Well it happened.  Starting playing with some work friends and the inevitable question gets asked.   "Do you want to DM for a bit?"  Honestly, i like DMing, so i agreed. 

I have most everything planned out for the campaign.  

 My idea is to start the campaign with level 1 characters in a court room.  The trial of the century is occurring.  a bugbear who has committed several heinous crimes has finally been caught.  The characters will be playing different roles in the scene.  Lawyer(s), Jury, witness, and audience (inside the court and outside amongst the angry mob.  Some wishing for the bugbear's head while some goblinoids are saying he is innocent) .  While the trial is happening, a Illithilich and a Dracolich attack the city.  The city's protector (a great sphinx) fights the dracolich while the illithilich goes and destroys the city's holy item.  I am going to have the characters  go into a skills test to get out of the city without getting smashed by debris from the sphinx/dracolich fight, get trampled by the temple/kings guard that running into battle,  avoid the minions of the liches, or to avoid the angry mob (see below)or the bugbear himself.

Here's where you guys can help.  The escape out of the city should be fun.  However, i want the court room scene to actually have an impact into the campaign or the very least, the story arc.  I do not want a random event happening to lead to the big event.  Im thinking it could be that the lawyer characters could be manipulating the jury and the crowds with persuasion and deception checks.  If one of the sides to the mob gets influenced too much they can begin rioting and add to the pandemonium to escaping the city.  Also if the prosecution side wins, the bugbear gets a reason to go after at least one of the party members.  if the defense wins, the angry mob goes after the defense lawyer?

Is there any other way to make the court room  feel like it means something, rather than making useless checks?

I'd say you sort of shot that plot in the foot by overshadowing it with a much bigger destructive event like a kaiju fight between giants monsters in the city mixed with some dark undead tentacle monster also raising a building and destroying a sacred relic at the same time for some reason. In the confusion of all of that, whatever happens in the courtroom is probably meaningless. You basically took the OJ trial and made it share the same news cycle as a Godzilla/Mothra fight and aliens attacking the Vatican...all in the same city.

I'd start with the core idea of the riots (either for or against) and various agitators trying to influence them a particular way that the players can do something about. Either way, the city can burn, either by goblinoids angry at a guilty plea, or others upset over the case being thrown out. Then you can hone in on the bugbear and decide if he is actually innocent or guilty, if he cares about the players' influence in the trial and subsequent riots, and what other forces were at work that were trying to get said guilty or innocent verdict. 

I can't answer your question, but the first thing that jumped to my mind was, "Why would these PCs form a Party?" What makes them all run away together instead of different directions? Why would they stay together?

Quote from mtngoatjoe >>

I can't answer your question, but the first thing that jumped to my mind was, "Why would these PCs form a Party?" What makes them all run away together instead of different directions? Why would they stay together?

 I actually agree with this. Having the party be in different and non-cooperative roles in the courtroom is fine if your intention is just to contrive a reason for them to be together that isn't "you all meet in a tavern." Making the scene count and be impactful will be harder since the motivations for all of the players will be different: a witness is trying to give a (usually) faithful recounting of what happened, a lawyer is trying to win a case, the jury is supposed to have no emotional investment in the proceedings and make decisions based solely on facts, and the audience is just spectating. It might make it hard for players to engage if the goal and impact of their role is not unified or clear.

What if, instead of a trial, this is a town hall meeting to discuss the punishment of the bugbear? The lawyers can present their case and welcome all citizens to speak. This will give the players equal weight in voicing their opinions and affecting the story. 

This is a really good question.  My thought was that i would have npcs telling them that they need to get to a specific meeting place.  Then from there they would be grouped "randomly" to do a task of some sort.  (whether it be going after the bugbear,  safely leading the survivors to a different town, or following the minions of the dragon)

or.......

Dont initially have them as a group.  They can go in whatever direction.  Based on the direction they go will decide what the next task to do.  Then over the next 2-3 sessions (maybe as high as six) is to get them all together in one room again for a common goal.  

"Plot-twist: Bugbear was using this as a distraction to escape trial. Now you have to track him down, fight him, capture him, and put him BACK ON TRIALLLLL!"

For first sessions, and mind you this is just my personal take, I have found that having a clear goal is better than a quest option tree. In the beginning of a campaign, especially if you have new players, a little clarity of purpose is helpful to get the ball rolling. You can offer options of how to pursue that goal or let the players come up with the ideas themselves, but having the endgame/quest/prize be obvious allows for some direction. A sandbox adventure still has edges, otherwise it's just a beach.

To me, your resettlement, bugbear escape, and dragon feel like mutually exclusive quests. Which is fine to have on hand, but can be overwhelming in a first session with players and a party that hasn't come together yet. If you do let players pick, especially if they aren't a cohesive group yet, you may find yourself running three campaigns instead of one. If I were you, I might select a simple introductory quest and have the other options arise at the end of it. Then, once they are unified, they can choose which to follow.

Your mileage may vary on the above advice. I just am coming from a place of experience, having offered a quest tree in the first few sessions and my players saying they felt a bit lost.

To theologyofbagels, 

My thoughts exactly, this is why  suggested combining them instead!