If you’re walking in on the middle of the Advanced Fantasy Dungeons series, there’s an index here.

Having separated out the advice for building a campaign and the advice for preparation. into their own sections, the advice for running a session is spread out throughout it the many books in sentences here and paragraphs there. As I read further in response to the impression the advice was absent, I realised it wasn’t, but rather wasn’t organised. Relying on a relationship with the legacy second edition inherited.

In terms of the GMs role, I summarised it earlier as:

The GMs job is to generously and truthfully say what every thing and every one in the world says and wants to do except the PCs, and to prepare for the campaign to the degree necessary to achieve this.

The GM’s job is also to make rulings where the rules are not clear or are unknown, and to maintain consistency in doing so.

This, plus the rules so far really govern what the GM does. So, this section is really an Apocalypse World style set of principles on how to do this. The work has been done for me, most effectively in my opinion Into the Odd and Mausritter.

Mausritter’s are principles are; make the world seem huge, create situations not plots, present the world honestly, make the world a consistent and understandable place, be an impartial arbiter of the rules of the game and the world, telegraph danger, don’t pull your punches and reward bravery. These are solid principles in keeping with the Principia Apocrypha.

Into the Odd’s aim differently: Give information , present choices and show impact. These principles focus on narration and improvisation focused rather than on preparation, which I like.

Throughout this project, especially once the benefit of introducing clocks became obvious, I’ve had to refrain from remarking how like Blades in the Dark the implied structure of second edition is. So, let’s go further afield to Blade’s principles, which are a bulky and cumbersome affair but insightful in my opinion.

In Blades the GM’s Goals are to play to find out what happens, convert the world honestly and bring the location to life. To achieve them, they use GM actions and are guided by GM principles. Actions are ask questions, provide opportunities and follow the player’s lead, cut to the action, telegraph trouble before it strikes, follow through, initiative action with an NPC, tell them the consequences and ask, tick a clock, offer a devil’s bargain, and think off-screen. Effectively, a GM takes an action when there’s a consequence as a result of a roll, or when a scene loses momentum. Note that there are a bunch of these in the other principles, but I like giving the GM concrete things to do, it’s one of my favourite tbh kings about Powered by the Apocalypse lineage games: The GM has a character sheet as well.

The GM principles are: Be a fan of the PCs, let everything flow from the fiction, describe evocatively, assess the characters and the players, consider the risk, and hold on lightly to your plans.

But then it has best practices (maintain the integrity of the fiction, be interesting, create an atmosphere of enquiry, help the players play the game to pursue their goals, sont block, keep the meta channel open, advocate for the interest and capabilities of the NPCs, play goal-forward, cut to the action, be aware of potential vs established function, zoom in and out of the action, being the game system to life on screen, put it on a card) and bad habits (don’t call for specific rolls, don’t make the PCs look incompetent, don’t overcomplicate consequences, don’t let planning get out of hand, don’t hold back on what they earn, don’t say no, don’t roll twice for the same thing, edit ahead and don’t get caught up in minutiae). All of these are good pieces of advice! But this is too much for me, so how could I include anything like this in the game?

My gut is to use the structure of goals and actions to simplify the most important of these principles into narrative-creation oriented actions and player-enjoyment oriented goals. The principles guide everyone’s actions, including the players. The actions indicate how you engage, and they differ between GM and players. Then, we have a clear list of things to do for the GM, which is the way I like it, and the major weakness for me in second edition, because there is no clear indication of what a GM does.

I think extending out the players principles and GM principles so that they mirror each other is a good idea. What are players equivalent to rulings? What is player prep? What is player improv? How do players bring fun to the table? These questions should be answered, mirrored, on one page, so that the players feel an equal part of the team. I’ll come back to this I think.

So, what are the GM and player goals?

Let the PC’s goals drive the story

Let the consequences of the PCs actions change the world

Hold lightly to your plans

Describe the world truthfully

Maintain the world’s integrity

Maintain the integrity of the rules and any rulings

Bring the rules to life on screen

These goals are for everybody, are general enough to apply to everybody, but are still key to driving the GMs preparation and how they direct their actions. Seven feels reasonable.

GM actions are always directed at a PC unless otherwise stated. When a session begins, when a scene loses momentum take an action, or when a consequence is the result of a roll, take an action. The actions are:

Ask an establishing or provocative question

Describe the fantastic

Differentiate options

Foreshadow danger

Threaten damage or something dear

Face temptation alone

Escalate the stakes

Offer an opportunity at a cost

Give what they earnt

Tell a secret

Show the impact of their actions

Follow their lead

Cut to the action

An NPC does something impactful

Something happens off-screen

That’s sixteen actions. That’s a lot. I’m not sure it’s too much. But it’s supposed to be o be inspirational. Ok, and finally, the the five don’ts (better name please help):

Don’t prepare plots, instead prepare powderkeg situations.

Don’t block the players; instead say yes, if they can first do this.

Don’t make the PCs look incompetent when they roll badly, instead make their foes look badass

Don’t overcomplicate consequences, instead choose the simplest logical consequence

Don’t roll twice for the same thing, instead hold the first result until the PCs are in a more desperate position

Ok, so this is still a lot, isn’t it? I feel like it’s digestible in a way that the Blades in the Dark ones isn’t, but practical in a way that Mausritter isn’t as well. They’re more supportive to acting during play than Into the Odds, which is something I think is a strenfrh. I think they’re comprehensive, too?

I’m not sure where to go with mirroring player and GM principles from here. I feel like there’s more to say to help players make choices. Consider how players of third through fifth editions look to their power list and proficiencies to choose how to a act. A similar action picklist to this so they know what to do instead of “I make a perception check”. I’ll have to come back to this, I think.

This has been a part of the Advanced Fantasy Dungeon Series! Let me know your thoughts on GM principles and running a session. Have I developed this out too much? Too little? Mausritter, Into the Odd and Blades in the Dark expanded each of these. Should I expand them as well? I’m inclined to, but there are a lot of actions and principles here. This is one where I’d really appreciate input from the few people reading along, and I’d appreciate input about player actions mirroring these (albeit briefer).

Idle Cartulary

2nd June 2022