Chatting to @auguryignored last night, we got on to the topic (briefly) of my most memorable (in a good way) RPG games from over the years. It didn’t strike me until afterwards, but there is a definite pattern in the games I enjoyed the most – both as GM and player – and it goes something like this:

I set up a weird situation which puts the characters in peril; they solve it (or die trying); the players ask an interesting follow-up question; I run a situation that partially answers the question; the PCs investigate it, find another problem and get into peril; they solve it (or die trying); the players ask an interesting follow-up question… and the cycle repeats.

In other words, the structure of my most enjoyable play revolves around setting up an initial problem the PCs engage with and then, once they resolve it, responding to the questions the players have asked to present them with another problem they are interested in solving.

Most of the successful games have involved a big chunk of investigation, usually uncovering some kind of larger conspiracy or big secret. The majority of my favourite past games have been in the modern era, near-past, near-future, or alternate future. Very few of the deeper games I run involve extensive combat.

What can I learn from this realisation?

The best tip I picked up in the chat with @auguryignored was simple: set-up an initial situation with a problem the players are invited to resolve. Don’t think about how this might turn out but rather leave that to the player characters. Pick up the threads which dangle and use them to present follow-up problems to solve. Repeat.

The second best tip was this: you can’t know if a particular set-up with a particular group of players, that world, and those characters will work and have legs. But you won’t know until you give it a go.

Game on!