the campaign, but then never giving them a way to restore themselves to full power and utility, and still expecting them to just dutifully trudge up the mountain to face the dragon anyway. That's a recipe for disaster
As Caerwyn noted, this kind of story in general can work in a medium with one author -- I've cited examples, and there's plenty more in movies, books, comics etc. D&D isn't a story with only one author, though. Ideally, everybody at the table should be contributing to the direction it takes, and you're trying to take that element away. You decried the players becoming murderhobos above, but in reality that seems to be exactly the role you're forcing them into. They'll just be murderhoboing for reasons you approve of
You are going to need to seriously re-think your approach to this if you're going to pull it off, because what you've got now simply won't play out the way you seem to think it will
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
1. No the NPC is stuck in the ring "the cage". He can only talk with them when they "submerge" into the cage. So the only knowledge that he has about what is going on in the outside world is what they tell him.
2. I do see RPGs as collaborative storytelling. What I specifically asked was if they had run any actually professionally produced campaigns INSTEAD of purely homebrew sandbox ones. Your answer is clearly no. Running a homebrew sandbox game is different than running an actual scripted outlined goal focused campaign. I have run both. My teddy ruxbin based one was the best. And I really love Rise Of The Runelords. I personally think it's Paizo's best adventure path.
3. This is part of the cooperative storytelling. If I say I want to run a game about space cops and you say cool I want to play a sheep herder, then as a player you're not being a cooperative participant in the story. And maybe reread the intro. In the new intro I added, that will be told to them before they ever make characters or we start playing, it specifically tells them that they have sacrificed their bodies. It doesn't tell them exactly what that means but most of my group is going to start asking immediate questions.
4. "Player agency is the capacity for players to make meaningful, independent decisions that directly influence a game's world, narrative, and outcomes." Nothing that I am doing changes that. Being stuck in the same body is a part of the story. They will still be able to make their own independent decisions. Those decisions will be meaningful within the game. those decisions will directly influence the games setting. None of that is being removed. I want my players to surprise me with how they go about interacting with and solving the puzzle that is presented.
This is more like running a game with a low magic setting where there is only one magic item and the goal is to use that magic item to beat the BBEG. If the players say **** it and go become bouncers on the coast then, because they chose not to be cooperative participants in the story presented, the BBEG starts winning. I've only had two games fall apart because of that. One because people didn't like the harshness of the setting, Dark Sun. The other because ONE player really wanted to play spelljammer while I was running planescape.
5. “it looks like you are trying to make Battlefield Earth, and do you really want to do that?” fair. But they are doing it by saying i should do madmax instead of terminator instead of suggesting ways to do battlefield earth better. Again the suggestion to give my players more heads up I have taken and added more information than I was originally going to. And I will probably try to add more without giving the base premise away.
6. Not every setting is for every group. Not every DM is for every player. Not every player is for every story. I love playing body horror cthuluesque stories. I hate running body horror cthuluesque stories. I have a love hate relationship with running cyberpunk because most people lack any kind of basic technical or mechanical knowledge and don't know how to ask the right questions. Try explaining stable state magnetic locks for the five thousandths time
I hate murderhobo games where players play to kill stuff get loot and treat life as disposable. I think it's great when players figure out non or less violent ways to achieve goals. If you need to get to the top of the building do you climb, fly, tunnel, sewer, bribe, sneak, or fight your way in? I'm not taking their choices away. I am adding a story element that player will have to learn to work with and around. Dark Sun uses the sun, lack of metal, and restrictions on magic and the fact that everything is actively trying to kill you or enslave while the other half of them are willing to eat you as an active story element. I'm using the single body as a story element while still allowing near full character autonomy.
Maybe you should re-read it. The very first sentence is "You are an eternal champion, a paragon. Your soul has been born again and again. Only fragments of your past lives remain, but a driving need to destroy fiends always surfaces."
The fact that their last body, and their soul, was used to fuel the fiend cage -- but now here they are in a body again -- just means something went wrong. Of course your players will have questions in Session 0, but nothing about that intro says they need to limit their character concepts to a narrow range of Forever Demon Hunter types. Quite the opposite, in fact. If something went wrong and the cycle's re-started or even been derailed somehow, it gives them more latitude to play around with the expected tropes
Except any decisions they make about who their character really is, or who they wanted their characters to become, will be completely erased by your planned resolution to the story. That's the agency you're taking away
You seem to be only listening to a very narrow range of concerns being expressed here -- you still haven't explained why you think the players will be interested in sticking with this puzzle and quest, other than that they "should", for instance -- so I'm tapping out
I expect your players will get very frustrated very quickly by your seemingly arbitrary movement restrictions (if the one body they all share can take multiple actions in a turn and effectively has multiple characters' worth of HP, why doesn't it get extra movement too?) and the general finickyness of the switching process, who's in "control" of the body at any time, etc., and the payoff you want at the end of the campaign will not be satisfying to anyone. If you even get there
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Yeah, I'm gonna stop you right there. The players' first instinct is not going to be to 'save the princess', no matter how you try to push them into doing it
Yeah... we have different players. The group I play with is goal focused, personal, and then loot.
You don't seem to have left any room in your campaign for them to have any other goals -- i.e. player agency --
That's not what player agency is. Player agency is making your own decisions within context of the story. In this story I am (figuratively) asking my players to show up with paladin style characters (regardless of what their actual class is) who already have a prescribed goal. Walking in they know they are the good guys, not the ambiguously grey free lance mercenaries. This doesn't mean that they can't/won't pick up other goals along the way that I haven't accounted for.
and you've also given them little reason to pursue the goal you want them to pursue, other than a throwaway line in your intro
You call that a throwaway line I call it the point of the game. This game is for people that want to be demon hunters. There characters are demon hunters who sacrificed everything to hunt demons and have been brought forth once again to hunt demons. If a player does not want to play this demon hunting game they can go play another game. It would be like playing Rise Of The Runelords and saying I don't want to fight liches mummies and undead that are going to take over the world if nobody fights liches mummies and undead. It would be like playing a sandbox vampire hunters game and not wanting to hunt vampires. They are demon hunters. That's the campaign.
Already thought of this. Bound Object. Ring only comes off if the wearer is dead or the final demon is trapped. Any attempt to remove the ring such as cutting off the finger result in the finger instantaneously reattaching. In the real world this will appear as the hand refusing to stay still. I did think about making it a necklace or torque because of this but opted not to because it didn't fit aesthetically. May revisit.
This is a very good question. And I do have one player that is always three levels past the paranoid he should be. The cage actually houses more than just the BBEG. it actually houses 31 total demon. I have a big ass map i made for it. So insight checks, Paladin divine sense, and the spell Detect Evil and Good. Starting at level 0 will give this a little speedbump but not much.
Combat will mostly take place in the fantasy setting. Most of the wandering about clue hunting and storytelling will take place in the mundane world. Example; you follow the drug dealers to a back alley underground gambling house. When you sneak in what should be the basement of a tenement building appears to be a torch lit medieval dungeon. There will be some non combat fantasy stuff but this isn't a I have ten thousand gold let me go to the magic shop and buy a flaming sword game.
The criminals want the ring because the diamond set in it opens an electronic lock. So even if the players just say **** it the demons will be coming after them.
You haven't given them that. Instead, you're giving them demons that (presumably) threaten a world and a time that isn't even their own, in order to save a guy in a ring that they don't know and probably won't have a particularly friendly relationship with. You've created a scenario where the players will be actively incentivized to deviate from the plot you have in mind. They won't want to go demon hunting. They won't want to help the guy in the ring, at least not right away, They will want to solve the puzzle of why they're trapped in the same body, then they'll get back to that other stuff once they're fully functional and in their own forms
This part is mostly answered above. Again, we have and are different kinds of players. The core group I play with is very cooperative with storytelling and staying on goal. The fact that i will be asking them to show up with character concepts of characters that HUNT DEMONS means they know that they should be hunting demons. And they have already be told that they sacrificed THEIR body and power to power the ring. And the fact that there is a guy trapped in the ring who is not a demon will scream that this guy is a clue to what's going on, which is what conversational NPCs are in games with any sort of mystery.
You're handicapping the characters to begin the campaign, but then never giving them a way to restore themselves to full power and utility, and still expecting them to just dutifully trudge up the mountain to face the dragon anyway. That's a recipe for disaster
No. I am in no way hampering the characters. In fact, I'm giving them a bunch of inherit advantages. As one body they will have an easier time sneaking and hiding. As one body they will be able to engage with NPCs with out looking like a mob of people trying to browbeat an answer out of someone. As one body they'll be able to defend each other easier or pull themselves out of combat. And knowing the core group of my players I'm sure they'll figure out other ways to use this unique situation to their advantage.
Railroad campaigns -- which is what you're creating here -- aren't inherently bad.
There's a difference between a linear campaign and being railroaded. Yes this will be a linear campaign which is what a vast majority of campaign modules are. In fact, the only actual sandbox level 1 to 20 campaign that I know of is Kingmaker and even that has set linear elements. This will not be a sandbox campaign. Just because this is a linear campaign doesn't mean that player choices won't matter and that there will only be one way to approach each situation.
They need legitimate stakes, though, like "you're in a race against time to stop the BBEG from destroying the world, so you have no time for side quests or dilly-dallying". You have to make sure the players are motivated to stay (mostly) on task on their own, so it doesn't feel like you're shutting them down every time they threaten to get off track.
Absolutely agree with this part. But I also think this is true of any linear printed campaign. But how the players approach those task are still up to them.
This video explains the difference between a linear campaign and railroading.
https://youtu.be/y6FamF2S5ZM?si=sbJF0yT9YVushXIZ
You seem to have your mind made up so that begs the question as to why continue belaboring the point. Almost everyone in this thread has told you its a bad idea, yet you're doubling down. So it seems you're doing it regardless, so maybe just do it rather than dragging this discussion on?
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Sorry, I know I said I was out, but for the sake of your players I want to say one more thing, because it really doesn't seem like you have thought about your idea from this perspective and you really, really should before you get to Session 0:
What are you doing to set expectations for your players that the body-sharing conceit will last for the entire campaign, and isn't simply an initial puzzle they need to solve and get out of the way before the "real" campaign begins?
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Because there has been some good feedback that I have integrated. The feedback I was more concerned about was more about the mechanics I presented. And many people have an incorrect interpretation of what player agency, linear campaigns, and railroading are. I'm also realizing that most people that have replied have only ever played sandbox games and have never actually played a full fledged 1 to 20 campaign module like Rise Of The Runelords.
This video explains the difference between a linear campaign and railroading.
https://youtu.be/y6FamF2S5ZM?si=3PcscFZ6o-I-8wOM
Good question.
1. They know that their bodies and power (class levels) were sacrificed (destroyed) so that their souls could power the cage (the ring)
2. They know that in order to keep the demons caged they will once again have to use their souls to power the cage.
3. It's not a puzzle to be solved, it's the only way that they can operate outside of the cage.
4. Their souls are bound to the ring. By rules, bound souls can't be unbound by anything other than a wish or destroying the object they are bound to. Destroying the ring would be an artifact level quest. Destroying the ring would destroy the cage which would make it impossible to defeat and cage the demons. Using wish to unbind their souls would render the ring useless which would make it impossible to defeat and cage the demons. AND... you can't cast wish until 17th level at which point they will have already defeated most of the demons.
I know what the difference is, so no need keep reposting that link....
Find my D&D Beyond articles here