Look To Hollywood Blockbusters For Adventure Design Guidance

Let's talk about a valuable lesson game masters can take from The Force Awakens and 2009's Star Trek, both directed by J.J. Abrams. Maybe you've heard of them.

View attachment 93995​

Those movies often polarize fans of the respective franchises, but game masters can take some lessons from how Abrams mixes character development into intense action scenes. The technique results in deeper characters without slowing the pace of the films, and I've found that attempting something similar in the games I run often enhances them by making the big moments feel as satisfying as the payoff in a well-crafted blockbuster.

Remember that scene from The Force Awakens where Finn and Rey run for cover as a TIE Fighter strafes the Jakku village? That's a prime example of what I'm talking about. Throughout the frenetic action scene, Finn repeatedly attempts to take Rey's hand, either as a means of protecting her or leading her to safety, but Rey protests each time. The exchange tells us something about both characters, even as explosions and blaster bolts detonate around them.

Something similar happens in Star Trek during the opening sequence. George Kirk shares a heartbreaking moment with his wife as they debate what to name their newborn son, even as George Kirk fights a hopeless space battle to hold off the time-displaced Narada to buy time for his crewmates to abandon ship. Both sequences give us a feel for the characters while simultaneously dazzling us with big-budget action and special effects.

Making an effort to replicate that in a tabletop rpg creates deeper PCs while also keeping the plot moving forward. Reflecting on my own games, I've noticed a tendency to partition action and character development into separate tracks. In the worst cases, I've intentionally injected character scenes into sessions just to pad them out and fill time. That's not always a bad decision, but it runs the risk of derailing the pace of a session by introducing scenes that feel like dead ends. So nowadays I try to hardwire opportunities for character moments directly into the most exciting and consequential scenes.

The simplest, most direct means of accomplishing this to ask the players to reflect on the big moments of a campaign through the eyes of their characters in real time. When a particularly fantastic or dramatic moment unfolds, ask the players what their characters think of this new development. Have the characters encountered something like this before? If a player responds in a way that creates interesting new layers for their character, consider granting an in-game reward such as an inspiration point or a bump in initiative.

Game masters can tie action sequences directly to the backgrounds of the characters. Raise the stakes by putting beloved NPCs or familiars in danger. Introduce magic items or tomes of lore with connections to a character's family or hometown, then give the players a moment to reflect when they finally get their hands on those precious artifacts or lose them forever. When characters have a personal stake in the action, the result of the scene naturally will provide opportunities for character growth.

Character development doesn't have to disappear when initiative is rolled, as recent entries in the Star Wars and Star Trek franchises demonstrate. If you've seen neither of the films mentioned here and have no idea what I'm talking about, I'm sorry this column missed the mark for you. But something tells me that won't be a widespread phenomenon around these parts.

contributed by Fred Love

 

[GMMichael]

A good technique if you have players who start to doze off during the "role-playing scenes" of your game.

 

[N01H3r3]

Recently, I've been making an effort to follow John Rogers' advice on action scenes: in short, don't make action scenes, make suspense scenes that require action to resolve.

 

[pemerton]

I try to hardwire opportunities for character moments directly into the most exciting and consequential scenes.

The simplest, most direct means of accomplishing this to ask the players to reflect on the big moments of a campaign through the eyes of their characters in real time. When a particularly fantastic or dramatic moment unfolds, ask the players what their characters think of this new development. Have the characters encountered something like this before? If a player responds in a way that creates interesting new layers for their character, consider granting an in-game reward such as an inspiration point or a bump in initiative.

Is that really the most direct means of having an action scene yield character development - by asking a player what his/her PC is thinking?

What about the choices the player makes for his/her PC in the scene? These seem more fundamental to RPGing, less epiphenomenal/"meta", and to go to the heart of who the character is.

 

[Henry]

Is that really the most direct means of having an action scene yield character development - by asking a player what his/her PC is thinking?

What about the choices the player makes for his/her PC in the scene? These seem more fundamental to RPGing, less epiphenomenal/"meta", and to go to the heart of who the character is.

This works when the choice is more than just “I attack Orc #3” or “I use magic missile on the spellcaster.” If a player is playing to what they always know, if a DM or other players want to encourage more role play during combat, sometimes it’s necessary to give a little nudge or to lead by example. As DM, take advantage of that whole “monologuing is a free action” thing and be OK with giving a sentence from the NPC’s mouth as they’re doing something momentous. Our GM for a Pathfinder game was having the main villain of a combat spout a couple of lines from his “down with the nobility, up with the proletariat” manifesto as his minions were ripping us a new one and as he was casting spell suport for them. It was fun when one of the players’ PC was countering the villain’s logic as he was gutting minions one by one.

Also the GM can call out a certain choice the NPC is making, like focusing on the group elf for his attacks because he’s homicidally racist against elves, or how the villain keeps trying to shut down the combat with save or suck spells but not kill anyone, and get away, because their child is in trouble and they want to go save them. A grand finale combat could become an alliance of forces because of the classic “face turn” a la professional wrestling. (cf. Darth Vader tossing the Emperor down the shaft)

 

[thzero]

What about the choices the player makes for his/her PC in the scene? These seem more fundamental to RPGing, less epiphenomenal/"meta", and to go to the heart of who the character is.

Can't say yes enough! Quit trying to force things on players... its a game, not a script writing seminar!

And considering Force Awakens, Last Jedi, the new Star Trek movies are pretty much terrible movies... not exactly a good model to be following anyways.

 

[thzero]

A grand finale combat could become an alliance of forces because of the classic “face turn” a la professional wrestling. (cf. Darth Vader tossing the Emperor down the shaft)

Deus Ex Machina?!

Story? Ok, can be a great plot twist especially if the villain/heel has been deeply written into the storyline. A game? Not so much... its anti-climatic.

 

[Henry]

Can't say yes enough! Quit trying to force things on players... its a game, not a script writing seminar!

If someone DOESN’T want to add more opportunities to role play, that’s a totally different topic, involving things like group play style, making sure all the players at the table (including the DM) are a good fit for the game being played, etc.

However no one’s talking about script writing or railroading, they’re talking about suggesting new opportunities for adding new avenues for player interaction. The player in my group CHOSE to rebut the villain in the middle of combat, and it added a lot of fun doing so - but we NEVER would have done it had the GM not tried it, and discovered how memorable the event could be.

Deus Ex Machina?!

Story? Ok, can be a great plot twist especially if the villain/heel has been deeply written into the storyline. A game? Not so much... its anti-climatic.

How is that anti-climactic? In the vas majority of D&D games I’ve seen both at home and at conventions, the enemy in a combat exists for two purposes - to be two-dimensional, and to be killed. Something like finding out that an enemy doesn’t have to be your enemy, or just as cool, finding out someone you almost see eye-to-eye with, but IS your enemy) makes for a great experience specifically because it’s uncommon. I wouldn’t do it for every main enemy, but having it happen once or twice in a campaign makes it stand out, and makes it more cinematic. And cinematic doesn’t have to be a bad thing, just because it’s a game.

 

[thzero]

Something like finding out that an enemy doesn’t have to be your enemy, or just as cool, finding out someone you almost see eye-to-eye with, but IS your enemy) makes for a great experience specifically because it’s uncommon.

That is different than having the villain/heel/npc make the finishing "move", aka Deus Ex Machina such as the Darth Vader scene you reference.

Having scenarios like you suggested that I quoted does make for an interesting game, not because of cinematics, but because it gives players choices - choices that they hopefully make based on their characters stats, background, personality, group dynamics, etc.

Do I side with the bad guy, or even try and convince him to help? But he's evil?! Nice quandary.

And yes, most games at conventions have very one or two dimensional (at best) villains... but those games generally run in a very short time period.

 

[pemerton]

This works when the choice is more than just “I attack Orc #3” or “I use magic missile on the spellcaster.”

<snip>

A grand finale combat could become an alliance of forces because of the classic “face turn” a la professional wrestling. (cf. Darth Vader tossing the Emperor down the shaft)

Something like finding out that an enemy doesn’t have to be your enemy, or just as cool, finding out someone you almost see eye-to-eye with, but IS your enemy) makes for a great experience specifically because it’s uncommon.

Having scenarios like you suggested that I quoted does make for an interesting game, not because of cinematics, but because it gives players choices - choices that they hopefully make based on their characters stats, background, personality, group dynamics, etc.

Do I side with the bad guy, or even try and convince him to help? But he's evil?! Nice quandary.

The sorts of things thzero talks about would count as examples of a player making choices for his/her character. Rather than narrating feelings (as the OP suggests), or the GM introducing some unilateral story element (like having the villain turn), those involve the players playing their PCs.

I think it would make for the more interesting way to have a villain turn, also: rather than the GM deciding this, the players declare actions for their PCs that (if successful) change the loyalty of the NPC.