Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Defining Story
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Xetheral" data-source="post: 9256111" data-attributes="member: 6802765"><p>There are (at least) two different approaches to this type of campaign that avoid it ending up like an MMO. The first was already mentioned upthread: the PCs comes with their own built-in motivations that will give them purpose and direction, either throughout the campaign or simply long enough to encounter the existing conflict points and getting the ball rolling.</p><p></p><p>The second is saturation: the "potential conflict points" aren't scattered and a chore to find, they're <em>everywhere</em>, and avoiding them all would require active effort. (And if the PCs are trying to avoid all conflict that's either a fail state or, in niche cases, counts as bringing their own motivation.) And as long as few of the conflict points exist in isolation, the PCs engaging with even a handful of them creates a self-sustaining cycle of conflict.</p><p></p><p>Sure, the <em>original</em> conflict points were created by the DM, but the players got to choose which to engage with, and their choices determine, shape, and drive the subsequent conflict points. The resulting story is literally about "what the players choose to do", while simultaneously being rich in traditional story elements, despite lacking an advance DM-written plot.</p><p></p><p>(Unlike in an MMO, the density of conflict this approach requires is possible because the DM can generate and/or flesh out the speciffic conflicts the PCs decide to engage with and the follow-on conflicts, rather than having to program it all in in advance.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Being a good storyteller is still vitally important in games using either of the techniques I described above. In particular, ideally those points of conflict the DM is dropping into the setting are <em>interesting</em>, and designed in such a way that they'd be fun elements if included in a range of potential stories, whether they're engaged with by the PCs or not. For example, it takes good storytelling skills to craft a regional villain who would be a fun antagonist if opposed, a good rival/foil if tolerated, a complex ally if coopted, a memorable encounter if interacted with, and an enriching lore/setting element if never met.</p><p></p><p>And because this style of game requires a ton of improvisation, it helps to have sufficient storytelling skills to be able to do all that on the fly. Ideally one fills in the necessary immediate detail to respond to what the players are doing now, while leaving interestingly shaped voids to return to later if future player decisions make the new content play a different role in the emergent story than originally anticipated. (This usually comes up when players unexpectedly ask for background information about a setting element--you want to be able to create the relevant detail from a lore perspective while leaving interesting gaps that can be filled in if/when the party decides to further engage with that element.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>So it sounds like you prefer to make tactical choices about how to accomplish your character's goals rather than strategic choices among your character's competing priorities. Cool! The types of games you prefer are well-suited to that. For players who prefer a mix, or outright prefer the strategic side, a DM-driven story where it's their job to get the characters to the action isn't going to be able to provide what they're looking for, since it (almost by definition) can't be open-ended enough.</p><p></p><p></p><p>In my personal opinion, the best mysteries in RPGs don't end with figuring out "who"... they're instead just getting started! Longer-term, the more interesting questions are "why" and sometimes "how" and, ultimately, "even once you get those answers, what are you going to do about it?"</p><p></p><p>As an example, consider a murder mystery where the identity of the killer isn't hard to determine with the party's resources, but (1) the question about whether it was murder or self-defense doesn't have an objective answer, (2) there are competing jurisdictional claims complicating the definition of "justice", and (3) any decisions made regarding whether or how to accuse, expose, capture, or kill the perpetrator would carry political costs.</p><p></p><p>Edit: See [USER=6790260]@EzekielRaiden[/USER]'s post above for a much better and more specific example.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I disagree. In my example mystery above, it's easy (and arguably inevitable!) to have an emergent story that arises from the decisions of the players even though the DM knows all the factual answers beforehand.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Xetheral, post: 9256111, member: 6802765"] There are (at least) two different approaches to this type of campaign that avoid it ending up like an MMO. The first was already mentioned upthread: the PCs comes with their own built-in motivations that will give them purpose and direction, either throughout the campaign or simply long enough to encounter the existing conflict points and getting the ball rolling. The second is saturation: the "potential conflict points" aren't scattered and a chore to find, they're [I]everywhere[/I], and avoiding them all would require active effort. (And if the PCs are trying to avoid all conflict that's either a fail state or, in niche cases, counts as bringing their own motivation.) And as long as few of the conflict points exist in isolation, the PCs engaging with even a handful of them creates a self-sustaining cycle of conflict. Sure, the [I]original[/I] conflict points were created by the DM, but the players got to choose which to engage with, and their choices determine, shape, and drive the subsequent conflict points. The resulting story is literally about "what the players choose to do", while simultaneously being rich in traditional story elements, despite lacking an advance DM-written plot. (Unlike in an MMO, the density of conflict this approach requires is possible because the DM can generate and/or flesh out the speciffic conflicts the PCs decide to engage with and the follow-on conflicts, rather than having to program it all in in advance.) Being a good storyteller is still vitally important in games using either of the techniques I described above. In particular, ideally those points of conflict the DM is dropping into the setting are [I]interesting[/I], and designed in such a way that they'd be fun elements if included in a range of potential stories, whether they're engaged with by the PCs or not. For example, it takes good storytelling skills to craft a regional villain who would be a fun antagonist if opposed, a good rival/foil if tolerated, a complex ally if coopted, a memorable encounter if interacted with, and an enriching lore/setting element if never met. And because this style of game requires a ton of improvisation, it helps to have sufficient storytelling skills to be able to do all that on the fly. Ideally one fills in the necessary immediate detail to respond to what the players are doing now, while leaving interestingly shaped voids to return to later if future player decisions make the new content play a different role in the emergent story than originally anticipated. (This usually comes up when players unexpectedly ask for background information about a setting element--you want to be able to create the relevant detail from a lore perspective while leaving interesting gaps that can be filled in if/when the party decides to further engage with that element.) So it sounds like you prefer to make tactical choices about how to accomplish your character's goals rather than strategic choices among your character's competing priorities. Cool! The types of games you prefer are well-suited to that. For players who prefer a mix, or outright prefer the strategic side, a DM-driven story where it's their job to get the characters to the action isn't going to be able to provide what they're looking for, since it (almost by definition) can't be open-ended enough. In my personal opinion, the best mysteries in RPGs don't end with figuring out "who"... they're instead just getting started! Longer-term, the more interesting questions are "why" and sometimes "how" and, ultimately, "even once you get those answers, what are you going to do about it?" As an example, consider a murder mystery where the identity of the killer isn't hard to determine with the party's resources, but (1) the question about whether it was murder or self-defense doesn't have an objective answer, (2) there are competing jurisdictional claims complicating the definition of "justice", and (3) any decisions made regarding whether or how to accuse, expose, capture, or kill the perpetrator would carry political costs. Edit: See [USER=6790260]@EzekielRaiden[/USER]'s post above for a much better and more specific example. I disagree. In my example mystery above, it's easy (and arguably inevitable!) to have an emergent story that arises from the decisions of the players even though the DM knows all the factual answers beforehand. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Defining Story
Top