Scenario starting points and PC's position in the gameworld

[pemerton]

I initially posted this on a thread on the 4e board, but thought it might be of more general interest. It's about framing mid-to-high level scenarios for D&D (or similar fantasy RPGs).

In 4e, once PCs reach 11th level they take on a paragon path - the PCs in my 4e game are a Demonskin Adept, a Warpriest of Moradin, a Questing Knight, a Radiant Servant and a Divine Philosopher. Other Paragon Paths include being a Knight Commander, a Kensai or Swordmaster, etc. As the names of these paths indicate, they bring with them fictional elements as well as mechanical elements. It's a bit like an AD&D fighter reaching name level and becoming a Lord has consequences for the fiction - the fighter can now become a noble and attract men-at-arms to his/her castle - as well as mechanical consequences.

Now Open Grave - the 4e undead sourcebook - has a fun little buried tower scenario called "Bloodtower on the Moorland", for 12th-level PCs. I've had a fondness for buried towers ever since Best of White Dwarf Scenarios 2, which has a mini-adventure in a tower buried in the desert, and I'm hoping to use this Open Grave one as part of the Vecna-cult plotline in my current game.

But as presented, the scenario begins in this way:

The PCs are visiting or passing through a city that lies near the moorland. While taking a meal at a local watering hole, they overhear a resident relating the following story.​

Now, what the hell is going on when 12-level PCs - Knight Commanders, Demonskin Adpets or whatever - are taking a meal at a local watering hole? As opposed to, for example, dining in the halls of the baron or the mayor! I regard this as yet another weakness in 4e adventure design - beside the inherent lameness of so many of the plot hooks, they tend to expressly contradict the game's default fictional content, which in relation to paragon tier PCs is as follows(PHB pp 28-29):

In the paragon tier, your character is a shining example of heroism, set well apart from the masses.. . the fate of a nation or even the world might hang in the balance as you undertake momentous quests... When you face a dragon, it is a powerful adult who has established a lair and found its place in the world. Again, much like you.​

In my view shining examples of heroism, on whose deeds the fate of the world turns, who have found their places in the world and who are set well apart from the masses, don't start their quests in a local watering hole (absent special circumstances of the Aragorn variety). In my view it is this sort of bad adventure writing, as much as if not more than the mechanical design, that leads to the suggestion that there is no "progression" in 4e, and that as they level the PCs just go through the same dungeons with bigger numbers.

(I should add: not all of 4e is like this. For example, the campaign arcs sketched in DMG2, the Planes Above and Below, Demonomicon and Underdark do show an awareness that changing tiers means changing the fiction in a way that matters to the play of the game.)

Does anyone else feel the way I do about this? Or do some not mind a game in which name-level PCs are still wandering the gameworld from inn to inn, essentially anonymous mercenaries? How important is it that the framing of scenarios reflect the change in status that is implicit in at least some aspects of level gain? I don't think these are questions limited to 4e (for example, one purpose of settings like Sigil and Union seem to be to rationalise the continuation of this sort of play into upper levels), although they are probably more pressing in 4e because so much of the game is meant to take place at these mid-to-high levels.

 

[Crothian]

This is very much campaign dependent. If the PCs go off to adventure in ancient temples but when they get back to town they don't tell stories or promote themselves then they probably will not be known no matter what level they get. Level does not equal famous; deeds do. And there needs to be a way for people to know about those deeds.

 

[Hussar]

And, to be fair, 10th or 11th level, while it is part of Paragon, you're just starting in.

But, yeah, find the adventure while having lunch in the color/animal inn is just lame. Lazy writing. By this point, the local lords should be guesting the PC's in honor of their fame. And, it's a much better way to invest the characters in the setting as well - it shows them that they're no longer just Joe with a Sword.

I would disagree with Crothian. By the time you've hit double digit levels, it would be very difficult not to be at least semi-famous (infamous). You've likely done several adventures by this time and that should be the baseline expectation in an adventure.

 

[pemerton]

This is very much campaign dependent. If the PCs go off to adventure in ancient temples but when they get back to town they don't tell stories or promote themselves then they probably will not be known no matter what level they get.

I would disagree with Crothian. By the time you've hit double digit levels, it would be very difficult not to be at least semi-famous (infamous).

Exploring this issue a bit more - where does the paragon path come from for a PC who doesn't engage with the outside world? Maybe the gods - even though no one back home has even heard of Friar Errol, angels sent by Pelor elevate him to the status of Radiant Servant. In this sort of situation, though, I would think it would be those same angels (or other sorts of divine portents) that would be sending the PCs off to their next adventure.

And even a PC who was bestowed with paragon-ness by some non-social agent - the gods, a demon prince, whatever - would still stand out, I think, in the local watering hole. This is someone who is wearing magical, probably masterwork armour; who is wearing a whole bevy of magical jewellery; and who is capable, at a pinch, of engaging meaningfully in negotiations with kings, dukes, angels and devils. I would have thought that blending in might be a skill challenge in itself (with Bluff, History and Streetwise as the most natural primary skills).

In my last campaign - Rolemaster set in fantasy East Asia - at one stage a god sent the PCs to a city (Freeport) expressly to find out what certain cultists were up to there (I ran a modified version of the Freeport trilogy for 15th+ level PCs). They were under instructions not to draw attention to themselves. This lasted for less than a day of gamtime, and less than a session of real time - only one (the fox spirit ranger/ninja) was particularly skilled at duping and disguise, while the first time the others were confronted with any sort of obstacle they revealed their mithril and adamantine weapons and/or used leadership and diplomatic skills that made it clear that they were serious guys who meant serious business.

I don't think it would be much different in D&D - unless a high level PC is successfully disgusing or bluffing, a few minutes interaction should be enough to give an NPC an inkling that this person is something other than a raw recruit.

 

[pemerton]

find the adventure while having lunch in the color/animal inn is just lame. Lazy writing. By this point, the local lords should be guesting the PC's in honor of their fame. And, it's a much better way to invest the characters in the setting as well - it shows them that they're no longer just Joe with a Sword.

Does this sort of plot hook stuff even serve any purpose? Does anyone use these plot hooks in their game?

I mean, if you're GMing a campaign and decide to add in this level 12 scenario, do you need the module author to give you this sort of segue? And if you decide to generate some 12th level PCs to do this thing as a one-shot, would you use this segue or just say "OK, people, you find yourselves looking across the moor at a half-buried tower"?

Is including these sorts of intros/plot hooks just a module-writing convention that WotC can't let go of?

 

[Mort]

Great point! (I'd give you xp but have to spread some around first)

The overhear something at a local watering hole is something that should be passé by the time characters get to 11th or so level (unless the DM is feeling he just hasn't gotten that particular cliché out of the way and feels an urgent need to do so).

Lazy adventure design is exactly the right word for it. Now, I suppose there could be circumstances, the PCs are deliberately trying to go unnoticed, they are far from their normal area of influence, etc. But it should not be the default assumption.

You're also correct that this kind of situation can easily lead to a stagnant campaign. PC (and more importantly the players) need to feel a sense of accomplishment, it doesn't have to be world shattering (though often it should be, depending on campaign), but it should be there. If the PCs encounter the same adventure hook at 11th level that they did at levels 1-5 it can really take away from that sense.

In the last big campaign I ran (D&D 3e-3.5e) one of the things that went over best was the PCs obtaining land at about 10th level. The shift from wandering heroes to ruling nobility was 1) tangible 2) a big change of pace and perspective. If I had kept the same format as prior levels, I don't think the campaign would have progressed nearly as successfully as it did (finally concluding at 21+ level). The change allowed me to run completely different sets of adventures and challenges, ones that would not have made sense prior to the character’s shift in status – it was key to keeping things fresh both for the players and for me as the DM.

 

[The Shaman]

Does anyone else feel the way I do about this?

*waves hand overhead*

Yup, right here.

Or do some not mind a game in which name-level PCs are still wandering the gameworld from inn to inn, essentially anonymous mercenaries?

I like games where the adventurers' success is reflected in more than the plusses on their weapons or the spells in their spellbooks.

I think the 'building a stronghold' aspect of roleplaying games - putting down roots, building social status, et cetera - gets regrettably overlooked or pooh-poohed by some gamers.

How important is it that the framing of scenarios reflect the change in status that is implicit in at least some aspects of level gain?

I think it goes a long way toward shaping gamer expectations of what the game is 'about' and offering suggestions on how to approach and manage those changes.

I don't think these are questions limited to 4e (for example, one purpose of settings like Sigil and Union seem to be to rationalise the continuation of this sort of play into upper levels), although they are probably more pressing in 4e because so much of the game is meant to take place at these mid-to-high levels.

Traveller is often described as the game where the adventurers tool around in a crappy starship taking odd jobs or trading on the fringes of society, and while that may be true to some degree, it's also a game where characters may begin play as retired generals, admirals, diplomats, scientists, and so forth, and it's also a game where a heads-up crew, with a little luck and determination and an infusion of capital, can aspire to running a fleet of merchant starships, with factories on a dozen worlds - for me, this is the 'building a stronghold' point in Traveller.

In Flashing Blades, the career system includes the opportunity for players to climb to lofty heights of power and influence, as marshals of France, royal ministers, bishops and cardinals, investors, grand masters of knightly orders, members of the nobility, or chiefs of influential social clubs. Many of these positions come with perks: command of people and places, opportunities for graft, et cetera. They may also require the adventurer to invest in the setting; an archduke must possess at least one chateau, and a grand duke must possess two.

Even gunslingers in Boot Hill may earn a "reputation" for surviving gunfights; a man with a reputation raises the morale of npcs in his presence.

So no, I don't think this is limited to any version of D&D.

 

[pemerton]

The Shaman, your point about Traveller - and the social positioning that should attend some of those starting PCs - is a good one that I've not clearly thought about before. The only published Traveller scenarios I know are old ones from White Dwarf - The Sable Rose Affair is one that springs to mind - and a couple of old GDW ones that had two adventures printed with two front covers.

I don't remember any of these adventures talking about how a retired General or senior Diplomat might fit in.

On the stronghold issue, I'm not a big fan of the way that AD&D/Expert D&D handled it, because it tends to push the game too much in the direction of a war game, and also is very accounting-heavy (building costs, upkeep costs etc). As levels increase I don't particularly want to change the basic structure of the game - I'm still happy with travel, fighting, unmasking dark and mystical secrets, etc - but want the way in which these adventurous events connect the PCs to the gameworld, and reflect those connections, to develop.

 

[S'mon]

I agree with your criticism, I bought a lot of Goodman DCCs recently and the higher level ones definitely had this problem; they were just low-level adventures with bigger numbers. Often the monsters were even the same - random hobgoblin bandits who were 8th level skirmishers, that kind of thing.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I don't think it would be much different in D&D - unless a high level PC is successfully disgusing or bluffing, a few minutes interaction should be enough to give an NPC an inkling that this person is something other than a raw recruit.

I usually think of "level" in D&D as functioning a bit like "POW" in earlier versions of RuneQuest. High power was needed for strong magic, but the more you had, the more conspicuous you were.

If nothing else, it would be difficult for a high level PC (absent that bluff or disguise) to carry themselves such that they seemed less powerful. Body language can be very telling.