Session 7: Learning to Say "Yes, and" and "No, but".

Improv or "improvise" is the cornerstone of ttrpgs. The ability to act on your feet, respond to unexpected questions and actions from your players is an absolute need. I feel like a lot of people think it is exclusively intended for humor, especially given things like improv comedy groups. But improvisation is anything theatrical that is spontaneous and without preparation.

A very common rule used in improv is the "yes, and" rule which is that you should accept the reality of the scene presented to you and add to it. Of course, ttrpgs require so much of that given we're creating stories within made up places with magic and technology that doesn't exist in our actual reality. The rule of "yes, and" is key to pushing forward the narrative and adding to the roleplay. It is key to any ttrpgs comradery within a story. We all want to be there and we all want the story to continue.

But what if I told you as the GM that it's not all that simple? Have you ever been running a session and someone's "yes, and" ruins more than just your short term plans? Or do they "yes, and" out of the setting of the campaign? I have a novel suggestion for you...say "no".

Now, I don't have any professional experience with improv. All of my "skills" come from being a shy, over-weight kid most of my life. I also like to watch lots of improv shows and my wife thinks I'm pretty funny, which makes me an expert (all things considered).

Let me extrapolate on the above by saying that there are actually four rules you as the GM should live by as it comes for improv:

1. "Yes, and..."

2. "Yes, but..."

3. "No, but..."

4. "No, and..."

"Yes, and..."

What does this mean as a GM? There's lost of fantastic ways to apply this. Did your player roll really well on an Investigation check and they roleplayed how they wanted to do it? Build on that. Give them the natural 20 result because they specifically looked for a loose brick behind the bed. What if they roleplay an excellent persuasion with an NPC? Skip the dice roll, let the conversation be natural. Reward the intent for roleplay and story telling.

I like to think of this as the moment where the "rule of cool rules all". Sometimes there are sessions in which the energy is on point, the dice are rolling as they should, and the players are jumping at roleplay and being creative and engaging. Those are the moments, to me, where applying the "yes, and" method is the most important. It's the rewarding effect to the cause. Feed their egos, goddammit, because it pays off on the other end. It lets them know that it's good when the getting is good but be ready for when those tables turn.

"Yes, but..."

This is what I like to think of as a my first "dash of reality". I know, I know, what's reality doing in my imagination game about fantasy and magic? But we've got to have some reality in order for a world to function. Gravity has to exist unless you want to concoct a world without it. 2 + 2 must equal 4...otherwise you better have an answer as to why.

So this, then, is what I use to apply the rules of the world. Did your players roll a natural 20 to convince the shopkeeper to sell them their goods for free? Hard to ignore the dice. Let it happen and then have them come back to town to discover the shop has gone bankrupt and closed. Do you players want to throw the halfling to land on the goblin across the gorge? Go for it, but I'm also going to roll for fall damage. It's the "give and take" dynamic that just reminds players there are rules to the game. Are they rules to be pushed and twisted? Absolutely, but I can twist them right back.

"No, but..."

Here we go, into the land of "no", a place that GMs are seemingly never supposed to go. But why? I just mentioned above that there are rules to this game and some of those rules cannot get twisted and broken. That being said, a "no, but" can be a few things: 1) A pity failure where a player's been having a particularly rough rolling session and I decide to take pity on them by giving them a nugget of info or a small bag of coins. It's insignificant to the overall story but I know we've all had a crappy roll day and those little things do make it feel better. 2) Resolving a failed roll that came with good roleplay. If you're selling some shady wares like a pro but you roll a six on your deception check then maybe you're only able to convince the person to buy one suspicious idol rather than the three.

I think of "no, but" as a way to keep the game fun and light. Players should know that failure is always possible and you as a GM should hold to that, but you're also trying to juggle player engagement. It's difficult to keep anyone (even outside of ttrpgs) engaged in something that they keep failing at. Give them a pat on a shoulder, a "not quite but you're getting warmer" reminder. Show them that failure exists but continuing to roleplay, question, investigate, etc. it always going to result in something.

"No, and..."

Here is where the full "failure" of the game comes into the play. The true natural 1s. The "let me roll for insight a third time" kind of items. I feel that this is a very important part of GMing as this is where you need to stick to "you failed, and that's it" or "there is nothing like that in this world." Some people could call this limiting but I think it's fair to put on guardrails to any game that you're running. You're doing a lot of work writing up the framework of this story, moving the pieces behind the scenes, reacting to your players as they forge on in their adventure.

This is what I like to use to show the full punishment and consequences of the game. To remind the players that they aren't just floating about the world without cause and effect. In Curse of Strahd, my players hadn't "played the part" during Strahd's dinner. But I hadn't had him particularly aggressive to them at this point. He was curious, but not bothered. After this night where they practically ignored what he (and I) had planned for them, they returned to Vallaki to find the town had been completely torched and was in ruin and chaos. They lost a home base and it changed how they played the remainder of the campaign. And credit where credit is due, they did an amazing job changing with the tone. Placing a moment of "no, and" in the campaign ended up adding even more depth than if I'd just let their digressions go unpunished.

And now let's put it all together...

There's no perfect formula for the above. That's the whole point of improv, you have to go with what feels right in the moment. And how do you get better at that? Well you practice it. It's a muscle that needs to be flexed. Build yourself some buckets of themes to draw from. Read up on typical writing tropes. Learn how authors use foreshadowing and apply it to your own future plans. You can both use improv to turn a campaign on its head but also to help reinforce how you want the game to run.

Do you all have any other sort of tactics like the above that you use with your players? What times has a "yes, and" really ruined a game? What about a time when a "no, but" improved it?

Looking forward to your sentiments.

See you next session.

Julia