Keeping control of your game while keeping illusion of liberty

The Grumpy Celt said:

That is the lie to the players – people who are spending their time with you. That is the contempt of the players. ...

Click to expand...

You are grumpy.

buzz said:

I can sympathize with this when a primary goal is immersion. What I (and I think some others) are trying to say, though, is that if you do some talking before the game gets going, all of this herding technique and OOC talking stuff should not be necessary.

Click to expand...

Perhaps I misunderstood. The things you're talking about here I consider to be very good ideas indeed.

Dishnonesty Sucks

Of course DM's can "lie in the role of an NPC", can maintain that across the ocean live giants when that's not so but is what everyone in the world thinks etc.

But to lie about the game's premise - about how much impact Player and Character action and choice can have, is to trick Players, to make their choices meaningless instead of being honest with them as many posts above suggest, that's just wrong. If the game is a linear progression of scenes, let them know that, let them know time spent looking for "the other entrance to dungeon" is always wasted. They'll figure it out anyway, get to the part of play people enjoy. If people can't enjoy a "high GM lead/prepped campaign", then they need to find a table that doesn't play that way.

I explain tabletop RPG's to people who know about video game's etc. precisely as, "Imagine that instead of being limited to the choices the program designer allowed for, the objectives they thought your character should have, even "who your character really is" - you could play a game where because it's all done live with real people anything is possible, no option is unavailable simply because it wasn't foreseen? You can define your own goals and objectives, together with other players, and then have adventures that fit your character and interests?"

The chasm, the swamp etc. are good "in game mechanisms" for encouraging play in certain directions but have to be coupled with willingness to say "guys, I havent worked up any notes on what's beyond them". Otherwise, some players will see that chasm and hear "it's uncertain what's across it" as the "call to adventure - Gee, let's focus on getting to other side, because being the ones to do it will be cool".

High prep-requirement games require lots of GM planning (e.g., high level 3.5 play) and players who want to play in that system have to accept you don't spring a curve on the GM midway through a game night and suddenly expect him to have an encounter prepped for it.

phindar said:

Throwing up an impassable mountain range or a quarantined plague zone is a major campaign addition, its something that's going affect all their future actions (and it presumes that the GM hasn't already laid out the general terrain). It seems like having an impassable mountain range (or whatever) show up when you need it and then never be a factor again would be a bigger hit to verisimilitude than simply saying, "I haven't prepped that," or running a smaller encounter to eat up the rest of the session.

Click to expand...

Of course if you throw up a mountain range in mid-session or put up a quarantine for no reason it will look weird... That doesn't mean that you can't prepare your map features so that it serves as a kind of boundary or buffer zone between your adventures. For example, if the Lord of the Rings was a campaign, I would have had no problems putting that army of orcs between the mountains and putting an avalanche in the mountain pass if I already had the Moria prepared, Moria is much cooler than walking slowly in a valley to reach the other side of the mountains.

Also, I have often been in the situation that I had to run games after games (3-4 sessions a week) because my players wanted so much to play and I was the only one who wanted to be the GM. In that situation, I sometimes had one dungeon prepared and the directions to lead them for their next adventure but nothing else prepared yet. Sometimes, the players had the time to finish my prepared adventure and where already on their way to the next adventure and throwing up some special terrains (that fits with normal geology) along with some random encounters was often useful to slow them down just enough so that they didn't start a dungeon I had a cool idea for but no prep at all. There are some places that I have no problems at all at improvising (wilderness) and some places where I want to be prepared (important dungeons and bosses).

I don't like "railing" my PCs but I did lift and steal the Monte Cook system of a GM Intrusion where I offer a Hero Point (Like Inspiration) to the Player if the accept the GM intrusion. My intrusion can be a clue or a narrative direction. The play can always refuse but even if they refuse it shines a light on the situation.

I disagree entirely with the premise behind the article. It's a matter of playstyle, but for my playstyle, giving pcs the illusion that they are free to choose while robbing them of the ability to actually make meaningful choices and deal with the consequences thereof largely misses the point of the game.

Cyberdrake said:

There's a new article called "Campaign Control: Keeping Them on a Leash" that helps Game Masters to keep the players in the plotted area while keeping the illusion of freedom to the players.

Click to expand...

That link keeps taking me to a popup add

Um, this thread is over a decade old. You're largely responding to forum ghosts.

LostSoul said:

While I don't like the advice personally, I could see how the DM saying "Sorry, you can't go there" would ruin the game for some people.

I don't think the solution is to limit their actions, however. I think the solution lies in two parts:

1. Get the players to tell you, in advance, what their character's goals are. That way you can prep for them.

Click to expand...

This is the bread and butter of my DMing style, assisted greatly by my players' roleplaying. Regardless of the system in which we're currently playing, I add a place for 'Short Term Goal' and 'Long Term Goal' for the characters. I work with the players to set these up ahead of time, and give me ample opportunity to prepare all manner of random endeavors in which the characters are likely to participate. Moreover, when a short term goal is achieved, I reward the player a little bit, and when the long term goal is achieved, the reward is significantly larger.

This helps me avoid the very situation the author is perilously planning against.

scoolio said:

I don't like "railing" my PCs but I did lift and steal the Monte Cook system of a GM Intrusion where I offer a Hero Point (Like Inspiration) to the Player if the accept the GM intrusion. My intrusion can be a clue or a narrative direction. The play can always refuse but even if they refuse it shines a light on the situation.

Click to expand...

Rise! Rise! I command! You have only been dead for 11 years, you can still breath again!