I write the story and the setting, then create the encounters to fit. My players are currently in the midst of 5 quest lines.
One is a multi-point series of treasure maps and locations. It involves ancient hidden dungeons, pirates, competing mercenaries and ancient creatures.
An other is discovering an ancient gnoll civilization. It has underground areas under some old ruins, gnolls, undead gnolls, some custom gnoll abominations, a giant hyena and a gnoll warlock spectre.
There's also some druids in the woods sending animals out to attack a local foresting town, the hunt for "the baking tree" (a play on the keebler elves) and a mine that anyone who has entered hasn't returned.
This varies for me in a few ways. Am I writing a one shot adventure for the night or a longer campaign style.
Quickie adventures normally involve starting off with a story more than a few battles. Battles can consume a lot of time depending on the size so sticking with more story works best for me. I like to get players rolling the dice quickly with skill checks for these and have some catalyst event happen almost right away like murder or an item stolen etc. The murder nights are fun.
Longer adventures I like to take a lot of time planning. I start with a story and villain (villains are really important to me) and begin to plot out possible courses the players may take. I'll spend a great deal of time working on a bunch of little side quests and tie those into the main story, but still giving the players multiple options.
Once I have everything and it seems to be fitting into place I'll start drawing maps and writing out specific areas and scripting new NPC's. I know it seems a little backwards for some. Most people I know start with a map. I like to have a story first and build around it.
I also carrying around a scribble pad with me everywhere I go so I see something that catches my eye as a possible idea and quickly write it down. This works well when watching other play. There is a host of talent and ideas out there and I've found that most people appreciate it when you let them know, that was cool I'm to use that or bend it a little to make my own.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
JT "You will find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."
I've just started writing a campaign, and its turning into a format like the old "Choose Your Own Adventure" type stories. I'm writing the main plot then leaving bookmarks for myself. So if the party has 2 choices, itll be "Continue for Choice A, go to pg # for Choice B". Then sections with random encounters already written up ready to throw in.
Depends on the group, but for me, telling the story that the players want is always paramount.
That said, it doesn't always go as smoothly as they'd like. ;)
Having worked out the area that the players are in, the main npc and locations in the story, I always make sure to end a session with me knowing what the players are likely to want to do next session - if they're in the middle of a dungeon, then they're probably going to carry on doing that. Once they're out though, they could head back to town for a reward, or decide to check on another nearby quest lead first, so by getting them to tell me, I know which one to flesh out.
I'll usually prep other possible choices too, in case they change their minds....
I've tried so many different ways, and I'm finally getting the hang of it, so I'm just going to tell you the way that I find is working for me. The format is pretty much:
#1 - Create a goal. #2 - Choose a setting. #3 - Hook the players. #4 - Make your two first encounters. #5 - Link your encounters and revise your setting. #6 - Make another encounter, then link it, then revise. Repeat ad infinitum.
First, start with a clear goal in mind for the players. A clear goal that you can reference every single time you're thinking of what to add next is crucial. This is the primary challenge, and don't fill it in yet with whys or hows or whos. Is this going to be about the combat (defeat something tough) or about the exploration (find something hidden). Then choose a setting for doing that in. I chose for the players to have to defeat a difficult dungeon. The setting should be something that is evocative and that can be filled in so many different things that you're never feeling that something is out of place. One of my big mistakes previously was planning out too much stuff, but that just made me a slave to my own setting such that interesting things couldn't happen because there could never be justification for it. It's okay to do the tried and true settings; a magic dungeon can have almost anything happen in it. A small town with no magic characters in a safe kingdom isn't able to create a lot of drama.
Then, find a reason for the players to have to go to that setting. Again, simpler is better, because your players will want to project their own hopes and dreams onto it. If the reason to go is treasure, the players will start thinking of what they can do with that treasure, which is why treasure is great. If the reason is that the players have to save people, then they need to like the people they're saving. I chose to go with saving a kingdom; but not just any kingdom, it was a kingdom they had saved during the previous campaign, so they already have a positive connection to it. Moreso, I flat-out told the players that this dungeon was going to be a challenge that they might not survive, and it would be an accomplishment if they could get through it. Sometimes the opportunity to try and overcome a challenge is reason enough for players to be interested, if properly framed.
So, now you have an idea of what you want to do, where that thing is, and how to get there. You're ready to start building the adventure. Start with making two encounters. Building a good encounter is important, so remember these parts. EVERY encounter NEEDS to have 3 of these parts, and having all 4 parts is great! - Narrative; What is this encounter doing for the narrative? Sometimes the narrative is setting the scene, so making a place creepy or bright. Sometimes the narrative is about someone there who is saying or doing something. Whatever it is, the narrative part of an encounter is driving the plot of your adventure. It's a bad idea to neglect this part. - Combat; What opportunities for conflict are there during this encounter? While not every encounter is going to have a combat component, with players you can never be too sure, so have something ready! If the combat part of this encounter is the main part of it, write out some tactics or some kind of twist to this combat that makes it different from the others. - Puzzle; This doesn't need to be a literal puzzle, but this represents something that the players have to think their way around. Perhaps the room starts filling with a poisonous cloud, or perhaps there's a pit trap in here. The puzzle could be a trapped chest, or maybe there's 3 statues that, if turned to a certain facing, cause a secret room to open. The puzzle might affect the combat, or might drive the plot, or might give treasure. - Treasure; What can the players get out of this encounter? Where is the treasure hidden? What's it worth? Sometimes the treasure isn't money, but a chance to rest, or someone important to the plot, or vital information.
Now that you have two encounters, link them together. I don't mean just how you get from one to the other, but consider things that are in one encounter and "seed" them in the other. If one encounter is about fighting goblins, and the other is about convincing a baron to do something, link them by maybe having a note on one of the goblins that includes orders to assassinate the baron, or make the baron have a hatred for goblins of a certain clan. Maybe there's a treasure that solves a problem in another encounter. Maybe there's a puzzle that brings you to a different encounter. Linking them link this creates a sense of continuity in the adventure and makes it seem bigger. Now go back to your setting and consider if anything needs to change. Maybe this adventure about defeating the goblin king is now also about revealing the traitor in the baron's court at the same time. Maybe there's more going on. You don't have to change the setting or adventure, but this is a good opportunity to go back and review where you are.
Lastly, rinse and repeat. Make another encounter. Link it to one (or more) other encounters. Review your setting. Do it again. And again. And again. Keep going until you finish the adventure! Good luck!
I'm very simple writing it, maybe 'cause the lack of time.
I usually write just a script to remember the story and a kind of timeline (or a brief description of each room in a dungeon). I go deeper in some key dialogues, at least the first intervention of the NPC's. Also I write the encounters or traps (just what enemies and quantity, with the MM page number) and treasures. If the enemy it's a custom monster or a modification I write it separately. Also if they find a magic item or weapon which a special rules, I write it in a card and give it to the player who take it.
The plot may vary. In towns and cities and other quiet areas I try my best to do a sandbox where my players can interact with the folk and feel it's a live world, with people with their troubles, neededs and worries. In dungeons or wilderness areas I describe the rooms and a constant danger, not just roll Stealth, move the mini forward and roll again for Perception or Investigation. I do my best to avoid that.
Reading all these detailed ways of setting up a campaign is honestly quite belittling on my part.
I generally write out an overall plot and my own world (which is also very general; for time saving purposes I normally use an rng for towns and less important characters). I normally use a pre-made religion and just let the characters explore the world.
I make major encounters squishy enough so I can throw them in when I feel the players are ready but other than that I gauge how and what the players expect and want and give it to them, be it a side quest that has some sort of dark twist or a simple hack and slash day.
I know that this sounds simple and maybe even hard (coming up with stuff on the fly) but with a dungeon or two and a whole day of play, as long as you have imagination, you can literally give your players any adventure. Why plan that adventure out and risk letting your players who want something different down when you can gauge what they want a give them something, though a bit simpler (though since it's what they want they normally don't mind) and have them love it?
Reading all these detailed ways of setting up a campaign is honestly quite belittling on my part.
I generally write out an overall plot and my own world (which is also very general; for time saving purposes I normally use an rng for towns and less important characters). I normally use a pre-made religion and just let the characters explore the world.
I make major encounters squishy enough so I can throw them in when I feel the players are ready but other than that I gauge how and what the players expect and want and give it to them, be it a side quest that has some sort of dark twist or a simple hack and slash day.
I know that this sounds simple and maybe even hard (coming up with stuff on the fly) but with a dungeon or two and a whole day of play, as long as you have imagination, you can literally give your players any adventure. Why plan that adventure out and risk letting your players who want something different down when you can gauge what they want a give them something, though a bit simpler (though since it's what they want they normally don't mind) and have them love it?
I wish I could do this! Alas, I know my strengths and weaknesses, and coming up with intriguing and engaging encounters and social interactions on the fly is not one of my strengths. That's why my system works for me; because it allows me to build a structure, and then fill in the details more easily. It also allows me to adjust it between sessions, as I can easily go back in and make a change and see how that change affects the next sections.
It's okay. I do this because if I were to continuously sit down and have to spend hours (which I don't have) to write out detailed campaigns (since I'm a stickler for details) I'd eventually lose interest and start something new only for it to meet the same fate
I do normally go back and record what happened/What I did (if its the first time I'm running the campaign) so I can run it again and I enjoy building worlds and creating vast arrays of custom items.
Reading all these detailed ways of setting up a campaign is honestly quite belittling on my part.
I generally write out an overall plot and my own world (which is also very general; for time saving purposes I normally use an rng for towns and less important characters). I normally use a pre-made religion and just let the characters explore the world.
I make major encounters squishy enough so I can throw them in when I feel the players are ready but other than that I gauge how and what the players expect and want and give it to them, be it a side quest that has some sort of dark twist or a simple hack and slash day.
I know that this sounds simple and maybe even hard (coming up with stuff on the fly) but with a dungeon or two and a whole day of play, as long as you have imagination, you can literally give your players any adventure. Why plan that adventure out and risk letting your players who want something different down when you can gauge what they want a give them something, though a bit simpler (though since it's what they want they normally don't mind) and have them love it?
I actually do something between the detailed plans and what you do -- I make sure the world is pretty rugged (or, player-proof I suppose -- hard to pick holes in) then just make sure I have relevant maps of the places I expect people to go and PC stats, and prepare to wing it. I find I'm more confident if I'm working from a rough plan than a detailed one, if I make a detailed plan and people go off course it's easy to flounder (I remember very vividly the first time a player tried to do something I hadn't prepared for, in my early GM days, and the confusion must have been obvious on my face). If I have low expectations of 'sticking to a plan', it's easier to just look up the relevant information and go along with the wacky adventure of the day.
Reading all these detailed ways of setting up a campaign is honestly quite belittling on my part.
I generally write out an overall plot and my own world (which is also very general; for time saving purposes I normally use an rng for towns and less important characters). I normally use a pre-made religion and just let the characters explore the world.
I make major encounters squishy enough so I can throw them in when I feel the players are ready but other than that I gauge how and what the players expect and want and give it to them, be it a side quest that has some sort of dark twist or a simple hack and slash day.
I know that this sounds simple and maybe even hard (coming up with stuff on the fly) but with a dungeon or two and a whole day of play, as long as you have imagination, you can literally give your players any adventure. Why plan that adventure out and risk letting your players who want something different down when you can gauge what they want a give them something, though a bit simpler (though since it's what they want they normally don't mind) and have them love it?
I actually do something between the detailed plans and what you do -- I make sure the world is pretty rugged (or, player-proof I suppose -- hard to pick holes in) then just make sure I have relevant maps of the places I expect people to go and PC stats, and prepare to wing it. I find I'm more confident if I'm working from a rough plan than a detailed one, if I make a detailed plan and people go off course it's easy to flounder (I remember very vividly the first time a player tried to do something I hadn't prepared for, in my early GM days, and the confusion must have been obvious on my face). If I have low expectations of 'sticking to a plan', it's easier to just look up the relevant information and go along with the wacky adventure of the day.
I had a similar experience one of the first times I DMed. I was dumbfounded and floundered (much like you did) and another player (who had some experience dming) pulled me over to the side and gave me some pointers (which only embarrassed me more).
Oh no! The shame. I think it's a good learning experience, though, I know that taught me to just not have specific expectations. Sometimes, players simply won't go the way you think they will go. Which is why I prefer to have looser plans and wing it now!
I find it's good to always have a sidequest written that can be dropped in anywhere (usually something funky down a well, or an ambush, or what the hell... some crazy wizard on a pegasus flies by and animates a bench). That way if my players veer off the current objective I can drop it to slow them down.
I have a general list of things the party needs to do, in the order that they should generally do them, but I don't try to write out the full scenario. I have some descriptions written out, a few ability checks that may grant added exposition, and a list of combat encounters with the HP already set for that specific list of enemies. Other than that, I really try to get into the whole communal storytelling aspect that's built into the game.
I do have overall story arcs planned out, and important characters that the party will need to interact with, but they're not limited to being in a single location (like a quest marker in a video game). I prefer to be a bit more fast and lose with the general meat of the narrative while still adhering to the outline I do have written out.
I tend to worldbuild a lot, generating content for cities and wilderness areas that the party may or may not ever need to know or indeed find out.
Take the starting adventure for a game I'm hoping to get up and running soon. I know there will be 10 combat encounters, mostly kobolds and goblins, and that the party needs to retrieve a world-specific item. This item is found in an underground dungeon area. Beyond that, I'll add in more concrete details as the party actually explores, so that I don't have to hold their hands to get them to follow my narrative thread.
I simply write everything and anything down that comes to mind, pull together a concurrent theme, then devise a plot from there. After the general plot's been formulated, I typically do the same for scenarios and lightly/heavily (depending on the decided campaign's feel) sprinkle decided portions of the main plot into said scenarios; writing is s bit loose for me do I can focus more on player actions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"For every moment of truth, there's confusion in life."
I've focused on learning to not need much plan if any, to react to what the players have their characters do and as a result let them be the ones doing the bulk of the process. The result being that the most planning/writing I ever do for a campaign that isn't being run from someone's published adventure/campaign is to write a loose outline of what events will transpire without PC interference (usually no more than one sheet of paper with a bullet point list) - and from there, I set up the initial scene and everything else is reactive improvisation.
And most of the time, I don't even have an outline I'm working from. Just notes of what important things happen in each session so I don't contradict anything that gets established while improvising during a session.
So I spend all the time that most DMs would spend writing and planning doodling maps, making up player hand-outs, painting minis, watching TV or playing video-games (while my "shower thoughts" part of the mind stashes away cool scenarios and such that come to mind for later spontaneous use).
I'll have the DM guide and Monster Manual with a big sheet of clean paper. I'll roll the typical step by step encounters in the DM guide and write what comes out- then I take each character into consideration as to what would get them "hooked" - then take each roll from the DM guide and alter or tweak it based on my characters. I'll look then at the Monster mannual and then outline a story plot(s) by lines with subchaprters and different ideas, much like one would draft a report in college. Then I get some places and NPCs drawn up, and let the players fill in the gaps.
1. I think about the ultimate goal of the adventure (the pinnacle of the story, the consequences of that ending, the treasurer/rewards).
2. I choose a location for the adventure, and flesh out the specifics of that location.
2. I create the story hook, which brings players into the story and gives them the incentive to follow through with it.
3. Create a few NPCs that will be the PC's main interactions throughout the adventure.
4. I then flesh out these NPCs and main villains using the rulebooks and good ol' imagination.
5. Then I create at least three parts in the story that will reveal more and more information, twists, or interactions for the players. (My group tends to prefer non-combat encounters, so a lot of these plot points involve NPC interaction and puzzle-solving).
6. I then tend to write the main conversations that PCs will have with NPCs in the game. But I keep the dialogue fairly open-ended to allow for the inevitable diversions and off-script moments you come to have a love-hate relationship with whilst DMing.
7. Lastly, I collate all the statistics and intricate stuff that I'll have to refer to during the adventure. I tend to leave this last because it means I can look at the story as a whole, change anything about it I don't like, then worry about the numbers stuff and alter any stats where necessary to fit with the adventure.
That's generally how it works with my story-building! It's never a strict rulebook though; creating a story, I find, more often than not involves me coming up with crazy ideas, writing everything down in a frenzy, and then working out all the narrative inconsistencies and plot-holes later on. I'd say focus on whatever aspect of story-building you enjoy the most and work in the other parts around it. Like creating wacky NPCs for your party to encounter? Then create the NPCs first. Like physically drawing maps and dungeons for your players to explore? Then start with that.
To be fair, I'm quite new to DMing and so I'd love to know if there's a way to make my story-telling more efficient, or what other DMs do to save time when making their adventures. Cheers!
I improv. Step one, figure out what the PC's doing. Step two, throw something at him, based on step one. Step three, come up with a plot, based on step two. Step four, figure out how to get the PC involved in the plot from step three. Repeat steps one through three until step four occurs.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Do you plot a lot of the scenarios and encounters out beforehand? Do you wait to build encounters last? What's your process?
I write the story and the setting, then create the encounters to fit. My players are currently in the midst of 5 quest lines.
One is a multi-point series of treasure maps and locations. It involves ancient hidden dungeons, pirates, competing mercenaries and ancient creatures.
An other is discovering an ancient gnoll civilization. It has underground areas under some old ruins, gnolls, undead gnolls, some custom gnoll abominations, a giant hyena and a gnoll warlock spectre.
There's also some druids in the woods sending animals out to attack a local foresting town, the hunt for "the baking tree" (a play on the keebler elves) and a mine that anyone who has entered hasn't returned.
This varies for me in a few ways. Am I writing a one shot adventure for the night or a longer campaign style.
Quickie adventures normally involve starting off with a story more than a few battles. Battles can consume a lot of time depending on the size so sticking with more story works best for me. I like to get players rolling the dice quickly with skill checks for these and have some catalyst event happen almost right away like murder or an item stolen etc. The murder nights are fun.
Longer adventures I like to take a lot of time planning. I start with a story and villain (villains are really important to me) and begin to plot out possible courses the players may take. I'll spend a great deal of time working on a bunch of little side quests and tie those into the main story, but still giving the players multiple options.
Once I have everything and it seems to be fitting into place I'll start drawing maps and writing out specific areas and scripting new NPC's. I know it seems a little backwards for some. Most people I know start with a map. I like to have a story first and build around it.
I also carrying around a scribble pad with me everywhere I go so I see something that catches my eye as a possible idea and quickly write it down. This works well when watching other play. There is a host of talent and ideas out there and I've found that most people appreciate it when you let them know, that was cool I'm to use that or bend it a little to make my own.
JT " You will find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."
I've just started writing a campaign, and its turning into a format like the old "Choose Your Own Adventure" type stories. I'm writing the main plot then leaving bookmarks for myself. So if the party has 2 choices, itll be "Continue for Choice A, go to pg # for Choice B". Then sections with random encounters already written up ready to throw in.
It may get a little monolithic.
Depends on the group, but for me, telling the story that the players want is always paramount.
That said, it doesn't always go as smoothly as they'd like. ;)
Having worked out the area that the players are in, the main npc and locations in the story, I always make sure to end a session with me knowing what the players are likely to want to do next session - if they're in the middle of a dungeon, then they're probably going to carry on doing that. Once they're out though, they could head back to town for a reward, or decide to check on another nearby quest lead first, so by getting them to tell me, I know which one to flesh out.
I'll usually prep other possible choices too, in case they change their minds....
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
I've tried so many different ways, and I'm finally getting the hang of it, so I'm just going to tell you the way that I find is working for me. The format is pretty much:
#1 - Create a goal.
#2 - Choose a setting.
#3 - Hook the players.
#4 - Make your two first encounters.
#5 - Link your encounters and revise your setting.
#6 - Make another encounter, then link it, then revise. Repeat ad infinitum.
First, start with a clear goal in mind for the players. A clear goal that you can reference every single time you're thinking of what to add next is crucial. This is the primary challenge, and don't fill it in yet with whys or hows or whos. Is this going to be about the combat (defeat something tough) or about the exploration (find something hidden). Then choose a setting for doing that in. I chose for the players to have to defeat a difficult dungeon. The setting should be something that is evocative and that can be filled in so many different things that you're never feeling that something is out of place. One of my big mistakes previously was planning out too much stuff, but that just made me a slave to my own setting such that interesting things couldn't happen because there could never be justification for it. It's okay to do the tried and true settings; a magic dungeon can have almost anything happen in it. A small town with no magic characters in a safe kingdom isn't able to create a lot of drama.
Then, find a reason for the players to have to go to that setting. Again, simpler is better, because your players will want to project their own hopes and dreams onto it. If the reason to go is treasure, the players will start thinking of what they can do with that treasure, which is why treasure is great. If the reason is that the players have to save people, then they need to like the people they're saving. I chose to go with saving a kingdom; but not just any kingdom, it was a kingdom they had saved during the previous campaign, so they already have a positive connection to it. Moreso, I flat-out told the players that this dungeon was going to be a challenge that they might not survive, and it would be an accomplishment if they could get through it. Sometimes the opportunity to try and overcome a challenge is reason enough for players to be interested, if properly framed.
So, now you have an idea of what you want to do, where that thing is, and how to get there. You're ready to start building the adventure. Start with making two encounters. Building a good encounter is important, so remember these parts. EVERY encounter NEEDS to have 3 of these parts, and having all 4 parts is great!
- Narrative; What is this encounter doing for the narrative? Sometimes the narrative is setting the scene, so making a place creepy or bright. Sometimes the narrative is about someone there who is saying or doing something. Whatever it is, the narrative part of an encounter is driving the plot of your adventure. It's a bad idea to neglect this part.
- Combat; What opportunities for conflict are there during this encounter? While not every encounter is going to have a combat component, with players you can never be too sure, so have something ready! If the combat part of this encounter is the main part of it, write out some tactics or some kind of twist to this combat that makes it different from the others.
- Puzzle; This doesn't need to be a literal puzzle, but this represents something that the players have to think their way around. Perhaps the room starts filling with a poisonous cloud, or perhaps there's a pit trap in here. The puzzle could be a trapped chest, or maybe there's 3 statues that, if turned to a certain facing, cause a secret room to open. The puzzle might affect the combat, or might drive the plot, or might give treasure.
- Treasure; What can the players get out of this encounter? Where is the treasure hidden? What's it worth? Sometimes the treasure isn't money, but a chance to rest, or someone important to the plot, or vital information.
Now that you have two encounters, link them together. I don't mean just how you get from one to the other, but consider things that are in one encounter and "seed" them in the other. If one encounter is about fighting goblins, and the other is about convincing a baron to do something, link them by maybe having a note on one of the goblins that includes orders to assassinate the baron, or make the baron have a hatred for goblins of a certain clan. Maybe there's a treasure that solves a problem in another encounter. Maybe there's a puzzle that brings you to a different encounter. Linking them link this creates a sense of continuity in the adventure and makes it seem bigger. Now go back to your setting and consider if anything needs to change. Maybe this adventure about defeating the goblin king is now also about revealing the traitor in the baron's court at the same time. Maybe there's more going on. You don't have to change the setting or adventure, but this is a good opportunity to go back and review where you are.
Lastly, rinse and repeat. Make another encounter. Link it to one (or more) other encounters. Review your setting. Do it again. And again. And again. Keep going until you finish the adventure! Good luck!
I'm very simple writing it, maybe 'cause the lack of time.
I usually write just a script to remember the story and a kind of timeline (or a brief description of each room in a dungeon). I go deeper in some key dialogues, at least the first intervention of the NPC's. Also I write the encounters or traps (just what enemies and quantity, with the MM page number) and treasures. If the enemy it's a custom monster or a modification I write it separately. Also if they find a magic item or weapon which a special rules, I write it in a card and give it to the player who take it.
The plot may vary. In towns and cities and other quiet areas I try my best to do a sandbox where my players can interact with the folk and feel it's a live world, with people with their troubles, neededs and worries. In dungeons or wilderness areas I describe the rooms and a constant danger, not just roll Stealth, move the mini forward and roll again for Perception or Investigation. I do my best to avoid that.
D&D Beyond Mobile Alpha Tester
Reading all these detailed ways of setting up a campaign is honestly quite belittling on my part.
I generally write out an overall plot and my own world (which is also very general; for time saving purposes I normally use an rng for towns and less important characters). I normally use a pre-made religion and just let the characters explore the world.
I make major encounters squishy enough so I can throw them in when I feel the players are ready but other than that I gauge how and what the players expect and want and give it to them, be it a side quest that has some sort of dark twist or a simple hack and slash day.
I know that this sounds simple and maybe even hard (coming up with stuff on the fly) but with a dungeon or two and a whole day of play, as long as you have imagination, you can literally give your players any adventure. Why plan that adventure out and risk letting your players who want something different down when you can gauge what they want a give them something, though a bit simpler (though since it's what they want they normally don't mind) and have them love it?
It's okay. I do this because if I were to continuously sit down and have to spend hours (which I don't have) to write out detailed campaigns (since I'm a stickler for details) I'd eventually lose interest and start something new only for it to meet the same fate
I do normally go back and record what happened/What I did (if its the first time I'm running the campaign) so I can run it again and I enjoy building worlds and creating vast arrays of custom items.
Oh no! The shame. I think it's a good learning experience, though, I know that taught me to just not have specific expectations. Sometimes, players simply won't go the way you think they will go. Which is why I prefer to have looser plans and wing it now!
I find it's good to always have a sidequest written that can be dropped in anywhere (usually something funky down a well, or an ambush, or what the hell... some crazy wizard on a pegasus flies by and animates a bench). That way if my players veer off the current objective I can drop it to slow them down.
I have a general list of things the party needs to do, in the order that they should generally do them, but I don't try to write out the full scenario. I have some descriptions written out, a few ability checks that may grant added exposition, and a list of combat encounters with the HP already set for that specific list of enemies. Other than that, I really try to get into the whole communal storytelling aspect that's built into the game.
I do have overall story arcs planned out, and important characters that the party will need to interact with, but they're not limited to being in a single location (like a quest marker in a video game). I prefer to be a bit more fast and lose with the general meat of the narrative while still adhering to the outline I do have written out.
I tend to worldbuild a lot, generating content for cities and wilderness areas that the party may or may not ever need to know or indeed find out.
Take the starting adventure for a game I'm hoping to get up and running soon. I know there will be 10 combat encounters, mostly kobolds and goblins, and that the party needs to retrieve a world-specific item. This item is found in an underground dungeon area. Beyond that, I'll add in more concrete details as the party actually explores, so that I don't have to hold their hands to get them to follow my narrative thread.
I simply write everything and anything down that comes to mind, pull together a concurrent theme, then devise a plot from there. After the general plot's been formulated, I typically do the same for scenarios and lightly/heavily (depending on the decided campaign's feel) sprinkle decided portions of the main plot into said scenarios; writing is s bit loose for me do I can focus more on player actions.
My process is one that isn't so much a process...
I've focused on learning to not need much plan if any, to react to what the players have their characters do and as a result let them be the ones doing the bulk of the process. The result being that the most planning/writing I ever do for a campaign that isn't being run from someone's published adventure/campaign is to write a loose outline of what events will transpire without PC interference (usually no more than one sheet of paper with a bullet point list) - and from there, I set up the initial scene and everything else is reactive improvisation.
And most of the time, I don't even have an outline I'm working from. Just notes of what important things happen in each session so I don't contradict anything that gets established while improvising during a session.
So I spend all the time that most DMs would spend writing and planning doodling maps, making up player hand-outs, painting minis, watching TV or playing video-games (while my "shower thoughts" part of the mind stashes away cool scenarios and such that come to mind for later spontaneous use).
I'll have the DM guide and Monster Manual with a big sheet of clean paper. I'll roll the typical step by step encounters in the DM guide and write what comes out- then I take each character into consideration as to what would get them "hooked" - then take each roll from the DM guide and alter or tweak it based on my characters. I'll look then at the Monster mannual and then outline a story plot(s) by lines with subchaprters and different ideas, much like one would draft a report in college. Then I get some places and NPCs drawn up, and let the players fill in the gaps.
My writing tends to follow this order:
That's generally how it works with my story-building! It's never a strict rulebook though; creating a story, I find, more often than not involves me coming up with crazy ideas, writing everything down in a frenzy, and then working out all the narrative inconsistencies and plot-holes later on. I'd say focus on whatever aspect of story-building you enjoy the most and work in the other parts around it. Like creating wacky NPCs for your party to encounter? Then create the NPCs first. Like physically drawing maps and dungeons for your players to explore? Then start with that.
To be fair, I'm quite new to DMing and so I'd love to know if there's a way to make my story-telling more efficient, or what other DMs do to save time when making their adventures. Cheers!
I improv. Step one, figure out what the PC's doing. Step two, throw something at him, based on step one. Step three, come up with a plot, based on step two. Step four, figure out how to get the PC involved in the plot from step three. Repeat steps one through three until step four occurs.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)