D&D 5E The importance to "story" of contrivance

pemerton · Dec 5, 2016

DMMike said:
I really appreciate the efforts of GMs to leave as much agency as possible to their players, but players don't always make decisions that will lead to an exciting story - which is more memorable than a contrivance-free session.

I think this is an important point - perhaps even the crux of the matter, as far as RPGing is concerned.

"Scene-framing" approaches to play make a very big emphasis between the "way into" the moment of dramatic contrivance - which, roughly, is under GM control - and the "way out" of that moment, which is a result of resolving whatever actions the players declare for their PCs.

Maintaining this distinction between "ways in" and "ways out" requires further things to be thought about - eg how mechanical resolution relates to the ingame passage of time.

steenan · Dec 6, 2016

In some systems, players can create dramatic contrivances too. That only requires giving them a metagame tool for it (or just a GM open to player's authorial input).

An example from the Exalted campaign I'm currently running:

PCs are in a city of Nexus, which is guarded by a powerful and mysterious creature known as Emissary. They are drinking coffee with Five Days Darkness (one of the gods) and discussing matters of philosophy and cosmology with him. They have already made a peaceful contact with Emissary earlier (some business matters).
At some point in the conversation a question is asked that, as one of my players feel, may be very relevant to the Emissary. She hands me a fate point, points to the city aspect that described the Emissary and says "That would be a perfect moment for him to come here for some reason, and hear that just before knocking at the door".

I wouldn't thought about it myself - but it created a great moment in fiction and started a fun story arc.

pemerton · Dec 6, 2016

steenan said:
In some systems, players can create dramatic contrivances too. That only requires giving them a metagame tool for it (or just a GM open to player's authorial input).

In my 4e games I tend to handle this via skill checks (eg Streetwise for fortuitous meetings). Not an especially elegant solution, but it doesn't come up that often - I mostly just use GM fiat in response to players' expressed interests.

Eg One of the PCs has, from his first appearance in the campaign at 3rd level, been part of The Order of the Bat, a mostly drow secret society of Corellon worshippers dedicated to undoing the sundering of the elves. (In case you're wondering, yes, the PC is a drow and the player made up this particular bit of backstory!) The first time the PCs met some elvish NPCs - surface elves, not drow - the player of the drow PC declared that he was making the secret sign of The Order of the Bat, hoping to achieve recognition from the captain of the elves. I can't remember if I called for any sort of role or merely fiated it - I think the latter - but in any event the upshot was that the captain paid no attention to the signal, but the lieutenant noticed it, and gave the ritual response (if my memory of fiating it is correct, my reasoning will have been that a secret alliance with the captain might be a bit too good, but with the lieutenant was useful without being too good). The player was then able to have the lieutenant take a dragon's tooth so that it could be forged into a Wyrmtooth Blade - not a power up (just part of the usual treasure parcel system) but creating an in-fiction rationale for how such an item could be acquired.

In MHRP, meeting a helpful contact simply requires paying a plot (= fate) point, and grants a bonus die to the pool if relevant. Meeting enemies is handled by the GM!

In Burning Wheel, fortuitous encounters are handled via the Circles mechanic. In the example I gave in my OP, after seeing the arrival of the holy man Bernard's ship the player of the rot-afflicted PC made a Circles check to meet a cleric in his entourage and succeeded, and hence encoutnered his childhood friend Jessica (who had gone off to religious training when the PC went off to mage training) among the holy man's entourage. (If the Circles check is failed, the GM is entitled to introduce a hostile NPC instead - and it was a failed Circles check in the campaign's first session that established the PC's nemesis. This sort of thing is what makes BW a harder, grittier game than something like 4e.)

Mishihari Lord · Dec 6, 2016

I very much dislike excessive contrivance in fiction, whether it be a movie, novel, or RPG session. Someone famous said that in SF you get one impossibility free, any others you have to work for. For me at least, coincidence is similar: I'm willing to accept an extremely unlikely event as the basis of a story, but an additional one makes my suspension of disbelief start to go.

As an example, I recall two movies about climbing Mount Everest. In the first, every single bad thing that can happen when mountain climbing happened in a single climb. In the second, the coincidence was that a climb was hit by a freakishly bad storm, but everything else was a reasonable extension of that event (It was based on a true story. Dunno if that factors in somehow). In the first movie, I became disconnected with about the third disaster: "Really, an avalanche now? I suppose there's going to be a meteor strike next ..." The second kept me engaged until the end.

And if there must be a contrived event, I strongly prefer that it be very early in the adventure or a background even before the adventure starts. That way players' plans are less likely to be affected, and there's not such a feeling of a dues ex moment.

Schmoe · Dec 6, 2016

pemerton said:
Or think about even a small scene in Casablanca: when Rick engineers things so that the young lovers win money on his gambling table. The opportumity for Rick to undergo this emotional transformation (from disengaged to engaged) occurs more-or-less simultaneously with the call upon him to decide the bigger questions of the film.

I agree that contrivance is important to a story. However, sometimes the opportunity is a reflection of changes in the characters, rather than the actual opportunity for the changes in characters. In the Casablanca example, I would expect that Rick had opportunities to become engaged pretty much every week. However, it was only important to him as he was faced with bigger questions and forced to action, and thus was only a part of the story when such things happened.

Same as in a game, there are opportunities all around, constantly, many more than a DM can relate. However, sometimes the opportunities only become relevant and thus part of the story because of how the story and the characters have developed up to that point. In some ways I think it's an important part of DMing to keep introducing opportunities that are relevant to current developments and thus help continue the current story.

Gardens & Goblins · Dec 6, 2016

I find a lot of things about the 'traditional' fantasy adventuring group contrived, as well as much of the content of fantasy creatures. While I've experimented with purely organic event development, I've found that a little mix of contrivance can make all the difference - know how and when to do it 'right', to my mind, is the difference between simulating and entertaining.

My lot want to be entertained first thing, last thing. I'd argue that simulating is the easier of the two, simply have the players push and the world push back. But entertaining? Carefully using contrivance in conjuncture with gently hooking players, knowing when and how to nudge without pushing and giving the characters and the world room to breathe and grow organically - that's an art. A skill. Makes a DM into a Great DM.

Greg Benage · Dec 6, 2016

kalil said:
Ensuring that contrivances happens would be anathema to my style of gaming and DMing. The entire charm of roleplaying (imho ofc) lies in player driven actions and the table conversation of player action <-> DM reaction. Thus the very concept of contrievances goes out the window for me and my group.

pemerton said:
Can you elaborate, because I'm not sure I see the connection.

For instance, the GM decides that the moment the cultists' ritual culminates is the precise moement the PCs kick in the door. This is a contrivance of the sort I'm talking about.

I'm almost certain you recognize that some folks prefer not to play this way, and why.

Some GMs develop a timeline for the cultists' ritual. This timeline can be as simple or as complex as the GM likes. For example, the timeline may just assume that everything will go off without a hitch. Or, as another example, the timeline may factor in interference from NPCs the GM has planned. Then the GM adjusts the timeline as necessary if and when the PCs take actions that would impact it. Maybe the PCs manage to delay the ritual by stealing the sacrificial knife, forcing the cultists to try to get it back or acquire a new one. Or maybe the PCs actually accelerate the timeline by interfering with the NPCs the GM had expected to interfere with the ritual.

The downside of this approach is that the GM can't guarantee ahead of time the high drama of the PCs kicking in the door at the precise moment the cultists finish the ritual. The upside is that the story (or the dramatic question, or even whether there will be a dramatic question to be resolved) is driven by the players' decisions and the characters' actions, rather than by the GM ahead of time. The story (whatever it turns out to be) is therefore more unexpected; the dramatic questions with which the PCs are confronted are more unpredictable, as are the ways those dramatic questions can be resolved.

The PCs might bust in on the ritual just as it's completed. They might ID and kill the cult leader before the ritual even occurs. They might get there too late and have to deal with the aftermath. They might never get there at all (and have to deal with the aftermath).

Both are fine. Most GMs I know use both approaches to some degree. I would say that if a GM does use contrivances of this kind, just like good writers, he or she should endeavor to ground them in the narrative effectively well ahead of time, otherwise eyes will roll at the cultists' good sportsmanship in waiting for the heroes' arrival to complete the ritual.

Jeremy E Grenemyer · Dec 6, 2016

I don't like the word "contrivance" because--to me--it has a negative connotation. It's one step away from words like "excuse", and there's not much fun to be had from thinking that way when I am planning for a campaign.

For DMs that are just starting out, or that are breaking away from published adventures and scripting their own adventure arcs, the only way to learn how to create event sequences that lead from A to B to C (where C is a fun/interesting outcome) is by playing the game and seeing what works.

What I have learned over the last thirty-plus years at the gaming table is to not rely on a preset sequence of events. This does not mean I don't plot my adventures--of course I do that. What it means is that I try to assign a good portion of my mental bandwidth to thinking about what the NPCs and monsters that are in the same orbit as the players are doing.

And that means thinking about what the NPCs are doing in response to each other and the campaign world in general, and not solely about their reactions to player activity.

The payoff comes when events unfold in my campaigns that seem natural and not forced. Also when players make spontaneous decisions that later appear inspired once an encounter or adventure is over--and these are the things players remember and talk about in the months and years to come.

The trick is to keep NPCs/intelligent monsters simple. Sure, write up a long and detailed backstory if you must, but follow the advice in the 5E DMG and boil your NPCs down to a few basic motivations, and then stick to them during play no matter what.

Your players will love you for it.

pemerton · Dec 6, 2016

sanishiver said:
the only way to learn how to create event sequences that lead from A to B to C (where C is a fun/interesting outcome) is by playing the game and seeing what works.

What I have learned over the last thirty-plus years at the gaming table is to not rely on a preset sequence of events. This does not mean I don't plot my adventures--of course I do that.

<snip>

The trick is to keep NPCs/intelligent monsters simple. Sure, write up a long and detailed backstory if you must, but follow the advice in the 5E DMG and boil your NPCs down to a few basic motivations, and then stick to them during play no matter what.

Linking this to my reply to [MENTION=6685730]DMMike[/MENTION] upthread:

I don't plot adventures. I come up with a few ideas for possilbe NPCs, and perhaps locations - the latter are more important in D&D than other systems.

As far as NPCs are concerned, I'll have a basic idea of the NPC's place in the world, but not detailed motivations - those I work out more-or-less as Paul Czege describes here:

I frame the character into the middle of conflicts I think will push and pull in ways that are interesting to me and to the player. I keep NPC personalities somewhat unfixed in my mind, allowing me to retroactively justify their behaviors in support of this.

Herobizkit · Dec 7, 2016

pemerton said:
For instance, the GM decides that the moment the cultists' ritual culminates is the precise moement the PCs kick in the door. This is a contrivance of the sort I'm talking about. Or, in the example I gave, the PC at the same time has to decide how to confront his demon-possessed brother, and how to seek the help of a holy man who has arrived in town to officiate at the wedding of the PC's nemesis.

The GM setting things up like this is a springboard for player-driven actions. Whereas your post seems to assume, or imply, that it poses some sort of obstacle.

In fiction, Antagonists are generally proactive and Protagonists are generally reactive.

But wouldn't it be a nice twist if, say, the Heroes arrive on the scene of the ritual EARLY? It's not as dramatic, per se, but maybe the bad guys just didn't get their plans in line and the Heroes got the jump on them. This is something I rarely see in D&D games.