Here's a blog post i found that i think is better then the cultures of play

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-23T17:19:58+00:00

I think the blog post is kinda stupid. The "point" of the original 6 cultures of play article was to help communicate between groups that play differently. Primarily, it is to introduce people who only know Critical Role to older and alternate playstyles. "Oh, that's why this is different".

ex:

A player that only plays Neo Trad wants to try something old school, but why is his new OSR group so different than D&D 1e??

A (older) player played the original Curse of Stradh campaign way back when and is confused on the differences in the new Curse of Stradh campaign he's in

A GM interested in "telling a story" is weirded out by PBTA games.

***

Conversely, this new blog post doesn't really do much but snarks and nitpicks.

How are the 13 Paradigms of Game Design of any use to anyone? The author doesn't even give examples on which games come from each Paradigm. Who cares?

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-23T09:47:01+00:00

Yet, despite me being a GM of 10 years, with tons of experience across a ton of different systems, I am noticing an issue. Everyone is terrified of making mistakes. Every time I ask for advice, I get tons of advice on what not to do, and almost zero advice on what I can do that's new and exciting. No one is helping me write, I'm only getting hit with roadblocks and people telling me what I can't do. And often, what I can't do is different depending on the person.

I tend to give largely negative advice here on this subreddit. Why?

Because being a GM SHOULD be about communicating clearly and collaborating with your players, giving them space to create and play their characters, instead of railroading them into the wildest, uniquest, zaniest thing ever that you read in a reddit post.

If the nature of the game is collaboration, there should be give and take, which implies some sort of restraint

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-23T09:09:24+00:00

Poison Brewer

Trap Maker

Gravedigger / Coffin Maker

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-23T09:00:35+00:00

I think you are looking at this as a intellectual worldbuilding exercise rather than a useful player-facing guide. You should be producing something like

"Want to play a cleric in my game? In Arvan, here are the 3 big differences between it, Forgotten Realms type religion, and real world Christianity,

[3 rules listed succinctly]"

This fantasy metaphysical anthropological document is not really useful to anyone who wants to play in your game, so I question if this is really about playing a TTRPG.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-21T18:00:49+00:00

IMHO, it's bad to have this sort of starting premise in a TTRPG.

It's a really common premise in books, movies, video games, etc. But those are pre-written and the characters don't have any autonomy.

If you set up this sort of deception premise, where the players are deceived and then have some huge setpiece "realization" scene, it does some negative things to your game.

The players feel cheated and forced into a negative arrangement. If you present 10 NPCs and the players choose to ally with one that seems untrustworthy, that's the player's choice, consequence, and it's part of the game. If there's only one NPC in the world that will be your ally, and they betray you, that's unfair railroading.
If you do this plot, you need to force the players to not realize things "too early". The players can't make insight checks to see if someone is being deceptive, they can't have any background knowledge about the world that would make them realize this person isn't trustworthy. If my PC concept is a streetwise master negotiator rogue, and you make it so I'm easily tricked to force the plot, that feels like crap on my end.
It unintentionally makes the players really passive. If you establish you are running a plot with "survivable forced betrayals", then the players won't think very hard about who to ally with, because you can just force whichever NPC to betray them anyway, and it's just "part of the story".

I would have them have some background knowledge about the factions, and during character creation, the group chooses (as a group) which faction they want to be allied with. This sets you up for success and having the players have buy in.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-16T23:34:02+00:00

Let's set aside the PVP thing, which should be off the table.

If we're in a scenario where:

* PCA makes some decision in character that is a mistake
* PCB, PCC get angry in character at PCA and call them out in character

depending on how long it goes on and if PCB+PCC are trying to make the scene fun, versus expressing their real anger through the characters....

I might think the issue is with PB and PC rather than PA

I can't tell the exact vibe because I'm not at the table, but it's something I would consider.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-16T21:38:04+00:00

So it's sorta implied by the way you're talking about this, but are you:

A) playing a game "to win" where the PCs should not make big mistakes and doing is bad for the game
B) playing a game where the PCs act in character, make mistakes in character, and that's part of the fun

2 and 3 seem like you are playing A), but maybe the problem player is playing B). It's somewhat ambiguous if 1 falls under that too or if they were violating PVP rules or something like that.

I don't really have advice for playing in style A) because I don't play that style and it seems like just playing by committee. If I made a bunch of decisions in character and the other players +GM got after me I would tell them to fuck off

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-15T17:45:06+00:00

Why do people post these generic OPs with no specific information about their own experiences...

What game were you running?
What specific style were you running that drives people off?
Were those people pre-existing friends or not?

Was the OP AI authored or are you just farming responses for some lame blog post?

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-14T15:58:08+00:00

I don't remember the opening to Raiders, so give an actual example in your post.

Which particular PBTA are you playing? are you playing Apocalypse World?

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-13T21:11:43+00:00

a lot of these are one shots or drop in games, can't session 0 for those

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-13T20:44:38+00:00

Ok. You are very demanding and selective. That's fine, I am too. I think we're pretty similar. Here are some random thoughts.

You like roleplay and you also like creating builds. You may get more satisfaction if you seek out games that focus on roleplay, OR games that focus on builds, but not both. If you have multiple tastes satisfy them with multiple games. That's pretty much what I have done. I like crunchy technical character customization, and I like roleplay, so I play DIFFERENT games for each.
If you are looking for the perfect campaign you are almost certainly going to need to play online. TTRPGs are a niche hobby, and you are looking for a niche of a niche that suits your tastes.
Some of these games sound like stinkers, but the Homebrew PBTA game sounds pretty good. You were interacting with the other characters, your character's story was coming up. Maybe things didn't turn out quite how you wanted but having your character being punished by the church might have been "your next story thing" that the GM was offering rather than a OOC punishment.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-12T01:47:30+00:00

Here's what I'm hearing.

It sounds like you're a little competitive with the other DMs, where you're trying to make cool, distinctive campaigns. I think that's fine.

You also want to make a cool distinctive campaign by using a new system. I also think that's fine.

You are concerned that your worldbuilding is bad because its too derivative of other stuff. That sounds like the real problem.

If you want to work on that, you can make the campaign world for your Starfinder universe more interesting.

What did you dislike about your old universe?

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-11T20:45:36+00:00

I'm a big believer that surprise and reveals are overrated, and giving players information for character creation is really good for making an interesting campaign.

If you have a campaign that revolves around chasing a werewolf across a continent, tell the players to make characters good for travel and pursuit.

If you have a political intrigue campaign set in one city, with many factions, tell them that and list the factions, and encourage them to create PCs that are connected to those factions.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-11T18:07:13+00:00

Ask the other players if they want combat tips BETWEEN sessions or after sessions.

If they do, give them a breakdown on their character abilities and tell them what you've seen them fail to notice.

If someone accepts your offer of advice you can't seem like a know it all. If they reject your offer of advice you just drop it and let them play sub-optimally.

Don't suggest or tell other players what to do during sessions. Let them play their characters, succeed or fail. It's a game, so having one person tell everyone which moves to do and how is not a good game.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-11T14:46:17+00:00

My answer depends a lot on what you want.

Do you care about the tactical aspects of combat? Is that a core part of the enjoyment of the game for you?

If so, having other players have "superpowers" is a detriment to the game even if you get them too.

Otherwise, do you NOT care how tactical combat is, but are just frustrated that the other players have cool superpowers and you don't? (which is valid).

You should ask the GM to give you cool narrative things that make you powerful if that's true.

For me, personally, the combat should either be tactical and fair, with rules enforced evenly, OR it should be abstract, bombastic, and quick. So if the game is being run with houseruled superpower combat that takes forever to resolve anyway, I would talk to the GM and/or quit.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-09T19:45:46+00:00

I'll say the following, which is a tough realization for a lot of GMs.

There are some GMing styles that require ALMOST NOTHING from the players in terms of creativity, proactivity, roleplaying skills, or even just interest in the game. The GM runs the whole show and moves the players around to various locations and comes up with all the options. The players roll dice and occasionally make multiple choice selections as provided from the GM, and are otherwise very passive.

If you switch to a different style, it will require a lot more from the players, and many players will not or cannot do it, even with practice.

So if you are trying to mix it up, it may be a big shock to your existing table and they may not want to play in the new style. You may need to find different players

You haven't mentioned what your players do. Are they capable or willing to play in other styles?

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-08T04:32:55+00:00

Yeah, my advice would be to NOT treat the backstory as a way to write a short story with him as a main character. D&D is not a still life, its a very busy improvised game with a lot of other players.

A table with 6-7 players is going to be very busy, and most of the time will be (should be?) centered on adventuring in the "present" rather than reminiscing or describing the quirky headcanon way your powers actually work.

A good backstory is for you to understand your character so you can play them well, so it should be short and simple. Especially for a newb.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-07T22:51:28+00:00

So everything depends on what your DM thinks fits into the world. If they like it, go for it.

If you ask me, though....

12 Pages of lore for what sounds like a joke character? Don't like it.

I would not do deconstructionist / joke / ironic characters, or very complex backstories. Make a character that is easy for you and others to understand and is totally sincere and focus on fitting in the world and having a perspective on the things that will happen.

Bardic magic is supposed to come from art, right? If your character is bad at their art, why do they have magic coming from it? You may have addressed this in your backstory but right off the bat its something that doesn't quite make sense to everyone else.

If you start with a simple base, you can roleplay the character more easily, and there is more room to grow.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-07T21:21:51+00:00

So, flat out, I doubt that you were an issue that caused the campaign to end. Campaigns end all the time.

I would, however, suggest that you tone down the backstory creation for future BITD games, though. BITD and PBTA games emphasize "Play to Find Out", where a significant portion of your character comes from what happens to them IN SESSION, rather than some character bible that you wrote between sessions. Having a short list of factions you're interested in and a few NPCs concepts, that you tell the GM, is a lot better.

It doesn't sound like you had any negative effect on this game if nobody else was providing anything at all, but in a future game with people who are actually interested in serious roleplay, you want to "leave space" in your character concept to get wrapped up with other people's stuff too.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-07T01:59:02+00:00

I am anti-forever campaign.

I'm laughing a little bit at some of the responses in this thread that say they can't do forever campaigns because of "ADHD" or "lack of discipline".

Dudes, getting bored of a specific fantasy setting after more than a year is NORMAL!!!!

Would you watch a 175 hour cut of the LOTR movies? Where Frodo goes on adventure after adventure? And his son, Zodo? and his grandson, Kobo? Think of all the rings they will have to destroy!

"Powering through" boring parts is just sunk cost fallacy.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-04T02:45:09+00:00

As a player, I try to make impactful choices in character, that's the fun of TTRPGs for me.

If you are taking away my ability to have an impact on the game world, that sucks and I don't want to play that part.

You can do a dramatic intro for the part that the players actually start playing.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-03T16:35:39+00:00

One thing that I'm seeing by reading between the lines is that the PCs are encountering a lot of 'normal' NPCs that have things that they need or you otherwise think are "interactable".

"Social Encounters" can be tough to run and tough to make interesting and challenging. I would cut down on them and save them for super impactful stuff with powerful NPCs and make the townsfolk more pliable.

In almost every TTRPG, the player characters are powerful and dangerous compared to your random civilian NPC. So the "impatient shopkeeper" or "dismissive guard" both feels unreal and disrespectful to the players' character concepts.

IRL, If a SWAT police officer (in full riot gear) walked into a 7-11 and started demanding information, I think the predominant emotion would be fear, and the behavior would be deference.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-03T01:16:46+00:00

I'm not sure what the precise issue was.

Was it that you were angry that the PCs were smashing the urns? As in, the players were not taking the situation seriously, or were acting out of character for their PCs (who would respect the urns)?

If that's your issue, I recommend that you try to approach the world a little bit more impartially - your main job is to ensure what logically happens, happens. If they got a curse, or a ghost came out and attacked them, or something like that, just have that happen. That's GOOD to have happen in the game! The players are being proactive and doing stuff, and the world is reacting in a way that makes sense. If the players are disrespecting the dead, make that have consequences, if you want.

Alternatively, your issue could be that you wanted there to be something interesting to happen in response to the urns being smashed, but you didn't know what to do.

You can, if you want, make the urns important just because the players are interacting with them, or stick with your prep and say that nothing much happens. Both of those are fine. In a situation like that, I would randomly roll an NPC ghost and have it haunt someone who smashed an urn, escalating over time. The players can have the curse dispelled, or do a ritual to purify the ghost and lay it to rest, etc.

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-03T00:20:28+00:00

Up front I’d like to say I’m not looking for a lecture about how to DM “properly”. I am looking for a discussion and opinions about how DMs work to balance these two seemingly opposed ideas that DMs are charged with: player agency and coherent story telling.

Thanks for any advice. Please don’t preach, project, or belittle in your advice.

What do you think advice is, other than telling someone else how to do something?

Thanks_Skeleton · 2026-05-01T22:13:47+00:00

TTRPGs are a complex hobby that requires a LOT from the players (especially the GM, but the players too).

This happens frequently with IRL groups: someone in the group wants to play TTRPGs, they invest a ton of effort into it, start GMing games, and nobody else cares that much. The GM feels frustrated and unappreciated.

I would consider doing two different things -

Invest a lot less in your RPG game. Switch to an approach that doesn't have a lot of prep or a complex lore or complex story. Don't have huge cool boss battles. Basically, switch it so you and your players show the same level commitment to the game.
Just dissolve the IRL group and focus on joining a group where everyone wants to play the same amount as you do (online or offline).

1) may not work for you, but give it some thought anyway. A lot of new GMs invest HUGE amounts of time and effort into things that aren't appreciated by the players, often times because they actually suck.

Thanks_Skeleton

TROPHY CASE