I am typically the one in my playgroup who buys boardgames, then reads the rules, then hosts the evening. I usually play with a range of non-gamers, casual gamers, and some advanced gamers.

Usually, when I am reading a boardgame rulebook, I start off trying to understand the win conditions. Then, I learn turn based structure, combat mechanics, card abilities, etc...

When reading through the rulebook for Zombie Apocalypse, there are rules mechanics, however, I could not find any "win conditions." Each scenario simply explains what is happening, and they are broken up into Apocalypse, and Post-Apocalypse sections, with neither of them indicating how you end the scenario. Seems to be simply focused on "survival." The game does talk about player generated goals, but the scenarios do not give you exact goals.

I guess this is necessary to take the leap from boardgames which present very specific goals, to RPG's where players are able to discuss and come up with their own. Right now, I dont feel like I can run a scenario without coming up with some intermediate goals, and an ultimate goal. I want to run the game similar to a boardgame night, where people who have never played the game before show up, we have some snacks, and do a 3 hour gaming session, and finish the scenario in that amount of time. It is unlikely that I will play with the same group again, so there needs to be a fairly quick character development, then like a 2.5 hour scenario which concludes with some type of accomplished objective other than not dying.

I am guessing the game was not designed to function like this, especially since the timeline has like a 4 year period of general events. I think I might just cut it off much earlier, and either have the players survive 24 hours, and have them reach an extraction point at a military base thats 10 miles away. I dont want to make it too directive, however, at the same time, I dont think I am ready to run this without some type of overarching win condition that brings the 2-3 hour play session to a conclusion. I am thinking about organizing the storyline according to the timeline in general as far as how thing initially progress, but then putting the session together like a book chapter, with sub-headings and then a chapter conclusion.

Am I approaching this totally wrong? For those who have ran this as a single session, how do you manage goals and objectives, and player / group success?

After watching the seasons 1st episode of The Walking Dead last night (was kinda weak in my opinion), they seem to typically have a goal that reaches beyond survival. They want to rescue someone, or they want to fortify shelter, or they have to go get supplies, or they are attempting to discern if other groups can be trusted or not. I dont see how simply surviving in this game makes for intriguing and engaging gameplay, especially with the scenarios lacking organized or detailed progression.

I need some kiddie bowling bumpers at first, to make sure I dont roll a gutter ball my first time, and then nobody ever wants to play again.

You're not approaching it wrong, per se, the overarching rule No. 0 of RPGs is - Have fun., however RPGs - and EotW in particular - are generally at their best (most fun) when the Game Master (that's you) doesn't have a single, specific result to the gameplay experience in mind. This is because RPGs are, at their heart, a collaborative, storytelling experience, whereas boardgames are a competition to complete X goal, within Y defined parameters - as you're aware.

That said, players who are not accustomed to Tabletop RPG gaming may have problems being proactive, using their player "agency" (which means; the players ability to change the game-world), to drive the action. They may not know what (or be confident in) their abilities or options - because they're more or less unlimited - it's the "tyranny of choices" conundrum. Those who have 100s of options have trouble picking 1.

Furthermore, a GM unaccustomed to TTRPG gaming may have trouble improvising in the way that such open-ended/open-world gameplay often demands. How do you plan or account for EVERYTHING in the world?

So, what are you to do?

I would recommend that you get the idea out of your head that the game/night needs 1 rigid goal - and/or even that any "goal" need be achieved at all - for the night to be a success. It puts pressure on everyone and thing (the system) that is not meant to be there - which can impede the fun. The only way to fail at having fun is to ruin people's desire/attempts at expressing their actions and trying to fulfill them (rolling the dice) and I think your rigid view of a game could do just that. Let the players tell their story - not your story. Let them determine what is important and adapt to that. Also, this is not a game of you against them, you are there as GM to facilitate the fun. Challenge them absolutely but get it out of your mind that it's a competition.

However, as GM it is your job to keep things moving when the players are lost - it's no fun to look around and be like, What do we do?, so absolutely have several possible goals that they could strive for to make the session interesting (Get to extraction. Fortify and gather resources. Take down the gang of looters. Etc.), but present them through the game world (the radio/TV/internet, non-player characters, etc.) rather than as a speech made regarding win conditions at the beginning of the game. Also have several sets of likely possible scenarios in mind that you think could present the game world (zombie outbreak) in a fun(ny), interesting and challenging way. Organize them by location, possibly (Okay, I have 5 city streets scenarios, 3 office building scenarios, 7 wilderness/park scenarios, etc. etc.), or whatever works for you, that could come up on the way to completing any goal. Just preferably avoid a; scenario 1, 2, 3, 4 and so on that have to be completed in order, or at all, to get to the next thing or to "win", make them insertable into any occaision with the right setting/environment. Does that make sense?

As a high schooler (15+ years ago now), my mom would ask me every time when I got home from our RPG nights "Did you win?", she did it the first time as an earnest question, and I went into a half hour rant about how "you don't win an RPG, it's something so much more than that yada yada", and she did it every night after as a joke, to poke me about it. But it's true, you don't win. RPGs are the prime example of how; it's not the destination that matters - it's the journey. Focus on presenting interesting scenarios to the players and letting them tell their story, not achieving some manufactured goal.

GMing is more work than moderating a boardgame night, absolutely, but it's an entirely different experience and if the effort is put in on the front end, you have such incredible potential on the back end for a night like no other.

Sorry, I know that's a lot to throw at you, but I hope it's of some help. Perhaps start the night with a short preamble how "This is not a boardgame. This is a collaborative storytelling experience. I am here as your entertainer this evening, you are here as the stars of the show. Now let's get it on!"

Also, if you know who is coming that night well enough in advance, given your time restrictions, I would recommend you create their characters (here; the players themselves, in game form) for them. Character generation is one of my favorite parts of RPGs and EotW has a really fun take on it, but your time constraints are too great.

Now; have fun! (and let me know if you have any other questions )

I have been a part of two End of the World scenarios, once as a player and once as the GM. Both times, the overall goal was survival by escaping the immediate threat (as a player, we had to make our way to the roof where we were to be extracted; as the GM, the players needed to escape from a siege situation and make their way to an extraction point). In both situations, there was no situation that had the players reaching a point where the GM would say, "You have stopped the zombie outbreak, you win."

Probably the best way to think of your gaming session would be to think of it like a zombie movie. In most cases, the threat continues, but the main characters escape the immediate threat. This way, you play through to a climax of your story (in the case of the game I ran, a mad race to the last chopper out as the "secure" lines collapse and the zombies flood in), an ending to your particular tale, though not necessarily an end to the situation as a whole.

In board game terms, think of a zombie outbreak session of this RPG like a game of Dead of Winter. You have a goal in mind (along with those individual goals that can muck up the situation oh so well), but none of them end with, "You have everything you need to end the zombie outbreak, you win!"

You're not approaching it wrong, per se, the overarching rule No. 0 of RPGs is - Have fun., however RPGs - and EotW in particular - are generally at their best (most fun) when the Game Master (that's you) doesn't have a single, specific result to the gameplay experience in mind. This is because RPGs are, at their heart, a collaborative, storytelling experience, whereas boardgames are a competition to complete X goal, within Y defined parameters - as you're aware.

That said, players who are not accustomed to Tabletop RPG gaming may have problems being proactive, using their player "agency" (which means; the players ability to change the game-world), to drive the action. They may not know what (or be confident in) their abilities or options - because they're more or less unlimited - it's the "tyranny of choices" conundrum. Those who have 100s of options have trouble picking 1.

Furthermore, a GM unaccustomed to TTRPG gaming may have trouble improvising in the way that such open-ended/open-world gameplay often demands. How do you plan or account for EVERYTHING in the world?

So, what are you to do?

I would recommend that you get the idea out of your head that the game/night needs 1 rigid goal - and/or even that any "goal" need be achieved at all - for the night to be a success. It puts pressure on everyone and thing (the system) that is not meant to be there - which can impede the fun. The only way to fail at having fun is to ruin people's desire/attempts at expressing their actions and trying to fulfill them (rolling the dice) and I think your rigid view of a game could do just that. Let the players tell their story - not your story. Let them determine what is important and adapt to that. Also, this is not a game of you against them, you are there as GM to facilitate the fun. Challenge them absolutely but get it out of your mind that it's a competition.

However, as GM it is your job to keep things moving when the players are lost - it's no fun to look around and be like, What do we do?, so absolutely have several possible goals that they could strive for to make the session interesting (Get to extraction. Fortify and gather resources. Take down the gang of looters. Etc.), but present them through the game world (the radio/TV/internet, non-player characters, etc.) rather than as a speech made regarding win conditions at the beginning of the game. Also have several sets of likely possible scenarios in mind that you think could present the game world (zombie outbreak) in a fun(ny), interesting and challenging way. Organize them by location, possibly (Okay, I have 5 city streets scenarios, 3 office building scenarios, 7 wilderness/park scenarios, etc. etc.), or whatever works for you, that could come up on the way to completing any goal. Just preferably avoid a; scenario 1, 2, 3, 4 and so on that have to be completed in order, or at all, to get to the next thing or to "win", make them insertable into any occaision with the right setting/environment. Does that make sense?

As a high schooler (15+ years ago now), my mom would ask me every time when I got home from our RPG nights "Did you win?", she did it the first time as an earnest question, and I went into a half hour rant about how "you don't win an RPG, it's something so much more than that yada yada", and she did it every night after as a joke, to poke me about it. But it's true, you don't win. RPGs are the prime example of how; it's not the destination that matters - it's the journey. Focus on presenting interesting scenarios to the players and letting them tell their story, not achieving some manufactured goal.

GMing is more work than moderating a boardgame night, absolutely, but it's an entirely different experience and if the effort is put in on the front end, you have such incredible potential on the back end for a night like no other.

Sorry, I know that's a lot to throw at you, but I hope it's of some help. Perhaps start the night with a short preamble how "This is not a boardgame. This is a collaborative storytelling experience. I am here as your entertainer this evening, you are here as the stars of the show. Now let's get it on!"

Also, if you know who is coming that night well enough in advance, given your time restrictions, I would recommend you create their characters (here; the players themselves, in game form) for them. Character generation is one of my favorite parts of RPGs and EotW has a really fun take on it, but your time constraints are too great.

Now; have fun! (and let me know if you have any other questions )

Emsquared,

Thanks for the detailed response. Its really got me thinking about how I should approach creating the experience for my players.

The more I read up on the instruction manual, and think about the "possibilities" the better I am understanding how I can pull this off.

Based on your insight, I think it is better for me to use the scenario to present increasingly threatening situations, then let the players determine what they want to do with them. Letting them determine whether to hide, investigate, rescue, fight, etc... will provide them with the decision making abilities, then I can adjust the game, NPC's, and situations as necessary. I will be playing with people in my neighborhood, where most people know each other, so I can easily get things started with a familiar setting, then ramp it up from there.

I am also thinking that I could take the time to have everyone create their own character, but I am thinking about doing some quick and simple open voting on selected stats. That should speed things up, so we can get to the action.

I really dont like player elimination in longer games (no guests on the sidelines at my kitchen table), so I think I will have extra character sheets, and if (more like when) someone dies, I will have them take control of a NPC and fill in the character sheet, so they can continue to play with a member of the group, but with different stats and abilities.

I think I will get a set of polyhedral dice to help me with the randomness of things in the story. If they go to a supermarket down the road, I may roll a d20, and then say there are that many zombies in the parking lot. I could also use a d4 in order to determine how many cars are blocking a road out of the neighborhood, stuff like that.

Totally appreciate your idea about presenting the players with information through the TV, Radio, Internet, etc... That can keep their options open, and give them some information as to what is happening in the world around them, without telling them what to do. If they ignore the info, thats fine, or if they use it to base their direction or decisions, that works too.

I just have to get it out of my mind that there has to be a predetermined main objective or win condition, and go with the idea of survival in light of the scenario and its dangers / challenges that develop along the way.

I really want to make this experience gruesome, threatening, and as immersive as possible. I have to run it at a pace that includes brief lulls, ramping up intensity, and outright adrenaline pumping scenes.

I am totally excited to run this thing. I will review the rulebook again (im reading it for the 2nd time) and then I will walk myself through the mechanics to make sure I can manage them smoothly. I will probably schedule a game night for this around Halloween. Should be a lot of fun.

I have been a part of two End of the World scenarios, once as a player and once as the GM. Both times, the overall goal was survival by escaping the immediate threat (as a player, we had to make our way to the roof where we were to be extracted; as the GM, the players needed to escape from a siege situation and make their way to an extraction point). In both situations, there was no situation that had the players reaching a point where the GM would say, "You have stopped the zombie outbreak, you win."

Probably the best way to think of your gaming session would be to think of it like a zombie movie. In most cases, the threat continues, but the main characters escape the immediate threat. This way, you play through to a climax of your story (in the case of the game I ran, a mad race to the last chopper out as the "secure" lines collapse and the zombies flood in), an ending to your particular tale, though not necessarily an end to the situation as a whole.

In board game terms, think of a zombie outbreak session of this RPG like a game of Dead of Winter. You have a goal in mind (along with those individual goals that can muck up the situation oh so well), but none of them end with, "You have everything you need to end the zombie outbreak, you win!"

Chyrondave,

I really like the chopper escape plan. Did you come up with that as the GM, or did that evolve as an option as the game advanced? I have played much Left 4 Dead, and the scenes where you win by escaping in the chopper can be epic.

Thanks for the idea of just bringing a climax of the story during the play session, and not trying to end the situation as a whole. I think doing it that way leaves the players with content to continue to think about after the play session, and will bring them back for more if they wish to continue it. I dont have a regular play group (due to being so busy with work myself) but I do play fairly regularly with a group of people (though I mix up my group quite often). I got this RPG because of the possibility of doing a one-shot run in a single play session, because there is no way I could run a RPG campaign. I have a guy in my play group who does that, but I just cant commit to the weekly schedule. I am hoping to replace a board game night with one of these scenarios, and mix it up for a different experience. I think the zombie theme, and playing as yourself, will allow people permission to try it, because each time I invite my non-gamer friends over to play, the first thing they ask is "this isnt like Dungeons and Dragons is it?"

Dead of Winter is a great game, one that I own, and have played about 4x now. I see what you mean. There is an overall objective for the session, but it doesnt result in eliminating the zombie forces. One of them is an attempt to create an antidote, but even in that one, you dont apply it, and eradicate the zombie forces. I will keep that in mind as I run my first scenario.

I think my overall goal is to immerse my players into the world, and create an experience where they each have to consider what they would actually do as they find themselves in the middle of a zombie apocalypse. If I can create that, then the experience will be totally worth it.

I have been a part of two End of the World scenarios, once as a player and once as the GM. Both times, the overall goal was survival by escaping the immediate threat (as a player, we had to make our way to the roof where we were to be extracted; as the GM, the players needed to escape from a siege situation and make their way to an extraction point). In both situations, there was no situation that had the players reaching a point where the GM would say, "You have stopped the zombie outbreak, you win."

Probably the best way to think of your gaming session would be to think of it like a zombie movie. In most cases, the threat continues, but the main characters escape the immediate threat. This way, you play through to a climax of your story (in the case of the game I ran, a mad race to the last chopper out as the "secure" lines collapse and the zombies flood in), an ending to your particular tale, though not necessarily an end to the situation as a whole.

In board game terms, think of a zombie outbreak session of this RPG like a game of Dead of Winter. You have a goal in mind (along with those individual goals that can muck up the situation oh so well), but none of them end with, "You have everything you need to end the zombie outbreak, you win!"

Chyrondave,

I really like the chopper escape plan. Did you come up with that as the GM, or did that evolve as an option as the game advanced? I have played much Left 4 Dead, and the scenes where you win by escaping in the chopper can be epic.

Thanks for the idea of just bringing a climax of the story during the play session, and not trying to end the situation as a whole. I think doing it that way leaves the players with content to continue to think about after the play session, and will bring them back for more if they wish to continue it. I dont have a regular play group (due to being so busy with work myself) but I do play fairly regularly with a group of people (though I mix up my group quite often). I got this RPG because of the possibility of doing a one-shot run in a single play session, because there is no way I could run a RPG campaign. I have a guy in my play group who does that, but I just cant commit to the weekly schedule. I am hoping to replace a board game night with one of these scenarios, and mix it up for a different experience. I think the zombie theme, and playing as yourself, will allow people permission to try it, because each time I invite my non-gamer friends over to play, the first thing they ask is "this isnt like Dungeons and Dragons is it?"

Dead of Winter is a great game, one that I own, and have played about 4x now. I see what you mean. There is an overall objective for the session, but it doesnt result in eliminating the zombie forces. One of them is an attempt to create an antidote, but even in that one, you dont apply it, and eradicate the zombie forces. I will keep that in mind as I run my first scenario.

I think my overall goal is to immerse my players into the world, and create an experience where they each have to consider what they would actually do as they find themselves in the middle of a zombie apocalypse. If I can create that, then the experience will be totally worth it.

The chopper escape was the main objective in the one that I was a part of when I played it at a local convention (that one did not go well for everyone playing). Regardless, the chopper escape is great because it is a hard objective and provides some nice visuals (in my case, a look down as the extraction point is overrun with a flood of zombies).

The nice thing about this system is that is functions more as a guide rather than a scenario. You build the scenario based on the suggestions that they offer. If you want to construct your story with your players making the journey to safety, it provides the tools to allow you to do that. If you want to have your players try and escape their current situation, the means of building that is there as well. I happened to luck out with the location I ran my scenario in (game shop not far from a hospital), allowing me to create a nice siege situation for my players to get out of.

The important thing to remember (in addition to having fun, naturally), is to be flexible. Your players might think of something you had not considered, and that's okay. Your players might also provide you with the means of creating conflict as well (one of my players had a wife and kid and lived a couple of streets down from the hospital, which opened him up for a disadvantage he did not even consider, or that I hadn't either).