I'm planning to start a new campaign soon-ish for my players. The problem is that my players tend to be on the more role-play focused side of things, so if i don't give them a reason to care about events, it usually ends with the statement "well, that's a you problem isn't it?". Well, not to that extreme, but still. I guess I could always go with the old "they killed my parents/they burned my village" routine, but that has been done to death. So I guess my question is what are some good ways to engage my players more and tie them into the story? I'm thankful for any advice. As for what the campaign is about, the general premise is "recently the northern tribes have been encroaching on the territory of the southern empire. the party gets conscripted by the crown to help deal with the situation"
Have the enemy been pushing refugees further away from the border? This could include both humanoids and animals which are leaving the hunting grounds of the advancing forces.
Although the PCs have been conscripted by the army, have they been conscripted merely as more combat troops, or because of their unique talents (e.g. class/race abilities)?
This is actually a player issue, not something that you have to force as DM. If they lack motivation then it's because they designed a character unsuitable to D&D.
In session zero, ensure that it's clear that each of the players must be playing a character who is motivated by either:
Money - they want to be rich, with no limit on how rich, so they will always work for money
Fame - they're more about being seen to be a hero
Power - they want to be individually/magically powerful and will go adventuring to find it
A desire to do good in the world - they want to be a hero
These are very broad categories, and can be nuanced. So maybe the character wants money in order to improve the orphanage, or the cleric wants the power to resurrect a dead sibling. But they will always need to fall into these 4 categories, because if they don't then you cannot reliably provide plot hooks that are desirable to every character in the party. In one campaign I ran, I had 3 characters who were not motivated by any of these things: so they simply wanted to find a home and settle down, become pacifists or hide from the law. Those characters were not suited to adventuring, and therefore not suited to D&D, and the campaign was constantly a battle of me trying to force them to do the content I'd spent hours creating while they all wanted to split up and do different things.
The PCs must want to be adventurers, first and foremost in their lives. Any character that doesn't want to be an adventurer, simply enough, is not an adventurer. Characters with backstories that say "He killed his boss, and now he's on the run from the law" do not work because every character in the party must be able, willing and eager to throw themselves at story hooks you present them with. It's not down to you to come up with something that's irresistible; when the PC sees the reward offered, their player should go for it because they want to play the game.
Provided that the players follow this, any time they are told: "Please go do this good, dangerous thing that involves some kind of magic, and we'll pay you for it" they'll go for it each time.
While it’s good that you try and engage them, some of this is their fault. Have an out of character discussion because they need to meet you part way. When it’s obvious what’s happening in the campaign, it should be up to them to find a reason for their character to want to be involved. Explain that this is what you’re prepping for the campaign, and they need to get on board. And if they really aren’t interested, talk about a campaign that would interest them during session 0.
They need to understand that at its core, this is a game. People are making a decision to play, and they aren’t there to just be entertained by you. They need to take an active role. You shouldn’t have to drag them along. Being DM is already 10 times more work than they put in, they can figure out why their characters care. You shouldn’t have to do that for them.
Have the enemy been pushing refugees further away from the border? This could include both humanoids and animals which are leaving the hunting grounds of the advancing forces.
Although the PCs have been conscripted by the army, have they been conscripted merely as more combat troops, or because of their unique talents (e.g. class/race abilities)?
Not quiet yet. It's still in the early stages and word hasn't spread far enough for it to cause massive unrest. Most just write it off as your usual bandit, mercenary, wild animal attack with only the imperial legion knowing what's really going on thanks to their scouts. As for the characters, they have been conscripted due to their talents as warriors. The game basically starts with an encounter that is designed to establish the group as valuable assets and the empire approaches them after hearing about their exploits (as they want a neutral party to interfere as to not provoke a full out war yet, since their forces are currently stretched thin dealing with internal matters).
The problem is that my players tend to be on the more role-play focused side of things, so if i don't give them a reason to care about events, it usually ends with the statement "well, that's a you problem isn't it?".
It's really not though. The player knows their character better than anyone else. They know what would motivate them, and if they know the opening premise they should figure out a way to jump in to the narrative. That is, assuming the want to play D&D.
You need to be very blunt with the players "You need to meet me halfway."
If a player has made a character that has no reason to adventure, then tell them to put that character away and make a new one that does. The same applies if a player creates a character with no reason to join the party.
3 Ys
Ask the players, "Why is this character an adventurer?" If the player doesn't have a reason why their character stopped being an innkeeper/soldier/merchant/whatever and started down the hideously-dangerous path of being an adventurer, then the character almost certainly won't gel with the group or with the adventure.
Once you have the answer, follow up with two more "why?" questions.
My character wants to be the strongest elf in the tribe! Why? Because the tribe considers strength to be the only thing of value. Why? *thinks for a while* Because in the past the tribe was almost wiped out by mindless monsters. Negotiation, diplomacy, trickery didn't work - only raw strength.
Now you've got some opportunities for engagement. The character could have a particular fear or hatred of mindless monsters, so they could be motivated to fight undead where they might be "meh" about fighting orcs. Does the character have feelings of weakness or inadequacy? How does the character feel about smart people or charismatic people or wise people? Do they consider wisdom and intelligence to be "strength"? Does the tribe feel that way? Since they want strength to protect the tribe, maybe that feeling of protection extends to cover other people.
You need to be very blunt with the players "You need to meet me halfway."
If a player has made a character that has no reason to adventure, then tell them to put that character away and make a new one that does. The same applies if a player creates a character with no reason to join the party.
3 Ys
Ask the players, "Why is this character an adventurer?" If the player doesn't have a reason why their character stopped being an innkeeper/soldier/merchant/whatever and started down the hideously-dangerous path of being an adventurer, then the character almost certainly won't gel with the group or with the adventure.
Once you have the answer, follow up with two more "why?" questions.
My character wants to be the strongest elf in the tribe! Why? Because the tribe considers strength to be the only thing of value. Why? *thinks for a while* Because in the past the tribe was almost wiped out by mindless monsters. Negotiation, diplomacy, trickery didn't work - only raw strength.
Now you've got some opportunities for engagement. The character could have a particular fear or hatred of mindless monsters, so they could be motivated to fight undead where they might be "meh" about fighting orcs. Does the character have feelings of weakness or inadequacy? How does the character feel about smart people or charismatic people or wise people? Do they consider wisdom and intelligence to be "strength"? Does the tribe feel that way? Since they want strength to protect the tribe, maybe that feeling of protection extends to cover other people.
I think it's great to ask the player these questions - but I'd go further and directly tie it into the campaign setting.
The question the DM in this instance needs to start with is:
"Why have you chosen to join the war effort against the invaders and made it your main goal in life?"
And don't accept any reason that says "I was forced to by..." because those answers are effectively saying "Actually, I don't want to and will try to get out of it."
In my most recent game, I gave the players the following information:
You are all from the small nation of Palass
Recently, an artifact called the Eclipse Stone has been stolen in a raid on a temple
The Eclipse Stone is responsible for agricultural wellbeing in a post-apocalyptic world, so it must be retrieved
The nation is sending 300 warriors to retrieve it. You will be one of them. You are already on the ship with them at the beginning of session 1, and have been 3 weeks at sea.
Why are you one of the 300 volunteers?
Outside of that, they could come up with basically anything they wanted to. So the answers I got were:
My goliath tribe ran a contest to see who was the strongest warrior to send, and I was that warrior. I am proud to represent my people!
I accidentally killed my best friend in the attack on the temple when my powers manifested for the first time, where I was an acolyte. I seek understanding and vengeance.
I belong to an order of monster hunters, and they are sending me on the mission. I have the skills to track them down.
I am the greatest swordsman of all time! At least I hope to be. I am young but I will prove my deeds and you will remember my name!
Take a piece of paper and put each character on it making a triangle, square, whatever. Then around each player have them define 3 NPC's that know or influence their character. Could be family, could be a lover, could be a mentor. With that done, have each player draw a line from on of their NPC's to someone else's NPC and define the relationship those two NPC's have. With that in place, you now have a web of connections between party members and a pile of plot hooks. Three out of the 4 are all connected to the same mentor character? Easy quest giver. 3 of them have the same affection for a certain buxom shopkeep? Guess who's in peril.
If you're providing events without any consequence, either good or bad, why would they want to engage with them?
When you put the campaign/adventure/plot together, you might want to provide the party-to-be with an elevator pitch that gives them the broader scope of what's happening and how this might impact the world-at-large. Then they, the players, can build PCs that want to engage with your world and fit within it. Collaberation style things. Also, it might be worth noting, that some of the plot hooks that you put forth would be readily acceptable for people that were trying to be heroes. You know the type, doing good for the sake of good being done. If you have players that want a campaign that is centered around villiany and bad-doers, as long as you're good with that type of game, have fun.
Basically, you might need to have player buy-in on the campaign premise in order for them to engage with the world. You tell them how and what is going down, they build PCs that fit and want to engage. You throw them clues and plot hooks, they take up whatever interests them. It makes it easy if you know what interests them in advance and can plan for it. So just ask the question of what makes them tick, what makes them want to be heroes/villians.
Have a session 0.
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
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm planning to start a new campaign soon-ish for my players. The problem is that my players tend to be on the more role-play focused side of things, so if i don't give them a reason to care about events, it usually ends with the statement "well, that's a you problem isn't it?". Well, not to that extreme, but still. I guess I could always go with the old "they killed my parents/they burned my village" routine, but that has been done to death. So I guess my question is what are some good ways to engage my players more and tie them into the story? I'm thankful for any advice.
As for what the campaign is about, the general premise is "recently the northern tribes have been encroaching on the territory of the southern empire. the party gets conscripted by the crown to help deal with the situation"
Tie it into the characters backstory, if you modify the plot a bit for it be signifigant to one of your players, the whole party will probably go.
PS. I had similar players (still do), and I had the bad guys come to the characters, instead of the other way around.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Have the enemy been pushing refugees further away from the border? This could include both humanoids and animals which are leaving the hunting grounds of the advancing forces.
Although the PCs have been conscripted by the army, have they been conscripted merely as more combat troops, or because of their unique talents (e.g. class/race abilities)?
This is actually a player issue, not something that you have to force as DM. If they lack motivation then it's because they designed a character unsuitable to D&D.
In session zero, ensure that it's clear that each of the players must be playing a character who is motivated by either:
These are very broad categories, and can be nuanced. So maybe the character wants money in order to improve the orphanage, or the cleric wants the power to resurrect a dead sibling. But they will always need to fall into these 4 categories, because if they don't then you cannot reliably provide plot hooks that are desirable to every character in the party. In one campaign I ran, I had 3 characters who were not motivated by any of these things: so they simply wanted to find a home and settle down, become pacifists or hide from the law. Those characters were not suited to adventuring, and therefore not suited to D&D, and the campaign was constantly a battle of me trying to force them to do the content I'd spent hours creating while they all wanted to split up and do different things.
The PCs must want to be adventurers, first and foremost in their lives. Any character that doesn't want to be an adventurer, simply enough, is not an adventurer. Characters with backstories that say "He killed his boss, and now he's on the run from the law" do not work because every character in the party must be able, willing and eager to throw themselves at story hooks you present them with. It's not down to you to come up with something that's irresistible; when the PC sees the reward offered, their player should go for it because they want to play the game.
Provided that the players follow this, any time they are told: "Please go do this good, dangerous thing that involves some kind of magic, and we'll pay you for it" they'll go for it each time.
While it’s good that you try and engage them, some of this is their fault. Have an out of character discussion because they need to meet you part way. When it’s obvious what’s happening in the campaign, it should be up to them to find a reason for their character to want to be involved. Explain that this is what you’re prepping for the campaign, and they need to get on board. And if they really aren’t interested, talk about a campaign that would interest them during session 0.
They need to understand that at its core, this is a game. People are making a decision to play, and they aren’t there to just be entertained by you. They need to take an active role. You shouldn’t have to drag them along. Being DM is already 10 times more work than they put in, they can figure out why their characters care. You shouldn’t have to do that for them.
Not quiet yet. It's still in the early stages and word hasn't spread far enough for it to cause massive unrest. Most just write it off as your usual bandit, mercenary, wild animal attack with only the imperial legion knowing what's really going on thanks to their scouts.
As for the characters, they have been conscripted due to their talents as warriors. The game basically starts with an encounter that is designed to establish the group as valuable assets and the empire approaches them after hearing about their exploits (as they want a neutral party to interfere as to not provoke a full out war yet, since their forces are currently stretched thin dealing with internal matters).
It's really not though. The player knows their character better than anyone else. They know what would motivate them, and if they know the opening premise they should figure out a way to jump in to the narrative. That is, assuming the want to play D&D.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
You need to be very blunt with the players "You need to meet me halfway."
If a player has made a character that has no reason to adventure, then tell them to put that character away and make a new one that does. The same applies if a player creates a character with no reason to join the party.
3 Ys
Ask the players, "Why is this character an adventurer?" If the player doesn't have a reason why their character stopped being an innkeeper/soldier/merchant/whatever and started down the hideously-dangerous path of being an adventurer, then the character almost certainly won't gel with the group or with the adventure.
Once you have the answer, follow up with two more "why?" questions.
My character wants to be the strongest elf in the tribe!
Why?
Because the tribe considers strength to be the only thing of value.
Why?
*thinks for a while* Because in the past the tribe was almost wiped out by mindless monsters. Negotiation, diplomacy, trickery didn't work - only raw strength.
Now you've got some opportunities for engagement. The character could have a particular fear or hatred of mindless monsters, so they could be motivated to fight undead where they might be "meh" about fighting orcs. Does the character have feelings of weakness or inadequacy? How does the character feel about smart people or charismatic people or wise people? Do they consider wisdom and intelligence to be "strength"? Does the tribe feel that way? Since they want strength to protect the tribe, maybe that feeling of protection extends to cover other people.
I think it's great to ask the player these questions - but I'd go further and directly tie it into the campaign setting.
The question the DM in this instance needs to start with is:
"Why have you chosen to join the war effort against the invaders and made it your main goal in life?"
And don't accept any reason that says "I was forced to by..." because those answers are effectively saying "Actually, I don't want to and will try to get out of it."
In my most recent game, I gave the players the following information:
Outside of that, they could come up with basically anything they wanted to. So the answers I got were:
Another fun exercise: The Web.
Take a piece of paper and put each character on it making a triangle, square, whatever. Then around each player have them define 3 NPC's that know or influence their character. Could be family, could be a lover, could be a mentor. With that done, have each player draw a line from on of their NPC's to someone else's NPC and define the relationship those two NPC's have. With that in place, you now have a web of connections between party members and a pile of plot hooks. Three out of the 4 are all connected to the same mentor character? Easy quest giver. 3 of them have the same affection for a certain buxom shopkeep? Guess who's in peril.
So so many options from there.
"Teller of tales, dreamer of dreams"
Tips, Tricks, Maps: Lantern Noir Presents
**Streams hosted at at twitch.tv/LaternNoir
Basically, you might need to have player buy-in on the campaign premise in order for them to engage with the world. You tell them how and what is going down, they build PCs that fit and want to engage. You throw them clues and plot hooks, they take up whatever interests them. It makes it easy if you know what interests them in advance and can plan for it. So just ask the question of what makes them tick, what makes them want to be heroes/villians.
Have a session 0.
“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