Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 7060755" data-attributes="member: 87792">Alternatively it's a sign that someone knows that they are going to be playing an adventure path that is going to send them to the four corners of the world, and doesn't want to have to fight their character's motivation tooth and nail in order to try to follow the pre-set adventure path. One of my current PCs has some roots in his background in and around $hometown but we are on an adventure path. But we haven't been within 20 miles of $hometown since the second session after he was introduced in the second module.Getting back on topic fundamentally a good story is based on two things:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Relationships and conflict</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Transformation</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Choices</li> </ul>Relationships are why we watch. For a story without interesting relationships and tensions see The Phantom Menace. On paper Obi-Wan, Qui-Gonn, and Padme Amidala are all great characters played by very good actors, and Darth Maul is impressive. But there is so little on which Obi-Wan and Qui-Gonn disagree that you wonder why you need two of them, Amidala has her own issues this way and is also a Diplomatic Defender of the Status Quo, and Darth Maul barely interacts with anyone else meaning he has no personality. Compare with the near stock characters from Star Wars and we find that Luke, Leia, Han, and Obi-Wan all come in from different angles, and Vader is sold by the conference room scene where his angle is very different from Grand Moff Tarkin and Admiral Choked. And there's far more of a difference in approach and background between Han and Chewie ("Let the Wookie win") than there is between Obi-Wan and Qui-Gonn. While the two droids merrily bicker.Now I'm not saying Star Wars is a great story. But I am saying the relationships, and the difference in motivation is what makes it a vastly more interesting story than The Phantom Menace despite a lot of similarities in terms of plot and story structure. I'm also saying that Dungeons and Dragons has nothing to encourage this.If the characters are the same people at the end of the story as they are at the start either you're deliberately telling a story about the cyclical nature of things (see, for example The Killing Joke where the end panels mirror the opening panels) or you're not telling much of a story. Something on which there is a focus needs to change; Luke at the end of Star Wars is far from Luke at the start of Star Wars and Han's change is only slightly less radical. In D&D a fighter at the end of an adventure is likely to approach the world in exactly the same way as at the start other than that they've got a sharper and more magical sword, an extra d10 hit points, and an extra +1 to hit from their level; that's not a change in character. (The only RPGs I can think of that are really good at this are Smallville where you explicitly change your values, and Apocalypse World (and hacks) where your playbook/class is your position within the world and if you give it up to do something else you change playbook).And Choices matter. Possibly the pivotal moment in Star Wars is when Han flies off in the Millennium Falcon. Or something like that. The Joker in The Dark Knight is so compelling in part because he's a magnificent bastard, and in part because again and again he gives everyone else choices (even if his thumb would prevent the hammer coming down when he puts someone else's hand on the trigger). It's only with choices where we see who characters are when the rubber meets the road. What they not just want but are willing to exert themselves for. It's important to note that a choice isn't an intelligence test or puzzle; making Batman choose between the D.A. reforming Gotham and his girlfriend is a genuine choice. Making a choice between saving everyone and letting a stranger die but saving everyone else isn't for Batman although being a villain he says he doesn't have to save is Batman making a huge choice.Most editions of D&D don't have much in the way of in-combat choices; fighters always do the same thing with the same chances of success. Meaning that their choices are about tactical positioning. If you have to make a choice about which consequences to suffer or whether to expend resources you might need later then that's a choice.Edit: WoBS and Zeitgeist are the two ENPublishing adventure paths. And they are known to be good ones - but I've seen little evidence Paizo is following RangerWickett's lead.</blockquote>

Verification