Please Just Play the Adventure (One Shots)

[MarkB]

Alternative Title of Thread: Just Engage with the %$#@ing Adventure

For free RPG day I ran a one shot at my friendly local game store, and, well, I didn't have as much fun as I'd hoped. I haven't played with a group of strangers since, well, it's been at least 5 years and I was a player not the GM. But come to think of it, I kind of had the same WTF reaction to the actions of the players back then like I did this time. So maybe I'm the problem?

It doesn't matter what game I was running yesterday, but the premise was that the characters were traveling through the desert when they come across a dead horse and the rider lying in the shade of a cactus some twenty yards away. Even without speaking to the rider, they can tell that he's a wealthy young man by his clothing, and they can also see by the condition of his horse that it was ridden to death. One of the PCs rightly figures out that this dude is running from someone or something and I'm thinking, "Yeah, we're off to a good start here." I describe the rider as being in a bad way, obviously suffering from heat stroke, he asks for water, and they help him out. The rider suggests they post a lookout and goes back to sleep. This is where the trouble starts.

The PCs start figuring out what they want to do. Which is great, because I normally love to see players engaged by having them discuss in character what they should do next. I cleared up some things for them, the rider isn't lazy for snoozing he's actually suffering from dehyrdation and heat exhaustion and genuinely needs some rest. During the course of conservation, we got your typically bad PC ideas and a few good PC ides, but the most popular choice was to leave the rider some water and just continue on with their journey. Which leaves me rather flummoxed thinking to myself, "This is the adventure, guys. If you refuse to nibble on the hook, that's it. You're getting 3 hours and 45 minutes of your time back." And I feel the need to stress that just leaving the rider was something they were seriously contemplating.

Seems fixable. If they make their minds up to start riding off, just have them spot the telltale dust plumes of riders on the horizon, heading their way, then the fugitive wakes up long enough to gasp "please don't leave me, they'll kill me!"

After much debating, they decide to wake the rider and go ahead and travel with him. So, yay! They notice they're being followed by about a dozen riders, and the rider, Billy, explains to them that this group is after him and intend to bring him back to his family. But he doesn't want to go. Since the PCs can't outrun these hunters, they decide to hole up in a nearby abandoned mining town. Things get a little weird from there. They find some miner's clothes and ask Billy to change in order to disguise himself. Billy balks, explaining that these hunters no doubt have an excellent description of him, this outfit won't hide him, and besides, it doesn't suit his style. One of the PCs decides its a good idea to pull a weapon on Billy and threaten him which doesn't work. But another PC persuades him to change which he does even if he thinks it won't work to disguise him.

Why is this a debate? Just let them win the argument, disguise him, and have it not be very effective.

Long story short, the PCs defeat the hunters. During the course of the fight, when things looked to be going south for the PCs, one of the players decided his character was going to sneak away during the fight, steal the other PCs horses, and leave. Which I really thought was an unnecessary, crummy thing to do. But, whatever, by the time his plan was coming to fruition the tide had turned and PC victory was fairly certain.

So the whole experience kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. What bothered me most was a bunch of people signed up to play a game and when we got started didn't seem interested in engaging with the adventure. That's just super frustrating. It's a one shot, guys, just go with the flow. I don't mind if you surprise me, but surprise me by how you engage with the adventure rather than running away from it. Then there's the odd behavior. Why would you point a weapon at the guy you're ostensibly trying to save?

Why would you be invested in trying to save someone you only just met, who for all you really know might be a criminal on the run from justice? And if you're not that invested, threatening his life is going to seem like a decent way to get him to go along with your plan.

Ultimately, the players don't know The Plan, so they don't know that they're deviating from The Plan - and when they come up with what seem to them to be perfectly good ideas to resolve the situation, it's not their fault if those ideas don't happen to match what's written in the scenario. And with a lot of people, trying to push back through in-character interactions is just going to make them dig their heels in even more.

 

[billd91]

Some players are really clueless at detecting and interpreting plot hooks so I get the idea of just starting them on a declared mission rather than having a hook show up in transit.
That said, it’s a con game. Subtle and sandbox aren’t things in the menu for a 4-ish hour slot. It’s typically a quick mission, series of encounters, or situation/site. There’s not usually enough time to develop much more and give the players a satisfying time and feeling of accomplishment.

That said, why not disguise the guy on the run? There’s nothing terribly wrong with that plan from the PC perspective. And if it fails because they have a really good description, so what? It sounds like a fun thing to play through even if it fails.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Some players are really clueless at detecting and interpreting plot hooks so I get the idea of just starting them on a declared mission rather than having a hook show up in transit.

True. If there's only one choice, it's not worth making it a choice. Just say you're looking for this guy to help him right from the start (or something to that effect).

That said, why not disguise the guy on the run? There’s nothing terribly wrong with that plan from the PC perspective. And if it fails because they have a really good description, so what? It sounds like a fun thing to play through even if it fails.

Yeah, I agree. No point in arguing with bad plans. Just go with them.

 

[MGibster]

If the scenario starts with them on a journey... I'd say it is partly the fault of the scenario, yes. It's perfectly reasonable for the players to assume the journey is the adventure, and engaging with the NPC is purely optional.

Well, sure, but finding the guy on the road is part of the journey.

IMO, the way to do a one-shot is to announce at the start, "You have accepted a quest to go to X and do Y." No ambiguity, no wasted time, no misunderstanding what you're "supposed" to do.

I certainly can't argue against that. It would have saved us all a lot of trouble had I just come out and said "this is the adventure, guys."

Seems fixable. If they make their minds up to start riding off, just have them spot the telltale dust plumes of riders on the horizon, heading their way, then the fugitive wakes up long enough to gasp "please don't leave me, they'll kill me!"

I would have had the guy speak up.

Why is this a debate? Just let them win the argument, disguise him, and have it not be very effective.

Billy was a dandy who was quite proud of cutting a dashing figure in his well tailored clothing and did not want to dress like a miner. I didn't think it was odd that the PCs wanted to disguise him, I thought it was odd that they so quickly resorted to violence when Billy balked at changing his clothes. And while I found this part odd, it wasn't all that annoying because at least they were engaged with the adventure at this time.

Why would you be invested in trying to save someone you only just met, who for all you really know might be a criminal on the run from justice? And if you're not that invested, threatening his life is going to seem like a decent way to get him to go along with your plan.

Admittedly, I have an expectation that PCs are going to be one of the goods guys. Not necessary perfect, mind you, but the type of people who will help others, or, at the very least, aren't prone to threatening to murder someone who has done no harm to them. That's on me.

Some players are really clueless at detecting and interpreting plot hooks so I get the idea of just starting them on a declared mission rather than having a hook show up in transit.

Yeah, which is why I have to agree with my esteemed colleage @Dausuul that it would have been best had I just said, "This is the adventure, guys."

That said, it’s a con game. Subtle and sandbox aren’t things in the menu for a 4-ish hour slot. It’s typically a quick mission, series of encounters, or situation/site. There’s not usually enough time to develop much more and give the players a satisfying time and feeling of accomplishment.

And that's where I was coming from. This is a con game, and it seemed obvious to me that this person they find on the side of the road was the adventure. Were I a player, it wouldn't have occurred to me to ignore him.

 

[Ovinomancer]

The scenario starts with the PCs on the road to a well known city. They know one another, but I never establish why they're going to the city. And the reason they're in the desert is because the whole region is a desert.

So, then, the goal is to get to the city. We know this because that's what we're told we're doing when the game starts. This guy by the side of the road is probably a diversion or something. The meat is that-a-way towards the city.

The problem here is that the hook isn't. It relies on the PCs abandoning the first hook (go to the city on this road) and it isn't even hook-shaped enough to catch. If you want people to bite a hook don't make it a hook, make it a harpoon. Don't confuse them with other hooks, like the setup of riding to the city. Don't let the hook be boring, like give this guy some water and then stand watch over him. Drive it home hard and set it with action.

"You're headed through the desert towards Dodge City, no good reason why, but less of a good reason to stay where you were. As you travel, you come across a dead horse, clearly ridden to death by the dried foam on it's haunches and the spur marks in it's side. Aways away, there's a richly dressed young man huddled up in the shade of a bolder (there's a few of those around). He calls out, "Water?" As you look towards him, shots ring out from a nearby stand of catci and an angry voice yells, "we're taking you back, Billy, even if we have to kill your friends!" More shots ring out, and Billy, who you can only assume is the young man, cowers further down behind the bolder and whimpers. These boys, whoever they are, clearly have the wrong idea about you being friendly with Billy, or do they? They're shootin' to kill, what do you do?"

The key thing here is that you have to have an idea of what comes next if they give Billy up. Maybe meet his girl waiting at a watering hole up the road a bit, who pleads his case and offers a rich reward for his safe return. If they turn that down, well, ask them to describe what their long trip to Dodge City looks like, and tell them to make it a nice one because you have, oh, 3 or so hours to kill with it.

No matter what happens, there's a rider watching from a nearby hill that leaves when the fight's over. Billy can tell the PCs that he's probably going back to get the rest of the gang. And they're probably looking for the PCs now, too. "Sorry," says Billy.

 

[MGibster]

The problem here is that the hook isn't. It relies on the PCs abandoning the first hook (go to the city on this road) and it isn't even hook-shaped enough to catch. If you want people to bite a hook don't make it a hook, make it a harpoon.

Going to the city isn't the hook. It just happens to be what they're doing at the time they encounter the hook. Personally, I don't see how anyone could miss that, but, obviously my view on this is rather myopic. I could have also started it, "You're all on your way to Applebees, when you spot a zombie chasing a woman down the street. What do you do?" Are you honestly going to think that going to Applebees is what's important here?

 

[kenada]

Are you honestly going to think that going to Applebees is what's important here?

Well, the eatin’ is good in the neighborhood.

 

[niklinna]

Going to the city isn't the hook. It just happens to be what they're doing at the time they encounter the hook. Personally, I don't see how anyone could miss that, but, obviously my view on this is rather myopic. I could have also started it, "You're all on your way to Applebees, when you spot a zombie chasing a woman down the street. What do you do?" Are you honestly going to think that going to Applebees is what's important here?

I have been in my share of games where going to the city (actually a planet) definitely was the intended hook, and we went off the rails due to something like the zombie. We never even got to the planet where the written adventure was. Me & two of the other players thought we were following a hook, and we had a grand time with bar fights and a space battle with pirates and such! One other player was utterly confused. The GM was low-key frustrated. He told us after how we totally went off the rails and we were kind of amazed he let us.

As I said earlier, if players have to interpret or guess at what's a hook or where the path is, things can easily go awry. Best to be very clear about it, especially with strangers. If you told the players they'd been sent to city X to find the particular dude they ran into, they would have been much more likely to stop & help the dude.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Going to the city isn't the hook. It just happens to be what they're doing at the time they encounter the hook. Personally, I don't see how anyone could miss that, but, obviously my view on this is rather myopic. I could have also started it, "You're all on your way to Applebees, when you spot a zombie chasing a woman down the street. What do you do?" Are you honestly going to think that going to Applebees is what's important here?

No, going to the city IS THE HOOK. Why? Because you told them that this is what their characters are doing right at the start. It's not sitting in a bar waiting around, it's doing something, going somewhere, for a reason. This is the initial problem with your setup and if you're not going to recognize it as such, then I'm not sure what advice might help because you aren't willing to look at the places that mistakes were made. It's only obvious to you because you know everything. One of the big issues with missed things like this is information asymmetry. The players only ever know the little bits you tell them. It doesn't matter how obvious it is to you, if you haven't planted a neon flashing sign that says "here is the adventure," then it's 100% your fault if the players miss the on-ramp. They don't know. Here, you've told them that they're going to the city. That sounds like a big deal. The thirsty guy on the side of the road that immediately requires them to stand around and do nothing while keeping watch just sounds like a delay obstacle on the real path. It's not at all pitched or engaging to be the real hook.

Look, the big problem you have here is that you presented a pretty weak hook and assumed that the one PC's flaw would lead everyone after it. That's poor planning for one-shots. Hooks should NEVER have to be things that are discussed or put to a decision point by the PCs for one-shots. You need to not try and set hooks the normal way (dangle and who cares if they bite, you can dangle it again later), you need to throw harpoons. Don't let them discuss or decide what the hook action is, drive it. Push it. Make bad guys show up or the lights go out or whatever and spear them with your harpoon and immediately tug on the rope.

 

[MGibster]

No, going to the city IS THE HOOK. Why? Because you told them that this is what their characters are doing right at the start.

I think we might define hook a little differently. A story hook is a premise that grabs your attention and promises something interesting. Traveling through the desert to a city for unspecified reasons isn't a hook, it's just the establishment of a scene. But what makes the scene interesting? The mysterious well dressed young man lying in the shade of a cactus not too far from the horse he's ridden to death of course. That is a hook because it piques your curiosity (What the hell is this about?), and it's going to lead to something interesting.

Look, the big problem you have here is that you presented a pretty weak hook and assumed that the one PC's flaw would lead everyone after it.

It may have been a weak hook, but it was the only hook in play. No, my big flaw is that I assumed the PCs would see the "Adventure This Way" sign and act accordingly. Which, ultimately they did after a lot of hemming and hawing. Admittedly, this was my fault as I should never assume what's obvious to me is obvious to others.

I've seen similar bizarre behavior at con games I wasn't running. I remember one fantasy game where all of us PCs arrived in town and were going to stay in an inn. One PC, the Ranger, insisted that his character wouldn't go into town and would instead just find a place to sleep out in the woods. After we wasted about 15 minutes talking to this character, the GM finally just said something like, "Look, if you don't come into town you're going to miss the adventure."