r/rpg

OK, so... I have been asked to run a one-shot at an '80s-themed event. The players will be from a local gaming club and have at least some familiarity with TTRPGs, though not necessarily the game being run.

But what should I run? Should I go with something from the actual '80s? Something '80s-themed? Or just run whatever? I am completely stumped. The event is in 6 weeks and I don't have a lot of work, so I have more than enough time to learn a new game. The most recent games I have run were Wildsea, Blades In The Dark and Vaesen, if that helps.

I see so many rule books coming out that have full page, full color illustrations, as well as every PAGE of the book not just "white" but a printed shaded color with some sort of marginalia whether it's celtic ribboning, crumple marks, whatever to make it look 'real'.

As I understand, the printing costs at a 10k book run for full color 400 page hardcover (A4) is something like $10-$20 per book. Not to mention the significant savings in art costs - a B&W lineart from a professional artist is what, $200? vs a full color image $500? $1000 depending on the artist? PER PRODUCT.

And then so many systems say you need a player book, a dm book, a monster book a setting book, etc?

It is not worth it.

Not only is it not worth it, I suspect it's doing a better (worse) job of undermining imagination, locking-in a particular narrow vision of what this creature looks like or how that sort of character should be.

Black and white lineart is FINE & ADEQUATE for purpose. If I had a choice between a rulebook being "pretty" and $20 in my pocket to buy ANOTHER product, I know which I'd choose.

I'm curious where people draw the line when it comes to a DM changing a player's backstory

For some context, in my current campaign my character was once an Imperial Inquisitor in a large empire that controls much of the world. He was extremely harsh and eventually became sadistic as a way to cope with the horrors of his job and preserve his sanity.

During one mission he was nearly killed. He survived thanks to an apothecary who saved his life. They eventually fell in love, got married, and had three children. Over the years, she taught him how to become a kinder and more compassionate person, helping him leave behind the man he used to be.

Years later, she died of illness. I specifically told my DM that I didn't want this to become a revenge story or a mystery about who killed her. The entire concept of the character is about grief, healing, and learning to live again (Frieren vibes). Before she died, she left him a list of 100 wishes she wanted him to fulfill( I already completed 20) , and that's why he's now traveling the world. Their children are already adults and living their own lives, the oldest became an Imperial Paladin (already find him in game), the middle daughter is in a magical academy to became an alchemist and the youngest became a bard

Recently, my DM told me about an idea he had considered but ultimately decided not to use. His plan was to reveal that my character's wife and children had never actually existed, and that all of those memories had been implanted by the Empire as part of a lifetime of manipulation.

I was honestly shocked. If that twist had happened, I think I would have completely lost interest in playing the character.

To me, that wouldn't just be adding a plot twist. It would completely erase the emotional foundation of the character I created. The story I wanted to tell was about coping with genuine loss, not discovering that my entire life was a lie.

Personally, I think the player's backstory should be discussed before the campaign starts so that everyone has the same expectations. Anything the player intentionally leaves open or undefined is fair game for the DM to expand, reinterpret, or connect to the larger world. But changing the core events that define who the character is feels very different to me, especially without the player's consent.

So I'm curious:

Where do you draw the line?

How much freedom should a DM have to change a player's established backstory? Is there a point where it stops being an interesting twist and starts undermining the player's ownership of their own character?

Edit 1: Additional Context:

I think I may have explained the situation poorly in my original post, so here's some additional context

I didn't hand my DM a detailed story or expect the campaign to revolve around my character. My backstory was actually pretty short. It was essentially:

My character worked for the Empire, learned to become sadistic as a way to cope with the horrors of his job, eventually crossed paths with someone far more powerful than he could handle (I only wrote down a name), was saved by the woman who would later become his wife, retired and lived peacefully with her for several years, they had children, she eventually died of illness, their children are now adults living their own lives (I only gave their names, ages, and what each of them is currently doing), and before dying she left him a list of 100 wishes to fulfill. That's where the adventure begins.

Including a short bullet point summary that I made for my DM to quickly reference, I don't think the entire backstory even filled a single Word page.

I also don't expect the campaign to revolve around my personal quest. The list of 100 wishes is intentionally broad, so I can naturally pursue it wherever the party goes. I'm happy following the group's adventures because almost anywhere we travel, there's usually something on the list that my character can accomplish.

My DM also enjoys intertwining the party's backstories. For example, my character's past as an Imperial Inquisitor has been very useful whenever we deal with the Empire. I've even managed to get the party out of what was essentially a public execution by using my authority and legal knowledge. Later, when we found my oldest son, who had become a paladin, he had information about another player's missing brother because they had served together in the Empire. I actually enjoy those kinds of connections between characters.

Finally, regarding the grief aspect: I brought this up during Session Zero, before the campaign even started. I wasn't asking the DM to make the story about my character. I simply said something along the lines of: "Whatever you decide to do with my character, I'd like his story to be about overcoming grief rather than seeking revenge. That's the kind of character arc I'm interested in playing." My DM agreed. If he had told me that this didn't fit the campaign or that he had something different in mind, I would have happily changed the concept or created a different character instead.

Edit2:
One more detail that I think is worth mentioning: I didn't force my DM to accept my character concept or my preferred style of play (and obviously I couldn't even if I wanted to).

When I was creating the character, I basically said:

"I'd like to play a character who's trying to overcome grief and find a reason to keep living. I'm not interested in a revenge arc or an edgy character. I want something simpler and more human. Does that fit the campaign? If not, that's completely fine, I'll come up with a different character."

He agreed.

So it's not that I think his plot twist was bad. I actually think a conspiracy story about false memories and manipulation could be really interesting. It's just not the story I wanted to tell with this character.

Maybe a gameplay analogy makes my point clearer.

Imagine you tell your DM that you really want to play a simple martial character. You don't want complicated mechanics or spellcasting, so you make a Barbarian.

A year into the campaign, your DM says:

"Actually, your rage comes from draconic blood flowing through your veins! Congratulations!"

Then he replaces your Barbarian sheet with a Sorcerer. You're physically weaker now, you have spells to manage, and the class plays completely differently.

The twist itself might be cool. Some players might even love that kind of change. But it isn't the character you wanted to play, and you made that clear from the very beginning.

I know that's a somewhat exaggerated example, but I hope it explains what I mean.

And again, I'm genuinely glad my DM decided not to go through with that idea.

Note: This text was originally written in Portuguese and translated into English with the help of AI.

I've had a grand time of running a bit of the Pirate Borg starter box over the weekend and was pleasantly surprised by one of the physical components they include: a lovely poster sized print of the treasure map characters find as part of the main quest.

Here's the twist - the module gives you explicit instructions to stain it, burn the edges, rub dirt on it and then rip that thing in half to give players one piece of said map as the reward for exploring their first dungeon.

I hadn't read the adventure to prepare the map for my players ahead of time but I rolled with it. I said to my players "Are you ready for this shit?" and tore it in front of them. Honestly it was pretty hype and shocking for all of us.

I remember an old Matt Coleville video on his deck of many things, but I haven't seen too many other examples of this idea of including real objects relevant to the game. What are some cool examples of physical props you've seen for RPGs?

I’ve been wanting to listen to a TTRPG podcast that the whole premise is involved to love or wooing other players or PCs though it still have plot element and such.

Thinking like love island or a visual novel dating game.

I’d prefer it to be queer still but I’ll keep my options open. State it if it’s queer or not!

They know the relic to do something along the lines of "For 24 hours, changes all creatures in a 10 mile radius into various Beasts, who appear as shadowy, colorfully hand-drawn animals. Terrain changes to match- forests may be scaled up, cities may become burrow/prairie/treetop villages" Big ((GM DISCRETION)) disclaimer slapped onto the back of it of course. It changes the world into a storybook with storybook logic.

My/their intention is that this change would allow them to take a different angle at an upcoming danger, simplified greatly here-- a citywide system of many magical nodes all connected to a heavily-guarded underground vortex guarded by a small army; in 1 day, the nodes will trigger and each will funnel magical force from its area, effectively killing off or draining much of the city.

The storybook version would be different-- perhaps a redwall-esque story about a giant tree with a pit of eels and snakes below its roots.

My party is excited at the prospect of turning a gritty, protracted race to save the city into a more improvisational, cartoonish adventure. They only get one of these in the entire campaign and they want to use it here. I'm looking for the right system though. To use their regular stats eliminates the whole encounter concept, using their Beast stat sheets makes it a little boring. I'm looking at games like Lasers & Feelings, which could be changed into something fitting the setting easily, but I don't want it to be so lightweight that it's not interesting. I'm looking for a game that's a good balance of cartoony and easy to set up, while still having stakes and unique characters.

Any thoughts?

Hey there, after years of playing dnd with my group i've been running a mixed-splat Chronicles of Darkness game (mage, vampire and werewolf) and we've found out that it's the best kind of ttrpg for our group. Particularly, we like:

• The skill-based system where you buy what you want with XP instead of being locked in a class, which allows for a lot of character customization. (very VERY big emphasis on this, and also a good XP system is ESSENTIAL for me. The Beat system in Chronicles is phenomenal for this reason, because you dont just gain xp by defeating stuff in combat or the DM deciding that you level up, but it's your choices and actions that determine how much you advance)
• The focus on the intrigue and social aspect of the game, so lots of social rules and social/investigative abilities for players, as opposed to a relentless focus on combat and combat abilities. Still, we need good rules for combat
• The power level being somewhat grounded and never reaching epic scale (im so tired of campaigns where the players face gods or world-ending-threats)
• The narrative being driven by the players and their characters
• if possible, I'd like if the players weren't beings with specific innate powers or "chosen ones" (kinda like the CofD splats) but normal people that learn and grow and suffer to become powerful

I'm basically looking for something that fits these criteria but is also a game in a fantasy setting like DnD. I appreciate any suggestion.

So I have been interested in Powered by the Apocalypse games for awhile, but I seem to keep bouncing off of them. And I think it really comes down to the idea combat being treated like a scene, just like any other interaction and typically being resolved via a single roll to see how things go (usually with a mixed success).

In comparison to other RPGs that treat combat as an action-by-action moment, PbtA kind of wraps the whole thing up in just a single dice roll, and it's never quite felt satisfying to me.

Do folks happen to know if there are any Apocalypse Engine games that instead do round-by-round combat or is that just not something anyone has tried to create?

I see a lot of rpgs nowadays that are either directly or indirectly related to these systems. And I really want to get into them but there's this tension in the fiction for me whenever I try and interact with them.

From my own understanding. And please correct me if I'm not getting it, these games are said to be fiction first. Meaning that what happened is a result of the world itself and what you are doing. You engage mechanically only when the fiction would call for it.

But the biggest confusion I have about it is how to ensure this works consistently? In pbta systems for example success with a complication can seemingly spawn things into existence? Or different parts of the system can just have things happen that don't make sense? Or weren't there or planned. I understand improvisation is a large part of any RPG but if it's ALL improv then is there an actual sense of world there? How do you all understand it? How do you make GOOD SENSIBLE complications or success? And do you think these types of games can be run in a way where the fiction it's trying to model is simply a living hostile world?

I really like the rules light aspects to a lot of this, I feel like it's a lot easier to play or possibly to run. But I only seem to find rules light attached to games that have this narrative focus where players have way more say over the world outside their character than I would like to have as a player. I want to control my character and interact with the world and explore it.

Am I looking in the wrong place or am I misunderstanding how these games work?

How would you recommend approaching the series? What is your favorite game?

I had played a lot of games before but WoD have overwhelmed me with options.

Soo hello their, I am about to GM my very first campaign and ill be using fate as a system well very very home brewed fate atleast to fit the world I have made but well that is not the problem, the problem lies with a friend of mine who is also doing a fate campaign which is for now my one and only experience with ttrpg's and well for this reason I listen to his advice and stuff and one thing he is constantly being mad over is that I am according to him trying to "railroad the campaign" by that he means that I am trying to force him and everyone else to do smth without leaving them with a choice by planing and preparing for stuff and I was wondring that if its bad for me to prepare for a campaign or well just free style it like how my friend does it in his campaign without doing any prep after all he does say that both the GM and the players make the story and well planning takes away that freedom from the players...

Ig for more detail I plan on dividing the campaign into chapters with each chapters following a quest which eventually leads to all of coming together for the final chapter.

Well this has deleyed my sesh 0 for a long time cause I just dont know how to proceed cause I can most def free style but it just that I cant just sit around without thinking of what should happen next and stuff and while even tho I will think about this, I dont wont to force my players into one path soo well I like to make multiple stories that will be ongoing at the same time and if the players divert they will be go into that story for that perticular chapter and welll this would in the end detect how the final chapter and stuff goes...

well I am sure I am in the wrong after all I dont know that much and well I dont even think my campaign will be that good like for godsake it got cards as a mechanic for doing combos along side fight and stuff but ohh well I just thought that ill hear the thoughts of people who are more exp then me (even tho yall ill prob agree with him)....

I am exploring the idea of using Solo RPG mechanics as a practical way to explore my setting from a ground-level perspective. The goal is to use game loops to experience the world dynamically rather than just writing passive encyclopedia entries.

I am heavily considering using the Ironsworn SRD to play through a narrative arc to see how the factions, geography, and lore hold up under real mechanical pressure.

I have a few questions for the community:

• Have you tried this? If you have used a solo game to build your world, did it actually help you flesh out the finer details?
• Ruleset Recommendations: Aside from Ironsworn, what other CC0, system-neutral, or open-license rulesets are excellent for creating a 'lived-in' feel?
• The Tradeoffs: Does playing a game inside your own world expand the lore naturally, or does it restrict your creative freedom too much?

I would love to hear your experiences, workflows, or any open-source tools you use to bridge the gap between worldbuilding and solo play!

Curious to hear both player and GM perspectives on this.

UPD: I meant a GM screen here.

Let's say I have a particular franchise or genre I want to play as a ttrpg, how do I find a good ttrpg for it? Yes I could google, yes I could ask in this subreddit, but both of those will usually end up the same way. With me having a list of around 10 different ttrpgs that I know nothing of. What do I do from there? How do I know which of the many ttrpgs I should try? A lot of ttrpgs that I've played before would've required reading quite a decent bit of the rules before you get a good understanding of the game and it's level of crunch, and unless it's a really popular game, finding a short description is rare. So do I just have to read through, or at least partially read through 10 different rulebooks? And what if I'm looking for multiple different ttrpgs? That starts adding up and I don't have the time or energy to read through 30 different ttrpgs.

Is there a better way?

I'm looking into Savage Worlds, and it definetly intrigues me. My only concern with the system, is how Fast & Furious is combat really? Is it much faster than 5e?

If not, any other setting agnostic RPGs you would recommend?

I'm starting to get into Obsidian and I'm discovering that there are a ton of RPG plugins for it.

How do y'all use it for your RPGs (especially as DMs)? Are the RPG plugins worthwhile? Interested in hearing about how you structure your vaults and use tags if you don't use the plugins.

Heya! I'm a massive fan of reading the Old MERP books, and especially look to their amazing maps for inspiration and guidelines for making my own maps.
I've recently building a tower based on a old MERP map, and it occurs to me, I don't know how the scales compare to the more currently popular 5ft square grid.

The scale bar has two segments are is marked as 15' which I assume is inches. I'm not sure how that compares in gaming feet.

Had a thought while going through the core.

I'm a fan of degrees of success, and I like the way that the one ring has them with the 6's etc.

But I was thinking, why is there not a choice instead of fail outright, a success with a complication.

Perhaps rolling a fail, but getting at least one 6 (elvish rune) on a success die could give a player an option of still succeeding, but with a complication.

Maybe their foot get sticks in a tree root, and now their defense is -1d or something.

Seems like an easy addition, however it would affect things.

Combats may go quicker on both sides.

Let me know your thoughts, do you think it's worth to add, or not really needed?

The players are ratmen/skaven, competing in a no rules grand prix. I was thinking of Savage worlds, but wouldn't mind some suggestions.

Hi all! I love books like Kushiel’s Dart and Swordspoint and other “fantasy of manners” type stories with balls and fashion, duels and affairs. I’d like to make my own setting for this kind of thing, if possible. I’ve seen Houses of the Blooded and Court of Blades but could use some help explaining what makes one more suitable than the other or looking for any other systems that could help me tell a pseudo-Renaissance story of intrigue