better gaming through chemistry

jdrakeh said:

That's not true - all stories, whether thay're pre-scripted or generated extemporaneously have a beginning, middle, and end. Every last one of them. Decrying unavoidable structure as a shortcoming of the GM is a cop out - it isn't true and it avoids the issue of player responsibility.

Click to expand...

If the DM already has the beginning, middle, and end of his story written out, those events are going to happen no matter what choices you make.

The kind of story I want to see in an RPG is one that is only apparent after you finish the game. "Oh hey, look at that, story." Not one that has its beginning, middle, and end pre-written for me.

LostSoul said:

If the DM already has the beginning, middle, and end of his story written out, those events are going to happen no matter what choices you make.

Click to expand...

That makes more sense, but it still doesn't mean that players don't have choices, as you stated earlier.

I guess I meant meaningful choices. So if there is a story out there, and it is already written, there's no way you can make meaningful choices.

You might be able to pick from dungeon1 and dungeon2, but there's no point in going into that dungeon (edit: there's no meaningful choice being made), since when you come out it won't have mattered either way. Things will be just the same, the plot will have advanced on its schedule, chug-chug-chuging down railroad valley.

Unless, of course, you like dungeons just for the sake of dungeons, but then the whole story is just extra work that the DM is doing for himself. Then the choices are more about what feat to take or what magic item to get and what to do in combat. Which is cool.

LostSoul said:

I guess I meant meaningful choices. So if there is a story out there, and it is already written, there's no way you can make meaningful choices.

You might be able to pick from dungeon1 and dungeon2, but there's no point in going into that dungeon (edit: there's no meaningful choice being made), since when you come out it won't have mattered either way. Things will be just the same, the plot will have advanced on its schedule, chug-chug-chuging down railroad valley.

Unless, of course, you like dungeons just for the sake of dungeons, but then the whole story is just extra work that the DM is doing for himself. Then the choices are more about what feat to take or what magic item to get and what to do in combat. Which is cool.

Click to expand...

While I don't agree with everything you've posted on this thread, LostSoul, this is an excellent concern.

You are describing the difference between plot-driven and character-driven adventures. Dungeon-crawling is location-based, but can be part of either kind of campaign, or just be part of a dungeon-hopping campaign that fuels the tastes of wargamers and miniature players.

You as a player are obligated to tell your DM, you want to play in a character-driven adventure where your character can impact the world (and I would certainly intend to address this in the book). And your DM is obligated to say... well, that's not going to happen in this campaign, but I'll try it next time... or whatever his response is.

I've said goodbye to all sorts of gamers in my time who couldn't handle the character-driven campaign (which by the way is what I predominately run). Some people like being pulled by the nose (event-driven), or sitting back and letting the NPCs' quests for power take hold (plot-driven).

Anyway. Your concern is valid, but not every DM is going to be receptive to your play style. And not every DM is receptive to min-maxing, either.

Good posts, today.

LostSoul said:

How about this: "I was a farmer. Today I went home and saw my wife being taken by orcs!"

DM: "Okay, you're going to hunt rats in the sewers."

Player: "That's lame, but if I don't follow his plot like this book says, I'll be doing something wrong."

Click to expand...

DM (thinking): Okay, I've written a few sessions worth of NPCs and encounters. Soon the players will discover that their sleepy little town is actually the secret home of the Bandit King. Will they crusade to stop him, or join his band of ruffians? This should be exciting. But first, it's into the sewers to fight some rats and discover evidence of intrigue brewing...

DM: Okay, do you have your characters ready?

Player 1: I'm Bob the Wizard. I guess I'm probably the apprentice of the local wizard or something, and I've got dreams of becoming a powerful diviner and learning the secrets of the universe, particularly the outer planes.

DM: That's cool. Sure, you're the apprentice of old McGillicuddy the wizard. (notes down bit about outer planes for higher-level stuff)

Player 2: I'm Fred the Cleric. I serve Heironius and I aspire to join a holy order of protectors of the crown under the banner of the god of valour.

DM: Okay, there's a temple just outside of town you can be from. (makes a note to think up a holy protector prestige class with associated NPC organization)

Player 3: I'm Tom the Fighter. Some orcs carried off my wife this morning and we have to go save her, now!

DM: Uh, well, actually I don't think there are any orcs in the area...

Player 3: No, there are orcs. It says so in my character background, now you all have to come help me fight them! My wife is kidnapped. Do you want the orcs to kill her?

Players 1 & 2: Hey, nobody asked us if we wanted to fight orcs!

DM: I don't have anything like that prepared. You see there are these rats...

Player 3: *siiiigh* Okay, whatever. I guess you don't care about what I want to do. Your plot is lame. I hate this. Why can't I do what I want to? You're a crappy DM!

A bit overwrought, but the point is, it's a two way street. The DM has to do actual work to prepare sessions and put together a game. Some people can just wing it, making it up as they go along. That kind of DM is great if you want to just wander off and see what kind of adventures you stumble across. But most of them do things like write up statblocks, prepare encounters, and come up with overarching plots so that the events of the campaign hold together with some kind of sense.

Prep time is a big issue. That's why lots of people rely on modules. Of course modules are even more limited in player freedom, but how many people come on these boards and fondly remember White Plume Mountain or Temple of Elemental Evil? Quite bit more than complain that the DM wouldn't let them leave Hommlet and go gallivanting off into Geoff instead of stopping the evil freakin' temple from summoning a demon queen.

NCSUCodeMonkey said:

That, sir, is pure and utter genius. All of it. I've never seen it said quite so well before.

NCSUCodeMonkey

Click to expand...

Well, thank you!

Barak said:

Here's a few things I'd like to see in that book, with examples!

-If the DM allows something out of the ordinary for you, don't whine about your choice afterwards.

I had a player who wanted to play a Watcher. Really badly. That's some dumb half-gargoyle-half-dwarf race from some book. I looked it over. It was alright. I warned the player "Fine. But you -do- realize that it's a +2 ECL race, right? Your Hit points are gonna suck bad." Player said yes. Two game sessions later, he's whining that his character has too few hit points, and should get 4d8 more Hit points, because gargoyles have Hit Dice. Ugh. Next time you ask me for something weird, you're getting a no, buddy.

-If the game is ongoing, and requires something specific to get your new character in, take that into consideration.

I'm running the WLD. In that setting, the characters don't get out. They don't visit towns. When a character dies, the player's new character will have to go/be on the dungeon on his own. So if you make your character, and I rack my brains to get your character where the party is, don't tell me "oh no, my character would -never- go there." 'Cause, well that won't work.

Click to expand...

I wanted to highlight this post for two reasons: (1) I agree with both points, and (2) I want to clue you all in on the fact that Barak is an excellent player who knows how to create a good background, IMHO.

Barak is a player in a d20 Modern game that I'm GMing, a military adventure campaign. Knowing that his character would be fighting in an environment where just about everyone carries rifles, machine guns, or grenades, he chose to create a character with above average brawling skills, a former boxer dodging some bad choices that put him on the wrong side of the law.

Barak didn't expect me to change the engagements (encounters) specifically so that his character could show off his right hook - in fact, he said that he knew his character wasn't optimized for the kind of combat most prevalent in our game, but that it made the most sense for the character to have those skills and feats. He also said that perhaps the character could find time off-duty to do a little amateur boxing - at the outset of the game I encouraged the players to consider ways in which their characters would spend their leave time and suggested that we could create opportunities to roleplay these activities.

Without knowing it at the time he created the character, Barak's character background played directly into a number of encounters that I planned for the game, and I was able to use material from his character backstory to expand on those encounters. Note that I didn't create these encounters with Barak's character in mind - rather the background was specific enough to understand the character's motivations while general enough that I could then tie it into encounters already planned.

This to me is how a good character background influences both character creation and campaign development: mechanics are a function of character concept, and background is used to tie the character to the game-world, not as a source of encounters or plot hooks directed at that character.

I'm mostly replying at this point to get subscribed to this very interesting thread. I'll have to catch up on where it's gone when I get back from out of town.

If I was going to sum up player advice into a few short sentences, they'd be these:

* Look for ways to "buy in" to the story rather than ways to "opt out".

* When your "thing" comes up (like combat for the Buttkicker or intense roleplaying for the Method Actor) embrace it fully. That's why the GM put it in there.

* When somebody else's "thing" comes up, let them enjoy it. And maybe even try to take pleasure in a friend being happy. Don't crap on it by acting as bored as possible in the hopes that the GM will hurry up and get back to something you're interested in.

* Tell the GM the things that you really enjoyed about the session. And tell him the things that you didn't care for so much. But understand that those two categories might be reversed for another player.

Dr. Awkward said:

A bit overwrought, but the point is, it's a two way street. The DM has to do actual work to prepare sessions and put together a game. Some people can just wing it, making it up as they go along. That kind of DM is great if you want to just wander off and see what kind of adventures you stumble across. But most of them do things like write up statblocks, prepare encounters, and come up with overarching plots so that the events of the campaign hold together with some kind of sense.

Click to expand...

A bit overwrought, but funny.

No, you're right, of course; it is a two-way street. Player 3 made a few "errors" that would keep him from enjoying the game.

He didn't tell the other players or the DM about his background before he created the character.

He was completely unwilling to compromise.

He wasn't willing to see where things were leading.

If I was the DM, I'd say, "Okay, the orc took her to the sewers! Unfortunately, it's plagued by rats and worse. So maybe Tom goes to find Bob, a Wizard, and Fred, a cleric, who can help him out. And that orc? He had a red armband. You can make a Knowledge (local) or Gather Information check to find out what that's all about."

Now maybe I didn't have any orcs statted up, but I can change one of the NPCs into an orc without too many problems.

jim pinto said:

While I don't agree with everything you've posted on this thread, LostSoul, this is an excellent concern.

Click to expand...

I haven't agreed with everything you've posted on this thread, but I agree with everything in your last post.

There's a lot of good stuff in this thread.