(tl:dr, I'm building a campaign setting for middle schoolers that isn't as tied to Tolkien as it has been, and would love to hear from you guys as I use this space to develop it.)
First, a little background:
I'm a teacher, and this last year the 7th and 8th grade students begged me to start a gaming club. I was cautious (because of reasons), but the school administration thought it would be an incentive for many struggling students to improve their efforts in class, so, with pressure from each direction, I conceded.
There were so many applicants to the club that we split them into two different games: one of experienced veterans, and one for newcomers to D&D. My role was to supervise and ensure that students had earned the privilege to come to the club. Things moved forward from there as I'd predicted: many students-- especially the two DMs-- just couldn't keep their grades up. Within a matter of weeks, the numbers began to fluctuate and dwindle, and the DMs started flaking out too. To solve this crisis, one of the experienced players stepped up to DM the experienced party, and I filled the DM role for the newcomers.
Taking the reins, I asked for the details of the campaign. They pulled out a map of Middle Earth and pointed to Lorien, explaining that they were going to steal weapons from the elves to go kill an ancient gold dragon... at level 2...
I realized I had lots of work to do. I managed to get them up to level 8 by fighting some goblins and trolls (which they assumed and insisted were from Moria), and then introduced them to a "Goddess of the Forest" on the borders of "Mirkwood" who told them of a dragon who lived in a mountain to the north. You guessed it: they thought they were fighting Smaug, and decreed that the dwarf in the party was related to Thorin, and therefore rightful heir to Erebor. Aside from blindsiding me with that little tidbit of backstory, they had totally forgotten they told me they wanted to fight the ancient gold dragon. They also totally missed that the "Goddess" was in fact an adult green dragon who tricked them into softening up her rival to the north so she could wipe him out and step in as a cruel tyrant. So I used their metagamed misinformation to good effect, further complicating matters by tossing in a balor as the warlock's patron, demanding he be freed from his prison in the mountain so he can "help" them defeat the dragon.
The campaign ended when they released the balor, who then high tailed it to the roots of the mountain and "awakened something inside". The entire mountain superheated and exploded in a gigantic supervolcano! [roll credits] For the most part, the kids were satisfied with the campaign's ending, but are eager to see what happens next, and want to continue in the same setting next year. For my part, I didn't enjoy such strong ties to Tolkien's world, which is probably what motivated me to just blow it all up at the end... :)
In preparation for the gaming club next year, I plan on continuing to DM, but I felt like this campaign was really restricted because we ended up so beholden to the map and, due to metagaming, the lore of the Tolkien setting. It was good training wheels for the newbies, but I'd like to distance the campaign from that as much as I can. I'll welcome any comments or feedback in building a new setting from the ashes of this old one.
Some thoughts, questions, and details of what I've got together so far:
What was once Erebor (which I tried shifting to the name "Heartless Mountain" to no avail) erupted in a supervolcano, which will bathe all of "Middle Earth" in ash, greatly affecting climate and, hopefully, geography enough that I can really distance it from its origins. As far as my tenure as DM was concerned, we only really explored the regions between Lorien and the mountain, so do you think I should pattern the lands beyond after the Tolkien map, ignore it completely, or do something in between?
I'm moving the clock forward, giving time for forces of evil to take advantage of the cataclysm, and other regions to heal and recover enough to have a modicum of post-apocalyptic civilization. Also to wipe away some of that metagaming Tolkien knowledge that vexed me so much in this year's game. Does anything come to mind that I should consider in moving things forward like this?
In a frantic effort to not toss a nameless balor into the story, I had given it the name Baazilor. Not very imaginative, but do you think I can change that name for the setting next year? Some students may remember the name from this last gaming club, and I like to have at least some consistency. Thoughts?
I am thinking that the devious green dragon will have finagled herself in to a position as the balor's lieutenant, possibly even becoming a shadow dragon. The gold dragon will likely have died in the bedlam, which I may use as a possible escape for any of the PCs from the last campaign (if I were in an area about to be filled with lava, a fireproof dragon's corpse would be my first thoughts of survival). That way I could bring some of them in as NPCs to explain how things really went down so long ago. Are there more interesting directions I could go with them?
Given the cataclysm, I really want to mess with the setting's ecology (perhaps this was an explosion of chaotic magic as much as it was tectonic?). For example, the elves and spiders of Mirkwood might find themselves fused into a society of driders, etc. Anything cool I could do with this?
I'm wondering if I should take things to a more "low-magic" kind of setting, given the difficulty many of the kids had with managing the magical classes this last year. Thoughts?
As I said, I welcome any thoughts or feedback as I develop things here. Feel free to chime in!
I too run a game for middle schoolers. For the last several years a DnD club has been run along with the more typical after school activities like running club, archery, or chess club. This year, I took the reins of actually being a DM. In prior years, the DnD club was small (6-7 students) and they ran their own games, sponsors (teachers just watched and sat in the room). Anyway, this year we started with like 18 kids. Way more than I could run, so I asked the 8th graders to run their own game, and took the 6th and 7th graders for myself. As you noticed in your game, the group was massive at first but slowly contracted as some kids found that DnD wasn't for them.
Since you tied up your last campaign with a bow, I would suggest that you leave it at that and next year run something you want. Start with opening the club to well anyone that wants to play and can commit to at least a semester's worth of time. Not saying that it is a bad thing to tie grades to playing the game, but maybe it should just be about having a social experience in the hell that is middle school. Sorry, mind is wandering as I have so much to say. Back to running your own game. Announce to the school next year when the D&D club will be opening and put out posters. If you can, find some of the kids from last year and tell them that A. DnD is back on, BUT there will be changes. B. Say that last campaign ENDED. PERIOD. C. See if the more mature 8th graders are willing to run a separate game for a small group, you will run new players.
Your new game, with new players (some returning ones maybe see above) can be anything you want it to be about. Tolkien's Middle Earth or the Forgotten Realms for that matter never even need to be brought up. I suggest starting your new world with a session packet, a few pages of need to know info about the world: Think DC 10 Int roll to know, LOTS of premade characters with lots of permutations, like Dwarf Fighter and Dwarf Warlock just to cover really interesting bases for the players to choose from. Tell them that the names on the sheets can be changed. DO NOT MAKE/LET new players of the game have their first experience with D&D be making a character. That is well hard and boring. Move them quickly through this stage by asking about what TYPE of character they want and give them options of FULLY filled out Characters to choose from. Then give them a set of dice, I prepurchased a set of dice for each my players so I knew they would have them. You can find large packs of sets for cheap on Amazon.com. From there introduce them to D&D in your own style. I prefer to RAILROAD the heck out of newbies the first few sessions, because they simply so not have a grasp of the game. YMMV.
Anyway. Read this over and reply back and we can discuss what we should each be doing next year.
A kindred spirit! I've really found that kids in this age group relish the opportunity to "fight back" at something; enter D&D!
The reason grades are tied to playing the game is that in order to participate in any of our afterschool clubs (excluding homework help) students must maintain a certain GPA. That stipulation is out of my hands, unfortunately.
As far as the logistics of next year's club, I was actually thinking of having it happen on two days of the week. One would be a more open, social day, for kids to run their own games, bust out a quick game of Magic or Munchkin, and have a more casual atmosphere (I might even run some "white room" combats on these days). The other day would be for the groups to seriously buckle down and get in some D&D. This is intended to accommodate those who want to just have a fun day of "PvP" style games as well as those who want to engage in some shared narrative experience. We had a lot of problems with people jumping into the middle of the game and really disrupting the fun for other players. Because I was only a DM for part of the time (and also doing double duty with the homework help kids), I was only marginally able to manage some of these issues. I'm hoping having two different days with two different intentions may help with some of that. Since you've had a few years' experience running something like this, I'd love to pick your brain on that too.
As far as the campaign setting, I like what you're saying. I might just keep the things we ended with that I liked and toss the rest away. To me, the campaign ended on a bit of a cliffhanger, and I'd love to use my favorite parts as building blocks for next year. Many of the aforementioned details are things I'd enjoy doing, but what I certainly don't want is people assuming things about the area based on Tolkien's masterpieces. We had bad enough "meta moments" with people looking up monsters we fought for weaknesses or making assumptions outside of their characters' knowledge that I think the players making something that is their own will be a healthy thing.
And I love your idea about the session packet! And the premade characters too. I think being able to hand a new player something like that would certainly be helpful, and because I'm building them I'll also have an idea of what kinds of characters to potentially build a story around (e.g., it always sucks if you make a cleric and never really face off against any undead). And the advice about railroading newbies (especially as young as these are) is good advice, as is the free dice. This last year we actually found someone who donated a bunch of dice to us. I don't know if we can arrange that again, but having a set of dice all your own should be par for the course.
Thanks for the feedback! I'll keep posting things here as I develop it. I'd love to hear what your plans are for next year too. It's always nice to build a think tank for these kinds of things!
I find I really like the idea of the post-cataclysm setting, and I'll likely keep that. And if I'm making the starting PCs for them to choose from, I think that I can help ease them into magic use too (after all, half the fun at that age is being able to throw fire at things). I think I'll toss out all but the most subtle Tolkien ties, but I see a lot of potential in what I have as a threat for them to face.
Hawksmoor, you mentioned a commitment from kids for at least a semester. Do you see a lot of turnover rate on something like that?
No not big turnover, but I think commitment is important. Commitment can forstall RageQuit, and allow a student to come back to the table if something happens they do not like.
Sorry for the brief answers last night, I dislike typing on a tablet and was too lazy to go into the other room and fire up my laptop.
Rereading your posts, I am struck by two things: One, you obviously do not want to play in Middle Earth and Two you are kinda getting into what happens next after you broke Middle Earth. DM to DM here...which is it? From my perspective the metagaming and player expectations zingers will not stop if the Tolkienverse is used going forward. Even after the conflagration is ended you still have hobbits and not halflings, elves in retreat, no real "wizards" to speak of unless you let them play Maia, and an inevitable "Let's go see if old Tom Bombadil can help us save the world!" situation. To me, just reading your first post, you managed to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear this year, but should probably just dump the whole LOTR and Hobbit stuff next year.
Already I can hear the other DMs and Players reading this post and getting their blood pressure high. Why? Because, I am suggesting that you run the game you want for your players and not just sandbox the whole thing. Running a game for kids is vastly different than running for adults, as you know. These new to gaming players need more guidance, not just in what dice to roll, but in how to inhabit a character and think in terms of that character being the UI for the world you are crafting. As such, you must run the game you want, populated with the characters the Players inhabit and focused on the challenges those characters face and hopefully overcome. So, if you want to continue the world: go ahead, but realize that you can just stop the game from this year and create a new game next year more to your liking. The older players will adapt and the new players will not even know the difference.
All that said, how often does your DnD group meet a week and for how much time a day?
That really is an excellent question., and perhaps I need to clarify a little. When I took over as DM, and was shown that we were using the Tolkien map, I thought, "Okay, let's use it!" not thinking I would be beholden to the lore of the setting too. After all, we had half-orcs and dragonborn in our band (not to mention more overt displays of magic such as a necromantic wizard), so this wasn't exactly Middle Earth as conceived by Tolkien. There were no halfling/hobbit PCs, or even any mention of them. Just the map.
So, with proper application of Schrödinger's Gun, the only things that "officially" existed during my tenure as DM were a forest inhabited and protected by elves, a mountain range extending to the north that houses goblins and trolls, a larger forest with elves, giant spiders, a set of dark ruins, and a single mountain not too far north-by-northeast from there with a town built on a lake below it, and a dragon inside. In my mind, the fact that they lined up more or less with details of Middle Earth was incidental to the map we were using, and given the cataclysmic eruption, much of that will dramatically change. The only references to Middle Earth came from players; as you well know, player characters are the stars of the show, and the DM is there to adjudicate the story. So when I balanced my personal desires for the setting against my Rule #1 (Everyone has fun!) I did little to argue or refute such assumptions. The furthest I probably went was, when they got excited about fighting Smaug, was to concede that yes, a red dragon had lived and died there ages ago, and that the dragon currently residing in Heartless Mountain (the name I gave it) had disguised himself as a dwarf king named Couatlin.
So yeah, I want to shake off the opportunities for metagaming as much as I can, but, to use your metaphor, I kind of like the silk purse I made. I ended it on a cliffhanger, and can think of lots of fun things I can do with it going forward. Moving the timeline forward upwards of a century-- and having a campaign packet like you suggested-- should allow me to shake off any aspects I didn't like. Like you said, the older players will adapt and the new players won't know the difference. :)
And I totally agree with you that younger groups may need some rails to follow, for all aspects of the game. Teachers understand the concept of scaffolding and training wheels all too well, and it certainly applies to learning a complex and rewarding game like Dungeons & Dragons. The only counter I have to this sentiment is that, as much as kids this age need structure and guidance, they also crave a sense of control. So I do the best I can to cover my rails in sand. I was actually thinking about this last night, when considering what kinds of PCs to prepare for the campaign (as you suggested), and wondering how I can balance having premade characters while letting them feel they're playing what they want. Any thoughts on that front?
This last year, we only held the gaming club for this final trimester, and there were a lot of learning curves, both for the kids and for myself. We met once a week, for an hour and a half, which isn't terrible, but really called for some focus in order to get anything done.
As to what kinds of PCs to prepare for the game, I just create broad archetypes, named so I can save them, but that is about it. So, I make the characters with different stat arrays, different spells, and subclasses (if applicable). Players can swap names, genders, and maybe even weapons to suit their ideas. Once the players have chosen their PC, they can start to develop backstories as they read your packet and let their imaginations wander. I do not make backstories for these characters. Once the players have all chosen their characters, I introduce the starter dungeon. It is usually short, like 5 encounters, and may or may not tie into the later game. This is usually enough time to get players used to die rolling conventions, and how to read their character sheets correctly. (Headaches still from one player that to this day couldn't remember how much damage his greatsword did.) In otherwords, make a ton of pregens. I used another random generator at: http://gmh.xocomp.net/dd5charactergenerator/ which uses SRD material only and easily kicks out character after character.
We also play once a week for about 1.5 hours, which is so not enough time. In prior years the group met 2x a week at lunch too. Next year, if my wife won't kill me, I plan on running D&D club 2x a week just so we can get through some content.
On to the subject of control, or Player Agency. I am all for agency. Once the players understand the game well enough (2-3 sessions in) options should open up. Then, D&D's training wheels fall off and it becomes a game about the Player's Characters in the Game you have devised. I, have dastardly plots and timelines, that if the players decline to bite or fail to stop will result in changes to the world. FOREX, if they decided in our game to ignore the whole Cult of the Dragon thing in Hoard of the Dragon Queen and instead journey south to the Cloudpeaks to smash some orcs and investigate giant tombs long believed to be there. Then the Cult would succeed and likely cause big things to happen in my game. Tiamat *might* not be summoned but her followers would likely be reinforced by Abishai from the Abyss. But early on, there are players that need those rails just to get into the concept of gaming.
Player: "What do we do next?"
GM: "You do remember a rumor of a wight inhabiting a king's tomb nearby."
Player: "Sounds neat. I go there to kill the wight and get the king's lost gold."
Rereading this, I can even see how even my example had player agency, because the player "invents" the concept of "lost gold". Still plenty of places for control besides which door do I kick down or which monster gets the pointy end. Which as Colville points out is not actually choice at all.
Okay, to make sure I understand, you'll take a handful of broad storytelling archetypes (are we talking about Cambpellian monomyth here?), whip up a few classes that can serve those roles well, and leave other character details (including backgrounds?) open for the player to fill in.
A shakedown dungeon/adventure can be very helpful, both as a gameplay tutorial and as an opportunity to feel out the first steps of the story. I've considered doing a "session zero" but at this age and experience level, I don't think it would be fruitful.
You'll get no arguments from me about the benefits of railroading, but I've seen enough examples to know that it must be handled with care. Rarely has that been the case with younger players, though, who often appreciate a little guidance.
Yeah, I make melee fighters, ranged fighters, support, healers, ahem artillery, etc and pregen a bunch of PCs that fit those molds. No backstory at all. Players invent those. As to session zero, I do still suggest those. It helps me spy on the kids and learn about their characters. Most kiddos will not write a four page backstory so I have to snoop. Also, it can eliminate that one kid that wants to play evil.
Here's a general setting intro that could start off my handout:
It has been nearly a century since the world broke.
Baazilor, Scourge of the Fiery Depths, awoke the sleeping fury of Heartless Mountain, unleashing chaos and destruction across all known lands. Sunlight was shrouded for months, casting the unnatural chill of the Ash Winter. Mountains fell and prairies shattered, razing and burying entire civilizations. Whole peoples were twisted into monstrous forms, beholden to the whims of Vesper, the draconic Queen of Shadows. As Baazilor’s chief lieutenant, she leads his fiendish armies against the last strongholds of light and hope.
But hope remains. Legends tell of an ancient artifact, the Creed Stone, that can bring an end to Baazilor’s corruption once and for all, and unite all good peoples of the Sunderlands!
What do you think? I'll follow this up with more specific setting details, but do you think this broadly introduces the setting well enough? Are there glaring omissions, points of confusion, or too-ambiguous details that might mislead players?
Ah, okay, so archetype based on mechanics. Gotcha.
So you do suggest a session zero? Iguess I found my kids rather impatient to get started...
Yes, I do suggest a session zero, even if the kids only have an hour and half to get ever thing done. This year, I broke it into about 3 chunks: One to select your PC, this took about 30 minutes, One to think about fleshing out the character/build some backstory and links to the other players, and One third to begin the minidungeon. In the course of the minidungeon, mechanics are introduced. The mini dungeon is usually wrapped up in the next weeks session. I find this satisfies even eager start players.
Again, I have not encountered the whole "I wrote all this backstory for my PC." in my kid groups, so during the SZ, I really had to listen in and take some notes to make sure I could make the player characters a part of the game. FOREX, we ran the Hoard of the Dragon Queen and I made two of the PCs from the town of Greenest (although they had since moved on) and because of their familiarity with the town and it inhabitants they got more information and felt, I believe, more connected with the module.
Here's a general setting intro that could start off my handout:
It has been nearly a century since the world broke.
Baazilor, Scourge of the Fiery Depths, awoke the sleeping fury of Heartless Mountain, unleashing chaos and destruction across all known lands. Sunlight was shrouded for months, casting the unnatural chill of the Ash Winter. Mountains fell and prairies shattered, razing and burying entire civilizations. Whole peoples were twisted into monstrous forms, beholden to the whims of Vesper, the draconic Queen of Shadows. As Baazilor’s chief lieutenant, she leads his fiendish armies against the last strongholds of light and hope.
But hope remains. Legends tell of an ancient artifact, the Creed Stone, that can bring an end to Baazilor’s corruption once and for all, and unite all good peoples of the Sunderlands!
What do you think? I'll follow this up with more specific setting details, but do you think this broadly introduces the setting well enough? Are there glaring omissions, points of confusion, or too-ambiguous details that might mislead players?
I like the way it sounds, very epic in scope and could take the players a long time to sort through the game. Which could be a problem given you have limited time to play each week. Mapping out the year, when could they reliably be considered to 1. obtain the Creed Stone 2. Get to the Demon (which means through his Lt. and her forces) and 3. Conduct the final battle. UbD principles could govern this problem well.
Next, although I did recommend Railroading them, is this mission statement too inflexible. If the players decide to instead journey to the Greyhavens to see if any boats survived the great cataclysm, and if so, to sail south into unknown lands? Matt Colville did an amazing video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkXMxiAGUWg watching this the other day made me really think about how most games are structured. On one hand we have the conceit that DMs should run games players want to play and do what the players want, and on the other hand, and modules are written this way, it is Players play the game the DM wants to run. Both are fine.
So, do you want a grand and epic campaign set up for the players to take up roles in? Or do you want a game where you allow the players to figure their place in the world and present challenges to them as they move through the world?
I like the way it sounds, very epic in scope and could take the players a long time to sort through the game. Which could be a problem given you have limited time to play each week. Mapping out the year, when could they reliably be considered to 1. obtain the Creed Stone 2. Get to the Demon (which means through his Lt. and her forces) and 3. Conduct the final battle. UbD principles could govern this problem well.
Assuming that I stretch the campaign over the course of the year, and given that our school is on a trimester system, the circumstances lend themselves to a three-act structure. 1: Establish characters and major dramatic question, 2. Put the characters in an impossibly dangerous condition, 3. Have them escape and be victorious. How that will precisely map out in the details is yet to be seen (though the scenarios you mentioned are a likely sequence of events), and hard to lock down until I can see some of the players' choices. I would need to make sure and pay attention to pacing from week to week, to ensure that things come to a satisfying end (I feel like this last year was a bit of a rush job, but people had fun, so...).
Next, although I did recommend Railroading them, is this mission statement too inflexible. If the players decide to instead journey to the Greyhavens to see if any boats survived the great cataclysm, and if so, to sail south into unknown lands? Matt Colville did an amazing video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkXMxiAGUWg watching this the other day made me really think about how most games are structured. On one hand we have the conceit that DMs should run games players want to play and do what the players want, and on the other hand, and modules are written this way, it is Players play the game the DM wants to run. Both are fine.
And both are possible, IMO.
Let's say that our intrepid heroes are presented with the setting as is, and go, "Yeah, that's cool, but let's go be pirates!" Who am I to say they shouldn't? As you say, the DM should run a game the players want to play. But what's to stop me from putting the Creed Stone in the middle of a pirate treasure hoard, or in the care of island-dwelling monks, instead of in some deep dungeon or wherever else I would have planned on putting it? They can still go find it and play the kind of game they want to. Everyone's happy.
But what if, even then, they show zero interest in the presented quest? Again, the Hero has the right to Refuse the Call to Adventure, but he/she will often be thrust into adventure nonetheless. If the players don't take up the mantle as saviors of the world, then they can see stumbling on the macguffin as an albatross, drawing opponents to them like a magnet, and then the quest becomes trying to get away from it and/or shaking off any connection to it at all.
Or I could go a third direction, totally forgetting the Creed Stone, and pursue goals more interesting for everyone involved (and I save the Creed Stone quest for next year). To use the same old metaphor, my philosophy as a DM is often about making silk purses, in order for everyone to have fun. (Man, I should fill the setting with all sorts of magical "ear purses", just so I can chuckle to myself...)
I'm a big fan of Matthew Colville, and this video is one of his highlights. I like to think that, at my best, I'm a flexible and accommodating DM like he describes here.
So, do you want a grand and epic campaign set up for the players to take up roles in? Or do you want a game where you allow the players to figure their place in the world and present challenges to them as they move through the world?
Um, both? Yes, both. Both is good. I typically place obstacles and encounters in whatever path the players choose that will culminate in an epic story whether they're buying a ticket for the train or completely offroading it. I'm reminded of Taking20's recent video, suggesting that beginnings and endings don't have to be (and rarely are) a straight line.
Me too. Like I said, I usually like to "think out loud" in places like this, where people can give feedback and catch glaring mistakes before I take things to the game table. Thanks for offering what you have so far.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
(tl:dr, I'm building a campaign setting for middle schoolers that isn't as tied to Tolkien as it has been, and would love to hear from you guys as I use this space to develop it.)
First, a little background:
I'm a teacher, and this last year the 7th and 8th grade students begged me to start a gaming club. I was cautious (because of reasons), but the school administration thought it would be an incentive for many struggling students to improve their efforts in class, so, with pressure from each direction, I conceded.
There were so many applicants to the club that we split them into two different games: one of experienced veterans, and one for newcomers to D&D. My role was to supervise and ensure that students had earned the privilege to come to the club. Things moved forward from there as I'd predicted: many students-- especially the two DMs-- just couldn't keep their grades up. Within a matter of weeks, the numbers began to fluctuate and dwindle, and the DMs started flaking out too. To solve this crisis, one of the experienced players stepped up to DM the experienced party, and I filled the DM role for the newcomers.
Taking the reins, I asked for the details of the campaign. They pulled out a map of Middle Earth and pointed to Lorien, explaining that they were going to steal weapons from the elves to go kill an ancient gold dragon... at level 2...
I realized I had lots of work to do. I managed to get them up to level 8 by fighting some goblins and trolls (which they assumed and insisted were from Moria), and then introduced them to a "Goddess of the Forest" on the borders of "Mirkwood" who told them of a dragon who lived in a mountain to the north. You guessed it: they thought they were fighting Smaug, and decreed that the dwarf in the party was related to Thorin, and therefore rightful heir to Erebor. Aside from blindsiding me with that little tidbit of backstory, they had totally forgotten they told me they wanted to fight the ancient gold dragon. They also totally missed that the "Goddess" was in fact an adult green dragon who tricked them into softening up her rival to the north so she could wipe him out and step in as a cruel tyrant. So I used their metagamed misinformation to good effect, further complicating matters by tossing in a balor as the warlock's patron, demanding he be freed from his prison in the mountain so he can "help" them defeat the dragon.
The campaign ended when they released the balor, who then high tailed it to the roots of the mountain and "awakened something inside". The entire mountain superheated and exploded in a gigantic supervolcano! [roll credits] For the most part, the kids were satisfied with the campaign's ending, but are eager to see what happens next, and want to continue in the same setting next year. For my part, I didn't enjoy such strong ties to Tolkien's world, which is probably what motivated me to just blow it all up at the end... :)
In preparation for the gaming club next year, I plan on continuing to DM, but I felt like this campaign was really restricted because we ended up so beholden to the map and, due to metagaming, the lore of the Tolkien setting. It was good training wheels for the newbies, but I'd like to distance the campaign from that as much as I can. I'll welcome any comments or feedback in building a new setting from the ashes of this old one.
Some thoughts, questions, and details of what I've got together so far:
As I said, I welcome any thoughts or feedback as I develop things here. Feel free to chime in!
Hi!
I too run a game for middle schoolers. For the last several years a DnD club has been run along with the more typical after school activities like running club, archery, or chess club. This year, I took the reins of actually being a DM. In prior years, the DnD club was small (6-7 students) and they ran their own games, sponsors (teachers just watched and sat in the room). Anyway, this year we started with like 18 kids. Way more than I could run, so I asked the 8th graders to run their own game, and took the 6th and 7th graders for myself. As you noticed in your game, the group was massive at first but slowly contracted as some kids found that DnD wasn't for them.
Since you tied up your last campaign with a bow, I would suggest that you leave it at that and next year run something you want. Start with opening the club to well anyone that wants to play and can commit to at least a semester's worth of time. Not saying that it is a bad thing to tie grades to playing the game, but maybe it should just be about having a social experience in the hell that is middle school. Sorry, mind is wandering as I have so much to say. Back to running your own game. Announce to the school next year when the D&D club will be opening and put out posters. If you can, find some of the kids from last year and tell them that A. DnD is back on, BUT there will be changes. B. Say that last campaign ENDED. PERIOD. C. See if the more mature 8th graders are willing to run a separate game for a small group, you will run new players.
Your new game, with new players (some returning ones maybe see above) can be anything you want it to be about. Tolkien's Middle Earth or the Forgotten Realms for that matter never even need to be brought up. I suggest starting your new world with a session packet, a few pages of need to know info about the world: Think DC 10 Int roll to know, LOTS of premade characters with lots of permutations, like Dwarf Fighter and Dwarf Warlock just to cover really interesting bases for the players to choose from. Tell them that the names on the sheets can be changed. DO NOT MAKE/LET new players of the game have their first experience with D&D be making a character. That is well hard and boring. Move them quickly through this stage by asking about what TYPE of character they want and give them options of FULLY filled out Characters to choose from. Then give them a set of dice, I prepurchased a set of dice for each my players so I knew they would have them. You can find large packs of sets for cheap on Amazon.com. From there introduce them to D&D in your own style. I prefer to RAILROAD the heck out of newbies the first few sessions, because they simply so not have a grasp of the game. YMMV.
Anyway. Read this over and reply back and we can discuss what we should each be doing next year.
Enjoy your much needed summer break!
Hawk
A kindred spirit! I've really found that kids in this age group relish the opportunity to "fight back" at something; enter D&D!
The reason grades are tied to playing the game is that in order to participate in any of our afterschool clubs (excluding homework help) students must maintain a certain GPA. That stipulation is out of my hands, unfortunately.
As far as the logistics of next year's club, I was actually thinking of having it happen on two days of the week. One would be a more open, social day, for kids to run their own games, bust out a quick game of Magic or Munchkin, and have a more casual atmosphere (I might even run some "white room" combats on these days). The other day would be for the groups to seriously buckle down and get in some D&D. This is intended to accommodate those who want to just have a fun day of "PvP" style games as well as those who want to engage in some shared narrative experience. We had a lot of problems with people jumping into the middle of the game and really disrupting the fun for other players. Because I was only a DM for part of the time (and also doing double duty with the homework help kids), I was only marginally able to manage some of these issues. I'm hoping having two different days with two different intentions may help with some of that. Since you've had a few years' experience running something like this, I'd love to pick your brain on that too.
As far as the campaign setting, I like what you're saying. I might just keep the things we ended with that I liked and toss the rest away. To me, the campaign ended on a bit of a cliffhanger, and I'd love to use my favorite parts as building blocks for next year. Many of the aforementioned details are things I'd enjoy doing, but what I certainly don't want is people assuming things about the area based on Tolkien's masterpieces. We had bad enough "meta moments" with people looking up monsters we fought for weaknesses or making assumptions outside of their characters' knowledge that I think the players making something that is their own will be a healthy thing.
And I love your idea about the session packet! And the premade characters too. I think being able to hand a new player something like that would certainly be helpful, and because I'm building them I'll also have an idea of what kinds of characters to potentially build a story around (e.g., it always sucks if you make a cleric and never really face off against any undead). And the advice about railroading newbies (especially as young as these are) is good advice, as is the free dice. This last year we actually found someone who donated a bunch of dice to us. I don't know if we can arrange that again, but having a set of dice all your own should be par for the course.
Thanks for the feedback! I'll keep posting things here as I develop it. I'd love to hear what your plans are for next year too. It's always nice to build a think tank for these kinds of things!
I just looked online. A set of six, in felt bags, costs 11.99 US. Cheap even for a teachers salary. I just ordered a set for next year.
I should get on that. It's a pretty good deal!
I find I really like the idea of the post-cataclysm setting, and I'll likely keep that. And if I'm making the starting PCs for them to choose from, I think that I can help ease them into magic use too (after all, half the fun at that age is being able to throw fire at things). I think I'll toss out all but the most subtle Tolkien ties, but I see a lot of potential in what I have as a threat for them to face.
Hawksmoor, you mentioned a commitment from kids for at least a semester. Do you see a lot of turnover rate on something like that?
No not big turnover, but I think commitment is important. Commitment can forstall RageQuit, and allow a student to come back to the table if something happens they do not like.
Hi again,
Sorry for the brief answers last night, I dislike typing on a tablet and was too lazy to go into the other room and fire up my laptop.
Rereading your posts, I am struck by two things: One, you obviously do not want to play in Middle Earth and Two you are kinda getting into what happens next after you broke Middle Earth. DM to DM here...which is it? From my perspective the metagaming and player expectations zingers will not stop if the Tolkienverse is used going forward. Even after the conflagration is ended you still have hobbits and not halflings, elves in retreat, no real "wizards" to speak of unless you let them play Maia, and an inevitable "Let's go see if old Tom Bombadil can help us save the world!" situation. To me, just reading your first post, you managed to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear this year, but should probably just dump the whole LOTR and Hobbit stuff next year.
Already I can hear the other DMs and Players reading this post and getting their blood pressure high. Why? Because, I am suggesting that you run the game you want for your players and not just sandbox the whole thing. Running a game for kids is vastly different than running for adults, as you know. These new to gaming players need more guidance, not just in what dice to roll, but in how to inhabit a character and think in terms of that character being the UI for the world you are crafting. As such, you must run the game you want, populated with the characters the Players inhabit and focused on the challenges those characters face and hopefully overcome. So, if you want to continue the world: go ahead, but realize that you can just stop the game from this year and create a new game next year more to your liking. The older players will adapt and the new players will not even know the difference.
All that said, how often does your DnD group meet a week and for how much time a day?
Hawk
That really is an excellent question., and perhaps I need to clarify a little. When I took over as DM, and was shown that we were using the Tolkien map, I thought, "Okay, let's use it!" not thinking I would be beholden to the lore of the setting too. After all, we had half-orcs and dragonborn in our band (not to mention more overt displays of magic such as a necromantic wizard), so this wasn't exactly Middle Earth as conceived by Tolkien. There were no halfling/hobbit PCs, or even any mention of them. Just the map.
So, with proper application of Schrödinger's Gun, the only things that "officially" existed during my tenure as DM were a forest inhabited and protected by elves, a mountain range extending to the north that houses goblins and trolls, a larger forest with elves, giant spiders, a set of dark ruins, and a single mountain not too far north-by-northeast from there with a town built on a lake below it, and a dragon inside. In my mind, the fact that they lined up more or less with details of Middle Earth was incidental to the map we were using, and given the cataclysmic eruption, much of that will dramatically change. The only references to Middle Earth came from players; as you well know, player characters are the stars of the show, and the DM is there to adjudicate the story. So when I balanced my personal desires for the setting against my Rule #1 (Everyone has fun!) I did little to argue or refute such assumptions. The furthest I probably went was, when they got excited about fighting Smaug, was to concede that yes, a red dragon had lived and died there ages ago, and that the dragon currently residing in Heartless Mountain (the name I gave it) had disguised himself as a dwarf king named Couatlin.
So yeah, I want to shake off the opportunities for metagaming as much as I can, but, to use your metaphor, I kind of like the silk purse I made. I ended it on a cliffhanger, and can think of lots of fun things I can do with it going forward. Moving the timeline forward upwards of a century-- and having a campaign packet like you suggested-- should allow me to shake off any aspects I didn't like. Like you said, the older players will adapt and the new players won't know the difference. :)
And I totally agree with you that younger groups may need some rails to follow, for all aspects of the game. Teachers understand the concept of scaffolding and training wheels all too well, and it certainly applies to learning a complex and rewarding game like Dungeons & Dragons. The only counter I have to this sentiment is that, as much as kids this age need structure and guidance, they also crave a sense of control. So I do the best I can to cover my rails in sand. I was actually thinking about this last night, when considering what kinds of PCs to prepare for the campaign (as you suggested), and wondering how I can balance having premade characters while letting them feel they're playing what they want. Any thoughts on that front?
This last year, we only held the gaming club for this final trimester, and there were a lot of learning curves, both for the kids and for myself. We met once a week, for an hour and a half, which isn't terrible, but really called for some focus in order to get anything done.
As to what kinds of PCs to prepare for the game, I just create broad archetypes, named so I can save them, but that is about it. So, I make the characters with different stat arrays, different spells, and subclasses (if applicable). Players can swap names, genders, and maybe even weapons to suit their ideas. Once the players have chosen their PC, they can start to develop backstories as they read your packet and let their imaginations wander. I do not make backstories for these characters. Once the players have all chosen their characters, I introduce the starter dungeon. It is usually short, like 5 encounters, and may or may not tie into the later game. This is usually enough time to get players used to die rolling conventions, and how to read their character sheets correctly. (Headaches still from one player that to this day couldn't remember how much damage his greatsword did.) In otherwords, make a ton of pregens. I used another random generator at: http://gmh.xocomp.net/dd5charactergenerator/ which uses SRD material only and easily kicks out character after character.
We also play once a week for about 1.5 hours, which is so not enough time. In prior years the group met 2x a week at lunch too. Next year, if my wife won't kill me, I plan on running D&D club 2x a week just so we can get through some content.
Back.
On to the subject of control, or Player Agency. I am all for agency. Once the players understand the game well enough (2-3 sessions in) options should open up. Then, D&D's training wheels fall off and it becomes a game about the Player's Characters in the Game you have devised. I, have dastardly plots and timelines, that if the players decline to bite or fail to stop will result in changes to the world. FOREX, if they decided in our game to ignore the whole Cult of the Dragon thing in Hoard of the Dragon Queen and instead journey south to the Cloudpeaks to smash some orcs and investigate giant tombs long believed to be there. Then the Cult would succeed and likely cause big things to happen in my game. Tiamat *might* not be summoned but her followers would likely be reinforced by Abishai from the Abyss. But early on, there are players that need those rails just to get into the concept of gaming.
Player: "What do we do next?"
GM: "You do remember a rumor of a wight inhabiting a king's tomb nearby."
Player: "Sounds neat. I go there to kill the wight and get the king's lost gold."
Railroading ain't all bad.
Hawksmoor
Rereading this, I can even see how even my example had player agency, because the player "invents" the concept of "lost gold". Still plenty of places for control besides which door do I kick down or which monster gets the pointy end. Which as Colville points out is not actually choice at all.
Okay, to make sure I understand, you'll take a handful of broad storytelling archetypes (are we talking about Cambpellian monomyth here?), whip up a few classes that can serve those roles well, and leave other character details (including backgrounds?) open for the player to fill in.
A shakedown dungeon/adventure can be very helpful, both as a gameplay tutorial and as an opportunity to feel out the first steps of the story. I've considered doing a "session zero" but at this age and experience level, I don't think it would be fruitful.
You'll get no arguments from me about the benefits of railroading, but I've seen enough examples to know that it must be handled with care. Rarely has that been the case with younger players, though, who often appreciate a little guidance.
Yeah, I make melee fighters, ranged fighters, support, healers, ahem artillery, etc and pregen a bunch of PCs that fit those molds. No backstory at all. Players invent those. As to session zero, I do still suggest those. It helps me spy on the kids and learn about their characters. Most kiddos will not write a four page backstory so I have to snoop. Also, it can eliminate that one kid that wants to play evil.
Ah, okay, so archetype based on mechanics. Gotcha.
So you do suggest a session zero? Iguess I found my kids rather impatient to get started...
Here's a general setting intro that could start off my handout:
What do you think? I'll follow this up with more specific setting details, but do you think this broadly introduces the setting well enough? Are there glaring omissions, points of confusion, or too-ambiguous details that might mislead players?
Or I could go a third direction, totally forgetting the Creed Stone, and pursue goals more interesting for everyone involved (and I save the Creed Stone quest for next year). To use the same old metaphor, my philosophy as a DM is often about making silk purses, in order for everyone to have fun. (Man, I should fill the setting with all sorts of magical "ear purses", just so I can chuckle to myself...)
I'm a big fan of Matthew Colville, and this video is one of his highlights. I like to think that, at my best, I'm a flexible and accommodating DM like he describes here.
Cool. I am really enjoying our chats. I look forward to more of what you plan on doing.
Me too. Like I said, I usually like to "think out loud" in places like this, where people can give feedback and catch glaring mistakes before I take things to the game table. Thanks for offering what you have so far.