Do you prefer your character to be connected or unconnected to the adventure hook?

[Dannyalcatraz]

No preference. Nice if it happens, but I’m not hung up in it.

 

[Aldarc]

It doesn't do anything to rule out the premise of "There are goblins in a nearby cave"; or any other adventure along that line. The most probable explanation for that event is simply that there are a lot of caves full of goblins.

It also doesn't rule out most adventure premises that don't involve the PCs specifically. If someone's brother was kidnapped by ninjas, and the PCs are the only ones nearby who are capable of dealing with it, then that isn't particularly unlikely; while ninja kidnappings aren't exactly common, there are a lot of potential targets for them in the world, and the PCs are often the most capable people in any region they travel. If the ranger's brother is kidnapped by ninjas, then the most likely explanation is that the GM is messing with you.

Goblins living in a nearby cave requiring PC intervention is highly improbable (and far too convenient), which only serves to remind me how fake your game and its associated world is.

 

[Li Shenron]

Do you prefer your character to be connected or unconnected to the adventure hook?

I don't think I can answer straight away. I run campaigns with the idea that there can be potentially hundreds of adventures ahead, and I like to think my own PC would have the same potential, so it's impossible that a character is connected with a hook to every single adventure. Sometimes they are, sometimes not, and I have no preference.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

An example of the former would be taking vengeance on the murderer of your PC's parents. An example of the latter would be a bounty hunter PC choosing to track down the same murderer but lacking any personal connection, at least initially.

The former makes for a more emotionally engaging story. The latter potentially gives the players more freedom, assuming it's a sandbox containing many possible adventures.

It doesn't matter either way as long as they have enough reason to CARE about the adventure hook to bite.

 

[pemerton]

Do you prefer your character to be connected or unconnected to the adventure hook?

An example of the former would be taking vengeance on the murderer of your PC's parents. An example of the latter would be a bounty hunter PC choosing to track down the same murderer but lacking any personal connection, at least initially.

The former makes for a more emotionally engaging story. The latter potentially gives the players more freedom, assuming it's a sandbox containing many possible adventures.

Different RPGs approach this differently.

In Burning Wheel, it's a fundamental premise of play that the situations the GM presents to the players will engage with the Beliefs and Relationships that the players have established for their PCs. So, eg, in the campaign where I'm a player it's to be expected that my PC's mother will figure in the action, that when we encounter my PC's brother it will be a significant moment, etc.

In our Prince Valiant game - where I'm the GM - the situations are deliberately framed to speak to the PCs' orientation as knights and crusaders. But they don't necessarily being with a personal aspect. But as the situation develops so, normally, does its connection to the PCs - eg their piety or prowess or loyalty might be put under pressure. That's how the game is meant to work, and is consistent - I think - with the Arthurian, vignette-ish orientation of the system.

I don't like play where there is no connection between the events and the PCs' characters and personal motivations - eg standard Gygax-style dungeoneering - but that can be avoided without going for the full degree of connection you describe in your OP. Eg in our Traveller game I include aliens and psionics - both as the object of hints, and literally as the game unfolds - because these tie in to particular PC backstories and motivations. But that's closer to your bounty hunter example - the PCs aren't themselves descended from aliens or the last psions of an ancient order.

 

[Lanefan]

As player, take or leave. If my character's connected to the hook for a single adventure, OK - I can usually live with it*. If my character is integral to the plot of the whole campaign, it's not my thing for two reasons: it limits what I can do with the character, and it somewhat forces me to keep playing the same character even if I'd rather cycle it out for something else.

As DM, I try to avoid it for the most part; largely because IME it's almost inevitable that whichever character the plot's revolving around is going to die at the first opportunity thus rendering that plot idea somewhat moot. That said, if it's something the PC/player brings upon itself e.g. taking on a quest in payment of a debt, all is cool.

* - funny story: not long ago a party I was in had just come off a major adventure and for various in-character reasons I wanted to retire one of my PCs and stick with another. I said this clearly enough that all the other players heard me - but not the DM, who unknown to me had made my PC the entire reason for the next adventure! So the party got a few days out of town, the DM looks over our night-watch list, and asks why my name's not on the list. "Because I'm still back in town, retiring - I thought you knew that" is my answer. "What?! No you're not!". As you might imagine, something of an argument followed...

The party ended up getting divine guidance saying they had to go back and get me, which they dutifully did.

 

[Phion]

Actually now that you mention it, I have never played a character that is hooked to the adventure. Not due to preference, but most likely due to the fact the DM never tells me what a campaign is about when I am about to start an adventure. Personally I feel my characters tend to be like Han solo, maybe they don't quite fit in or you could argue just about anyone else could have fit into the narrative, but at the same time once they are in there its hard to picture the film (or campaign regarding the game) without them

 

[Ovinomancer]

It doesn't do anything to rule out the premise of "There are goblins in a nearby cave"; or any other adventure along that line. The most probable explanation for that event is simply that there are a lot of caves full of goblins.

It also doesn't rule out most adventure premises that don't involve the PCs specifically. If someone's brother was kidnapped by ninjas, and the PCs are the only ones nearby who are capable of dealing with it, then that isn't particularly unlikely; while ninja kidnappings aren't exactly common, there are a lot of potential targets for them in the world, and the PCs are often the most capable people in any region they travel. If the ranger's brother is kidnapped by ninjas, then the most likely explanation is that the GM is messing with you.

The GM has contrived for there to be a nearby cave (I, for instance, live in an area where there isn't a cave within hours of travel by car. That goblins happen to infest a nearby cave is also contrived, in that no one else has dealt with theses goblins, leaving them for the thoroughly normal PCs to start their rise to power.

Contrivance in RPGs is a measure of personal tolerance, it's not universal.

 

[uzirath]

In general, I like it when the GM works to connect campaign events to PC backstories. I like having a personal stake in the story. In my experience, it has been rare for it to feel heavy-handed or like we're all being dragged onto the GM's plot locomotive.

As a GM, I've found that it's not too difficult to forge personal connections even when you're using pre-published or fairly traditional dungeon crawls. It's a matter of introducing plot threads and NPCs early enough that PCs begin building their own connections before things really get going. I also try to make sure that any given adventure will pull on some of the PC's strengths and weaknesses. If a character is greedy, for example, I'll consider if there is a natural way to challenge that weakness during an adventure. If there's a mermaid in the group, I'll lean toward including more aquatic challenges than I might otherwise.

 

[Ulfgeir]

Depends, but some connection is good. But not so tighly connected that everything in the adventure hangs on one character. Have had that happen a few times , and then the player of that adventure can't make it to that session. That's when you got problems.