Design & Development: Quests

[PeterWeller]

The reason I call this Quest system, as described by Mearls, railroading is simply that XP is the primary motivator in play, and witholding XP unless the players prop up the DM's predetermined outcome is, in fact, railroading.

Rewarding extra experience points for completing a quest according to the parameters set out by an NPC is not withholding experience points. It's receiving extra points for doing what you have been asked to do. You're acting as if the players are entitled to XPs. That's not true. They have to earn them, and there's nothing rail-roading about earning extra experience for completing a mission given to you by an NPC.

 

[neceros]

In 12 pages I don't have one response, as I don't' see this as a big deal, but I digress: I finally have something to add.

If your DM is giving you exp entirely on some sort of narrow quest-goal system then you both need to get together and rework the way your game plays out.

Quests are, in my games and as I've known them, events and plots that may come true if the players decide to go down that route. Sometimes they are required to continue play with the character, but I'd estimate 80% of quests should be optional.


Again, quests should not be your only source of experience, ergo a new Quest System should be a boon and rewarding chances for additional exp, not limiting it.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Please show me where it gives an example of a player making their own quest up...even a refrence that this mechanic is intended to be used in such a way. The blog by Mike Mearls even infers that this is a DM tool. When I say player based...I mean what the player wants to do, not what the DM thinks the character should do.

I seriously don't see how you could write the quest system in such a way that the DM couldn't say, "you want to go rescue the bard that the lizardmen dragged off? Okay. Let's make it a minor quest, level 5." Explain to us how they can write a system that prevents the DM and players from running a sandbox game in which quests are assigned as the opportunities for quests come up. What measures would they have to write in to cause the system to fail to operate if players say "I want to have a quest based on finding my long-lost father"? All the DM has to say is "okay." If the DM says "no," then it's not a problem with the quest system, it's a problem with the DM.

Wow, I remeber all the heated debates about worldbuilding, relevance and the fact that players shouldn't be forced into exploring or listening to things that don't interest them by a majority of posters on this site ( I of course argued the opposite). Ah, I see now it's better if they are bribed and cajoled into it, even if it's not necessarily what they want to do.

This is utterly amazing. I think I might keep it for posterity.

And you've supported everything they've announced about 4e.

I haven't. Guess your carefully considered argument collapses like a house of cards, eh?

Again, show me where it is infered, or stated that a player can create his own goals. What examples of this are given?

Do you really need to be told to do something before you'll do it? I really don't know what to say about that.

Anyway, why can't a player create his own goals? What possible reason, other than the DM being a nay-sayer, would prevent it? Is there going to be a line in the DMG that says "the player can't create his own goals"? Even in the laughably improbable scenario in which this is the case, wouldn't we just ignore it and allow players to make up their own goals because that would be cool, get the players involved in the game, and make it more fun for everyone? So isn't the whole question of whether players are supposed to come up with quests or not completely irrelevent? Can we please just get on with coming up with cool ideas for quests now?

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

So, it's better for the DM to spend weeks working up a campaign just to have it tossed in the trash because Joe doesn't want to be friends with the Archbishop and goes out of his way to avoid anything the DM wants, all in the name of "player choice." It's the same kind of player that whines about railroading when he's told he can't play a CE drow cleric of Lolth when the campaign is supposed to be about good characters. Wannabe iconoclasts is the term I usually use.

We call it "bigfooting," as in "Bob keeps bigfooting the DM by undermining all the plot hooks." Meaning, Bob wants to let everyone know that he's always totally in control, and no one has any authority over him or his character, especially the DM.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Again, quests should not be your only source of experience, ergo a new Quest System should be a boon and rewarding chances for additional exp, not limiting it.

Hmm... I could go on this quest to find seven goldfish for the princess, scale the razor mountain, and make fruit salad for an ogre's tea party, or I could just go kill seven bugbears and a troll and get the same reward.

...Options, not restrictions

 

[neceros]

...Options, not restrictions

Hey, that's my phrase.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Hey, that's my phrase.

I optioned it.

 

[LostSoul]

Which I find odd, because if the DM isn't the ultimate authority in his own game, then what is to stop the players from overruling him every time things don't go their way?

The rules.

 

[PeterWeller]

The rules.

Tell that to the rules lawyers.

 

[Hussar]

They aren't supported by the article, either, and Mearls' comments make it clear that these are supposed to be goals handed out at the beginning of the adventure/quest and are to be completed by the PCs.

Going back a bit.

How is this ANY different than any game ever? You get hired by the dark stranger in the bar to go murder a bunch of goblins.

As a DM, I generally hand out a bunch of hooks and let the players decide which one interests them. How is writing them down any different?

Wow, I remeber all the heated debates about worldbuilding, relevance and the fact that players shouldn't be forced into exploring or listening to things that don't interest them by a majority of posters on this site ( I of course argued the opposite). Ah, I see now it's better if they are bribed and cajoled into it, even if it's not necessarily what they want to do.

Wow, nice way to mischaracterize those discussions.

In that debate, the entire POINT of the discussion was that the DM's goodies should be relavent to the game. Tacking on an xp award makes something entirely relevant doesn't it? Makes it actually matter. If discovering why they use square windows in Forgotten Realms gains me a bonus on xp, I miight just expend the effort to track it down. Otherwise, fergeddaboutit.