Weird Writer's prep post has started a bandwagon. I have enjoyed reading people's various modes of prep.
As I am preparing a campaign right now (running the Yellow Book of Brechewold using His Majesty the Worm), it feels interesting to me to explain my own approach.
Reflections on extremes
My understanding of the games I like to run is based on my matrices of blorbiness theorem.
 |
| Read this post first to understand my silly vocabulary |
In my RPG history, I have experienced both underprepping and overprepping.
Underprepping (improvisation)
I have never felt confident in my improvisational abilities, so have never tried to sincerely improvise large swaths of a campaign (of course, some improvisation is part of the gig). However, I have played in such games.
I have been at games that were mostly planned by the GM on the drive to the game. Some of my fellow players loved those games. But, to me, it always felt like the GM was just making stuff up--in a bad way. I didn't feel like I was exploring a realistic world; it felt like I was interacting with cardboard scenery that fell over when I touched it.
Put another way, when I've sat at a table where the GM created content mostly through improv, I could always tell. I never thought "Wow, when did they have time to plan such an amazing story!" I was always mildly disappointed.
Put a more charitable way, blorb-style games are a preference not just when I am running games, but also playing them.
Overprepping (set piece encounters)
In a past life, I would work all week to prepare for game night, like homework before a class. Because I was in school (high school, then college) during this period, I suppose this felt natural.
- I would fill out a Word doc with all the beats of the next session: monster stats, villain monologues, scenery descriptions.
- I'd meticulously build "balanced" fights. Lucky Sven had power X, but was weak towards Y. Hairo would want a chance to show off their Z power, but I couldn't let them beat the encounter too fast, so let me give the boss a 1x/encounter perfect defense. Etc.
- I'd read forums and discuss techniques for monsters and combat encounters. I'd buy the new books. Everything was an arms race.
- The players would make a mess of it. They zig instead of zag. They'd roll luckily and one-shot my monster. They'd have unforeseen stratagem I hadn't balanced the fight against.
- My prep was often wasted, and everyone had a blast. They ruined my plans and I chuckled ruefully and did the same thing next week.
The Golden Mean
Today, I have an approach to prep that feels better than either of the two extremes mentioned above. It works for me based on my own preferences.
I like to prepare for a campaign with a healthy stretch of "lonely fun" where I set up all the dominos. Then, the campaign consists of the players knocking them down. Between campaign prep and the end of the game, I do very little preparation weekly, instead relying on my initial work.
This requires a bit of prep.
What is important for me regarding prep:
- Doing the "right size" of prep
- Collecting and collating tools to use
- Frontloading my work and completing everything I need, more or less
Right size of prep
Collecting tools to use
Frontloading and completing the work
Reflections on the Golden Mean
His Majesty the Worm's default campaign style, where you create a megadungeon (5 dungeons in a trenchcoat) and then restock it only during a City Phase, is reflective of this approach to prep. You need to spend a couple weekends setting it up, but then it runs itself.
Do the work! Spend a few weekends getting your maps ready, your encounter tables stocked, your treasure budget spent. Then, press "Go." Let your players loose in your weird little world. You can play for months on just a few weekends of honest prep. It's not that hard! (Especially if you embrace the copy and paste manifesto.)
I think this prep is valuable and (importantly) fun! It is worth doing. I am pro-prep.
