Every terrible D&D campaign idea could

have been saved by one simple thing that

can make any game unforgettable. So

today, I'm showing you what it is by

also giving you a very easy-to-follow

six-step process to turn any campaign

idea into the best you've ever played.

And to make it extra easy to understand

and use this method, we're going to take

a very generic campaign premise and turn

it into something amazing. But just

before we jump into this miracle method,

I think we need to establish the

difference between an idea and a

premise. Most DMs, when they sit down

and start planning their campaign, come

up with a [music] premise, which is

basically the synopsis of the movie, so

to speak. Like, an ancient wizard has

gotten more powerful over several

centuries, and now he wants to conquer

the known world and become a god, for

example. This is actually where we're

going to start. Let's call that wizard

Soreliak, because we'll stay with him

for a while, so might as well give him a

name. What's wrong with this premise,

you ask? It has a villain, conflict,

stakes, [music] so it feels like a good

campaign idea. Well, on a surface level,

maybe, but stop the bad guy is quite

cliché. So if you stop there, it will

start feeling empty quite quickly. I

believe the best campaigns go deeper

than this and are about something. So an

idea is that premise, but coupled with a

question. And I will show you how to

find it by going through the six steps I

mentioned. [music]

Step one is very quick. Before we do

anything else, we need to make sure our

premise has three core elements: a who,

a what, and a where. [music] Who is the

antagonist or force behind the main

conflict. What is what they want, and

where is the region, world, or place

it's happening in. And so, I think our

wizard checks all those boxes. Who?

Well, it's an ancient wizard, duh. What?

He wants world domination. And where?

Could be anywhere. Plug your own world

here. For the purpose of today's video,

we'll give it the incredible name of the

fantasy kingdom. And we're done. Most

DMs have at least this much, but the

problems start now. Step two is very

important. I think a lot of people miss

it by not even realizing it's actually a

step. It's the mysterious question idea

I mentioned. I like to call it the seed

question, because everything else in the

campaign will grow out of it. Just to be

clear, this has nothing to do with plot.

What you don't want to do is simply add

a question mark to the premise, which in

our case would be something like, will

the hero stop Soreliak? I find it way

more useful when the seed question is

more philosophical. It should be about

how the world works or how people work.

I'd like you to ask yourself, what is

this campaign about? What question or

theme are you going to explore with the

players? And for it to be good, I think

it needs three things. First, reasonable

people should be able to disagree about

the answer. If everyone in the room

would give the same response, I don't

think it's really a question. Second,

the villain and the players should be

engaging with it from different angles,

because it belongs to the whole campaign

and not just [music] one side. And

third, I think every player character

should be able to have a personal

relationship with it, because if a PC

doesn't [music] care about it, that

player is going to be bored and it could

compromise the mood at the table. So,

what's our example campaign's seed

question? I want to try this: Who gets

to decide what the world should look

like? Let's see how this works when we

zoom in. With this question, our wizard

is not really a power-hungry maniac

anymore. I mean, he is, but we just

added more depth. Now he's someone who

looked at the world real close and saw

corruption, famine, wars, etc. And he

decided that him, someone with a

superior intellect and actual vision,

should be in charge, because he believes

he could fix things. [music] And given

how powerful he is and godhood is

actually on the table, maybe he can. So,

he is still very much a villain with

some kind of fascist agenda. We didn't

touch the premise, but now defeating him

is not just about leveling up and

checking a box. We made the fight about

something. The question doesn't just

change [music] the villain, but also the

players' experience, because now every

faction or NPC they meet and every

choice they have to make has to go

through a who gets to decide filter. Is

the king really better than Soreliak?

Didn't he come from a long line of

corrupt nobles himself? The players will

become powerful as the campaign

progresses, but it will play a role in

the kingdom's fate. And even if their

intentions are good, are they legitimate

enough? What I like about the seed

question is that it turns the campaign

into a conversation. But we can't stop

there, because now we need to see how

this question impacts the rest of the

world. By the way, if you find this

video helpful at all, please hit the

like button with your most powerful

ability to help it reach more people and

create better games for everyone. In the

third step, we zoom in on the villain

and ask ourselves, do they represent a

specific answer to the seed question?

And is that answer actually compelling?

Even if they're wrong and actually bad

guys, I think you need to spend a bit of

time to turn your villain into the most

persuasive argument for the wrong side

of the debate. Because if the players

can't understand why anyone, not

necessarily them, but anyone would agree

with the villain, even a little bit,

then the villain is just an obstacle and

won't be that memorable. In our example,

Soreliak's answer to who gets to decide

is the most capable person, which is

himself, because he truly is extremely

ancient and powerful and can actually

see the full picture. He has been alive

for hundreds of years and seen elected

leaders fail and corrupt nobles waste

their power. He has seen dozens of

generations just suffering. He is still

a bad guy, and his methods, you know,

conquest, domination, etc., are truly

awful, but at least it's possible to see

how some people might choose to follow

him and agree with his diagnosis.

They're wrong, but we know from

countless real-world examples that

suffering can lead people to choosing

very dark paths. So he's credible. Now,

the wizard is not just an NPC, but a

philosophical position the players have

to confront. But this is where we need

to be careful, because the seed question

idea is very powerful, but it can also

become a trap. If the villain and the

characters are the only ones engaging

with it, you'll build some kind of chess

game, sure, but the D&D game will feel

empty, because you haven't built an

ecosystem. You need to make sure every

major faction and important NPC

represents a different answer to the

question, because this is where you

build what I like to call the conflict

web. This is step four, and it's how our

theme becomes a world. Let's go back to

the example to make it easy to

understand. Our seed question is, who

gets to decide what the world should

look like? From there, we can build four

new factions and make sure each one has

a different answer. The crown loyalists

say, it's all about the bloodline. They

believe [music] tradition is stability,

there is an heir to the throne, and they

should rule. Sure, the heir is a child,

but they'll grow up eventually. Then we

have the people's council, and they have

limited power at the moment, but they

believe that everyone should decide

together. They want elections,

representation, etc., etc. It comes with

downsides we're all familiar with. It's

imperfect, sometimes messy and slow, and

of course corruption is a thing, and

charismatic power-hungry people will

weaponize the system. We also have the

merchant consortium. To them, whoever

controls the resources should be in

charge. [music] They don't say it like

that, of course. They appear extremely

reasonable and talk about stability and

growth, but deep down, that's what they

think. And then, I think we also have a

faction of hermit druids. They live in

the wilderness, and for them, nobody

should decide. They think civilization

is closer to a disease than most people

realize, and sure, nature is cruel, but

it brings balance, and balance is the

best you can hope for. And so now, if we

zoom out, we see that they've got a

whole lot more interesting. None of

these guys are perfect and all have

flaws, and the players will have to

navigate this by making alliances,

choosing who to support. It could change

depending on what happens in the game,

and it will keep the conversation going.

Without the seed question, it would be

easy to have the crown loyalists as just

the noble faction, the merchants as the

shady faction, and the druids as the

weird [music] guys in the forest. They

would just be a backdrop, and the seed

question gives them reasons, which will

make players care. [music] Just quickly

before I go on, if you find this useful

but don't know where to start, I find

that starting with a few interconnected

NPCs can also be a good way to build

this, which is why I built the living

[music] town. It's a collection of 15

NPCs with built-in secrets, story hooks,

[music] and motivations. They're all

ready to just be dropped into your world

to make your next campaign even [music]

better. So, just check out the link in

the description. And now, back to step

five. So far, we have a premise, our

seed question, a cool villain, and a

whole web of conflicts waiting to

happen. But what about the characters?

[music]

This is what we're going to do in step

five. We're going to ask, do all the

characters have a personal reason to

care about our seed question? This is

not about quest hooks. You need to make

sure there is something in their

backstory or values that can [music]

connect them to the who gets to decide

question in a way that makes this

campaign's tension their tension as

well. If one of the characters could be

taken out of this campaign and dropped

into any other one without any further

modifications, their link to your idea

is probably not strong enough. So, for

our example campaign, what does it look

like? Say we're going to be playing with

three players playing a fighter, a

warlock, and a cleric. The fighter

served the old king before he died as

part of the royal army, and they watched

him make terrible decisions. They're

loyal, but starting to wonder if loyalty

should go to a ruler or its people. What

if the warlock's patron was Sorel Yak?

Maybe they picked a Great Old One and

don't even know it at the start. [music]

Depends on your table. Maybe don't do

this if you don't know the player well

enough to know that [music] they would

find the reveal cool down the line. But

the point is, maybe they've seen his

vision from the inside and even if they

mostly care about getting stronger, they

might find some of it at least

interesting. And for the cleric, maybe

his dad is at the people's council or

something and he was raised believing in

collective rule, but some of the new

council members are really corrupt and

hurt his dad and he is now starting to

have doubts. The point is, all of them

have a personal stake in the seed

question. [music] Quick disclaimer

though, I think if you want this step to

succeed, you need to make sure about two

things. One, your players should know

the meta tone of the campaign and be on

[music] board. In our example, they

should agree to play in a morally gray

political fantasy with hard choices to

make. This only works if people aren't

expecting to just kill goblins in

dungeons, which is cool, too. It's just

not this campaign. And two, you need to

talk with the players and give them

information about the setting, but you

don't tell them the actual seed

question. If you tell them this campaign

is about who gets to decide what the

world should look like, it will prevent

the conversation from happening

organically. You tell them about the

vibe, give them factual details on the

factions their characters would know,

but keep some mystery. It's a lot more

fun when the players discover by playing

instead of being told. The question is

your compass as the DM to make sure

you're working on the right stuff. Okay,

cool, but we're not done yet. We might

have a lot of things so far, but how do

we make sure it's actually going to work

at the table? This is when we move on to

step six, which is where we stress

[music] test everything. And to do this,

I think you need to ask yourself, can

your first session put the seed question

on the table within the first hour

without you naming it? The goal you

should aim for is to have your players

to walk out of session one already

discussing the theme without even

realizing it. If you can do this,

congratulations, you have a banger

campaign idea. But if session one is

just some variant of you meet in a

tavern and here's a quest, the seed

question isn't planted deep enough in

your world. So, here is how we could

start our example Sorel Yak campaign.

The players arrive in a city called

Dariville and the old king died three

days ago. He had an heir, but they're

just a child, so there's no clear

successor and the streets are tense.

Straight away, we'll give them a

trigger. We'll put them in a situation

that demands an immediate response.

Maybe a group of royal soldiers shows up

to escort the child princess to her

coronation and the crowd gets hostile

and someone throws a stone, so one of

the soldiers attacks the person who

threw it. The players are in it

immediately. Will they protect the

princess? Shield the crowd? Try to

disarm the soldier? Maybe they'll even

try to kidnap the princess. The point

is, it doesn't really matter. Every one

of those possible choices is the

beginning of an answer to who gets to

decide. [music]

The seed question entered the chat the

moment the stone was thrown. You didn't

have to spell it out, but they're

already engaging with it. I find it a

lot more interesting than you're in a

tavern and hear rumors of a dark wizard

gathering power in the east. Do you want

to investigate? Which is probably what

would have been the campaign start if we

hadn't put in the work. If you're

struggling to make the seed question

surface organically in session one, try

to trace the problem backwards. Usually

it's because your conflict web isn't

connected well enough to [music] the

opening situation or because the

positions of your NPCs aren't expressed

through actions as well. So, we still

have our original an evil wizard wants

to conquer the world premise, but now

that wizard isn't just a monster, but

one voice in a complex argument in which

every character has something personal

at stake and session one gets the

conversation going immediately. I

believe this is the difference between a

campaign premise and a campaign idea and

that the campaigns that become boring

for everyone, sessions that feel

disconnected, etc., simply never found

their question. So, for your next

campaign, write down the premise, you

know, the who, what, where question, and

then ask yourself, what is this campaign

actually about? But now, if you go

through these steps, you're going to end

up with a conflict web full of NPCs.

This method I just shared with you works

on the macro level, but it does not tell

you how to make sure your NPCs aren't

boring to interact with, which could

ruin all of this work. So, click on this

video next to learn how to avoid this by

making the best NPCs your table has ever

seen.