Design & Development: Quests

[Jinete]

What you seem to be suggesting is that the DM needs a (more or less?) subtle way of saying he hasn't gotten stuff done, that there is only one choice for this evening's gaming. Not unlike saying, "I bought Age of Worms and want to run it", if your group is gold with railroading, then everything is great. Agreed-upon rails are not a problem. But the rails are implied in the very set-up you describe, whether agreed upon or not.

Because, what will you do if the players go to the Goblin Caves instead? Why isn't wiping out the goblins a quest?

And that is the one thing I have yet to hear anyone answer well -- why aren't player-driven goals also quests?

I was in the middle of writing a post about quest cards being bad because they are like a DM saying "I have this prepared" and "sorry no quest card, don't even bother doing this" when it dawned on me.

Just write ALL quest cards on the spot. If the players head for the Goblin caves, take out a piece of paper and write "Investigate the Goblin caves". Then do whatever you do when players try a course of action you haven't prepared for.

More importantly, this will prevent WoTC from selling you quest cards booster packs. IN YOUR FACE WoTC, your evil plan has backfired!

 

[Raven Crowking]

So it seems to me the folks who are complaining the loudest have things rather backwards. Somehow, they seem to have the ability to keep their players on the rails without Quest Cards, and even to improvise when they go off the rails, and yet somehow they lack the ability to ignore or improvise Story XP...?

If you are imagining that I am complaining, you have things rather backwards. Pointing out the potential pitfalls of a system is a good way to ensure that they have a chance to be addressed before final copy.

As for story XP, I've never seen a system that wasn't full of wibbly-wobbly questy-westy...stuff. The idea is a good one. For my Doctor Who game, for example, you get XP based on how much you participated in a given session. I narrowed the range to 1-5 XP per session, though, to avoid wibbling more than necessary.

I considered something like quest cards for my Star Trek d20, and would have used them if I'd ever gotten an interested group of players for the setting. The idea there would have been, specifically, to give players background "extras" for role-playing that didn't (necessarily) disrupt the main storyline. In my homebrewed 3.X, characters choose a "personality"; each personality has a condition that must be met to gain 1 AP that session (a system I would abhor were it the DM, and not the player, who chose the personality!). I've considered a Star Wars game with pregen characters, each of which has a specific agenda, and each of which has specific victory conditions, stuck together in an escape pod (and then an "unknown" world). Each player would get a description of the events that led to being in the escape pod from that character's point of view.

These are not ideas that I am adverse to, but they are ideas that I have some experience with the pitfalls of. The pitfalls, as I see them, could be dealt with by instituting the following:

(1) Discuss how Quest Cards might lead to railroading, with advice on avoiding the same. Less experienced, and especially new, DMs need some solid guidelines on the pitfalls of railroading. This applies doubly for DMs who cut their teeth on 3.X.

(2) Discuss an alternate where the players can devise personal goals, and earn story XP for them. This should include personal goals at odds with DM Quest Cards.

(3) Ensure that you have a good, clear description of how to determine XP for Quests. This is by far the hardest of the three (in fact, I have never seen it done well), and must be clear enough that a DM allowing players to determine personal goals can easily decide what XP are appropriate.

If the WotC does a good job with (3), I will be impressed, even if they ignore (1) and (2). (This is not a swipe at WotC; it is a statement of fact. I've never seen a good Story Award system, certainly not for a system that rewards multiple factors in addition to story, and I would be mightily impressed by anyone who devised one that met my criteria for clarity!) I would, of course, prefer that they hit all of these marks.

RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

I was in the middle of writing a post about quest cards being bad because they are like a DM saying "I have this prepared" and "sorry no quest card, don't even bother doing this" when it dawned on me.

Just write ALL quest cards on the spot.

Or, better yet, have the players write out a card on the spot.

More importantly, this will prevent WoTC from selling you quest cards booster packs. IN YOUR FACE WoTC, your evil plan has backfired!

I can't imagine any scenario under which Quest Cards could be sold as booster packs. I could see "official quest cards" with good cardstock and a snazzy looking parchment background for you to write on (and I honestly think that they would be a cool "toy" for gaming), but I cannot imagine how you could randomize content that has to also fit into your campaign world.

I very, very much doubt that Quest Cards have anything to do with marketting.

RC

 

[KingCrab]

Quest Cards can be used to describe a general goal. "Rescue the princess", "Find out who killed Valance". They don't tell you that you how to do it. They also don't force you to do it all, but it's probably a good idea because apparantly, the DM has something prepared if you follow that quest. That's not different from the DM coming at the table and saying "Okay, I got all issues of the Dragon for the Savage Tides Adventure Path. It's pretty cool, so I am going to run it."

Agreed. With pre-bought modules, even really good pre-bought modules, then this isn't as much of an issue but there can still be problems. Usually the players know they are on a quest. Usually there is a twist. After the plot point, the players then may very well not want to complete the quest. Now at this point, does the xp award that was attached to the quest go away? Or if the players complete the quest would they still get the award.

I don't want to give out any spoilers and this isn't the perfect example, but since you mentioned Savage Tide: In the first module "There is No Honor" the party is sent on a quest, but they don't have all the information. When they get all the information, they might want to do is something different (gosh I'm being vague.) So at this point, how does the quest card system work? You probably write them up new quest cards and let them choose? If you're going to be giving out story awards, wouldn't it be better to keep the feel a little more open ended and give out the story award when they accomplish something you think seems worthy but wasn't necessarily written down?

Going "off-track" is possible with or without a quest system and with or without quest cards. If your group's play style is very open-ended, the DM might want to use the quest system more "on the fly", and if he is using quest cards, some might be never used again*.
But if you usually follow the plot of a prepared (possibly bought) adventure, quests will probably remain as static or dynamic as the adventure allows (and the DM can still handle).

*) Though it's possible that quests emerging from the flow of play are actually more likely to be followed, since they seem very "natural" to the participants.

In my longest campaign, I created an incredibly detailed city. I filled it with situations and conflicts. They players had their own motivations and interacted with the city and the nearby wildnerness. Could quest cards work here? Perhaps if the players wrote up all their own quest cards it might. Even in that situation though, I would prefer not to have the xp awards tied to the cards the players were writing. Sure, it's good for them to write down their character goals and motivations. I don't like the idea of them cashing in one of those cards for xp. Let the DM decide when the xp awards are either on the spot or after the game.

 

[Jinete]

I can't imagine any scenario under which Quest Cards could be sold as booster packs. I could see "official quest cards" with good cardstock and a snazzy looking parchment background for you to write on (and I honestly think that they would be a cool "toy" for gaming), but I cannot imagine how you could randomize content that has to also fit into your campaign world.

I very, very much doubt that Quest Cards have anything to do with marketting.
RC

I wasn't being serious

However, sometimes my paranoia kicks in and I get the feeling that all of these changes to the game are just a part of a devious scheme by WotC. I don't know what that scheme is and how it works, but that is just because my mortal mind is to weak to comprehend it in it's diabolicalness. In fact it is so sinister and subtle that we won't even realize what's happening, until it's too late. It is of course devised entirely by lawyers and people from marketing.

And one day we will suddenly realize that the game we're playing is totally different from the game we used to play those many years ago. It's fun and cool and simple, and you don't have to think very much or do math or imagine stuff. It costs more though.

wow, I managed to scare myself

 

[KingCrab]

Wich, still, is fantastic!
Look at it this way: New campaing, 1st level, newcomers game. PCs want money, exp, and power, so they go to the baron and he gives them missions. Noob DM shows them 3 quest cards, they chose 1, complete, chose 2, complete, and so on. By the time the baron gives them the 14th quest card, probably before, the DM (wich is not such a noob anymore) realizes the players do EXACTLY what the baron (therefore, the DM himself) wants them to do, no questions asked. They are nothing more than simple mercenaries, not heroes. DM is troubled and can't sleep at night: "have I reached the point where my campaign is nothing more than a cRPG? Is this what the great-ENWorld-sages-of-older-edition call 'railroading'? What have I done?"...
But suddenly, the inspiration hits him, and he knows just what to do. Perhaps he'll look for advice over internet forums, or DDI, or read some magazine articles, who knows, but the 15th quest card will be different: maybe the baron will ask the players to kill an evil witch who is secretly rising in power - but she turns out to be one of the players mother/daughter/lover/sister. Maybe the baron will ask them to return an artifact that belonged to one of his ancestors, buried in a dungeon - but a mad man will aproach them and tell that the item is cursed or that by moving it the seal will break and a great evil will be released. Maybe the PC cleric will be contacted by his deity and be told the baron has evil plans...
Will they go with the mission to get the rewards, or will they (for the first time) think about their actions and their consequences? Suddenly, what was once a linear campaign is shaping up to become something else entirely. Players will be cautious before following every quest card they've been given. DM is proud of himself.

What your describing here is a game that might very well be worth playing. If the players become stagnant because it's easier to follow quest cards the campaign could recover from a quest card situation. I'm not claiming that quest cards are the devil and a game can't ever be saved if the players get too used to the cards. I am saying that I don't think this really encourages good habits and creativity.

Really, I don't see why people are so angry about this SUGGESTION. Sure, it can be used in a wrong way, but so does every rule in the book. And it bothers me a lot to realize that I had to read over 100 posts to get to someone who mentioned what I'd like to discuss (the minor/major quest reward as encounter/monster level), and over 300 posts later very few people said anything about it... Shame on us :\

Sure it is a suggestion in 4ed DMG. It is clearly a controversial suggestion that many gamers are not agreeing with. There is probably better advice they could be giving new DMs in that space instead. As for people being angry, it sounds to me like the pro-quest card posters are every bit as angry as the opposition. I think maybe this is an angry time.

 

[KingCrab]

On the Lighter Side

I was in the middle of writing a post about quest cards being bad because they are like a DM saying "I have this prepared" and "sorry no quest card, don't even bother doing this" when it dawned on me.

Just write ALL quest cards on the spot. If the players head for the Goblin caves, take out a piece of paper and write "Investigate the Goblin caves". Then do whatever you do when players try a course of action you haven't prepared for.

More importantly, this will prevent WoTC from selling you quest cards booster packs. IN YOUR FACE WoTC, your evil plan has backfired!

I'm gonna wait till my friends buy a full booster pack of quests and then photocopy them all and put them on laminated cards! WotC can eat that!

 

[ThirdWizard]

Here's the best piece of advice I can give:

Never give out plot hooks at the beginning of a session.

I cannot emphasize that enough. I can't bold it enough. I can't subliminally implant it into people's minds enough. With regard to my DMing philosophy this is one of the highest priority rules, one of the most important things to remember, because it is so very basic. Handing out plot hooks at the beginning of a session is bad. It leads to no good. It backfires. It is putting all your eggs in one basket in the middle of a herd of elephants. Players just don't do what you expect them to do. It doesn't matter how well you know them, something is going to go wrong eventually.

Drop plot hooks in the middle of sessions. At the end. Interspersed throughout the quest they're working toward at the time. Drip subtle hints, drop bombs on them. Hit them upside the head with plot twists or obvious liars. Pounds that adventure hook into their heads. Give clues that they might not even pick up on. Whatever. Just don't do it at the beginning of the session expecting them to pick up on it and run with it. That way only leads to madness.

This way, after each session, you can ask what they're plans are for the next one. The baron has offered them a large sum to find his grand-daughter? Great, but they might not pick it up. Or maybe they will. Or maybe they'll hire some other adventurers to do it for them. They're insane, after all, they're PCs! But, now you know and you can plan what areas to work on and what plots to move forward and all that fun stuff. And the best part: you know they'll participate in it. They've already told you they're interested. That's what they're doing.

Now, they might change their mind. This isn't fool-proof. Call everybody up between the sessions. Make sure they haven't changed their minds. Be sure to remind them of any things that they might be forgetting. Maybe even write each quest down in, I don't know, card form! What a good idea! Make sure they don't have more pressing things they've forgotten. Be ready for any changes, just in case they happen, but let them know that you plan based off their own ideas.

It's a kind of sandbox. A smaller sandbox that the players build around themselves instead of a desert they can run through. That's okay, I think its better. It leads to an open ended game that is still detailed and full of intrigue and all that other fun stuff. Have you ever tried to run a 15th level adventure on the fly? It isn't very impressive, let me tell you. Especially when its a plane-hopping game of 15th level. Just don't try it. Trust me.

So, there you go.

 

[KingCrab]

These are not ideas that I am adverse to, but they are ideas that I have some experience with the pitfalls of. The pitfalls, as I see them, could be dealt with by instituting the following:

(1) Discuss how Quest Cards might lead to railroading, with advice on avoiding the same. Less experienced, and especially new, DMs need some solid guidelines on the pitfalls of railroading. This applies doubly for DMs who cut their teeth on 3.X.

(2) Discuss an alternate where the players can devise personal goals, and earn story XP for them. This should include personal goals at odds with DM Quest Cards.

(3) Ensure that you have a good, clear description of how to determine XP for Quests. This is by far the hardest of the three (in fact, I have never seen it done well), and must be clear enough that a DM allowing players to determine personal goals can easily decide what XP are appropriate.

I like. If this discussion was included in the DMG, it would be a helpful part of the book. Some people would use quest cards and they would not be abused quite as much in the ways I expect them to be.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I wasn't being serious

However, sometimes my paranoia kicks in and I get the feeling that all of these changes to the game are just a part of a devious scheme by WotC. I don't know what that scheme is and how it works, but that is just because my mortal mind is to weak to comprehend it in it's diabolicalness. In fact it is so sinister and subtle that we won't even realize what's happening, until it's too late. It is of course devised entirely by lawyers and people from marketing.

And one day we will suddenly realize that the game we're playing is totally different from the game we used to play those many years ago. It's fun and cool and simple, and you don't have to think very much or do math or imagine stuff. It costs more though.

wow, I managed to scare myself

Maybe I can help you here.

4th Edition is, one must assume, being devised in such a way as to work well with the Digitial Intiative. The idea is to sell you books, of course, but even more so to get you to sign up for the DI and pay a monthly stipend. Design decisions that require you to have a "bigger table" (for example), or keep track of terrain pieces, help to make the DI worthwhile to DMs even if they are playing a tabletop game. The laptop replaces the DM screen.

Let's not forget that there are some beautiful projection tables out there now, and folks are playing D&D by projecting the map from the DM's laptop to the tabletop. Hell, I wish I could afford such a system myself, as well as the ability to devote a whole room to the game. If you subscribe to the DI, and have such a system, you can project not only the DI tabletop, but the DI minis as well. And the DI tabletop automatically shows you only what you can "see" based on your light source.

In addition, I imagine that if they are selling you digital "items" like minis, they might also be willing to sell you digital enhancements, such as quest cards. In fact, it might well come to pass that there is a basic subcription rate where you get basic services, but if you pay more you get more. Right now, for example, they are saying that the digital tabletop will offer counters if you don't fork over cash for minis. This is, in fact, rather similar to the very successful Second Life model.

Players outnumber DMs by a large margin, and playing over the Interweb is becoming a big thing. I'd love to have taken Hussar up on his offer to join his WLD Interweb group, but I don't have the free time to commit to sitting at the computer from X-Y pm however many nights a week.

But say, instead, that it was a job. Imagine that WotC set me up with access to a special DMing platform, and gave me a percentage of "sales" from folks playing in my games. Then say that they set up a "pay-n-play" section of the DI for folks who don't have a regular DM, or who want to be in the game of a particular DM. Under such a setup, I could easily make as much as I make at work now, and WotC would make a boatload of cash as well.

Better yet, WotC knows that I would give back a % of that income, automatically, to update the rules, minis, and whatnot that I had available to make my "table" a better one. After all, if I don't update, my players may well trickle away to the "table" of someone who does. They might even make me pay upfront for the DMing platform, ensuring an income on the basis of offering that resource.

Now, remember also that WotC has unlimited rights to anything you create using their software (unless the user agreement has changed from when I last looked, at draft), meaning that WotC can easily use the materials of all those DMs to create a "core world" that is, in effect, one hell of a huge sandbox with all kinds of quests and all kinds of characters running around, with full-time DMs who pay for the priviledge of being full-time DMs (and, perhaps, make something off it as well).

If they get the DI up and running, and do as good a job as is possible, WotC may well give MMORGs a run for their money.

RC

EDIT: Dang. I might have just talked myself into supporting the Digital Initiative.....