Conflict in literature and D&D adventures.

[Hunter99]

Anyone who takes a look through the Monster Manual will see that monsters can be divided into two broad categories: Intelligent villains (such as liches etc.) and non-intelligent villains. (such as dire wolves.)

In literature there are different types of conflict such as Man vs. Man, Man vs. Self, Man vs. Nature etc.

My question is how much of the conflict in your adventures is of the following types:

Man vs. Self

Man vs. Man

Man vs. Nature

In may games I try to have only Man vs. Self and Man vs. Man conflicts. I do my best not to have Man vs. Nature conflicts. (I consider Man vs. Nature conflicts to be where one side is a rational animal such as humans, elves, dwarves, liches etc. and the other side is non-rational such as Frost Worms, Elementals, Dire Wolves etc.)

What do you do and why?

 

[Dandu]

I find that the party is often their own worst enemy.

 

[Sekhmet]

I really like using weather, starvation, harsh terrain, rockfalls, avalanches, and other natural occurrences to switch up my encounters and keep my party guessing what is coming next.
It is all well and good, during an undead campaign, to know your final enemy is a lich and that you're nearing his room in the stronghold -- no one expects the roof to cave in on top of you before you hit it, though.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'll use just about any other kind of conflict I think makes for a nifty storyline.

If by Man vs Self- in the context of RPGs- you mean that the PC must overcome their own limitations, yes, I do use that.

 

[Summer-Knight925]

An adventure is usually USUALLY a series of external challenges, however the entire process is one internal struggle to find the end

trying to divide anything small groups limits you too much

for instance (to add a few)

Man vs. the nature of man

while this is a lot like Man vs. self, it is more of the character against the concepts of what makes us human, while man vs. self is his own faults, man vs. the nature of man is the character against basic human desires


you could still put it into those 3 category's, but that limits yourself

what you need to think about is the big picture, the ultimate concept is not Man vs. X but X vs. Y

it could be self vs. nature

but again, it is usually Man vs. Man (combat) or Man vs. Nature (this would include traps for the purpose of it all, but traps and hazards are nature) meanwhile Man vs. Self is the roleplay side of it all, something numbers cannot account for, trying to keep nature out of an adventure tends to make it heavy combat, less puzzles and hazards (puzzles are man vs. self [since the 'self' is his mind])

hopefully this doesn't confuse you.

 

[Hunter99]

I'll use just about any other kind of conflict I think makes for a nifty storyline.

If by Man vs Self- in the context of RPGs- you mean that the PC must overcome their own limitations, yes, I do use that.

By man vs. self I mean a conflict of values.

For instance you fall in love with a woman but then you find out that she is a part of the noble family with which you and your family have a feud and you have to make a choice.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yeah, sounds right- and yes, I use that.

 

[the Jester]

I tend to use any kind of conflict I can think of.

 

[green slime]

So what is the category of conflict when the antagonist is a shard of your own consciousness in the shape of a saucy Dryad? Nature? Man? Woman? Self?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Self. Naughty, naughty self.