Campaign preparation with newbie players

[Ben Finney]

Howdy all,

I'm hoping to start a new campaign with a bunch of new players soon,
and am thinking about ways to encourage their creativity in building
fun characters that they have a personal investment in, yet are
coherent and fit well with the setting and premise of the campaign.

The situation I imagine is, having chosen a setting we'd like to run a
campaign in, we get everyone together and hash out the characters
independent of any game mechanics. The rule books would be present,
but hopefully never opened during this session; the important part
would be for the group to decide *as a group* what the party is in the
setting.

I imagine asking things like "What story role do you want to play?
What do you want your character to be good at? How, in the setting,
would your character have become that way, and what else would have
happened as part of that process? How do you know the other main
characters?" and recording the answers so that later I could create
their game stats.

What kinds of questions should I be asking? How should I be asking
them?

Also during the setting I'd want to get a good idea of what kind of
game style they want. I know of many knobs that can be tweaked on
GMing and play style, and I'm painfully aware of the trouble that
ensues when everyone has different expectations of how those knobs
will be set. However, with new players, I don't want to bore them with
questionnaires or discussion of terms they're not even aware of yet.

What good methods can people suggest? What approaches should I avoid?

[Mary K. Kuhner]

In my experience it helps if the GM contributes some ideas about
what he'd like to run. A completely blank slate may not get
the juices flowing, or may generate too many ideas to choose among.

I am personally very fond of having a strong link among the PCs:
I GMed a (multi-player) game where the PCs were the family members
of a gypsy caravan that worked really well. In the first session
they hashed out the family tree, picked out roles (the matriarch
with a dark secret, the drunken uncle, the two rival brothers),
and gave me two party NPCs to develop. The game clicked much
faster than usual because we had so much context.

However, some players turn out to loathe this, so I wouldn't
force them to do it.

Some useful non-technical questions are "What kind of situation will
give your character a big chance to shine? What kind will be
particularly tough for him? Here are some possible hooks for
early adventures: which would grab him the most?"

It seems to me that some of the players who hate cooperative
character generation hate it because they are afraid they'll be
strong-armed into filling some boring niche (healer, place-holder
fighter, that sort of thing). You might make it clear that the
cooperation is more about "Why are we together? What are our
plans?" and less about "Who has to play the boring roles?" Ideally
there should be no boring roles: if there is something the
group agrees it must have, but everyone hates to play it, look for
a creative solution. (In D&D the splatbooks can help here. I
mistrust them, but if you need novel ideas, they have ideas
aplenty.) Or you can offload that role onto an NPC, in a pinch.
Two of the gypsy-party characters were NPCs because they filled
niches we wanted (the cheeky kid, the conscientious administrator)
but didn't seem like good PC material.

Mary Kuhner ***@eskimo.com

[Ben Finney]

Post by Mary K. Kuhner
In my experience it helps if the GM contributes some ideas about
what he'd like to run. A completely blank slate may not get the
juices flowing, or may generate too many ideas to choose among.

Yes, the setting will be chosen from among options presented by the
GM; the preparation I'm describing is what comes after that, but
before character stats.

Post by Mary K. Kuhner
I am personally very fond of having a strong link among the PCs: I
GMed a (multi-player) game where the PCs were the family members of
a gypsy caravan that worked really well. ...
However, some players turn out to loathe this, so I wouldn't
force them to do it.

You're right that I should be contributing my own ideas about what I
want to the decision, since I'll be assuming much of the work of
preparing and running the game.

Post by Mary K. Kuhner
Some useful non-technical questions are "What kind of situation will
give your character a big chance to shine? What kind will be
particularly tough for him? Here are some possible hooks for early
adventures: which would grab him the most?"

Good suggestions, thanks.

Post by Mary K. Kuhner
It seems to me that some of the players who hate cooperative
character generation hate it because they are afraid they'll be
strong-armed into filling some boring niche (healer, place-holder
fighter, that sort of thing).

I'm hoping to lessen that by having mostly newbies who haven't had any
such bad experience, but the warning is well taken and I should try to
be aware of that possible concern.

Post by Mary K. Kuhner
You might make it clear that the
cooperation is more about "Why are we together? What are our
plans?" and less about "Who has to play the boring roles?" Ideally
there should be no boring roles: if there is something the group
agrees it must have, but everyone hates to play it, look for a
creative solution.

Exactly. I want to ensure that the only roles that will be taken by
the party are those the players say they want. The actual story itself
will come *after* that, so I can design it knowing what the players
expect their characters to do.

Post by Mary K. Kuhner
(In D&D the splatbooks can help here. I mistrust them, but if you
need novel ideas, they have ideas aplenty.) Or you can offload that
role onto an NPC, in a pinch. Two of the gypsy-party characters
were NPCs because they filled niches we wanted (the cheeky kid, the
conscientious administrator) but didn't seem like good PC material.

That sounds like another thing to keep in mind at the party
discussion: secondary character roles the players expect to be there,
but as NPCs.

Thanks for the advice. Anyone else?

[Erol K. Bayburt]

Post by Ben Finney
Howdy all,
I'm hoping to start a new campaign with a bunch of new players soon,
and am thinking about ways to encourage their creativity in building
fun characters that they have a personal investment in, yet are
coherent and fit well with the setting and premise of the campaign.

Are the "new players" new to gaming, or are they more-or-less
experienced players who are just new to you as a GM?

Post by Ben Finney
I imagine asking things like "What story role do you want to play?
What do you want your character to be good at? How, in the setting,
would your character have become that way, and what else would have
happened as part of that process? How do you know the other main
characters?" and recording the answers so that later I could create
their game stats.

I personally have a galloping allergy to games where the GM creates
the character for me. If any of your players have a similar allergy,
you'll have a problem with the "so that later I could create their
game stats" part.

Post by Ben Finney
Also during the setting I'd want to get a good idea of what kind of
game style they want. I know of many knobs that can be tweaked on
GMing and play style, and I'm painfully aware of the trouble that
ensues when everyone has different expectations of how those knobs
will be set. However, with new players, I don't want to bore them with
questionnaires or discussion of terms they're not even aware of yet.
What good methods can people suggest? What approaches should I avoid?

Maybe ask: "What *kind* of fun are you looking for from the game?"
"What conventions in fiction (and in gaming) do your really like, and
which ones really annoy you?" "What do you see as your character's
place in the game world?"

One other thing you might need to deal with is the difference between
design-at-start and develop-in-play players. The latter might be
annoyed that you're trying to push them into doing too much work on
their characters at the beginning, when they'll need to run their
characters through a few sessions of actual play in order to get them
to gel.

[Ben Finney]

Post by Erol K. Bayburt

Post by Ben Finney
I'm hoping to start a new campaign with a bunch of new players soon,
and am thinking about ways to encourage their creativity in building
fun characters that they have a personal investment in, yet are
coherent and fit well with the setting and premise of the campaign.

Are the "new players" new to gaming, or are they more-or-less
experienced players who are just new to you as a GM?

Post by Ben Finney
I imagine asking things like "What story role do you want to play?
... and recording the answers so that later I could create their
game stats.

I personally have a galloping allergy to games where the GM creates
the character for me.

... these are players who are averse to lots of rules, so I'm doing it
as a way to introduce them to how RPGs work, rather than requiring
them to know loads of rules before play begins. I'll certainly discuss
the resulting character stats with the player before the first session
of play, and make any changes resulting from a misunderstanding of
what they want the character to be.

Post by Erol K. Bayburt
If any of your players have a similar allergy, you'll have a problem
with the "so that later I could create their game stats" part.

Your cautionary advice is well taken. I'll make it clear to the
players that they can get involved in the minutiae if they choose, or
leave it to me to do most of the crunchy work.

Post by Erol K. Bayburt
Maybe ask: "What *kind* of fun are you looking for from the game?"
"What conventions in fiction (and in gaming) do your really like,
and which ones really annoy you?" "What do you see as your
character's place in the game world?"

All good suggestions, thankyou.

Post by Erol K. Bayburt
One other thing you might need to deal with is the difference
between design-at-start and develop-in-play players.

Good point. I might even allow each player to give their character a
couple of "Schrödinger's Traits" of a certain level of power, that are
left indeterminate for the first session or so until the player (with
GM's approval) decides what they actually are.

[Simon Smith]

Post by Erol K. Bayburt

Post by Ben Finney
I'm hoping to start a new campaign with a bunch of new players soon,
and am thinking about ways to encourage their creativity in building
fun characters that they have a personal investment in, yet are
coherent and fit well with the setting and premise of the campaign.

Are the "new players" new to gaming, or are they more-or-less
experienced players who are just new to you as a GM?

Post by Ben Finney
I imagine asking things like "What story role do you want to play?
... and recording the answers so that later I could create their
game stats.

<snip>

Using a familiar setting will help a lot. I have found Star Wars by far the
best for this, simply because it is so well known. Everyone already knows
about blasters and landspeeders, Droids and Jedi, and that saves /so/ much
explaining ahead of time. But if you wanted to run a fantasy campaign, you
could sit down and watch a Conan film first - and then use that as an
example setting. I suppose on the fantasy side, the only thing that can
match Star Wars for familiarity among non-roleplayers is the Lord of The
Rings saga. So when trying to describe the kind of setting you want, think
in terms of a particular book or books, film or films, or genre and be sure
to be able to name several examples of the genre. That will quickly give the
players a handle on what to expect. For a superhero genre I'd suggest the
X-men. Other, more specialised niches become increasingly tricky to 'tag' in
this way precisely, unless the players are all fans of the right subset of
material.

[gleichman]

Post by Erol K. Bayburt
Are the "new players" new to gaming, or are they more-or-less
experienced players who are just new to you as a GM?

Given this answer, I think most of the advice you're getting is just too
much. It's like asking someone who's never seen color if they like blue
better than red.

I'd be more interested in asking them what they expect from the game. It may
not be what you expect. One newbie I encountered wanted to create character
write-ups (is true, this was his primary starting reason for playing- to see
things in his mind put to paper stats).

For those looking to live in an existing world, I often give them exactly
that. If the like Marvel Comics, I hand them the characters from there and
run them an adventure. This allows them to see if the reality of the game
matches their expectations- instead of forcing my game to match theirs
(which would never work anyway).

If they like it, then there's time to dig in questions such as those posed
here. But even then, I would in general advise against them. Frankly, more
rpg players are no where near as demanding as posters here- and by running
wild with the advice given, I fear you will only confuse and
over-complicate.

[Ben Finney]

Post by gleichman

Post by Erol K. Bayburt
Are the "new players" new to gaming, or are they more-or-less
experienced players who are just new to you as a GM?

Most of them are new to RPGs completely

Given this answer, I think most of the advice you're getting is just
too much. It's like asking someone who's never seen color if they
like blue better than red.

This is, indeed, one of the main areas of concern. I think the
questions that ask about non-RPG-mindset stuff will be the most
useful, and especially the ones that get them to describe what they
want rather than rank things against each other.

Post by gleichman
I'd be more interested in asking them what they expect from the game.

My problem is that I'm the one defining what an RPG is to these
people; they've never experienced anything like it. I've played
various modern board games with each of them, so have enough of an
idea about what they like that I'm proposing they play an RPG, but if
they don't know what an RPG is, how useful will it be to ask them what
they want from it? Presumably they want out of it what I've said they
can expect from it.

Post by gleichman
It may not be what you expect.

Regardless of my above concern (which I'm hoping someone can address),
I will take this advice on faith and ask them plainly what they want
from the game, to see what they come up with. They will no doubt
surprise me.

Post by gleichman
For those looking to live in an existing world, I often give them
exactly that. If the like Marvel Comics, I hand them the characters
from there and run them an adventure. This allows them to see if the
reality of the game matches their expectations- instead of forcing
my game to match theirs (which would never work anyway).

This has been a common theme in the responses, even though my initial
post presumed that we'd already picked a setting. I'll take that as a
strong indication that I should present, for their first game, only
familiar settings from which to choose.

Post by gleichman
If they like it, then there's time to dig in questions such as those
posed here. But even then, I would in general advise against
them. Frankly, more rpg players are no where near as demanding as
posters here- and by running wild with the advice given, I fear you
will only confuse and over-complicate.

Yes, I don't plan to ask every single question that's been proposed in
this thread :-)

[s***@sonic.net]

Post by Erol K. Bayburt

Post by Ben Finney
I'm hoping to start a new campaign with a bunch of new players soon,

Are the "new players" new to gaming, or are they more-or-less
experienced players who are just new to you as a GM?

Or new to the system? In particular, the first time people meet
point-buy chargen tends to throw 'em off a bit; the first time
they hit GURPS/HERO/etc complex-build systems, the first time
they meet diceless like Amber or Nobilis (or, uber-powerful,
like Amber-Nobilis)... each one *can* throw off even players who
had seemed "more-or-less experienced."

Post by Erol K. Bayburt

Post by Ben Finney
... and recording the answers so that later I could create
their game stats.

I personally have a galloping allergy to games where the GM creates
the character for me. If any of your players have a similar allergy,
you'll have a problem with the "so that later I could create their
game stats" part.

IME, experienced GM's can create better, more-faithful PC renditions
of the player-concepts than utter-n00b-players can. I have repeatedly
seen the n00b-built-PC turn out horribly frustrating to the player,
once they have a better grasp on the game-mechanics (and sometimes,
the setting).

However, I too prefer player-built PCs to GM-built PC's. Substantially
so!

My solution has been to *permit* players to build if they want, but to
also *offer* (as a GM) to build for them, and (either way) to allow
tweaking the PC in-play. Sometimes, that's shifting skills around;
sometimes, it's moving traits/attributes/etc; sometimes, it's altering
Feats/Virtues&Flaws/Edges/Etc. In this phase, I permit liberties that
in other contexts would give me the screaming-munchkin-heebie-jeebies.

It took me a while to overcome the S-M-H-J's but I've found this to
work quite well... YMMV.

Post by Erol K. Bayburt

Post by Ben Finney
What good methods can people suggest? What approaches should I avoid?

Maybe ask: "What *kind* of fun are you looking for from the game?"
"What conventions in fiction (and in gaming) do your really like, and
which ones really annoy you?"

More concretely: what are your favorite stories & plotlines, favorite
characters, etc. And... WHY, what is it that you so enjoy about those?

[Russell Wallace]

I find the biggest bang for the buck, in terms of amount of information
shared per effort expended, is to identify a genre of fiction the
players are familiar with, like and want to play in, and go from there.
Of course a published system/setting can fill that role if the players
are familiar with gaming, but if not, then toss out a few possibilities:
"Hard science fiction in the classic style of Niven, Asimov, Heinlein."
"1930s pulp adventure in the style of Indiana Jones." "Anime-style
teenagers with magic powers, set in modern-day Tokyo." That gives the
players something to latch onto, and also examples they can use to make
suggestions of their own if they want something else.

(Obviously you can go a step further and actually run in an existing
setting: Star Wars, Call of Cthulhu, Middle-Earth etc, optionally using
a published rule set. But you don't necessarily have to do that - the
genre gives you the shared vocabulary.)

Once you've thereby settled on a genre, you have a shared vocabulary to
use as a starting point for character ideas: "A geek type like Sailor
Mercury, except..." "An Oriental martial artist like the guy in Shanghai
Noon, and with this idea for background..." etc. After that you can play
it by ear, but you're talking deltas from an understood base, rather
than trying to build from scratch.

[psychohist]

Ben Finney posts, in part:

I know of many knobs that can be tweaked on
GMing and play style, and I'm painfully aware
of the trouble that ensues when everyone has
different expectations of how those knobs
will be set.

It's good that you're aware of these things. I'd point out a couple
of pitfalls you may need to avoid, one with the way you are planning
to do things, one with one of the suggestions others have offered.

You say you'll ask general questions, without reference to the
mechanics, regarding what kind of character they want to play, and
that you'd implement these in the mechanics for the players later. I
would worry that the rules might not support their desires exactly -
especially since, when making their descriptions, they won't
understand the constraints of the rules. They're also likely to leave
out details that might come to be important later. For example, if
one said, "I'd like my character to be able to fly", you might assume
they mean "fly" in the Superman sense, and they might actually mean
"fly" in the Chuck Yeager sense. That example is blatant enough that
you'd probably catch it, but there might be others less blatant that
would still be important.

Since these people do play board games, might it be a better approach
to pick a simple set of rules that they can understand - say, The
Fantasy Trip, or even something like the simplistic rules that come
with the Games Workshops "Lord of the Rings" figurine sets? Once
they're used to the idea, you could move to more complex rules later.

The other thing I'd suggest is that if you take a setting straight
from fiction, you be careful about which setting you select. Authors
have control over protagonists that gamesmasters don't over player
characters. Some fictional universes translate well to roleplaying
games; others don't without a lot of unspoken genre rules that all the
players have to buy into.

Warren J. Dew

[Ben Finney]

Post by psychohist
You say you'll ask general questions, without reference to the
mechanics, regarding what kind of character they want to play, and
that you'd implement these in the mechanics for the players later.

It's now clear that I failed to mention an important part of this:
having done the drudge work of making the game stats for the
character, I would them talk with each player about their resulting
character and fine-tune it based on their responses. I wouldn't expect
the players to be handed a character sheet unseen and begin playing
it, even if they provided the prose description of the character.

The important thing is that the initial character design would be with
all the players designing a party of characters together, and me to
guide them and veto anything which doesn't fit the setting; and the
initial design would be game-stats-free so that it doesn't bog down
into learning the game rules in detail before play begins.

Post by psychohist
I would worry that the rules might not support their desires exactly
- especially since, when making their descriptions, they won't
understand the constraints of the rules.

I will be using a rule set (perhaps GURPS or FUDGE) that allows for
very flexible character design. The limits of character traits would
be imposed by the chosen setting tropes and level of realism, not by
the rules.

Post by psychohist
Since these people do play board games, might it be a better
approach to pick a simple set of rules that they can understand -
say, The Fantasy Trip, or even something like the simplistic rules
that come with the Games Workshops "Lord of the Rings" figurine
sets? Once they're used to the idea, you could move to more complex
rules later.

Based on the advice given in this thread, which has been as much about
setting (which I didn't ask for) as character design, I'm getting the
strong indication that choosing an appropriate setting for these
newbies is more than just "what would you like?".

Perhaps running a once-off, multi-session adventure with disposable
characters could be better than starting with a campaign. It would
give the players a chance to learn how to roleplay without being stuck
with a character design that, despite their choosing it, turns out to
be incompatible with their play style.

Post by psychohist
The other thing I'd suggest is that if you take a setting straight
from fiction, you be careful about which setting you select.

This is advice I've read many times, and it's still good. I'll keep it
in mind as I present settings and design the adventures.

Thanks for the good response.

[gleichman]

Post by Ben Finney
Perhaps running a once-off, multi-session adventure with disposable
characters could be better than starting with a campaign. It would
give the players a chance to learn how to roleplay without being stuck
with a character design that, despite their choosing it, turns out to
be incompatible with their play style.

That's idea IMO. The question here is if they really want to do this in
concept- not in detail. And that can best be answered with sterotype
characters in a one off example of your game style.

However I wouldn't make the first game stat free unless your style involves
a significant number of adventures that are stat free. Don't bait and switch
your newbies, give them an true example of your game from the beginning. I'd
use the rules (or at least the core ones), but would walk them through them
as they go (except for character generation, which I'd hand them). Ideally,
they will want to play the rules as well as the RPing, or afterwards at
least explain why they didn't so that perhaps you can select a different
game system if they are up for another try.