Act structure in adventure design

[Kzach]

I'm currently piecing together a campaign and decided that I really want it to be an involving story. So I hit upon the idea of using screenwriting act structure. I'm sure it's not an original idea, but I did think it would make an interesting topic for discussion.

For reference purposes, I did a little write-up. It's not a 100% accurate as I'm going mostly off of memory from Syd Fields and Robert McKee books I read years ago. Feel free to correct it or add to it

Further, there are scenes, beats and sequences that can be interspersed in between levels to make up the rise and fall of tension and action that characterises the encounters that give the characters XP for each level. Heck, you could even tie these to treasure parcels

Act I

Level 1 (Exposition): Introduces the characters to each other, highlights their individual abilities, brings them together as a team and connects them to the setting.

Level 2 (Inciting Incident): This introduces the conflict that will carry the story. It is usually put forth as a question, ie. Who is behind the goblin raids?

Level 3 (Plot Point 1): Also known as a turning point. This is where the action turns on its head and the characters are faced with, usually, a negative outcome that changes the direction of the story.

Act II

Level 4 (Obstacle): This is an element that frustrates the characters and builds tension. Often it is a minor resolution to one problem that in turn presents another, bigger, problem.

Level 5 (First Culmination): This is where the characters are close to the solution. It's in their sights. Everything will be solved by this event...

Level 6 (Midpoint): ...and this is where it all goes horribly wrong This should be the lowest point in the character's objectives. They have lost everything and all seems hopeless.

Level 7 (Obstacle): This is much like the first obstacle, however instead of resolving an issue, it frustrates the characters in a way that opens up the path to a new solution.

Level 8 (Plot Point 2): This is another turning point. This is usually a big reveal of some type and is the culmination of the previous obstacle and the presentation of a solution that turns the tide, usually in favour of the characters.

Act III

Level 9 (Rising Action): This is where things get really exciting. Carving one's way through a BBEG's henchmen and lieutenants, all building up to a final confrontation.

Level 10 (Climax): Also called the Second Culmination, this should be the absolute height of the action where the entire adventure hinges on a successful outcome.

Level 11 (Resolution): Finally, the battle is won and the ultimate question presented by the inciting incident is fully answered to a satisfying conclusion.

Denouement: This is the bit where Luke, Han, Chewy and Leia get their medals

 

[Ariosto]

How does this work ...
... in a game?
... with player choice?
... with dice rolls?

 

[Grymar]

Yeah, I've thought about it, in a much simplified form, but the problem is this odd little bit of random junk that's thrown into the mix...and I don't mean dice. The players. They have a way of making quick introductions long, long combats quick, exciting events mundane, and the opening of a simple door an elaborate, complex, multi-person and multi-hour event.

When so much of the pacing is set by the players, it will make it difficult.

Beyond that, as an author you can convey emotion to the reader, but as a DM it is the players who decide much of the emotion of the moment.

So again, good idea but you may find it difficult to put it into play, especially on a short term basis. As far as a long term campaign plan, it might work, but again you'll have to hope that your players play along...mine never do.

 

[Piratecat]

I write one-shots like this.

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

I also plan one-shots (and sometimes regular play sessions) in a similar vein. I simplify it a lot, however.

Act I - Intro (meet, get the lead, head out)
Act II - Climax (the meat of the adventure)
Act III - Conclusion (well, for better or worse, the adventure must end - or cliffhanger/bridge to the next session)

I like to leave a lot of room for the players to pick their direction and run with it...

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

7th Sea encouraged you to stage your adventures like plays

Act I Scene 1
Act II Scene 3

I wrote all of my 7th Sea adventures in this style and it encourages a very cinematic style of game. Each Scene had some purpose, a clear starting point, and a clear ending point. You have to be careful with a narrative like this as you run the danger of railroading. If the Heroes go "off-script," you've got to be flexible enough in your plotting to give the heroes all the rope they want.

Beyond that, each act had a clear purpose that all of the scenes built upon. In building the adventures, I'd come up with the purpose of the Act first, figured out what I wanted the climax to be, then worked backwards fleshing out the scenes.

This type of game is not a sandbox (in the least). I would encourage players to keep the same characters throughout the game and have character death be for plot reasons only. If they are defeated, I'd find other ways then death to punish them.

Finally, apply Chekov's Gun to things. Show the party the villains, the objects, or the places they will need to go early in the Act. Most people are savvy to this rule (even if they don't know the formal name of it) and you can use it to create great drama in the game.

 

[Ariosto]

If they are defeated, I'd find other ways then death to punish them.

Punish them?

Anyway, it does look as if you might want some sort of "plot protection" rule (no PC death). For practical reasons, you probably want to avoid splitting the party. A variety of clearly "defeat" type outcomes seems preferable to repetition, and since you're already stage-managing quite a bit that shouldn't be too hard.

Bad guys "escape" (maybe tricky to pull off convincingly, depending on situation).
Capture of important NPC.
Capture of PCs.
Fortuitous escape (or opportunity for it, which players might not take if you leave it up to them).
-- Could be setback by leaving them only less direct route to goal.
-- Could add time pressure.
-- Could mean only partial victory possible.
-- Could involve injury or equipment loss making progress more strenuous for PCs.

You might be able to work some of the dramatic structure along alternate paths on a flow-chart / decision tree. Real player choices should make significant difference (some options being somehow better than others).

 

[Janx]

Let's avoid devolving into a railroading thread. I'd assume that "if" this were a railroad, it's only bad or noticeable when it doesn't go where the players want to go, and they can't get off.

So to prevent that:

"Chekov's Gun": show them the gun in act 1, use the gun in act 3. You see this ALL the time in sci-fi. Nerd-guy is working on new device that's unimportant to the problem. Then in the last act, somebody gets the idea to use his new unfinished device to solve the problem and save the day.

The point, is the players are fed the solution early, they see it. They have a chance to think of it when it matters (and feel clever about it). By showing them the bad guy, they know who the bad guy is, so they can have that "aha!" moment of figuring out the bad guys is the bad guy. It also frames the show. Everybody in the episode is important, even the gentleman you met in act 1, who had nothing to do with the case.

All Roads Lead To Rome: (I made that up, sort of)
Every clue leads some where useful. The NPCs follow the dead ends, and miss the clues, the PCs find the real clues. This makes sure that what they find is useful, and leads them to the next scene.

This also means, that if the party goes the wrong direction, you shift things so it looks like they made the right choice, so you can connect them up to the next scene.

Note: Do NOT do this if the party is trying to get off the train. Then you would have a railroad. Use this technique for when the party is TRYING to solve the problem, but simply thought of something you didn't, or made a wrong guess, and are going the wrong way.

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

Punish them?

Punished by the people who defeated them. As a DM/GM you don't punish the characters, bad guys do that... right

 

[Ariosto]

That's right; I punish only players. "No more Mountain Dew for you!"