• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

5 Lessons for DMs from the LOST Series Bible

JJ Abrams made TV history with his groundbreaking series LOST -- and, love it or hate it, it's hard to argue that the show wasn't a significant accomplishment on Network TV, a landscape dominated by reality programming and multi-camera, laugh-track powered sitcoms.

Just this past Thursday, BoingBoing.com noted the appearance online of a PDF of the original LOST series bible[ ]. It's a 27 page document addressed to the folks who will be supporting and working on the show, and as interesting as it is on it's own, there are some really important messages to take away for Dungeon Masters of all stripes.


View attachment 59036
So here goes:

1. Be Bold

When you're planning your campaign, or planning an adventure within an existing campaign, don't hold back. Imagine stories that you would tell if there were no limitations.

Abrams faced serious limitations -- budget, for one thing. Studios want shows that can be produced on a soundstage, where expenses can be controlled. And you can see some of Abrams' efforts to convince the studio folks that he was going to try to manage those costs:

Our idea is to build a jungle inside a soundstage. And in this patch of jungle, our characters will begin to build their own "mini" sets. Call it a primitive "Melrose Place.

And, if you watched the series, you remember that a lot of the interaction took place within their home camp, especially during that first season, but it never felt like a soundstage, and as the season went on, more and more of the show took place in a wide variety of locations.

For your own games, don't worry about things like how you'll manage to handle encounters as you imagine them -- if you can imagine a scene where the PCs wind up riding dragons into battle, and it makes sense, run with it, and trust yourself to come up with a way to stage the encounter.

Your only limitation should be your imagination -- and that should be no limitation at all.

2. Your Characters are the story

From the PDF:

At the end of the day,. LOST will sink or swim purely on the merit of its characters…and taking a page from the successful playbook of Reality Television, we've stocked our island with the ingredients for limitless conflict. No Conflict, No Drama.

Your campaign -- and your adventures -- should be an expression of your characters -- PCs and NPCs. Players that give you strong backgrounds are asking you to include those backgrounds in your campaign -- and you're absolutely required to do so. By the same token, your important NPCs should have a bit of backstory that informs who they are and what they're going to be looking for in your story.

But more importantly, think about how you can build conflicts into PCs and NPCs for your game -- and turn those conflicts into stories. If you've got a barbarian who loves to drink beer, you're going to need an NPC teetotaler cleric -- either as a PC or an NPC.

At the same time, your PCs may have stories which are not completely revealed at first. Using Jack as a model, here's what the show bible says about him: "…much of Jack's past is shrouded in mystery. Simply put, out's not something he likes to talk about -- but if he did, it would certainly explain his tattoos."

As a DM, given that in a PC background, aren't your wheels spinning already?

3. Mystery is engaging

Few shows have excited so much speculation about the inherent mysteries that LOST did.

Which brings us to what may be the key ingredient for LOST --

Mystery

The hope is that every episode will be anchored by some type of MYSTERY -- an event or task that gives each episode a driving investigative thread, even if that mystery is as simple as figuring out why there is seemingly no fresh water on the island, why everyone is getting sick, or where one of our characters has disappeared to.

For an RPG -- at least, for most RPGs before Gumshoe -- mysteries were a tough thing to include -- and games like 4e that excelled at combat and encounter design tended to sideline mystery as a compelling game element.

But the mysteries that LOST spun for it's audience were a critical part of what kept the show in people's minds from one week to the next. Watercooler debates about the nature of the island, the polar bear, the Dharma institute, and Locke's apparent mystical connection to the island -- those rivaled Facebook as a productivity sink at most workplaces.

What if your home game could keep your players just as engaged between sessions -- just as intrigued by the mysteries they're caught within.


4. Don't limit yourself to one type of story

The third part of the show bible includes a discussion of the sorts of stories that they could tell -- basically thumbnails for a wide variety of episodes they might shoot. Some sound like the seeds of episodes we saw -- others obviously didn't make it out of the writer's room, but the collection is a great example of the creative range that's possible, even within what could be a limited setting.

The key to many of them, goes back to my second point - character. Check out a couple of excerpts:

Vincent
In an attempt to find common ground with Walt, Michael ventures into the jungle to find his son's pet Labrador. Upon locating Vincent, Michael is surprised to see that not only has the fog's ear been bitten off, but the bite marks appear to be human.


Sawyer's Deal
Having cornered the market on alcohol by liberating all the booze from the fuselage, Sawyer refuses to turn over some of his booty to Jack, who needs it for his makeshift infirmary…but when Sawyer finds himself in that same infirmary after a run-in with a wild boar, the 'negotiations' take on a whole new tack. "

These -- like a great many of the 30 sample stories in the bible -- are examples of different potential story lines that come directly out of the characters and the drama they bring to the show. The same thing can be true of your PCs and NPCs if you take the time to develop the conflicts and tensions that exist between them.

If you're looking for ideas for building that sort of conflict between your players, take a look at an old column of mine that details using Fiasco as a tool for building those connections between characters [http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?574-Gamehackery ]


5. You Don't Need to have it all figured out at the start

One of the most fascinating things, reading this document, is that even though they're clearly holding some of their ideas back from the reader, they did not have the whole thing figured out when they started out.

Sure, there are things in the document that would not play out until several seasons into the show. But there are clearly details -- big, important things - that were left to figure out as they went along.

In other cases, there are signs here of things that changed by the time the show aired. Take Hurley, for example. The bio for him in the bible describes him as "born into a vast Puerto Rican family" who had "parlayed his skills into a career in asset recovery -- a Repo Man able to talk anyone out of anything." That's a lot different from the character who had been in a mental hospital and used the island's secret sequence of numbers to win the lottery.

In your own games, anything that is not nailed down already in the player's information is entirely free to change -- and anything they know already could also change, for a variety of reasons. Don't allow yourself to be trapped by past ideas -- if you come up with a better one, find a way to make it work, even if it means putting Hurley in the nuthouse.

###

So. That's what I'm getting out of it. What do YOU think are the most important lessons to be learned from LOST?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Know when to wrap it up.

Don't keep turning the current clues into red-herrings as new clues contradict the old ones. Don't force players to keep investigating the same mystery, at some point, give them solid clues, let them figure it out, and be done with it. Don't drag out a quest for too long.

Oh hell, yes.

Actually, I'm not a fan of DMs deliberately placing red herring 'clues' at all. In my experience, players are quite capable of generating plenty of red herrings of their own. :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I wonder if RG imagined the rathole this thread would take when he wrote about using writing ideas from Lost for GMing. :).

I had an inkling. As a EN World columnist, I see it as my job to occasionally take on the role of "that guy who is wrong on the internet."

At least people still come back and read each week. So far. Maybe this one will be the one that kills my readership.

As for me, I'm back in the dilemma of having to come up with a column idea for this saturday. I'm thinking "Learn Roleplaying from Miley Cyrus" or even "Getting Away With It: Printing Character Sheets and PDFs at Work".

Please, gaming muse, bring me something better than that.


-rg
 

I had an inkling. As a EN World columnist, I see it as my job to occasionally take on the role of "that guy who is wrong on the internet."

At least people still come back and read each week. So far. Maybe this one will be the one that kills my readership.

As for me, I'm back in the dilemma of having to come up with a column idea for this saturday. I'm thinking "Learn Roleplaying from Miley Cyrus" or even "Getting Away With It: Printing Character Sheets and PDFs at Work".

Please, gaming muse, bring me something better than that.


-rg

Here's a topic idea that I wrote an EN blog post about awhile back:

How to take a TV/movie/book setting idea and reskin it for your completely different game system.

In my blog, I talked about how I took Babylon 5 and adapted it to be naval battles, exploration and the D&D races and island nations.

Maybe you can take a better run at it than I did.


Or

"How to Roleplay your PC without being obstructionist"
 

Actually, I'm not a fan of DMs deliberately placing red herring 'clues' at all. In my experience, players are quite capable of generating plenty of red herrings of their own. :)
I don't know. There are times when the ideas the players come up with are better than my ideas. In which case my ideas can kind of become red herrings unintentionally.
 

I don't know. There are times when the ideas the players come up with are better than my ideas. In which case my ideas can kind of become red herrings unintentionally.

Fair enough. Generally, when my players come up with a better idea, I make a not of it and stick it into my recycling system for use later. As an added bonus, that means that I don't constantly get accused of stealing their ideas. :)
 

Fair enough. Generally, when my players come up with a better idea, I make a not of it and stick it into my recycling system for use later. As an added bonus, that means that I don't constantly get accused of stealing their ideas. :)

I think there's missing context here.

I bet Ahnehnois doesn't mean when a player has a new idea about something that isn't happening now. To which recording that and using it later makes sense.

I bet what he means is when Ahnehnois has his idea of what the smoke monster is in the current campaign, and his players have their own idea of what the smoke monster is. Ahnehnois seems to be saying, that he will switch to the player's better idea for "whats going on" if it is truly better than his and avoids contradictions.

Because the player's "idea" is about the current situation, it would be useless to record their theory about the smoke monster so a future campaign can have a smoke monster like that instead of the current smoke monster. You're not likely to use a smoke monster in a future campaign (under the assumption that the smoke monster is a special thing and not a critter from the monster manual to be killed for XP one day).
 

I bet what he means is when Ahnehnois has his idea of what the smoke monster is in the current campaign, and his players have their own idea of what the smoke monster is. Ahnehnois seems to be saying, that he will switch to the player's better idea for "whats going on" if it is truly better than his and avoids contradictions.

Because the player's "idea" is about the current situation, it would be useless to record their theory about the smoke monster so a future campaign can have a smoke monster like that instead of the current smoke monster.

Ah, I see.

In that case, I still wouldn't substitute my players' idea for my own. I may or may not find a way to use it later - and quite possibly in a heavily modified form. Basically, I don't do well with switching in mid-stream like that. :)

(But, again, I'm not claiming this as any sort of One True Way - YMMV, of course.)
 

I bet what he means is when Ahnehnois has his idea of what the smoke monster is in the current campaign, and his players have their own idea of what the smoke monster is. Ahnehnois seems to be saying, that he will switch to the player's better idea for "whats going on" if it is truly better than his and avoids contradictions.
This is what I was getting at. Certainly, mining ideas for future use and such can happen, but I try to be flexible enough that I can sometimes change things as they're happening.

delericho said:
In that case, I still wouldn't substitute my players' idea for my own.
Fair enough. For me, I don't really care where ideas come from, just where they go.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ah, I see.

In that case, I still wouldn't substitute my players' idea for my own. I may or may not find a way to use it later - and quite possibly in a heavily modified form. Basically, I don't do well with switching in mid-stream like that. :)

(But, again, I'm not claiming this as any sort of One True Way - YMMV, of course.)

Glad that's cleared up.

The ironic thing being, when you had said "As an added bonus, that means that I don't constantly get accused of stealing their ideas." you would have been stealing their ideas if you had used them later.

By changing your idea to theirs mid-game (ex. what is the smoke monster), they won't see it as stealing, because to them, you invented the smoke monster, they just guessed what it was and are now "right".

I'm not usually keen on changing my answers based on what the players think it is either, but I do see how that can solve some problems. Such as the players never figuring it out and not moving on, or their discussion of their idea reveals holes in my idea such that their idea truly is better, not just different.
 

The ironic thing being, when you had said "As an added bonus, that means that I don't constantly get accused of stealing their ideas." you would have been stealing their ideas if you had used them later.

True. But then, I steal bits of stuff from everywhere, so why not them too? :)
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top