A tension in RM's Campaign Law

[aramis erak]

Exactly, although I was more thinking about like story elements in character backstory here. When you are trying to setup stuff for the GM to use that you think will lead to compelling narrative down the line, but what you don't know makes it considerably more lame. Or just the act of trying to think about situation stuff that could add to play and negotiating over it without a clear idea about implications and stuff.

Fundamentally, player backgrounds are equally capable of rendering a character great or lame...
The detailed setting is sometimes a help or hindrance...
I've seen players take the Waterdeep set and tie themselves in just below the listed characters, and feel great...
... but they had to work to fit to it.

Many of the deep lore games have this same issue: Lots of details that hardly ever intersect with PCs - in either direction.

This was common for the early deep lore games - RuneQuest, post-1981 Traveller, HârnMaster, Rolemaster's Shadow World...

Lots of lovely detail to read... very little to use.

Player backgrounds, especially when not done jointly, often suffer similarly - Hooks that the GM has no interest in, no ties to the other PCs, and all too often, nothing shared with other players; even when shared, often nothing aimed at other players to hook into.

I wondered why my last few Traveller games didn't feel right... this thread got me thinking.
I used to ask players for their means of knowing each other... often, it was "We Hit outprocessing the same day."
My last two, I had to supply a why. The one before? I didn't exactly care for the why they chose, because it was a poor fit for the setting.

As a GM, I need to remember, "I am a player, too," and also to remind all to give each other hooks to hang stories off of. Also, remind players not to build big backstories because small ones are easier to make interesting use of.

 

[pemerton]

this thread got me thinking.

That's nice to hear!

 

[Voadam]

Some recent thread took me back to Rolemaster's Campaign Law. I'm quoting from my 1989 version of Character Law & Campaign Law, but am pretty confident the text goes back to 1984 and the original release of Campaign Law.

Here is some stuff about world building, under the heading Design the Campaign Setting (p 104):

Design should flow from the general to the specific. Construct the general parameters first, and then build specific concepts using the general framework. The design of a world setting would progress as follows:​

​

1. The World​

a. Gods, the Comsos, and the World​

b. Physical Landscape . . .​

​

2. The Inhabitants . . .​

b (iii) Social Beings[/indnet]​

​

3. The Cultures . . .​

​

4. The Events​

a, The Dynamics of Politics and Culture​

b. Natural Events​

c. Political Events.​

​

5. The Non-Player Characters . . .​

Not long after this, on pp 104-5, is the following, under the headings "Start the Players with a Rich Background" and "Start the Game with a Manageable Yet Challenging Adventure":

A. Ask each player about their desires for their character. Maintaining reason and play balance, attempt to incorporate them into their PC background.​

​

B. Based on the player's wishes, game needs, and the PC's race and profession, help choose an appropriate cultural background for the PC.​

1. Give the PC (sic) a handout or talk about their cultural roots, and the manner of their folk.​

2. Inform the PC of any overall goals or problems associated with their culture.​

​

C. Build a specific past for the PC.​

1. Discuss any family background, taking note of any adventures connected with family members. . . .​

2.Discuss the early goals and activities of the PC.​

a. Adventures​

b.Schooling . . .​

4. Be clear about things the player wishes to keep secret. . . .​

​

Get clear any long or short-term goals each PC may have at the time the game begins. . . .​

​

Allow for any common goal or goals that might keep them together. . . .​

​

Based on the area and the PC group’s desires and stated goals, construct a variety of adventure options with which to start the campaign.​

What is missing is how to reconcile these two sets of instructions. Hence the the tension I mention in the thread title. What if a player's idea for family background, or schooling, clashes with a GM's ideas about cultures and NPCs? What if a player's desire for his PC has a religious or cosmological aspect that contradicts the GM's ideas about the gods and the cosmos?

There's also the practical problem of how to connect all the goals and secrets and the like the GM is invited to elicit from the players, with the variety of adventure options the GM is instructed to construct.

The text is simply silent on all of this.

This all seems to be advice for strong DM participation in both world building and making sure characters fit into the world.

First the DM does the numbers to create the world. Second under the letters the DM is advised to work with the players in creating their characters.

Under B "Based on the player's wishes, game needs, and the PC's race and profession, help choose an appropriate cultural background for the PC."

So if a character is a spirits of nature priest type concept and the DM has a dualist angels and demons good/evil only spirits cosmology it seems the DM explains how the specific character concept won't work but the DM should suggest what similar concepts in the cosmology would be.

The suggested discussion seems to be either "that sounds great, it can tie into X" or "That sounds great we will go with that" or "That won't work here because of Y".