Greetings fellow DMs (and a few players I am sure),

We have all been there. You have your approved character sheet, your case of caffeinated drink, your alcohol (if you are of legal age), and your snacks. You show up super pumped about your first game session. And as soon as it starts, you hear the words (in some form or fashion), "You have arrived at [name] Inn, in the Kingdom of [name]."

I have been DMing for a long time, and I must admit; this was usually my go to plot device to bring a party together. The problem is, it sucks raw eggs under water. It is just so tired. And when you set this as your stage, you as the DM are now sitting there hoping against hope that your players (who we will assume are RPing their characters well) will come together to rise up against whatever you have set for them.

Sometimes this takes the form of a bounty, or a request from a noble, to rid the area of some lesser evil that will set the players of a collision course with destiny. Either way it is one of the most used, and in my opinion worst, ways to bring a party together.

As a writer I struggled to find a better way. I have hosted games that absolutely fell apart because the players didn't respond the way I expected them to. In one campaign, I had a player go and eat noodles at a noodle house while the city was being destroyed by a dragon, one of the other players got arrested because he snuck off to commit a crime, and three more almost got arrested while trying to break out the first.

So I went back to the basics of writing. When writing a book, or a script, or whatever we are writing, we use what is called a "hook". This is the beginning. It is crucial to getting your audience engaged and invested in your story. We also follow a formula called "The Hero's Journey". And yes, this formula applies to D&D as well. Because it starts with what we call, "The Call to Action". What motivates your characters to push forward? What outside influence has spurred them into risking everything.

I languished over these questions for a long time, and then the answer hit me. Simply find a clever way to remove the player's choice.

I can hear the rabble of the lynch mob forming now. So before your try and reenact the opening scene from Hang 'Em High, please allow me to explain.

We use roll20 (everyone roll their eyes and groan now to get it out of your system). So before the game launched, I posted some "required reading" for my players. The first was just general knowledge of the world they live in that the characters should and would know. I posted this so, that at any time, my players could go back and refresh their memory of the world they are in. And yes, thanks to the wonders of modern technology, I literally created a world, populated it, determined what cultures go where, and how it fits into the general existence of D&D. I did all this so I could run our Game Zero and then turn them loose. Most of the time I just have to react. Other times, I steer the narrative in a certain direction.

The next article I posted for them to read was their opening story. Like I said, I took away their choice in coming together as a party. I wrote the narrative as if they had wandered into an inn and sat down to have a drink and listen to any rumors from the bartender.

While they "listen" to the bartender's tale, something peculiar starts to happen. They realize they have been drugged, but it is too late and they are passing out. Just before everything goes black, the character hears the bartender call a cohort over to "take you out back and let you sleep it off because you can't handle your alcohol". And when they woke up, they are locked in the hold of a ship, on their way to an unknown destination and in the charge of a particularly unsavory crew; with no weapons, no armor, and unable to use their spells.

I had it planned to go one of two ways. Either I rolled and the Kraken attacked the ship and they would have to escape, only to be at the mercy of the current and eventually wash up on shore; or they made it to their harbor safely, where they would be conscripted into a slave army. I also had percentages set up for them to contact the resistance in either scenario.

But how did I keep them together? That was even more simplistic and clever than the abduction.

Remember the unsavory crew? Well they gave the usual, "If you resist us, we will kill you" speech. And then, just to add depth to how dire their situation was, the crew threw someone overboard and a few seconds later, a random NPC in the hold with them dropped dead. After which it was explained to them that they were all cursed, and that their life was bound to another's but only the original caster knew to whom. They must keep a certain proximity to one another or die.

When the dice determined that the players would meet the resistance, the resistance offered to lift said curse. Now my players are indebted to the resistance; something I knew I could work with because none of them opted to play a chaotic evil alignment. So the resistance asked for their help, and away they went. Now they are actively engaging in missions, and as they learn more about what is going on, eager to help their benefactors.

I write this in the hopes that it helps another DM who is struggling as I was. Because as DMs we are always asking ourselves (or at least we should be), "What is the motivation for them to do this?"

Best,

JD Linderman

P.S.

This is what I actually wrote for them. Use it, or use it as a launching point for your own variation of this.

Welcome to Varden traveler!

Who am I? Oh, I am just your typical inn keeper. Serving ale and food to adventurers and passers-by. You however... yes, I see an air of trouble about you my friend. There is a dark aura that follows you. Why don't you take a seat and have a drink while I tell you a tale.

Once, long ago, the various kingdoms of Varden had heroes that rose up to face a great evil that threatened the world. These heroes had the blessings and support of the gods. It would seem though, that the fight changed them. Not long after... they all vanished from this plane. Most folk figured the gods had taken them to their various realms so the heroes could rest after such a brutal fight.

That's what people always thought.

As an inn keeper, I get to hear all the rumors as people travel. And recently the rumors have been most disturbing. It would seem that all the kingdoms have started amassing massive slave armies and sending them to the island kingdom of Eto. No one is really sure how the slaves are being captured. All they know is that sometimes, people just go missing. So naturally, everyone is on edge.

The other problem is, no one knows what they are fighting in Eto. Information coming out of the isle kingdom is strictly regulated by ALVA, or the Authoritarian Leaders of the Varden Alliance, an organization that works behind the scenes of each kingdom, ensuring that our uneasy peace continues. The problem is though, many of the other humanoid races feel that too much of the power is already too "human-centric". Many of the other races, or sub-races if you buy into the propaganda, are clamoring for better representation in all aspects of life.

Yet rumors persist that ALVA and the world governments are only paying these issues lip service. What? No! Now listen, I am just passing along information as I have heard it. Don't go reading anything into what I believe. All I care about is earning coin!

Oh, listen to me. Getting upset like that. I'm sorry. Here, have another ale on the house by way of apology and let me finish my tale.

Now, as I was saying, ALVA controls all the information coming out of Eto. In fact, travel from the islands is strictly regulated. I hear tell of entire ships being sent to the depths of the oceans that were reportedly smuggling sentients off the isles. There are a couple of captains I haven't seen in an age myself, but that doesn't really mean the worst could have happened, does it?

*the inn keeper finishes cleaning a mug, and picks up another and starts cleaning it*

Every once and a while, I hear about someone that claims to be a survivor, or a refugee, but no one can ever substantiate what these "survivors" claim. Most of them sound stark raving mad if you ask me. Talk of slave armies fighting the heroes of old, or demons from the depths of the seven negative planes. Others talk of fighting angels and demi-gods from the seven positive planes.

What? No. I don't believe one way or another. I only care about earning coin.

*the inn keeper looks at you with concern*

Hey, traveler. Are you feeling okay? You don't look so good.

*your body feels to heavy for you to lift, your eye lids to heavy to keep open*

*the inn keeper smiles wickedly at you as you pass out on the bar*

I told ya, I only care about earning coin.

*as you slip into unconsciousness, you hear the inn keeper call out to someone*

Hey! Clev! Yeah, we have another one that can't handle their ale. Why don't you take them to the back and let them sleep it off. Set them up with the usual.

*blackness*

Nice write up and great story. Thank you for sharing it. I've DM'd a few groups now and feel as you do a bit. That's why I've never started a group in an inn. There's nothing wrong with it as it's the classic way to start a game. Doesn't mean it's the only way.

As a player, I have never minded starting in an inn. You can do it other ways but the starting inn (or tavern) is a one-size-fits-all approach. No matter who the character is or where he or she came from, what class or background or race or what have you, everyone needs to eat and drink (whether water or something stronger). It's the one universal, and you can count on it to be applicable to every character in the game. They are not from this town, so they need to find food and shelter, and the inn/tavern is where to get it. So they would end up there. As you say it is a classic -- yes it may be "trite" but, I still love it. Just like I love exploring dungeons (also "trite") and fighting dragons (same).

Your intro is very engaging and I'm sure it was a fun and unique opening for the players... but I am an old curmudgeon when it comes to RPGs so I am still partial to the inn.

That said, if I ever start DMing again, I will probably try to find *some* way to have them not all start at an inn. But I'm not sure what I'd do instead.

That's one way to do it. I generally prefer to have them build characters as a group, though, and have them create a collaborative back story. Then I build the campaign based on the things that they have stated as important to them or to their characters.

Yes, adding things to the campaign based on backstory is something I like to do.

I love world-building and I am thinking of DMing in the future (not doing it right now because I am just returned to D&D and very out of practice) and I have been looking at map-making programs like WonderDraft and Worldographer. I have some really cool world ideas and campaign ideas. But although I might make one up for fun or practice, I would not plan to actually use it as a campaign without first having players, and asking them what their taste is in a campaign... And then getting their backstories and seeing how I could tweak things so that each character will have a significant something related to the game world.

I built a world for them to exist in and then took their personality traits and their backstories and started folding those into the narratives. They just recently out witted an aspect of the Raven Queen in the Shadowfell, and have now caught the attention of the entire pantheon. All because of two backstories and a couple actions that happened to tee up a trip to the Shadowfell.

I used Azgaar's Fantasy Map Generator. It took a few days to learn it, but it makes world building easy once you do.

I have a second "standard" beginning I use.

You hired yourselves out as guards to a merchant caravan and you're arriving at your destination, the town of Great Bridge.  The leader of the caravan rides up beside you and says, "This is where we'll part company.  Good luck."  And he hands you a small cloth bag with twenty gold pieces (for the whole party).  He says, "When we are stopped at the edge of town, I will tell the guards you are my escort.  We will then be on our way, but the guards will have some questions for you since you've not been through here before.  I recommend being respectful of them."  And with that, he rides on ahead to the front of the column to greet the guards.  The guards do halt the column and then wave him on through but as you approach he holds up his hand for you to stop.  What do you do?

This gives them a starting place where with the little money they have they could stop at the tavern, or they might explore some of the shops, or they might go to the Governor's mansion and seek employment, or any number of other things.  But it doesn't place them in the Inn where a brawl is likely to break out before they have made any real choices. - Have fun.

I started one set of players in the market square once, asked them what their characters were there to buy or do. Then I dropped a dragon on the town.

They banded together quite quickly, I remember.

Quote from BigLizard >>

I have to admit that in a way, this is kind of my beef with modern D&D and modern D&D culture.  I feel that the fantasy of modern D&D skips the part where you are innocent little flowers, would be heroes about to embark on their first adventure.  In modern D&D, a first level character is a bad ass, pretty much already a hero, ready to take on swarms of enemies with powerful abilities, skills and spells.  That "low level" game where players establish themselves as heroes doesn't really exist in modern D&D.  Its kind of why I still prefer to run 1st edition AD&D (not the only reason, but one of several).   

I agree with your take on modern vs. classical D&D... I have not actually played 5E yet (we are about to do our session 0), but I have watched some streams and just looking at what our characters can do at 1st level vs. what they could do in the past, I agree that they are already pretty badass.

You mentioned just starting in the town and buying stuff and what not... and part of that was also your first battle, which was usually clearing out rats out of the store room for the innkeeper or something like that... Because back in the day of D&D Basic set and so forth, a handful of rats was a challenge for a level 1 party.

Quote from BioWizard >>

Quote from BigLizard >>

I have to admit that in a way, this is kind of my beef with modern D&D and modern D&D culture.  I feel that the fantasy of modern D&D skips the part where you are innocent little flowers, would be heroes about to embark on their first adventure.  In modern D&D, a first level character is a bad ass, pretty much already a hero, ready to take on swarms of enemies with powerful abilities, skills and spells.  That "low level" game where players establish themselves as heroes doesn't really exist in modern D&D.  Its kind of why I still prefer to run 1st edition AD&D (not the only reason, but one of several).   

 

I agree with your take on modern vs. classical D&D... I have not actually played 5E yet (we are about to do our session 0), but I have watched some streams and just looking at what our characters can do at 1st level vs. what they could do in the past, I agree that they are already pretty badass.

You mentioned just starting in the town and buying stuff and what not... and part of that was also your first battle, which was usually clearing out rats out of the store room for the innkeeper or something like that... Because back in the day of D&D Basic set and so forth, a handful of rats was a challenge for a level 1 party.

 I have to say this is what has turned me off the most from the new system. I want to start out as a wide eyed, seeing the world for the first time adventurer, and work up to being able to kill the gods  themselves.  Maybe I will have to run a game soon, and its funny because I was thinking of the rats in the basement, sewers. to start out :)

So one thing that also works really well is the system of questions introduced by Renegade Games with Kids on Bikes.  For each player at the table you roll a D20 and answer the corresponding question.  There are "good things" and "bad things" listed so each character gets two questions from each other player.  These include things like:

• What would this character have to do earn your forgiveness?
• What is the most dishonest thing you have seen this character do?
• What does this character do that you know they need to stop for their own good?
• Why do you care about this character more than they care about you?
• What aspect of this character’s personality do you try to use as a model for your own?

The full list is here:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54148cdae4b05a3412bfa19b/t/5ade659e70a6ad52326cbbd8/1524524449213/Appendix-A-Final-01-19-18.pdf

What this does is gets the party talking about their values, why they're tied together and guides that character back story.  I ran a game of Kids on Bikes at a convention this weekend.  Before we even started playing the three players had laid out a close bond as to why a Laid Back Loser, a Plastic Beauty, and a BoyScout were all hanging out together and looking out for each other.

Quote from Lordneg >>

Quote from BioWizard >>

I agree with your take on modern vs. classical D&D... I have not actually played 5E yet (we are about to do our session 0), but I have watched some streams and just looking at what our characters can do at 1st level vs. what they could do in the past, I agree that they are already pretty badass.

You mentioned just starting in the town and buying stuff and what not... and part of that was also your first battle, which was usually clearing out rats out of the store room for the innkeeper or something like that... Because back in the day of D&D Basic set and so forth, a handful of rats was a challenge for a level 1 party.

 I have to say this is what has turned me off the most from the new system. I want to start out as a wide eyed, seeing the world for the first time adventurer, and work up to being able to kill the gods  themselves.  Maybe I will have to run a game soon, and its funny because I was thinking of the rats in the basement, sewers. to start out :)

I know of several NWN modules that started out that way — it was classic and it wasn’t just Basic Set that had this.

I might want to start running once I get more of a feel for 5e, but I am going to have to look hard for players who are OK with a lower level of power... and I’ll probably need some house rules to keep things a little more old school. One thing I liked that someone said on another thread was, having the ‘short rest’ recovery actually take a long rest, and having ‘long rest’ only happen if you spent at least a day resting in town (and not out in the wild or in a dungeon). I’d have to play test it but it sounds attractive to me as a player (and potentially as a DM).

I think if I was going to change the rest a short rest would last 2 hrs and you could maybe  take 2 during the day. A long rest is what you do at night when you are sleeping ect. If a rest is interrupted then the effects of a rest may not happen. So if you want a long rest that will benefit you , you would want to set up a well thought out camp or something. A short rest could be stopping for lunch at a way side tavern. just ideas. 

Wish I lived in North Carolina, now.  I'm about as old school as it gets.  Heck, "I'd probably rather play AD&D."

”Modern gaming culture has become very, how shall I put this in a politically correct way...privileged. 

I mean in the last few years I have experienced some stuff that in the old school days would get you kicked out of the game for even trying.  Like players handing me a list of magic items they want to find on their adventure, or handing an adventure module and saying "I read it, its great, can you please run it for us", or my favorite, "We don't want to play a game where characters can die".  Stuff like that I have a ..... reaction to, lets just put it that way.“

All of this. I don’t have a problem with folks wanting to play the game they want to play. It just kinda sucks that it’s harder and harder to find a game I want to play. D&D is popular again and I still can’t find a group to play in.  I am going to try and run my own game. The group I have now are older folks still new to the game so they are less power hungry 

One of the good/bad things with 4th edition was the framing of "one day = 5 encounters" or whatever the number was.  It was built around the idea that the game was "balanced" if a moderately well balanced party spread their "Big Guns", their "decent Guns" and their at-wills around over those 4-5 encounters and then got a general reset.  The same thing applies to 5th, in a way, with the short rest/ long rest.  We can adjust WHEN they have a short/long or how often they need to do so, but all that REALLY does is shift up the number and type of encounters we throw at them.  

That's one thing I learned running my one-shot Ravenloft.  With only two combat encounters before they got to Strahd (we had lots of good RP up till then) they were still basically at full strength as a party and he wasn't much of a foe to them.  The Wizard still had all of his 3rd level spell slots available and that pretty much shut down Strahd's spell casting early in the fight, for example.  Granted they were low on HP and if the dice had REALLY gone bad they were screwed.  I also learned that one can be a little redundant with the "protection" on a shield fighter and that there's a thing called "precise shot" that I could have invested in instead....

Either way, I think the best solution is to pace the game as works best for the party and play style but keeping an eye to the idea that "balance" asks you to not give them too many nor too few rests between encounters.

Quote from Lordneg >>

”Modern gaming culture has become very, how shall I put this in a politically correct way...privileged. 

I mean in the last few years I have experienced some stuff that in the old school days would get you kicked out of the game for even trying.  Like players handing me a list of magic items they want to find on their adventure, or handing an adventure module and saying "I read it, its great, can you please run it for us", or my favorite, "We don't want to play a game where characters can die".  Stuff like that I have a ..... reaction to, lets just put it that way.“

All of this. I don’t have a problem with folks wanting to play the game they want to play. It just kinda sucks that it’s harder and harder to find a game I want to play. D&D is popular again and I still can’t find a group to play in.  I am going to try and run my own game. The group I have now are older folks still new to the game so they are less power hungry 

So... here's what I read:

People used to play a game that they enjoyed but often felt there were things they would find more fun.  Now those people feel empowered to talk about and ask about ways they feel will make the experience more enjoyable.  These are requests that run counter to what I find enjoyable, therefore they are bad.  Where we used to bully those people into submission (by threatening to remove them from the group) we now have to entertain these requests for more enjoyment.  This sucks because its not what I find fun and therefore isn't fair.

I know that 30 years ago I would have laughed at the player who said "I want to earn a +2 bow in the near future".  I would have made them roll up a new character when FIghter #3 died because they just plain ran out of HP.  To me, 30 years ago, that challenge of not dying was what made RPG's fun games.  It was a GAME where you had to balance risk/ reward and maximize your stats to kill the biggest and the badest.

Over the last 30 years the hobby has grown to include more story telling elements.  We've opened our tables to be more inclusive and seen more women come into the hobby.  We've seen this diversity bring more emphasis on the characters and with that emphasis:  INVESTMENT.  Some players come back week after week for the story rather than the "can my dice help me beat a bigger monster".  I'm not saying that everyone does but I am saying that if people find that fun, this is a good thing.  We shouldn't be looking down on it.  The example of "I don't want my character to die" is a great example of this.  I've spent months working on this character.  I've spent hours writing back stories and looking up art to show them.  I've got a custom mini had printed.  Letting them die from a few bad dice rolls .. .well.. that's harsh.  And it breaks my investment.  Now if I know going in that I shouldn't make that investment, fine.  I won't.  

But I also won't personally have problem with either play style but I do think we shoudl be careful not to dismiss one over the other.

I don't think anyone is being dismissive. I think some of us are saying that the prevalence of the "investment" play style you describe is making it harder and harder to find groups of players willing to play the game with a more "classical" take on things. Someone said on another thread that players don't like when they feel that you have "taken something away" from them (i.e., they feel like you've nerfed them). So you can buff the monsters to +5 AC and x2 hit points and nobody cares. But tell the players you are going to do away with Cantrips, say, or give them "cantrip slots" so that they can't simply cast them at will, and in many gaming groups you will face open rebellion -- even if you assure them that you have play-tested this and you have balanced your campaign to take this limitation into account. (And I am not saying the cantrip thing is a good idea but just using it as an example.)

And again there is nothing wrong with playing it the "modern way" -- I don't think that at all. But I tend to like playing it the older way because (a) that is how I learned to play it and (b) if I am in this game again after, while RPing in other ways for many years not playing D&D since the 80s, I'm partly in it for the old school feel. Which I'm not necessarily going to get unless the DM chooses all the "old school" options from the DMG. (I have not read the DMG and don't own it since I am just a player right now and am trying to avoid spoilers -- I want to learn the new stuff as my character does.)

On another thread a few days ago I saw someone lamenting that there are tons of player groups looking for DMs and not enough DMs. Matt Colville has said the same thing on his channel -- he loves DMing but he also likes to play and it's hard to do that because there are so few DMs; he feels like he can't take himself "out of circulation" as a DM or the problem only gets worse. So one of the reasons for his channel is that he hopes to recruit more DMs so that some day he can lay the mantel down and go back to just playing. But what I see being said here and in some other threads is that there are potential DMs out there (like me) who would be happy to do the work of running a game but not necessarily happy with the "I don't want my character to die" and the "magic item wish list" mindset. It seems to me that if this is so the DM shortage, if there is one, is liable to continue. 

Quote from BigLizard >>

 

This tradition exists for two reasons.  First, it gives the players the feeling of "we live in this world now and we can do anything and go anywhere we like".  The open world feeling is an important perceptual concept for players and you have to understand that even though its a total illusion, it's a really important feeling you must establish with a grouping of characters starting off on a new campaign.  If they think their world is an isolated story, a path laid out before them with no player agency, the story will always feel claustrophobic to them.  Scene framing is better served when used after a campaign start, rather then before.  A classic open ended start is in my opinion always a better way to go.

Secondly, the players need time to prepare for the adventure.  This is why I often use the classic AD&D way of doing things where you start out with starting gold (no equipment), I assume you are a 1st level group in a new campaign hence the players might not even know each other.  I let the first couple of sessions be about acquainting themselves with their surroundings, with each other, I let them do some shopping and get into the spirit of playing a new role.  It takes time and it's not particularly exciting but its good for new campaigns to give players a brief moment to become acclimated.  This is particularly true for fantasy stories.

I have to admit that in a way, this is kind of my beef with modern D&D and modern D&D culture.  I feel that the fantasy of modern D&D skips the part where you are innocent little flowers, would be heroes about to embark on their first adventure.  In modern D&D, a first level character is a bad ass, pretty much already a hero, ready to take on swarms of enemies with powerful abilities, skills and spells.  That "low level" game where players establish themselves as heroes doesn't really exist in modern D&D. 

 

    I get what you're saying about limiting starting equipment and letting the PCs grow into being professional adventurers.  For that reason, I don't allow Variant Human and certain feats at my table until level 8.   

 I appreciate the historical background, btw.

  While I have nothing against the "You are drinking in a tavern when" opening, I also feel it's overused.  The opening that I prefer would depend on the campaign and on the PCs' backstories somewhat, though I seem to like to plop them into a setting where they are all temporarily already employed at some common location or for a common purpose.  If I get the chance, I like using Session 0 as  a way to facilitate backstory tie-ins between different characters so that they automatically have reasons to talk to each other..  

The "you all meet at the tavern" opening may be over-used to us. We have played D&D and RPGs for years.

But I am getting ready to start playing with 4 other players and a DM. One player, the DM, and I, are old hat at D&D (although only the DM, so far, has actually played 5e -- the other guy and I did 1, 2, 3, and 3.5e and then stopped). But the other 3 players are all new. Two have never played an RPG before and know almost nothing about D&D. The third has played LARPs and Vampire The Masquerade and such, but not D&D. 

For those 3 players, "You meet at an inn" would not be "over used." They've not seen it before. It would probably be very fun and engaging for them, just as it was for me and you and the other old hands when we first did it.

So my feeling on this is, it depends on the game group. If you are with a group of ornery old cusses who have seen "meet at the tavern" openings before you  might need to mix it up. But if you have a lot of new players who have not played D&D before, it can be a fun way to start. And NOT doing it, ever, anymore, would deprive all the new players of the fun experience of a bunch of strangers meeting at the inn and eventually becoming a party, that the rest of us had in the "olden" days.