Design & Development: Quests

[KingCrab]

More annoying for you perhaps.

Agreed. Quest cards are more annoying for me, (someone who doesn't like the idea of quest cards) than for you (someone who does.)

 

[kennew142]

I think this is a fine Variant Rule for kids 10 and under. It concretizes things and makes it easier to remember. It also helps lead them around the world to the more interesting parts instead of relying on them to be independently creative with their decision making. Shyness is very common in young children and standing out while in front of your peers is the definition of peer pressure.

This seems like hyperbole at best and a borderline ad hominem attack on all of us who've been playing with props and concrete mnemonics since 1979. It's not just 10 year olds who use props in game. My group consists of well-educated professionals with an average age of 40. We've been playing rp intensive games for decades. Guess what? We've been doing it with gm created handouts and props.

I've seen the arguments on both sides of this issue, but I believe that quest cards (which I will probably not use) are no different from any other gm note handed to a player. We would all love it if our players could remember every detail we've ever given them. Most of them won't. The worlds we create are always going to be more real (and more relevant) to us than to them. No matter how good or experienced your players are, they do not see the world in the same way you do. The gm is the one creating the world, the one who knows all the details about every plotline. It's his or her job to know these things.

BTW, saying that a particular tool makes "a fine Variant Rule for kids 10 and under" is rhetorically the same thing as saying that those who use it are at the level of 10 year olds.

 

[Raven Crowking]

This seems like hyperbole at best and a borderline ad hominem attack on all of us who've been playing with props and concrete mnemonics since 1979.

Agreed. While I might have some concerns about how QUest Cards are implemented, the maturity of those using them (or lack thereof) is certainly not among them.

RC

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

Mike Mearls on Quest Cards

I found this post from Mike Mearls on the Gleemax forums;

Re: Quests... Feh
Quests are all about making the DM's story important to the campaign. Nothing says important in D&D more than, "You'll get XP for doing this, chuckles, so snap to it!"

If this mechanic helps beginning DMs build better adventures and stories, and tells beginning players "This is what you should do next", then that's awesome.

90% of this stuff is implementation. The card thing is purely a bookkeeping tool, something used to help remind players of what's going on. It's no different than suggesting that a DM use index cards to track initiative.

Personally, I like handouts and tactile parts of the game. I like the Paizo item cards. I like the idea of giving the players a sheet of paper with an incomplete treasure map on one side and a quest describing the map and the story behind it on the other. I think that helps bring the game to life.

Not every DM needs this mechanic, and not every DM who uses this mechanic needs to use cards to represent quests. We have no plans to produce quest cards or make them a standard part of D&D, and the adventures I've worked on do not include them.

I think the problem is that everyone seems to look only at the lowest common denominator quest: the baron gives you a mission, so you get a quest to go do it. I think that sells the concept short. If you look at a classic module like Temple of Elemental Evil, the characters might have quests like:

* Uncover the Temple spies in Hommlett and bring them alive to the archbishop in Verbobonc for questioning.
* Clear the moathouse of monsters and convince Burne to spend the time and money to rebuild the place and garrison it with troops.
* Convince the gnomes of the Kron hills to ally with the archbishop against the resurgent forces of elemental evil.
* Kill two of the high priests of the four temples before the next full moon, when they are set to complete an important ritual binding an alliance between them.

This kind of stuff isn't a simple go to place X and bash Y over the head; it requires planning, sound thinking, and creativity on the PCs' part. If your quests are things the PCs would do anyway, or if they aren't tied to driving the story forward, you're missing out on the strength of this mechanic.
__________________
---
Mike Mearls
Lead Developer, Dungeons & Dragons R&D
Friend to norkers, ally to qullans, champion of Fiend Folio 1e
"Mike Mearls = Gary Gygax on steroids...those poor hapless and unsuspecting players..." - nastynate, CO Boards

 

[catsclaw227]

Mearls pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one. This is exactly how I felt that the idea of quest cards be used.

 

[Reynard]

Mearls pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one. This is exactly how I felt that the idea of quest cards be used.

The cards aren't the important part. The important part is that the mechanic is built around the idea of forcing the PCs into courses of action for the benefit of the DM's "story".

Quests are all about making the DM's story important to the campaign. Nothing says important in D&D more than, "You'll get XP for doing this, chuckles, so snap to it!"
...
If your quests are things the PCs would do anyway, or if they aren't tied to driving the story forward, you're missing out on the strength of this mechanic.

Note that this is a mechanic. It is in the DMG and is intended to teach new DMs how to run the game. Essentially, the idea is, "Come up with a cool idea and force your players into doing it by withholding XP if they don't."

For example, instead of

* Uncover the Temple spies in Hommlett and bring them alive to the archbishop in Verbobonc for questioning.

He could have stopped after "Hommlett". After all, isn't the point of being a PC being able to decide what to do.

And for those that might not know -- I am a DM, and a bit of a RBDM at that witha solid neo-grognard streak. But "storytelling" is not something DMs do. DMs allow players to tell stories but providing situations and possible outcomes. The whole Quest mechanic undermines that, and in so doing undermines the role of the DM (particularly the DM that uses published modules).

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

He could have stopped after "Hommlett". After all, isn't the point of being a PC being able to decide what to do.

And they will. But when the Archbishop says "I'd like it if you brought them back alive," that seems a meaningful thing to note before setting off. There's certainly no guarantee that that's how it'll go, and some high-falootin' fancypants asking real nice-like has never deterred a PC from going with his gut, in my experience.

 

[LostSoul]

The cards aren't the important part. The important part is that the mechanic is built around the idea of forcing the PCs into courses of action for the benefit of the DM's "story".

Note that this is a mechanic. It is in the DMG and is intended to teach new DMs how to run the game. Essentially, the idea is, "Come up with a cool idea and force your players into doing it by withholding XP if they don't."

And for those that might not know -- I am a DM, and a bit of a RBDM at that witha solid neo-grognard streak. But "storytelling" is not something DMs do. DMs allow players to tell stories but providing situations and possible outcomes. The whole Quest mechanic undermines that, and in so doing undermines the role of the DM (particularly the DM that uses published modules).

Use Quests differently, then. Make them more open-ended.

The setting: the muddy streets and dark alleys that make up the slums. Gangs rule block-by-bloody-block.
"Your uncle, the man who holds your gang together, just died. Resolve this."
"You've just been offered a chance to join another gang if you betray your own. Resolve this."
"Your little brother has been kidnapped by the other gang. Resolve this."

Or, Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil:
"The daughter of the sage/potion maker is upset because her father has gone missing. Resolve this."
"Y'Dey fears the return of Lareth the Beautiful, and is obsessed with him to the point of ignoring her other duties. Resolve this."
"The paladin in town is a drunk. Resolve."

The DM makes more Quests based on how the PCs resolve these. If no more Quests can be made, then that line of adventure is done with.

It's still DM-heavy, but it doesn't force the players into making certain choices. And once the first initial Quests are completed, the choices the players have made are what determines the next Quest or Quests.

 

[Reynard]

Use Quests differently, then. Make them more open-ended.

I don't have to, because I won't be playing 4E.

But my point is that they are building in a mechanic for determining XP rewards by meeting pre-determined outcomes to support the DM's "story". That is not a good thing.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

The cards aren't the important part. The important part is that the mechanic is built around the idea of forcing the PCs into courses of action for the benefit of the DM's "story".

Forcing, how? Cajoling, suggesting, or even bribing I could see, but not forcing. You can get XP from other sources as well, after all.

Also, do you think that story awards are a bad thing overall? Because they're the staple of just about every other RPG except D&D.