One of the things I’ve learned from GMing (both by doing it well and by doing it… not so well) is that overplanning is more likely to backfire and hurt your game than it is to help it. The first campaign I ever wrote and ran was definitely a success, but I was guilty of what was called “railroading” my players, meaning I had set them on a pre-determined path and didn’t really let them stray from it, comparable to a lot of video games (which allow for interactivity, but in which the main plot line is locked in no matter what the player does). I wrote that campaign to death, not allowing a lot of breathing room for my players.
Did they enjoy it? Yes, they did. But could I have given them more agency? Absolutely. The only reason that it was successful is due to what I’ve come to think of as the Orient Express Effect: when you are riding a train, you know exactly where you’re going to end up and likely how you’re going to get there, but if the train is interesting, if the scenery is bewitching, and if the other passengers are engaging to talk to, the riders won’t really mind that they’re being shoved down one path to one destination. The fact that The Scion Chronicles, that first campaign, turned out so well, is entirely because of this (which was about 50/50 good instincts/luck on my part).
What I’ve learned is that I shouldn’t script out everything that I think my players are going to do; I shouldn’t play god and try to imagine every possible scenario and then get ahead of each of them. What I should do is define the major story beats of an arc or session and angle to hit those if possible, but otherwise just sort of let go and flow with the players. I’m getting much better at this with Blades in the Dark, which is a system that thrives on improvisation and specifically not planning things out beforehand. I’m also running a pre-written module for Dungeons and Dragons, and I’m falling into the same trap of over-preparing and I honestly think it’s making the experience a bit flat – maybe not for my players, but for me. It’s harder to play Yes And when there’s a script that someone else has already written out for you and which, if you deviate too far from, could ruin the story pretty badly.
Story beats are different from scenes; they’re the dots that we connect to create a plot. It’s not every single small thing that happens, but, rather, the handful of the biggest definable moments of action and change. This could be things like, “the party takes the job from the old woman,” “one of the members threatens a guard,” or “they decide not to steal the painting because they don’t want to betray their new contact.” These should always be choices that the players freely make, never ones that they are cornered into or that they feel they have no choice but to do.
The biggest different between writing a story or screenplay or novel and running a game comes down to the agency of the participants. As a reader, we have no real say in how a story turns out and we are just along for the ride. A game, however, is a living, breathing thing that the GM or any of the players can change in a heartbeat. This is what makes GMing so difficult, yet so rewarding. This adaptability is a challenge, but it creates the most engaging of experiences .