Naming the Party

 

Everyone agrees a +1 sword—without anything more—is dull.

Everyone agrees a dungeon—without flavor—is boring.

So why does the Party not have a name?

Giving the Party a name is similar to wielding "The Sunblade" or delving into "The Tomb of the Serpent Kings." It contains a wow factor.

There are plenty of ttrpg groups that stream with party names.

• Critical Role has Vox Machina and The Mighty Nine
• Acquisitions Incorporated
• MCDM has The Chain, The Revenant Vow, The Shield of Gravesfold
• and there are many many more examples.

Naming the Party has some amazing benefits such as:

• Increased Group Unity (there is now a clearer defined "us")
• Ability to confer rewards that are unique to the Party (ex. +to charisma checks or bonuses to reaction rolls against those who have heard of the Party's accomplishments).
• Provide an easy in game reason for a new PC to seek the group out in the event of a player character death

Despite so many indications that there is power in a name, I don't think it is a prevailing part of gaming culture.

There is definitely pressure on a group to pick "the right name." A DM could also worry the players won't take the matter seriously and chose something like "Power Rangers" or "The Mighty Five." These types of names could ruin immersion in something other than a beer & pretzels style game. Fear over this does not mean you should instantly dismiss the concept. I think there are two strong starting options to guide towards a name—although I'm sure more are available to those with more creativity.

Team Unity 10/10 — Go go name the party! 

1. The Skyrim Cart

• Have the campaign begin by the characters selecting their name. They can be in a tavern if you like tradition. I've done this on a boat, sailing into the "starting city." Actually I've done this a few times starting on a boat . . . what can I say? If it works it works. The players are together for whatever reason you've determined in session 0. Maybe they are friends setting off for adventure! Maybe an organization? Maybe just a band of adventurers? Regardless, the populace is more apt to spread the word on whatever deeds the Party achieves if there is a name to associate them with. Regardless, once the name is selected—something should just HAPPEN. Orcs attack! A tavern brawl breaks out! The kraken surfaces and threatens to drag them down to the depths!  Reward the achievement of unity by having a big set piece. 

2. The Indiana Jones

• Start the players in a situation where the need to accomplish something before returning to town (or their safe haven).  It should be open ended enough where the players have a ton of freedom on how to respond with their starting goals.  This might be a good spot to introduce a secondary antagonist or the primary antagonist's lieutenant (maybe not in a combat encounter, just talking between the bars of a portcullis!).  The Party can then return to town successful (perhaps not 100% success, even Indy lost to Belloq) and a town guard could ask "Wow great work, what do you call yourselves?" The players now have an event to base their decision off of—something to help spark ideas.

Either way, the DM should give the players an opportunity to discuss things and even feel free to chime in and guide some discussion. If the DM hears a good idea—say so!  This can help the players feel reassured in their decision.  Additionally, the entire table should feel some degree of comfortableness (is this even a word?) with the name.  This includes the DM. 

The name should also be reinforced through repetition. NPC's should use the name. Comment on it. And love it.  The reinforcement should be that the name is good and that the name is important. This also goes for antagonists. I would not recommend "making fun of" the name—as you risk the players feeling like it was dumb to put themselves out there.  

Finally I want to comment on the idea that the players will not unify.  This is not a problem that results because you asked for a group namerom.  This may be a problem with the player's group dynamic.  Being able to see this and discuss solutions as soon as possible will result in less future problems.  If they players aren't going to play nice together, then perhaps a boardgame is a better option?  Or a different group? 

Having these discussions can also reveal characters that will not gel together.  This is probably a tangent for a session 0 blog, but simply giving the group a similar goal does not mean the characters will mesh.  Depending on the prevalence of inter-party roleplay, the conflict may not even arise until well into the game.  If they can't compromise on a name—they will not be able to compromise during any major point of tension.  And that is something I would want to know as soon as possible.

That's my thoughts, really trying to get back into blogging, not sure what topic I have in me next—maybe a reaction to a zine I recently read ("Barrow Keep") or discussing death at 0 hp and death saving throws.