Do you prefer DM-driven or PC-driven plot lines?

[Fenes 2]

As a DM I like it when a player takes the initiative and tells me what he would like to do, since I prefer planning adventures that are fun for the players, and cater to their taste. I myself have been burned once too often by a adventure that I just wanted to finish so that it was over, and would not like to subject my players to the same.

This does not mean that a PC has to take the initiative in game. A player can tell me he would like to take part in a tournament and have his PC stumble upon a tournament in progress, or get roped into one as an semi-willing champion for a lady, or he can actively have his PC seek out a tournament.

I usually have an main plot arc, but I regularly clear those arcs with the players - no need to prepare something no one likes - and generally try to let the players decide in which direction the adventures go.

 

[JoeGKushner]

As a DM, I try to put a lot of work into the world and background utilizing official resources and a ton of homemade characters, places, and other goodies.

Having said that, I try to make sure that enough is going on so that the players have some options. I'm not afraid however, to use some elements of the campaign against 'em.

For example, one of the players has been a hostage for months of real time and over a year of game time for no good in-game reason outside of the players just wanting to kick some ass here and there. Their merc company ordered them to go get 'em.

Same thing with a Necromancer who keeps sending undead and other assassins after them. They just sit back and wait for the order to take 'em down while they do this and that.

As a player, I try to flow with the overall story, but interact with the inhabitants and make little impacts here and there to give the GM ideas on what my character may want to do or help other characters out on trying to figure stuff out. "Gee, you haven't been home to Burok Torn in months? Perhaps we should head there soon." "So you think that your spellpower is weak? Perhaps we can search for a new mentor for you."

 

[s/LaSH]

I can't spring carefully formulated surprises on the players if I don't have a place for them to leap out of shouting 'Booga-booga!' In that regard, I favour DM-driven plots. However, one of the most fun sessions we've had was when the PCs went charging off into the next kingdom but one looking for a merchant I'd made up on the spot, when I'd planned them to go into the distant desert on a completely different wild goose chase. That was cool. I guess I provide hooks, and if the players don't pick up on them I have to go along with it. It just seems the fair thing to do - I get to call the shots most of the time, after all.

 

[Danyon Dehlmari]

Both. I like the DM to have a rich detailed world, and have ideas/plots regarding NPC politics etc that involve my character. I also enjoying carving my own way in the world, and I focus a great deal as a player on the plot and character development/RP.

 

[Joseph Elric Smith]

What if you are both a player and a dm?
ken

 

[Drawmack]

My option wasn't above.

My favorite style campaign is a city campaign. This leads to an interesting type of playing that is not available in other scenarios.

Here is how I work it. The party is a company within the city, usually some sort of investigative company - but I've also had military parties and the like.

Then based on their position with the community I will allow them to decide how to explore the city, with some nose leading involved. The first adventure is usually a no choice type thing. Here is an example.

Party: Troop of investigators in Freeport.

How The Campaign Works: After the party completes an adventure they are informed how much down time is going to happen before the next adventure starts, anywhere from a week to a year. They then are allowed to tell me, or for long breaks write up, what they do in this time. This is when supplies are bought, training takes place etc. I also drop a newspaper on them with 4 - 8 stories, each one is an adventure hook and they decide which lead to follow. Sometimes people will seek to hire them as well, but not often. All these stories then progress with or without the PCs intervention. The tale of their last adventure will always be in the paper as well. The basic idea is that the world is zooming by all around the PCs and we zoom in on different parts of their careers. The PCs get to decide what we zoom in on, but the DM gets to decide what is available to be zoomed in on and control the zoom once the PCs pick the aspect to zoom in on. It's kind of like a choose your own adventure book.

 

[bill2825]

I think this is a great dsicussion!!!!

IMC I have been accused of both leading the PC's to much and not leading the PC's enough, both by players in the same group. I have to admit, I understand where the frustration comes from.... "let me splain".

My current campaign is an epic campaign, planned for levels 1 through 30. This is a very very broad range for a single campaign, but I have developed a method (successful so far) to make it easier to work with.

First, I view the entire campaign as a series of books or TV mini-series (a la Babylon 5). I use terms closer to books, and as such the campaign is split into books and chapters. Each chapter is generally one "adventure" while each book is a mini-campaign. Each book ties back to an over-arching plot line for the entire campaign.

The over-arching plot line has been drawn out in minimal detail for the entire campaign. Basically, BBEG has such and such a background. BBEG is aiming to get to such and such a point. BBEG is at such and such a starting point when the campaign begins.

Now, within each "Book" I lay out the details of what is happening in the world at that point. For example, the first book was entirely concerned with a Major Orc invasion of the country the party is from. That invasion, of course, tied back to the ocer-arching campaign, but the goal was more of an introduction or prelude to the campaign as a whole. (sort of like Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan (the first book, not the series)).

Now, I then split each "Book" down into chapters where a certain line of events will happen. I then toss in the players and let them react.

At the end of every chapter I go back and match the actions and reputation of the PC's to the outline of the "Book". Based on this, I can make changes on a chapter by chapter basis, be they minor or major. (Damn, that troublesome hero just foiled my plot to only sell red jello and banish the other colors of jello from the world!!!).

Because I do not put restrictions on what PC's are in the game, and work to create plot hooks for new races/characters/classes, I was accused of not being controling enough. Also, because I do not restrict the PC actions within the game, I was accused of not being controling enough.

Now, let me futher explain that I do not believe in leading the characters by the nose, but I do believe in world continuity and in reputation settingfuture actions. This really hit my players as they came to the end of the first book. Because of my setup, the players, upon entering the last 2 "chapters" of the "Book", pretty much had pre-scripted the outcome of most encounters. They had already, through past actions, determined major NPC reactions to them and such.

I carry this longterm affect out to the over-arching campaign as well. When past NPC's reoccur, they already have preset reactions and thoughts on the PC's.

Lastly, as the PC's finnish one "Book"and move into the next "Book", I review the actions and results of what has happened in the book and then apply those affects to the over-arching campaign. This determines where the overall campaign is still headed, and allows the BBEG and other campaign entities to modify thier actions in the future. It also provides basis for future "chapters" and "Books".

I hope all that makes sense.


Bill

 

[A'koss]

IMCs, they change over time. During the early stages of the PCs career, I have a tree-like outline, offering some choices to the players, but is still essentially where I want it to go. (Or should I say "used to"... I keep forgetting I'm a player now! )

Eventually, when (and if) the PCs become a more powerful presence in the campaign I start nudging them into using that power towards a specific long-term goal (and to go wild, even if the character doesn't know how to achieve this end), rather than continue to horde gold and power for it's own sake. Get them to use those abilities and resources to create something in the campaign that will outlast the character who made it. Build your magic-based city, create a transplanar league of paladins, a zoo of monsters (Abyssal Park?)... I've even had one player drop something like 1.5 million in gold to build the most extravagant Inn and Gambling den in my old Greyhawk campaign. It was a staple feature for probably more than 10 years.


Cheers,

A'koss.

 

[MerakSpielman]

I voted "DM: They will be aware of the state of the world as a jumping off point."

I feel very strongly on this issue. My next campaign is shooting to take it to a new level. I am crafting a conviluted SITUATION, and arranging to have the characters involved in a small part of it. Where they go from there - if they get further involved in the events that will inevitabaly be occuring around them - is up to them.

I won't let them get lost, though. There will be TONS of hooks for them to follow if they want - enough for them to pick and choose the ones that sould appealing to their characters. Or they can try to do things that aren't on my hook list at all. I won't stop them, and I will be prepared to make up something interesting off the top of my head. Ad-libbed adventures are often the best.

 

[Mark]

As a DM or a Player, do you prefer to have the DM or the PCs initiate adventures?

-- Nifft

I prefer player initiated plotlines but always plan for DM driven plots, just in case. Plus I make sure to keep track of the DM driven ones so they can progress alongside the player driven plot and be interwoven at points during the campaign.