100% yes. I believe my players have a much better time when they "find the plot." There are narrative lines to pull, but the key is to allow the players to find these lines in what they believe to be important. I can create as many characters and plot devices as I like, but many times, the players' actions will necessitate a whole new character or route.

This happened in a recent session. I had a location with named NPCs who could help the party escape from a city where they were wanted. Even after all the info on these characters and coming so close (literally one room away), the players decided they wanted to find someone else. Now Patrick Seaworth, an arm-wrestling legend, exists in the world.

That's a good take. I agree that consequences shouldn't happen to spite the players. They made their decisions and had the enjoyment they sought, and as DMs, we're only here to facilitate that.

I think consequences are there to add a sense of scope. It's not a "you didn't do this, so here's your punishment." It's "let's take a look at how your active choices affected the world and figure out how to play in that space together." Maybe 'consequence' wasn't the best word for this discussion.

Let me put this to you -- has there been an instance where you revisited an area or plotline that the players diverted from? If so, how did you do it?

I love making combat difficult for myself, so I use theater of the mind... for everything. I don't use any physical or digital tools either in-person or online.

I've run and played in games that use virtual tabletops (roll20, tabletop sim, foundry), and they all seem to work very well. However, I tend to focus mostly on the narrative and roleplay, so it feels good to do everything via imagination. It works out nicely, because I get to pay more attention to my player's faces and react accordingly. We also made our recent campaign into a podcast, so doing everything verbally helps us create a more cohesive narrative for listeners.

BUT I think theater of the mind works to my strengths as a DM, and it certainly isn't for everyone. I know I'm in a very minuscule minority, but you're welcome to join me at the theater table.

Excellent! I'll be listening on the way home from work!

I think it's always best to look at the modules as guidelines, especially anything from Wizards. Like others have said, the writers can never account for your players.

When it comes to making stuff up on the spot, I have two suggests that might help:

1. Give yourself a moment to think. Taking a minute to formulate will never ruin anyone's immersion. I do a podcast, and we edit out the space I give myself to come up with a satisfying answer. Even the professionals take a beat.
2. Take notes. You'll never know enough about your NPCs, and you'll always forget some detail you've given them. If you take a note, you can come back to the thing you made up and build on it in the future. That way, the line blurs between what you know (what the module tells you) and what you make up.

Extra advice: Remember that you stepped up to facilitate. That means your players already appreciate the work you're putting in (or at least they should).

Keep it up!

Was

Most of them have this as a base: portrait, white background, fantasy art, dishonored style --ar 2:3 --v 5.1

Two of them (Baeth and Father Del) use this as a base: portrait, white background, medieval, fantasy art, Donato Giancola, craig mullins, parth, masterful strokes --ar 2:3 --v 5.1

Beyond that, I tend to use basic descriptions and generate until something clicks. With two of those, I had to use actors because my prompts didn't return anything I liked. For instance, the nobleman at the bottom, Caundry Aborlein, uses William Powell as a descriptor. I had to Photoshop the mustache on him, however. Here's his prompt: nobleman, curly shoulder length brown hair, William Powell, arrogant expression, large nose, fat face, fancy clothes, portrait, white background, fantasy art, dishonored style --v 5.1

Thanks for asking! I used Inkarnate for this one. I've used Wonderdraft in the past, but I like the feel of this simulated hand-drawn map better.

I really like Tsuro, but when I introduce it to people, they find it boring. I don’t get it! Yes, it’s simple, but you can really use some strategy to influence the board. Maybe my friends just don’t like when I roar at them as our pieces pass.

The artist is Tithi Luadthong (Grandfailure). Their art is available on many stock sites like Adobe Stock.

We release every other week, but I like to post maps, stories, and other homebrewed content instead of just saying, “Episode 538 is out now! Please listen to my stuff!”

I do think it’s important to be a member of a community instead of just using a community. So maybe there’s a criteria of interaction that comes along with self-promotion?

Sorry for jumping into the conversation so late, but what’s the feeling on podcasts? I have a very small one that I’m quite proud of, and I’d love to share it. I don’t think a post for every new episode release should be allowed, but I feel like an occasional post about milestones or information that others could use should be acceptable. In essence, posts intended to engage with everyone instead of just sell to them.