I think some of my favourite games to plan have been the ones where the players suggested the base premise. The players-to-be sat in a group, eating snacks and talking about what would be cool to play. In one instance, the group said they wanted to be somewhere non-temperate and fight a classical D&D villain of high level. Tomb of Annihilation was just about to launch, and from it the Jungle-infested island of Sebek was born, under threat from a slaad-growing lich. In another instance, the group had seen a comic premise for a prince & his allies seeking to reclaim the throne. From this we created the starting blocks of a realm-spanning political campaign, as the group designated one player to be the prince they rallied behind as they went to gather unlikely allies and reclaim the throne from a mysterious usurper.
The reasoning for this is obvious. It immediately creates player investment: this is what they think will be fun. Much can be gained from players having characters they are invested in, but starting off with a story that they want to see through, or themes they want to explore, or a setting that comes from a shared moment of creativity can also work wonders.
It builds hype as we discuss the idea: spoilers are out the window as the game isn't made, we're just throwing ideas around of what would work and what wouldn't. It keeps me on my toes and gives me an opportunity to try something new. I would not voluntarily choose to create a campaign about succession and the merits of monarchy, but it was super fun to explore the idea and make it into something; it was even better to see the ideas the players came up with and weave them into the story.
There are of course limits. In both of these cases, the ideas just clicked with everyone in the group, but this won't always be the case. Perhaps if this was going to be refined into a more organised system – a player led Session Zero perhaps? – then some guidelines would need to be placed, both in terms of majority preference and what the DM is not interested in running.
I should try and do this more often.
That's a very interesting concept that one can take further and further. From starting with a blank sheet of paper and drawing a map from scratch, letting you and your players flex their creative muscles in collaborative worldbuilding. You can even play a game like microscope to establish history for that world and after that you can as a group decide what kind of ttrpg want out of that world. It's a highly creative process that gives you as a writer fresh perspectives and different ways of thinking, but it requires the right group to pull it off successfully and satisfyingly.
ReplyDeleteMicroscope looks fun, and collaborative worldbuilding also looks fun, but in my experience I've found them to be dissatisfying, due to players having different ideas of what they want and it resulting in a big clash in tone & content.
DeleteBut if the group agreed on a starting premise, then it could work better that way. Get the tone, atmosphere etc. out of the way, then just focus on getting ideas down on paper.