I'm running a West Marches style game. I've written about it before. Last night we had our first session in a while, and while it went well (streamlining my navigation rules seems to be paying off)  we also identified some weaknesses in the format. I'm now looking to make improvements in these areas. 

One of my players pointed out that the game I've been running offers limited opportunities for character interaction between party members. In other campaigns I've run, the most memorable moments had very little to do with my role as GM. Instead, they were all about two friends playing their characters to the hilt and interacting with each other. Unfortunately, last night I dove directly into the travel mechanics as I always do, providing little opportunity for roleplay. Opening the game with 'roll your Intelligence Test for scouting' doesn't lend itself to building pathos.

As the session progressed, the issue became less pronounced. The characters encountered challenges that highlighted their quirks in the solutions they chose. In the final 30 minutes, we discovered a fascinating, layered dynamic: one player preferred to avoid combat, yet his character was eager to fight, while another player was keen on combat, but his character turned out to be risk-averse. It was a shame that this complexity only emerged at the end of the night.

After the game, we spent some time discussing potential solutions to this issue. I believe that the responsibility to create these character moments lies with everyone at the table. However, as the GM, I also recognize that there are steps I can take to facilitate this process. Below are a few half-baked and untested ideas:

Icebreaker Questions
One of my players introduced a concept using icebreaker question cards that came with a bottle of wine he bought. While the questions were a mixed bag, the underlying idea seems promising. To integrate this into the game, I could couch these prompts into the narrative. For example, I might suggest that the recent buzz in Coal Town, our central hub, revolves around a specific topic. I'd then ask my players if their characters engaged in this conversation while leaving town. This approach is non-demanding; players can opt out without any pressure.

Natural Conversation Opportunities
I could also create natural moments for character interaction. If the party follows a river or path in good weather without encountering any random events (in other words: they have a long, uneventful stretch of travel), I could simply point out that this could be an opportune time for them to chat about something. This technique, used by another player of mine (who happens to be my brother) in his own game, tends to be effective. Like the first solution, it's an invitation, not an order, allowing players to choose their level of participation.

Establishing a 'Setting Out' Routine
Another idea I'm contemplating is to establish a 'setting out' routine before the party leaves Coal Town. This could be framed as a local tradition, where party members spend about five to ten minutes discussing key details in character:

I would encourage players to have these discussions in character, allowing for organic disagreements and decisions. After ten minutes, the group either sets out or postpones the game until they reach a consensus. Should a player choose to leave, the remaining members can decide whether to proceed with the expedition.

Encouraging roleplay is great, but there are some risks involved that are worth considering:

It is another thing that eats up time at the table.
My games are already short. Generally they run 8:00-10:30, but realistically by the time everyone shows up, chats a bit, and overcomes technical hurdles the actual gameplay session comes in at just under two hours. Paired with the West Marches' requirement to Start In Town and End In Town, this means there is little time for lollygagging. Roleplaying is important for me and for my players, but it will have to be tightly controlled. Lop off conversations with dramatic turns of events or relevant new discoveries if needed.

Not everyone likes being dumped into an unexpected roleplaying scenario with no warning.
This is very individual. Some tables may not have this problem. Some players really do not like being told "now talk," which I think is totally fair. Making sure the players know that this is optional and offering easy ways to decline without feeling bad is key here.

I will play with these approaches. Regardless of how they go, I don't think it's sensible to be militant or prescriptive with them. They seem like they might be useful tools, but at the end of the day the GM has to judge each session with common sense and apply the tools when they are needed.

Nick Hendriks
Illustrator & Animator