Session 1: You Won't Find These Rules in Any Book (sort of).

Hello and welcome back to Sessions + Sentiments. I'd like to start off this first formal posting with what I would consider to be my "GM Home Rules". What does that mean? To me, it's what I use whenever I'm running a game. My players don't particularly play to these rules, but I do as a way to ensure that my games run how I want them to.

This is a GAME for FUN

I have never enjoyed the concept of "GM vs the players". That could mean intentionally trying to beat them up and kill their characters, or be inflexible on decisions they didn't understand, or overall being what I consider as a kill-joy. Now, this doesn't mean I don't provide challenging combats and that doesn't mean I retcon every choice my players have made just because they didn't like it. Here are some examples of what I'm trying to say:

Killing Players Without Mercy: In session 1 of a new homebrew campaign I started, I had my level 1 players come up against a small group of smoke mephits. It was a combination of tough combat mixed with little room to move around and bad rolls from the players. The worst case scenario. Next thing I knew, a mephit exploded and the Paladin was dead-dead. Yikes. Now, the "correct" way of dealing with this is to tell them "sorry, if you roll up a new character now you can jump in again by the end of the session." But why? They'd been spending weeks planning these characters only to play them for an hour. So I shrugged and improvised. Paladin has a god, god gives them an ultimatum, Paladin takes it, and Paladin comes back to life. Now, they weren't immune to consequences which we treated by having the character permanently lose an eye. And now, we have some unique mechanics the player gets to deal with (disadvantage on perception checks with sight) and more twists to add to their arc. A real "making lemonade out of lemons" kind of deal that we're all happy with.

Letting Players Change Their Minds: I bring you to Barovia with my level 3 players fresh out of Death House. It's a pretty good mix of classes to try and go after Strahd: a ranger, sorcerer, monk, barbarian, and physician. The Physician was a homebrew class that had a fun flavoring where they could use pieces of dead creatures to help heal their companions (think Dr. Frankenstein). Being a homebrew, the Physician and I had talked a lot about how he wanted to multiclass with a different homebrew rogue class that gave him a sawblade (like Bloodborne). Awesome. I was fully on board. (I'm a sucker for creative homebrews, but we'll discuss the dangers of that in a future post.) But once he hit level 4 he realized that the way he wanted to tell his character's story was far more down the route of Dr. Frankenstein than Bloodborne. So, do we tell him he's out of luck and will have to deal with 3 useless levels in rouge? Hardly. Instead, we made a hard shift, modified some story aspects and expanded on some others. What came out of it? An amazing prepared speech of appreciation of the "good" doctor to his companions and a "dead" vampire lord.

Players take precedent over story

This one was a tough one for me as I started my GMing tale as a "plan for every option no matter what". You know what happened? I got burnout, I lost interest, and I messed up opportunities to create something great with my players. Fortunately, most of my players are friends (or players-turned-friends) and are thus too kind to say that to my face but I feel it when I look at my old notes. I would do things like hide story progression behind required player activity (like investigating odd objects they found) or dice rolls that ultimately meant nothing because I told them anyway.

To me, ttrpgs are something to be played with the players. Stories that are created in frames but flushed out in hours of roleplaying and combat with people. And I didn't learn that initially. Writing stories are way different than campaigns where you have to drive the plot forward at every moment. You have to know. But I've discovered (and come to enjoy) what happens when I don't "know" everything and instead let the story and the players flush it out themselves. So, I've stopped putting major lore behind required dice checks and I've instead started pushing out hooks and secrets and rumors that my players can latch onto. I give them more of a feeling that they truly are a part of this world and it's up to them to start peeling away at it. Did they ignore a letter to a secret society because they got distracted by something else? No problem, the secret society will come find them. Did they forget to investigate a room for a special type of infernal fungus deep in a sewer? It's all good, because their character would know to be looking for it in a place like this and manage to find it anyway.

I want to run games where I no longer know how it's going to end.

PvP is Not Acceptable

This one probably sounds a bit "snowflakey" but PvP is one of those things I've never had a good feeling about. Sure, there are exclusions like planned pit fights or discussed conflict but random PvP with the loose excuse of "it's for the story" is never a good reason. Why do I think that? Well, for one, ttrpgs are collaborative games. It's why "lone wolf" characters will be forever left behind in the tavern and toxic murder hobos are happily handed off to the nearest city guard. People come to these games for some flavoring of collaboration. PvP doesn't bring that. What it does bring is heightened emotions that often bleed out beyond the table.

I want conflict, intrigue, excitement, but you can find those things with monsters and kingdoms and haunted houses. Turning your ire to one of your fellow players does nothing but detract from the companionship and the above-the-table collaboration.

Splitting the Party Should Always Happen

I feel like this is one of those things I've slowly started to see come into the forefront of GMs "dirty little secret". Gasp splitting the party! But that guarantees death, doesn't it? Not entirely, and in some cases, not at all. It's not "GM vs the players", remember?

There are a couple places where party splitting can happen: shopping / downtime sessions, exploring a dungeon, investigating and collecting intel. I think all of them are important and a must do for any GM with involved players or players that are looking to find some excitement.

Shopping / Downtime: This one is pretty self explanatory but can you imagine running a shop and having just a crowd of people suddenly show up flashing cash and demanding things from your "secret menu"? No? Just me? Weird... Anyway, shopping and downtime activities after a long dungeon dive or journey back to the local hub is important for every game. It gives the players a chance to relax and take stock. Some of these players may have gold to spend or information to look into. They don't always need to bring their adventuring companions with them to pick up a pouch of ball bearings or follow up with a secret contact about their royal connections. (A campaign I'm playing in we fondly call doing our "errand runs" a "group loop" as we normally walk together but split off as we make our way around the city.) Use these moments to spotlight and let your players drive the story without the typical chaos a large group can bring along. Plus, what's more exciting than knowing above table about a companion secret while your own character has no idea?

Exploring a Dungeon: Some may say this is the most dangerous option and it probably is, but it's also the most exciting. Have you brought your players into a room-filled dungeon in the bowels of the city? Have they gingerly walked their way up to a fork in the road? Does your rogue and fighter want to go left where they hear sounds of voices while your wizard is certain there's a hidden library to the right? Let them choose. Let them split up. Why? Because it puts them in a situation of problem solving that they wouldn't otherwise have been in. Maybe the wizard triggered a trap that they rogue would've picked up and now has to creatively use their magic to stop the poisonous gas from filling the chamber. Maybe the fighter tripped over a rock while sneaking towards the voices and alerted the enemies to the sound and now they have to decide if it's worth revealing themselves or sneaking back and setting their own trap for the overly curious guards. Not to mention, this does help avoid those TPK rooms if not everyone is in said room.

Investigating and Collecting Intel: You've returned from the vampire lord's castle, your arms full of old papers and journals. One of you found an ancient-looking amulet that looks similar to an amulet the local priest wears. Another one of you found journal entries about your lost mother...and that she may be hiding somewhere nearby. But time is of the essence. Night is falling and those you're hoping to question are turning in for the night. You could always risk waiting till morning, but what if the missing mother changes locations? What if the priest is attacked and killed at night? The collecting of intel is my favorite. It's where the entire party split off with their respective plans, all with the same goal to find any information or leads that they can and to bring it back to the group. The best part of all of this is the roleplay, in my opinion. You create situations like players realizing their character wouldn't ask certain questions in an interrogation, or another character learning of a secret meeting because they showed up alone. The options are endless but fun.

It's All About the Resources

This is probably my newest rule after messing around with the idea of letting my players feast or famine with equipment and items and access to other things. In the long and the short of it, ttrpgs are resource management games. Originally from war games, right?

One of the issues I constantly dealt with was having my players hoard items and equipment rather than use or trade them off. I kept trying to figure out how to fix it. Maybe make the items stronger? Maybe give them more gold? But they just kept being little pack rats. While watching a video by Mystic Arts he made mention of the importance of resource management within ttrpgs and pushing that onto the players for their own use. I realized I needed to put them in positions where there was no other option but to use their resources.

One of the ways to do this is to stop creating "nova combats". Stop letting your players long rest in dungeons or right before a big boss fight so that they have no worries about "going nova" since they'll get a long rest right after. Keep them on their toes, show them the importance of trying to maintain their abilities as long as they can. I add in more combats as much as I can, random encounters, traps, puzzles, and things that require the players to be active and thoughtful in their choices. You look at a boss fight differently if you've had to fight a hoard of zombies and avoid traps while sprinting up a set of stairs. The stakes naturally become higher when your players aren't in a position to be fully refreshed.

So there they are, my personal GM rules that I use to ensure my games run how I want them and how I hope my players want them. What about you? Do you have any house rules that you use while crafting and running campaigns? What're your thoughts on what I've put together?

Looking forward to your sentiments.

I'll see you next session.

Julia