Campaign Styles : Plot-driven versus Character-driven

[I'm A Banana]

Think of the difference between Independence Day and Signs.

ID is a plot-driven adventure. Aliens come to earth, mess stuff up, and the heroes need to mess them up. There's a lot of action and reaction.

Signs is a character-driven adventure. Aliens come to earth, and the family explores some personalities and resolves some issues. The aliens just sort of exist to make it about the family.

A D&D adventure where a dragon kidnaps a princess and the heroes need to kill it is probably plot-driven.

A D&D adventure where a dragon kidnaps a princess and the heroes work through their own fears and insecurities and figure out its motives and the reasons behind this kidnapping is probably character-driven.

The plot/character divide is a pretty old writing traditional divide.

When you have a dragon come to town, is it so your characters can slay it? Or so your characters can slay their own inner demons (along with maybe the dragon)?

D&D tends toward plot-driven adventure. FFZ tends more toward character-driven adventure, but it's fun for that.

 

[Slander]

I voted for "playing in and prefer plot-driven games".

However, that's really because it's all I've been exposed to. Character-driven games demand a specific skill-set from the DM that I haven't encountered; and I certainly don't have the right skills to pull it off. I think I'd enjoy a character-driven game given the opportunity, but until the opportunity arises, I don't know if I'd prefer it.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Hmmm, it wasn't my intention to present a dichotomy at all, just an emphasis on what drives the action - player choice or existing story elements. I've played in games where the characters decide something and the action proceeds from there, as well as games in which the characters have to be lead around by the nose. I understand the inference, though. I guess I could have thought of a better way to phrase the discussion... :/

I understand what you're saying. In some cases you break out a module, or turn to your adventure notes and start playing before fully fleshing out the characters and figuring out what motivates them. Other times, the DM and player spend time before the first session establishing their character to figure out what makes him or her tick. Then when the adventure starts up, there will be elements that will focus on the characters.

I've done both, depending on what my goals are with the game. Obviously I'm not investing too much time in character building if it's a one-off, but if it's a real campaign, I want the PCs to play a central role rather than just having them jump in and face a series of static adventures. When I have a larger adventure arc that I have planned out, the overall structure will change very little, regardless of the characters. What I definitely do though is figure out a way to add elements to certain adventures that focus in on one of the characters. I might also add in an entire adventure that's intended to resolve an issue from a character's past.

For example, in the third of four of my multi-year Galovinius campaigns, I had one adventure where the royal elvish wizard was caught up in political intrigue and ended up poisoned at the end of it (leading to a cliffhanger that lasted for two months, during which the campaign was on hiatus because a couple of the players were unavailable). In another case in that campaign, the party's rogue, who had been dealing in black lotus in between adventures, got caught up in his dealings, putting the whole party in danger. There were other examples, but despite these side treks, the focus of the campaign was always on stopping a fallen and dangerous god from regaining his godhood by conquering the world.

As a side note, when they finally fought the god and killed his mortal body, there was an explosion so large that it could be seen a hundred miles away. The characters were killed instantly, but they didn't know it because the avatar of one of the gods, appreciative that the PCs had done their dirty work, recreated them and carted their unconscious new bodies back to town, at which time they started working on the elf problem. Their original bodies, which were blasted, remained in that location, and because of the dark taint of that location, reanimated as undead and had to be confronted in the campaign I ran immediately following that one.

The one thing that was consistent with each campaign in that setting is that successive campaigns at least partially dealt with the consequences caused by the character's actions from the previous campaign. I structured them in this way to provide continuity, as though it were one book in a series leading to the next, and this served as an homage to the players who weren't around anymore from the previous campaign. So, in that respect, all but the first Galovinius campaign was largely character driven, they just didn't happen to be the characters that were being played at that time.

 

[The Shaman]

Forget plots. Gimme that sandbox.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Hmm... I would say I am amongst those that mix things up. I like it where I (as a DM) set down various plot-points. However it is up to the characters and their choices to see what plot-points get resolved, brought up, etc.

Many of my plot-lines are like mysteries. The PCs have their own goals and wishes and through doing their own thing, they unravel the mysteries that lie beneath the adventure. Usually what the mysteries are tie into their own goals and thus they uncover more, the method and what they end up recovering is entirely in their own hands.

This is why I always make a brainstorm/web page where I connect all the various plot-points together so I can somewhat see where they could go once one of those is uncovered. It helps with getting ready for the next session.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I much prefer plot-driven, though it' certainly nice if my character's role playing and backstory plays some factor as well. I've always been of the mindset that more creativity comes from a strict framework. Give me some hard rules as to what's going on and what it'll build towards, and then let me loose to work towards and struggle against those rules as I see fit.

I picked in a plot-driven game, but I'm not sure if that's totally correct. It's still early and the plot is just forming, but the plot was chosen to tie in with the character's backstories and beliefs and may end up being largely shaped by how they go about the campaign.

EDIT: Only 29 votes so far, but wow what a perfect split!

 

[roguerouge]

I'm in multiple campaigns. In one, it's an adventure path. So we designed characters that, in theory, were going to develop their characters along the adventure path. So that's plot-driven. In another, the campaign has morphed over ten years as it reaches its conclusion. It was initially character-driven, but our drives led us to this plot climax. So, right now? Plot-driven. Initially? Character-driven. Similarly, in the campaign I run, it depends on where we are. I've ditched entire adventures because the player wanted to Save the Piskies. I've also done the avert the apocalypse story line. Technically, she could not go down that story line, but it was pretty clear that transforming a city's inhabitants into monsters from beyond the veil would have been a bad for her character development.

So, I didn't vote because I'm in three campaigns as DM or player and the answer varies for each and within each.

 

[SolitonMan]

For example, in the third of four of my multi-year Galovinius campaigns, I had one adventure where the royal elvish wizard was caught up in political intrigue and ended up poisoned at the end of it (leading to a cliffhanger that lasted for two months, during which the campaign was on hiatus because a couple of the players were unavailable). In another case in that campaign, the party's rogue, who had been dealing in black lotus in between adventures, got caught up in his dealings, putting the whole party in danger. There were other examples, but despite these side treks, the focus of the campaign was always on stopping a fallen and dangerous god from regaining power by conquering the world.

As a side note, when they finally fought the god and killed his mortal body, there was an explosion so large that it could be seen a hundred miles away. The characters were killed instantly, but they didn't know it because the avatar of one of the gods, appreciative that the PCs had done their dirty work, recreated them and carted their unconscious new bodies back to town, at which time they started working on the elf problem. Their original bodies, which were blasted, remained in that location, and because of the dark taint of that location, reanimated as undead and had to be confronted in the campaign I ran immediately following that one.

That's just cool.

 

[el-remmen]

I run a plot-driven campaign that can be happily derailed by character-driven action.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I prefer plot driven games. This is mostly because that most of the people I know, left to their own devices will have their characters drink in the tavern for hours and hours(both in real time and game time). I don't have much fun as a DM roleplaying the bartender and the local drunk and so on. Not when the most exciting thing they have to say is "Isn't think good ale?"

As a player, I'd prefer to react rather than drive the storyline. I pretty much always design my characters as adventurers. When left to their own devices they ask everyone in town where to find a job, where there might be ancient caves filled with treasure or if anyone needs help. Mostly, they look for plot.

Another reason I'm not a fan of character driven is because of the randomness involved in the rules and real life. When you run a plot about "a bunch of heroes attempting to save the world from the evil cult" and someone dies, it's no big deal. The plot moves on, possibly with different heroes. If you make an adventure about "The Legendary Lightbringers, The Wizard, The Brute, and the Lady, who are destined to save the kingdom as has been foretold in prophecy and their continuing quests", well then you can never have anyone die. You can't have a player get bored of their character and decide to play something new. You can't have one player leave and invite someone new to your group. You can't prepare as much in advance and often have to react to the whims of the players who decide to do something unexpected.

In a plot driven game, you can easily say "Next week, a dragon will attack the city. The players will likely beat it. They will be asked by the Mayor to figure out who sent the dragon to attack. They will find a piece of paper on the dragon that leads them to Town X. When they get there, they will find all of the people in the town missing. They'll be forced to investigate."

In a character driven game, you're often blindsided by, "I've decided my character hates Orcs. I'm going to ask around as to where the Orcs live, then I'm heading in that direction to slay them all."(as actually happened in a game I ran once)