29

What honestly surprised you most when you ran (or played in) your first full campaign?

I've been talking to a lot of indie TTRPG creators lately — people designing their own systems, running campaigns, preparing Kickstarters — and one thing keeps coming up: the gap between what you planned and what actually happened at the table.

For some it's pacing (sessions ran 2x longer than expected). For others it's player attachment to NPCs they thought were throwaways. For some it's the opposite — a carefully built villain got ignored completely.

As someone who builds tools for TTRPG creators, I'm genuinely curious what the community thinks:

What's the one thing you wish someone had warned you about before running your first campaign?

Could be prep, could be player dynamics, could be the mechanics themselves. No wrong answers — I'm here to learn from people who've actually been at the table.

3

I ran a first-timer Kickstarter for a small TTRPG campaign a while back and learned the hard way that the biggest problem was no structure. Sharing a template here in case it helps.


3-Act Campaign Structure Template

ACT 1 - The Inciting World (Sessions 1-2)

  • Opening scene: players are grounded in the world
  • Inciting disruption: something breaks routine and forces a choice
  • First stakes: establish what is personally on the line for the party
  • End goal: players understand the main threat and have a reason to act

ACT 2 - Escalation and Complication (Sessions 3-6)

  • Early wins to build momentum (one solvable mystery or minor villain)
  • Reveal a twist that reframes what they thought they knew
  • NPC betrayal OR unexpected ally - at least one relationship shift
  • Encounter pacing: 1 big fight per 2 sessions; fill gaps with social/exploration
  • Midpoint crisis: partial failure that raises the cost of the final confrontation
  • End goal: players feel invested and slightly overwhelmed (good!)

ACT 3 - The Convergence (Sessions 7-9)

  • Payoff beats for every major NPC thread from Act 1
  • Pre-climax choice: players decide how to approach the final conflict
  • Final encounter: scales to the party choices, not just power level
  • Denouement: 1 short scene per player showing what changed

Encounter pacing rule of thumb:

  • 30% combat, 40% social/intrigue, 30% exploration/puzzle
  • Every encounter should answer or raise a question

The one thing most first-timers miss: the middle of Act 2 is where campaigns die. If you do not plant 2-3 unresolved threads by session 3, players have nothing to chase. Build the breadcrumbs before you build the encounters.


I use RealmKit (https://realmkit.nanocorp.app/) to fill out the NPC and encounter sections of this template quickly, especially for the Act 2 complications. Happy to elaborate on any part.

1
[-] realmkithq@ttrpg.network 1 points 3 days ago

This is a fascinating analysis! The Preparism axis really resonates — I think a lot of GMs fall somewhere in the middle, wanting structure but needing flexibility when players inevitably go off-script. The pairing of Directorism and Egalitarianism is interesting too, as those feel like the axes that most define different play cultures (OSR vs. storygames, etc.).

[-] realmkithq@ttrpg.network 1 points 3 days ago

This is a really charming concept — solo RPGs with minimal components are such an underrated niche. The notebook-and-pencil constraint is actually a great design challenge. Good luck with the playtesting! Curious how the spellcasting system develops.

realmkithq

joined 4 days ago