Do you like plots?

[BullMarkOne]

As a player I find I like a good plot, (or overall storyline) even if I chose to ignore it. I like to know that there are things going on out there in the campaign world, that I might have been able to have a hand in. I also appreciate smaller subplots which can revolve around the actions of my pc/party

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

I love plots. I just hate plots written by a DM and forcefed to you.

Plot is a property of the player characters, and it emerges from the game as a result of continued play. It is NOT something that an adventure designer should sit down and write. If the DM's going to write a whole plot arc that you need to follow through no matter what, then there's no point actually playing the game - you might as well sit round drinking beer while the DM tells you what happens, and then tot up your xp.

The DM's role is to provide an interesting, challenging and flavourful setting in which the player characters can decide what to do with their lives. No more, and no less. If the DM does a good job of this, and the players do a good job of playing their characters, then a plot emerges spontaneously.

 

[Psion]

As a Player (not a DM), how much plot do you like in a D&D game?

Are you satisfied with raiding dungeons without thought as to any behind-the-scenes reasons for going in?

Are you excited by deep, convoluted plots for everything and everyone?

I could not run JADC (Just Another Dungeon Crawl). I require some sort of evolving background events that the players get embroiled in.

But I have learned the hard way that there is a limit (varying from player to player) to how complex a plot the players will become meaningfully involved with.

 

[The_Gneech]

I like short, self-contained plots and small, one-page dungeons.

More than that, tho, I like cool and different ideas. There was a scenario in Dungeon magazine a while back in which the whole "dungeon" was a series of towers on the back of a giant beast stomping all over the countryside. That's the sort of thing that makes me sit up and take notice!

The game I'm playing in right now has had a LOT of fighting lately, and I have to admit, I'm getting kind of sick of it. I want some neat new stuff, not just more giants to kill.

-TG

 

[BullMarkOne]

I love plots. I just hate plots written by a DM and forcefed to you.

Tru Dat. I will say, however that if the dm has a far reaching world affecting plot, and I choose to ignore it and instead traipse around getting sidetracked, I like to see the effects of said plot on the world around my pc. Ie, hypothetical DM has a plot outline where the evil orc warlord of the south is preparing to invade the peaceful barony of pleasdontkillme, and my pc has the opportunity to get involved in and maybe prevent the invasion, well then I darn well want to hear about the invasion while my pc is tossing a few back at the local suds and grub. Just makes the world feel more complete.

 

[francisca]

Depends.

Sometimes, a good old dungeon crawl is just what the Dr. ordered. Other times, I like to have the feeling there is a plot going on, and enjoy unraveling it.

 

[Speaks With Stone]

According to the Robin Laws Book, I am a storyteller gamer. That being said, I only want so much plot, but it has to be there.

My way of thinking is that fighting for no reason is completely uninteresting. I want to fight for a good reason. But notice the emphasis is on fighting and conflict. I don't want to spend my time negotiating trade deals, resolving love triangles, or picking up someone's dry cleaning. I roleplay for the action, but I want the action to be meaningful.

I have overplanned and overplotted my share of adventures, but my current philosophy is that I will set up situations in front of the direction the characters have chosen. I will try to make everything meaningful, but I will first try to make it exciting and interesting. I have found that it is fairly easy to incorporate new things into a loose plot and can even use player interests to roll things into the next adventure.

One of the players makes a 20 on his appraise check on random loot - Great! You recognize the ring as having the markings of a prominent merchant family. How did this ring get in the monster's lair? Was a victim from that family? Was it a payment for services? Maybe I'll say that one of the characters has an old friend in the family? Depends on my whim, really. A few gather information rolls in town later, we have the next adventure rolling along while the party is still trying to figure out what to do with the last batch of loot.

 

[RFisher]

The important thing is that I can--generally--apply reason. If things are consistenty so random that I might as well be making random decisions, I'm not going to be having too much fun.

When I'm DM, I often wing it. Sometimes I just listen to the players to figure out how they're thinking & adjust the world to seem pre-existing & rational. Don't tell them that, though.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I love plots. I just hate plots written by a DM and forcefed to you.

Plot is a property of the player characters, and it emerges from the game as a result of continued play. It is NOT something that an adventure designer should sit down and write. If the DM's going to write a whole plot arc that you need to follow through no matter what, then there's no point actually playing the game - you might as well sit round drinking beer while the DM tells you what happens, and then tot up your xp.

The DM's role is to provide an interesting, challenging and flavourful setting in which the player characters can decide what to do with their lives. No more, and no less. If the DM does a good job of this, and the players do a good job of playing their characters, then a plot emerges spontaneously.

I disagree. Again, I think it depends on the skills of the DM, and the willingness of the players to start in the "right place." I've both run and played in campaigns where I/the DM had a story in mind from the beginning. This does not limit the PCs in any meaningful way, so long as the DM is willing to go with the flow, not to assume the PCs will move through the story on any specific pathway, and isn't afraid to ad-lib and change things at the drop of a hat.

In other words, a skilled DM can take PCs from Point A to Point G to Point M to Point S to Point Z, regardless of whether the PCs go from A to B or A to F (and so forth).

Or, to put it another way by quoting someone--I just wish I could remember who, to give proepr credit:

"Plot is what happens if the PCs aren't around to stop it."

Sure, this sort of campaign falls apart if the DM sets up a "save the world" campaign, and the players are make characters that are cold-blooded mercenaries who skewer toddlers for profit. But frankly, any game with such a dichotomy of views between DM and players is going to fail, overarching plot or not. So long as the players and DMs know what they're getting into together from the beginning, and are both interested in working together, it works.

 

[rogueattorney]

I agree with Foster and P&P, which is I'm sure a shock to all concerned. (Grognard gamists unite!!!)

The DM is there to provide the setting. To provide the basic starting scenario for the players. It's up to the players to run with it. The story is what happens to the pc's in the setting.

This might be a finer distinction than it seems, and some of us might be talking past each other. An orc-invasion scenario has been mentioned. I've used similar. What I would object to is a game in which the pc's are taken from scene to scene in a pre-planned sequence ultimately discovering the invasion, defeating the minions, and conquering the BBEG at the end. This is the kind of game involving railroading to keep the characters on track, miraculous escapes by the BBEG because he isn't supposed to die yet, and fudging to make sure the players don't fail and ruin the DM's story. In other words, it doesn't matter what the players do, good or bad, because the DM has his story to tell.

What I don't object to is a dynamic setting in which things are happening independent of the player characters and the pc's can choose how and when they involve themselves in the setting. The players find out about the orc invasion. Do they try to stop it? Try to join it? Get the f outta Dodge? If they do try to stop it, do they roust the local militia and meet it head to head? Do they engage in spying and sabotage? Do they kick the orcs' door down, kill them, and take their stuff? All those answers are provided by the players and not the DM. The DM, of course assigns consequences to the players' actions. If the players say screw it, and get out of town. Well, that orc army takes over. Or maybe some other heroes take care of it and get the kudos the pc's should have gotten.

In the end, the "story" is reflective, post hoc, what the pc's did, not what the DM decided would happen ahead of time.

R.A.