Whatever happened to all the adventurous heroes?

[Storm Raven]

Yes, I realize there were limits to what he could do. But if this were a "typically expected" D&D campaign it would run something like:

Player: Hmm. That's interesting. How does the political system work? I should work on making some contacts so I'll have an easier time when I ascend.

You mean like serving in Gondor's army, fighting alongside the king of Gondor's most important ally (on multiple different occasions), spending time studying with the foremost scholar of the world, and establishing ties with one of the most powerful wizards in the world? Or establishing ties with the King of the most powerful nation of wood elves left in Middle Earth? Or patrolling the northern regions fighting to quell threats from Gondor's greatest enemies?

or...

Player: What exactly does the prophecy say? Maybe I should find out more clues about this.

Like, for example, consulting with the wisest of the wizards, and spending time living among the community elves that was ruled by an oracle and loremaster?

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

Quasqueton, out of curiosity - how much prompting did they need for the rest of them to follow the fighter?



Wrt Aragorn: I think the normal PC reaction would be to pick Favoured Enemy: Dark Lords of Mordor, then try to kill Sauron and steal his stuff.

 

[Steverooo]

Goodness, gracious! Have you ever read the books?

I don't know about all the Tolkien characters jumping at the chance to adventure.

You're right, Fatty Bolger didn't... Merry, Pippin, and Sam did. Aragorn was in the middle of an adventure when he did. Boromir pushed Faramir out of the way to. Legolas and Gimli just "happened" to be in the right place at the right time, and willingly joined the Nine Walkers.

Aragon was shirking his duty to become king for a long time. Granted, what he ended up doing wasn't worthless, but the most heroic thing for him to do would be attain his rightful place at the throne. Yes, it's also true that before wasn't the time for it, but from what I remember he wasn't thinking "The catalyst for me to attain the throne hasn't occured yet," it was more like "My ancentors really messed things up; am I doomed to repeat their failure?"

Pshaw, Sir! Aragorn was a shirker ne'er a day in his life! He was hunted by Sauron (who had long sought to wipe out the line of Elendil), and used secrecy to his advantage... until it was advantageous to reveal himself to Sauron (through the Palantir of Orthanc) at the battle of Helm's Deep!

Aragorn could have tried to claim kingship of Gondor and Arnor, and been turned down, just as one of his anscestors was, after the death of King Arvedui. This would have helped no one, and revealed Aragorn to Sauron, who would then have sought to wipe him out.

Instead, after his father's death, he was raised by Elrond, who didn't reveal his heritage until he turned 21. He began by riding with Elrond's sons, Elladan and Elrohir, in their long war against the Orcs. He protected Bree and the Shire, even getting up into the Trollshaws, on occasion, served with the cavalry of King Thengel in Rohan, then, when Denethor's father sought good men to replenish Gondor's waning strength after the War of the Kin-strife, Aragorn went to Gondor, where he served in the army & navy as Thorongil, for many years. It was probably there that he met Gandalf.

After many years, he went to Ecthelion (Denethor's father) and told him that the ever-growing power of Pelargir was bothering him, and the Steward gave him permission, and a fleet, to break the power of the Corsairs (this is important because, if they existed in LotR, they would have backed up Umbar, which Aragorn and the dead had to sack in order to break the siege of Gondor).

He did, then left the service of Gondor, and went into Mordor... We're not told why, but I suspect that Gandalf had him tracking Gollum, by this point. We know that he did search Mordor for Gollum, at some point, but only picked up his trail on the return trip.

He also went far into the east (possibly during the wars against the Balchoth and/or Wainriders), and far into "the south, where the stars are strange". He learned much about not only the friendly kingdoms and their arts, but also the hearts of men, and unfriendly kingdoms and their arts, as well.

We're also told that he helped Gandalf on many unnamed adventures, and had even been into Khazad-Dum before the LotR, for some reason (and didn't want to go back). He mentions that "the enemy has set traps for me, before", and knew much about the Nazgul.

Sorry, no shirking, there. He knew Gondor was weak, and that revealing himself would draw all Sauron's might. He waited until The One Ring was revealed, and on its way to be destroyed, and Denethor was dead. Then he revealed himself to Sauron (to draw him away from Frodo), and assumed the kingship only after Boromir, and Denethor had been lain to rest, Faramir had acknowledged him, and the people had had time to accept him.

Frodo wasn't hopping to deliver the ring to Mt. Doom. Sure he had a bit of wanderlust, but it still took him several decades and then Gandalf telling him to leave that got him out of the house. Otherwise he might have lived out his days in the shire without incident. And eventually he only took the ring because he knew there was no other option.

Again, pshaw! It didn't take several decades! Gandalf didn't know that the ring was The One until he found the scroll of Isildur in Minas Tirith, and tested Frodo's (Bilbo's) ring in the fire. From there, it was less than a year (and Frodo would have gone sooner, had Barliman Butterburr ever remembered to post Gandalf's letter)!

Frodo was also VERY proactive! He made plans to slip away from the Shire (fooling everyone but Merry & Pippin... and maybe Fatty). He also took steps to leave the rest of the fellowship near Rauros, and go into Mordor, alone (but Sam was wise to that)!

It's been a while so did Boromir even want to go to the elves? Or was he basically forced to because his younger brother wanted to go and so the king, to spite him, sent Boromir instead? It's possible he was jumping to go, but I seem to remember he thought the whole trip was a waste of time. (Again, please correct me if I'm wrong, it's been a while.)

Faramir was the one receiving prophetic dreams, but Boromir pushed him aside, and went, instead. Yes, he was rarin' ta go!

Each (or most of them at any rate) of the adventurer's advocated running at some point in time. Being heroic doesn't mean being suicidal or even being aggressive necessarily.

In my mind, the adventurers are heroes because of their dedication to the fellowship. This is what unites them and motivates them. They are heros because they must be for the sake of their fellowship. I believe that if the fellowship hadn't been formed, the hobbits would have lived their life out in the shire, Aragon would have wandered the land as a ranger, Boromir would have become the king of his kingdom etc etc.

The Hobbits would have stayed home, true enough. Aragorn would have become King, or Gondor (and the Shire) would have fallen. Boromir might have TRIED to become King, but wiser heads would have prevailed.

If adventure never presented itself to your PCs, they wouldn't be heroes, either, in most cases. Not many go wandering off, SEARCHING for danger!

When you start out a campaign and don't have ties formed between the individuals, I wouldn't be surprised that their motivation is to look out for themself, and I don't think that's a problem. If you get through several sessions and this remains the case, however, I do think that the campaign will suffer.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Aagh! The movie has ruined you.

I don't know about all the Tolkien characters jumping at the chance to adventure.

Aragon was shirking his duty to become king for a long time. Granted, what he ended up doing wasn't worthless, but the most heroic thing for him to do would be attain his rightful place at the throne. Yes, it's also true that before wasn't the time for it, but from what I remember he wasn't thinking "The catalyst for me to attain the throne hasn't occured yet," it was more like "My ancentors really messed things up; am I doomed to repeat their failure?"

This is true in the movie. Not in the book. In the book, Aragorn was not shirking a duty to become king but was rather waiting for a time when he could become king without starting a civil war. (Indeed, he might have been able to pull off becoming king when Denethor became the steward but chose to leave Gondor for the north after his victory over the corsairs of Umbar. Denethor, as he intimated to Gandalf, would have fought to keep the throne even if he wouldn't ever take up the title of king).

Frodo wasn't hopping to deliver the ring to Mt. Doom. Sure he had a bit of wanderlust, but it still took him several decades and then Gandalf telling him to leave that got him out of the house. Otherwise he might have lived out his days in the shire without incident. And eventually he only took the ring because he knew there was no other option.

So far, so good. Frodo indeed, was a sort of reluctant hero. Still, his reluctance was that of inertia rather than a kind of active reluctance. He wanted to go visit the elves and to have adventures since he was a lad but he loved the shire too (as Bilbo noted when he decided not to ask Frodo to go with him). So, he was the kind of guy who was always planning to have grand adventures but never got around to it rather than the kind of guy who shuddered at the thought of adventure. Bilbo was a respectable hobbit prior to his adventures. Frodo was less staid.

It's been a while so did Boromir even want to go to the elves? Or was he basically forced to because his younger brother wanted to go and so the king, to spite him, sent Boromir instead? It's possible he was jumping to go, but I seem to remember he thought the whole trip was a waste of time. (Again, please correct me if I'm wrong, it's been a while.)

That's the basic picture given by the movie. In the book, however, Boromir wanted to go and seek the meaning of his brother's dream, viewing it as a grand quest and a chance for adventure. Of all the characters in the Lord of the Rings, Boromir was probably the most likely to kick in a door rather than open it, to open a tomb and explore it to see what was inside, etc.

Each (or most of them at any rate) of the adventurer's advocated running at some point in time. Being heroic doesn't mean being suicidal or even being aggressive necessarily.

Quite right. Although, you'll notice that Aragorn and Boromir both shared a conception of honor that meant they would have been much more daring (for instance staying to help Gandalf on the Moria bridge), had it not been their duty to safeguard the hobbits and the ring.

In my mind, the adventurers are heroes because of their dedication to the fellowship. This is what unites them and motivates them. They are heros because they must be for the sake of their fellowship. I believe that if the fellowship hadn't been formed, the hobbits would have lived their life out in the shire, Aragon would have wandered the land as a ranger, Boromir would have become the king of his kingdom etc etc.

Well, assuming that the world had basically held still, the hobbits might have gotten around to visiting Bilbo in Rivendell but likely would have gone no further. And the other Fellowship members would have continued to have individual adventures. If Boromir died before becoming Steward or died without an leaving an heir and Faramir became Steward, Aragorn might have sent his claim to the throne of Gondor and become king. He would not have done so with either Denethor or Boromir as Steward because they would not have yielded the throne. Whether or not he claimed the throne, though, he would have had adventures tracking down servants of Sauron across the land, joining the Rohirrim and riding with their warriors until he became a trusted captain, possibly even earning rank in the service of Gondor under some disguise or pseudonym.

Boromir would have been a great war leader in Gondor and would likely have had a lot of adventures but of a different kind.

Gandalf had lots of adventures before he was a part of the Fellowship and he would have continued to have them--they just would have been less epic.

Legolas likely would have had a fair number of minor adventures in the Mirkwood--he might have been involved in the capture of Dol Guldur, for instance.

Gimli--well, Gimli would probably have gone into Moria as a part of a dwarven scouting expedition to find out what happened to Balin and the colonists. He might even have survived.

When you start out a campaign and don't have ties formed between the individuals, I wouldn't be surprised that their motivation is to look out for themself, and I don't think that's a problem. If you get through several sessions and this remains the case, however, I do think that the campaign will suffer.

It doesn't have to damage a campaign, no. However, there are only two ways to get involved in an adventure:
To choose adventure
Or to have it thrust upon you unwillingly.
If players don't make characters who would choose adventure, the only way they will adventure is to be railroaded. It's that simple. Adventuring is like a ship. You can buy passage, or you can get shanghaied but one way or the other, you've got to get on the ship or you won't cross the sea. It's that simple.

 

[ThoughtBubble]

I find that I have a lot of problems with this as a DM. Most of my group can't come up with character backgrounds very well. The one who is good at developing background tends to always play at cross-purposes to the game, and creates backgrounds that are variations of "I'm an orphan without any friends."

The game that's gone pretty well for me had a couple of changes. One of the fellows played up to his archetypical role (the sneak/ranged attacker) and quickly fell into the game. Fighting 'evil' is good,b ecause it lets him take their stuff and show off his mad precision. We also got a new player who approaches things with a lot of wonder. Finally, I didn't invite the friendless orphan character's player to the game.

They're still not heroic, but they're much more motivatable.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Well, doing what needed to be done had something to do with it. Elrond's condition that he would not permit Arwen to marry anyone of lower position than the king of both Gondor and Arnor probably had something to do with it too.

And what was Aragorn's motivation to become king anyways? I firmly believe that he did it for Frodo and the fellowship, and not because he wanted to rise to power. He did what needed to be done.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I just started a new campaign. We started with the PCs not knowing each other, but are fellow passengers on a very large immigrant ship.

One night, the ship is awakened to thumps, bumps, and faint screams from the cargo hold. One PC is annoyed at having his sleep disturbed. One PC shows complete apathy to the event. One PC is frightened and hides under his blankets. The other PC at least shows interest enough to go investigate the problem---but this is mostly due to him being a guard for some of the freight stored in the hold (he only acts when paid to act).

I mentioned to the Players, if this is how their PCs react, then it is going to be a very short campaign.

Quasqueton

I can see why this happened. Something similar happened to me in a Modern campaign.

1) The GM didn't oversee character creation. In my group the GM (there are many of them, and I'm guilty of this too) usually lets in anything that isn't broken or stupid, so virtually every time we start a campaign the group doesn't get along?

My character joined the group when two members tried to kill him... until the GM threatened the world with magical explosion I was a reluctant adventurer. And this was a good campaign by a good GM. Engaging players simply isn't easy.

Did the characters get made up some days before the campaign started, or on the same day? The latter gives you less time to dodge.

2) Low-level characters are fragile. Even with the CR system, etc, low-level characters die at a fairly high rate. (Compare the damage a 2nd-level rogue can do with sneak attack compared to his hit points, and you'll see one reason why PCs don't always rush to the fore.)

And if they weren't all wearing armor... I mean, when I play an armored character I rarely wear armor in the sanctity of my room unless I have reason to fear assassins.

3) You'll need something more interesting than faint screams. My character would have gone to take a look... unless he thought there were guards to take care of it. Other characters might be less likely to do so.

PS I saw lots of reference to "your family is in trouble" etc in this thread (not from you, of course). Resist the temptation to rail-road the PCs that way-in DnD families are already a big weakness, even if they're not getting kidnapped. There's a good chance they'll say "I'm an orphan".

 

[BelXiror]

You said they'd been on the ship awhile, mingling?

If they didn't actually do anything, I would have had someone they know turn up dead the next day. Say the fighter or rogue was hitting on a pretty lady, and was one step from success...

Have little things like this happen. Show them that evil deeds don't go away if you ignore them. If they don't deal with something when they see/hear it, have it come back and bite them on the rear. Don't do this ALL the time, but try to illustrate that evil things are evil, and don't wait for the PC's to arrive to do evil things.

I always try and make somewhat proactive adventurers as characters. Particularly when there good characters, if theres evil afoot, it's gonna get a squishing .

Having curiosity as a character trait can really help toward getting adventures going.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

If players don't make characters who would choose adventure, the only way they will adventure is to be railroaded. It's that simple. Adventuring is like a ship. You can buy passage, or you can get shanghaied but one way or the other, you've got to get on the ship or you won't cross the sea. It's that simple.

Exactly. There are two ways to propel a campaign forward. Player-driven, by having active adventuring PCs, or DM-drivin, through railroading. Players who refuse to create active adventuring PCs and then complain about railroading need to wake up to reality. Not that that is the case here.

I think you're missing the point. Maybe your players DON'T WANT to be heroes. I've played in a campaign where the DM forced the PCs to be heroes- and all the players hated it and resented the railroading.

As E-B stated, you can't have it both ways. You can't play an unmotivated PC and not be railroaded. Nothing will happen.

And also, I think this statement illustrates another issue. It's important to remember that D&D is a game for the DM, too. Unless the DM is getting paid, he's there to have fun, same as everyone else. If the DM wants to run a heroic game, that has to be taken into consideration by the players. And if, after taking it into consideration, the DM won't have fun running a non-heroic game and the players won't have fun playing a heroic one, then it's time for someone else to take a shot at the DM's chair.

 

[Gothmog]

Exactly. There are two ways to propel a campaign forward. Player-driven, by having active adventuring PCs, or DM-drivin, through railroading. Players who refuse to create active adventuring PCs and then complain about railroading need to wake up to reality. Not that that is the case here.As E-B stated, you can't have it both ways. You can't play an unmotivated PC and not be railroaded. Nothing will happen.

Actually, thats not true. Non-heroic doesn't equal unmotivated. I've played in several campaigns where the PCs are adventuring and very active for very personal reasons, and the last thing on their mind is pursuing the "greater good". The railroading I'm speaking of involved a DM who, along with one player, decided they wanted the campaign to be heroic, and basically strongarmed the rest of the group into doing it by threatening imprisonment in the king's dungeon, retaliation from an enclave of wizards, and general guilt tripping. We hated being forced into heroics and saving the world- its easily the most miserable campaign I've ever played in.