GeorgeZBush

https://dune.fandom.com/wiki/Butlerian_Jihad

Honestly, in America, on a demographic that grew up on CoD, it would probably work. Rile them up against the yellow peril and they'll have their monstrous purpose and opportunities for social bonding.

Whatever man this shit's boring who cares

"bro just gotta hit the gym it'll fix your depression" well i can safely say after a year of going that no the fuck it doesn't.

This is the shit that's driving me mad, they're not even pretending anymore. No "Well Israel has a right to defend itself from terrorists." They are openly stating they do not care. "Yeah they're getting killed, we will continue to support the people killing them." Literal fucking "We see you, we hear you".

Fuck Kamala and anyone who supports her for any reason.

Find your most vocal players and figure out what it is they want. (if they are playing a paladin they probably want justice and dogoodery if they are a thief they want cash and wizards want more magic

See, yeah, this is what was missing from the online campaign. I've been playing a pure rogue thief forever and barely did any thieving because halfway through the DM decided we were all officers in an army preparing to fight a war. It's almost over now and I'm in too deep to back out now, but it was very disappointing ngl.

This is done through the use of "the hook" If you can get good at developing hooks you will always have players who want to go where you want. Some games are easier to do this for than others as are some players. Ultimately the players should drive the game forward because the GM is luring them in. If they aren't buying what you are selling you have to come up with something else

This is also lacking in that campaign - it always feels like we're being dragged somewhere. I'll keep all this in mind, it makes intuitive sense to me.

Hideous house

After establishing whatever the current goal is, the DM should follow the rule of 3, any given task should have 3+ solutions each solution catering to a player (so they can be the hero of the session). This gives players agency in figuring out how to solve the problem and still direction to solving the problem.

Ah yeah this makes sense and allows for a good balance. Noted for my own use in the future.

Question to those of you who are experienced DnD (or any TTRPG) players and/or DMs: how much do you plan out a story vs. letting players sort of run wild and rely on emergent story?

I ask because of the two campaigns I'm in, one (online) feels like we're just playing along to the DM's (kind of mid) script with minimal time spent on character arcs or RP, and the other (in person with a few of the same people, different DM) feels like we're meandering and have way too much downtime (I don't fucking caaare what food we get in the tavern) because there's no real central goal(s). They both have their moments (mostly the in-person one) but I'm never really satisfied by how things play out.

These are the only two full campaigns i've ever been in and I just wonder if there's something I'm missing out on. Plus I'm toying with running a short campaign myself someday and I wonder how I should handle this.

Yep

high shovel