Hey guys, I'm interested about DMing at my local gaming store for the first time. I originally planned on running LMoP and then transitioning into SKT (which would be my first time running official WoTC adventures), but then I started thinking/worrying about rotating and inconsistent players and thought maybe an open table sandbox game with a bunch of one-shots that lead to an overarching story may be better. Maybe an adventuring guild that sends PCs on one shots. What do you guys think? Help me out with thoughts and building my confidence! I am an intermediate level DM meaning I have run several single adventures off and on since late 4e and am currently running a homebrew campaign. I think It would be cool to incorporate an open table game into my world that takes place during my main campaign so that both games are both affecting the world at the same time.
Disclaimer: I have never run a West Marches campaign, but would love to try (maybe with a co-DM) if I had the infrastructure/player base
Honestly, if you think you will have a good supply of unreliable players, I'm not sure why you wouldn't draw some inspiration from the West Marches style. Ignoring the specifics (people can get really hung up on the definition), it seems like the basic concept gives you what you need:
1. 1 session adventures (players are forced back to town at the end of the real world night)
2. Suitable for rotating players and even DMs if you like to share or want to roll as a PC for a change. After some players hit tier two, they could roll up alternates and hang with newer players for a night, or organize a higher level session.
3. Exploration and Murder Hobo based, no overarching plotlines or complex lore required. Continuity is provided by an ever expanding world map and the stories players tell each other.
4. Totally homebrew, mostly improvised, players tell you where they want to go and you decide what is there. You can drop in previously designed locations, maps from modules, random ideas, roll from tables, anything goes. No reason you couldn't advertise a menu of quest options or suggestions before a session.
5. Has the potential to create a really interesting shared experience with a large group and create a unique world. Especially since it's a bit more hardcore than the story/character heavy style of modern roleplaying.
Personally, I would like to run or play in a situation where the world evolves a bit as players discover and adventure more. Maybe the Boring Empire decides that Boringtown should have more resources as the PCs discover things and bring back treasure, and they build better shops and accommodations. Maybe they establish more towns and outposts to make it easier to travel deeper into the wild. Maybe the high level PCs build strongholds or shops of their own. Maybe you come up with a genius overarching plotline that spans several parties and adventures even though they are all one shots. All sorts of potential if the game has longevity.
It would also be cool to have another DM in a campaign like this. I like the idea of letting someone else play with the toys I leave on the map, and then being inspired by the things they throw down. I also have the terrible problem of dreaming about characters I want to try while I'm running a campaign and coming up with new campaign ideas when I'm playing my character, so the variety would be fun.
Anyway, be confident and keep it simple. I would try your game if you were in my town.
I think It would be cool to incorporate an open table game into my world that takes place during my main campaign so that both games are both affecting the world at the same time.
Be mindful that the only person who's really going to get any appreciation out of that is you unless you have significant overlap between your "main campaign" and the game store games' players. it's like an in-joke that only you know. So don't be so rigid with cross table ramifications, there's no need to have a unified "cinematic universe" (of which you're the only audience) with continuity between the two tables. Sure maybe both tables can share the same map, and there's a common history of the world portrayed on that map. But once two games are playing on that map, probably little to know overall through the first two tiers of play, but once you're in tier III or IV you got the problem of Main Group doing something really cool and Game store group being affected by it but aren't able to do the cool thing or anything comparable to it because of the needs for world consistency. There are plenty of legends and mythologies IRL that lack consistency from tale to tale within them, DMs should be more aware of that.
EDIT: It's sort of like you're setting up your main group to be like The Avengers, and the game store crowd is like The Defenders, they'll know they're playing in "your" world and are not as important as your main game. It's just not necessary. One thing you could do, and would save you considerable work is break the present campaign history into a series of one shots. Recycling is a perfectly fair DM trick.
Temp Agency D&D - picking up the side quests that your party neglected.
You'd most likely post the week prior the level of PCs required for said adventure. It's doable. Maybe a little complicated, but doable.
Good luck, let us know how it works out!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
I think It would be cool to incorporate an open table game into my world that takes place during my main campaign so that both games are both affecting the world at the same time.
Be mindful that the only person who's really going to get any appreciation out of that is you unless you have significant overlap between your "main campaign" and the game store games' players. it's like an in-joke that only you know. So don't be so rigid with cross table ramifications, there's no need to have a unified "cinematic universe" (of which you're the only audience) with continuity between the two tables. Sure maybe both tables can share the same map, and there's a common history of the world portrayed on that map. But once two games are playing on that map, probably little to know overall through the first two tiers of play, but once you're in tier III or IV you got the problem of Main Group doing something really cool and Game store group being affected by it but aren't able to do the cool thing or anything comparable to it because of the needs for world consistency. There are plenty of legends and mythologies IRL that lack consistency from tale to tale within them, DMs should be more aware of that.
Agreed and good advice.
West Marches-style open sandbox games are as much a style of running D&D as it is as a way to organize gaming groups. The basic principle behind West Marches is that you run a setting rather than an adventure per say and as a DM you kind of create "hooks" into the setting and have adventuring locations on some form of map. Conceptually the organization of the actual session is dependent on the players where players get together to decide when they want to play and what they intend to do with their session (where are we going, what are we doing) and let the GM know and he prepares material based on their intentions.
Typically in West Marches games players have multiple characters and a lot of the approach to the game is very meta. For example players will get together and form a group and decide to explore "XXX mountains" to see what is there. Then that becomes information passed to all of the other players in the group who might use that information to explore it further (maps made by the players for example).
Its quite different then the more standard "I'm writing a story for my players" style of D&D running. You can think of it this way. In a West Marches game the story of the game is what emerges when the players get together and do something in the game world, its not a story written by the DM for the players to discover/explore.
So a West Marches story might be "Yeah we went to that cave in the northern mountains, it turned out to be an Ogre cave with a large underworld cavern, we explored the 1st level but it goes much deeper, we may want to go back their and see what is further down, but be careful because we found evidence that their might be a dragon in their somewhere". That is both the story and information for future explorers in the west marches campaign as a whole.
However players may also do crazy stuff like "lets raise and army and try to conquer XX kingdom" for example and the whole game is about the players trying to do that.
Generally West Marches campaigns are best for like 8+ players. You want to have more players then would ever show up to any single session. The idea is that there may be several groups doing different things, who quasi work together.
As an example, I have a West Marches campaign that has run online for about 2 years, I have roughly 14 players.
This is an excellent point and reminds me of exactly why I don't flesh out my entire history my setting. So, I slept on this topic and decided that because of the fact that going into this I have no idea on how many people are going to attend or what people want out of the game and I plan on consistently being the only DM (for now) and playing on Mondays only, I'm just going to start with a good ol' session zero and see where that leads me and what my players will be expecting. I also agree with what has been said about how West Marches is good for a large group of people. Currently, I'm not so sure if that is sustainable since I only want to play on Mondays and that style of game would just make a waitlist for my players. I have a WM style setting roughly set up should it get to that point, but ultimately I decided I'll just run what I think will be fun and just go from there. I swear I get so excited about this game that I start overthinking what could potentially happen and forget to just keep it simple and let it play out organically.
My local game store had a gaming league thing. It was patterned off of AL and in theory there were multiple games going on of different adventures and levels and player experience. There was a DM and the game was held at the same time each week and there were reservation slots but more people came some weeks and less others and some left due to jobs or other reasons. But since it was league based at first, the DM would fit new people as they came in. “You meet a cleric that was captured” or “the Hall sent you reinforcements.” Advancement was determined by a number of sessions, and tokens were given for attending sessions and there was a token cost for magic items. It worked well, and gradually the regulars coalesced into a non-league group and most of us have been together for a couple of years+. So this thing can definitely work.
I've been thinking about running a campaign that is mostly a bunch of 1-on-1 adventures where PCs go on missions on their own. Then from time to time, PCs come together to solve a bigger problem for like one session.
My local game store had a gaming league thing. It was patterned off of AL and in theory there were multiple games going on of different adventures and levels and player experience.
Adventurer's League is the advice I was going to give. The campaigns do have a story but it's not a problem if the roster changes between sessions.
In my neck of the woods we have successfully run one shot games each and every week for the last 6 years (- 1 for covid). The basis is built to accommodate new and upcoming players into the DND world. A new player comes in and a DM helps them build a level one character. We set that person down with other new level one characters. Then the DM then takes them through the basics to learn the game, learn the character and participate in a group. At the end of session they level up to 2. Pending the player has time, enjoyed them self and had a great experience they are more then welcome to come back next week for their newly leveled two character. Same process repeats itself for the player whom is now level two.
The process takes place until the character reaches level 5. After that time the player should be experienced enough to find a regular gaming group for a campaign type situation. Or take up the role as a new DM to form their own regular gaming group.
With this being only one shot games the player and the DM has the flexibility to come and go as they please with out the worry of being penalized for missing a session or two due to real life situations.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey guys, I'm interested about DMing at my local gaming store for the first time. I originally planned on running LMoP and then transitioning into SKT (which would be my first time running official WoTC adventures), but then I started thinking/worrying about rotating and inconsistent players and thought maybe an open table sandbox game with a bunch of one-shots that lead to an overarching story may be better. Maybe an adventuring guild that sends PCs on one shots. What do you guys think? Help me out with thoughts and building my confidence! I am an intermediate level DM meaning I have run several single adventures off and on since late 4e and am currently running a homebrew campaign. I think It would be cool to incorporate an open table game into my world that takes place during my main campaign so that both games are both affecting the world at the same time.
Disclaimer: I have never run a West Marches campaign, but would love to try (maybe with a co-DM) if I had the infrastructure/player base
Honestly, if you think you will have a good supply of unreliable players, I'm not sure why you wouldn't draw some inspiration from the West Marches style. Ignoring the specifics (people can get really hung up on the definition), it seems like the basic concept gives you what you need:
1. 1 session adventures (players are forced back to town at the end of the real world night)
2. Suitable for rotating players and even DMs if you like to share or want to roll as a PC for a change. After some players hit tier two, they could roll up alternates and hang with newer players for a night, or organize a higher level session.
3. Exploration and Murder Hobo based, no overarching plotlines or complex lore required. Continuity is provided by an ever expanding world map and the stories players tell each other.
4. Totally homebrew, mostly improvised, players tell you where they want to go and you decide what is there. You can drop in previously designed locations, maps from modules, random ideas, roll from tables, anything goes. No reason you couldn't advertise a menu of quest options or suggestions before a session.
5. Has the potential to create a really interesting shared experience with a large group and create a unique world. Especially since it's a bit more hardcore than the story/character heavy style of modern roleplaying.
Personally, I would like to run or play in a situation where the world evolves a bit as players discover and adventure more. Maybe the Boring Empire decides that Boringtown should have more resources as the PCs discover things and bring back treasure, and they build better shops and accommodations. Maybe they establish more towns and outposts to make it easier to travel deeper into the wild. Maybe the high level PCs build strongholds or shops of their own. Maybe you come up with a genius overarching plotline that spans several parties and adventures even though they are all one shots. All sorts of potential if the game has longevity.
It would also be cool to have another DM in a campaign like this. I like the idea of letting someone else play with the toys I leave on the map, and then being inspired by the things they throw down. I also have the terrible problem of dreaming about characters I want to try while I'm running a campaign and coming up with new campaign ideas when I'm playing my character, so the variety would be fun.
Anyway, be confident and keep it simple. I would try your game if you were in my town.
Be mindful that the only person who's really going to get any appreciation out of that is you unless you have significant overlap between your "main campaign" and the game store games' players. it's like an in-joke that only you know. So don't be so rigid with cross table ramifications, there's no need to have a unified "cinematic universe" (of which you're the only audience) with continuity between the two tables. Sure maybe both tables can share the same map, and there's a common history of the world portrayed on that map. But once two games are playing on that map, probably little to know overall through the first two tiers of play, but once you're in tier III or IV you got the problem of Main Group doing something really cool and Game store group being affected by it but aren't able to do the cool thing or anything comparable to it because of the needs for world consistency. There are plenty of legends and mythologies IRL that lack consistency from tale to tale within them, DMs should be more aware of that.
EDIT: It's sort of like you're setting up your main group to be like The Avengers, and the game store crowd is like The Defenders, they'll know they're playing in "your" world and are not as important as your main game. It's just not necessary. One thing you could do, and would save you considerable work is break the present campaign history into a series of one shots. Recycling is a perfectly fair DM trick.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Temp Agency D&D - picking up the side quests that your party neglected.
You'd most likely post the week prior the level of PCs required for said adventure. It's doable. Maybe a little complicated, but doable.
Good luck, let us know how it works out!
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
This is an excellent point and reminds me of exactly why I don't flesh out my entire history my setting. So, I slept on this topic and decided that because of the fact that going into this I have no idea on how many people are going to attend or what people want out of the game and I plan on consistently being the only DM (for now) and playing on Mondays only, I'm just going to start with a good ol' session zero and see where that leads me and what my players will be expecting. I also agree with what has been said about how West Marches is good for a large group of people. Currently, I'm not so sure if that is sustainable since I only want to play on Mondays and that style of game would just make a waitlist for my players. I have a WM style setting roughly set up should it get to that point, but ultimately I decided I'll just run what I think will be fun and just go from there. I swear I get so excited about this game that I start overthinking what could potentially happen and forget to just keep it simple and let it play out organically.
Thanks for the Insight!
My local game store had a gaming league thing. It was patterned off of AL and in theory there were multiple games going on of different adventures and levels and player experience. There was a DM and the game was held at the same time each week and there were reservation slots but more people came some weeks and less others and some left due to jobs or other reasons. But since it was league based at first, the DM would fit new people as they came in. “You meet a cleric that was captured” or “the Hall sent you reinforcements.” Advancement was determined by a number of sessions, and tokens were given for attending sessions and there was a token cost for magic items. It worked well, and gradually the regulars coalesced into a non-league group and most of us have been together for a couple of years+. So this thing can definitely work.
I've been thinking about running a campaign that is mostly a bunch of 1-on-1 adventures where PCs go on missions on their own. Then from time to time, PCs come together to solve a bigger problem for like one session.
Adventurer's League is the advice I was going to give. The campaigns do have a story but it's not a problem if the roster changes between sessions.
In my neck of the woods we have successfully run one shot games each and every week for the last 6 years (- 1 for covid). The basis is built to accommodate new and upcoming players into the DND world. A new player comes in and a DM helps them build a level one character. We set that person down with other new level one characters. Then the DM then takes them through the basics to learn the game, learn the character and participate in a group. At the end of session they level up to 2. Pending the player has time, enjoyed them self and had a great experience they are more then welcome to come back next week for their newly leveled two character. Same process repeats itself for the player whom is now level two.
The process takes place until the character reaches level 5. After that time the player should be experienced enough to find a regular gaming group for a campaign type situation. Or take up the role as a new DM to form their own regular gaming group.
With this being only one shot games the player and the DM has the flexibility to come and go as they please with out the worry of being penalized for missing a session or two due to real life situations.