Expanding D&D adventures past mere combat

[The Shaman]

Seriously if you have a good 'experienced' group you can turn a game into an interactive story creation experience where all player intiate, expand and resolve encounters in a world of there own creation.

This is pretty much how we played Boot Hill back in the day - we had a random event table and we took turns playing the "bad guys" (which were in fact sometimes the good guys, but bad relative to our bad guy characters, if you follow my meaning).

It can be done, but it requires a cohesive group of like-minded players.

 

[Mystery Man]

How do you have the noncombat planning go so quickly? That would save me a -ton- of time.

-Matt

Every time I did you what described it always turned into a complete waste of time because my players would never give me the chance to use the material I prepared because they would do the exact opposite. Without fail! So I come up with 2 or 3 sentences of what is going to happen a brief ouline of various consequences and wing the rest.

That's why I'm struggling to find the point in this thread. Merric says we need this or that to expand DnD beyond combat and you'll get a ton of posters agreeing with him but no real concrete suggestions as to how. Just bitching about all rules of DnD. Not that there's anything wrong with that!

So I go back to my proposition that it can't be taught. That isn't to say that it can't be learned.

 

[Quasqueton]

I cut that part out, actually, didn't realize a moderator chimed in on it, and it was off-topic, so my error there.

Your video game comment was not off topic. It was exactly *on* topic (and correct):

Are computer games as legitimate an influence on D&D as novels? I'd say so.

Quasqueton

 

[Kid Socrates]

Every time I did you what described it always turned into a complete waste of time because my players would never give me the chance to use the material I prepared because they would do the exact opposite. Without fail! So I come up with 2 or 3 sentences of what is going to happen a brief ouline of various consequences and wing the rest.

That's why I'm struggling to find the point in this thread. Merric says we need this or that to expand DnD beyond combat and you'll get a ton of posters agreeing with him but no real concrete suggestions as to how. Just bitching about all rules of DnD. Not that there's anything wrong with that!

So I go back to my proposition that it can't be taught. That isn't to say that it can't be learned.

Pointers always help, though. Even if it's just notecards for the NPCs covering attitude and knowledge instead of base attack and save bonuses. That'd be more useful if you have a ton of NPCs, though.

How many rules would you want on this side of things? We've got skills for Diplomacy and Bluff and other things like that, which was far more than AD&D had (I think - only played it a bit), so that's definitely a step up.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

One thing I have found, which has been alluded to by others here, is that the PCs world needs to have a certain amount of stability. Someone mentioned large cities force players to focus less on combat. One of the reasons for that is the fact that they are likely to encounter the same people time and again. They PCs are in one locale. They may have a "home base," which means they frequent the same bars, meet the same city guards, annoy the same neighbors many times. Screw with someone, whom you will likely meet again, and there may be consequences at a later time.

Most published adventures don't work with this, unless they are part of a long story arc. It is a "waste of space" and it reduced the genericness (is that a word?) of the adventure. If your PCs are always on the move across the continent, travelling from one city to the next dungeon, to the later temple and so on, they never have to worry about the story behind the adventure. "We killed the BBEG, they townspeople threw us a banquet, gave us some stuff, and now we are off, never to see these people again. Who cares why the BBEG set up his evil camp here."

Think of it like TV shows. Some shows are individual episodes. Very little connection from one to the next. In many of those shows the story is action focused and fairly linear. In recent years shows have discovered the story arc. Now the characters grow, the antagonists return, the intrigue is more complex.

A good DM will find ways to weave the individual "episodes" (adventures) into a tapestry. Good players will help to do so by adding their own work. But publishers will be hard pressed to create that tapestry for a DM (unless they railroad everyone) because they can't see what will develop as each individual group plays it out.

In my opinion some of the better adventures run you through it, but then spell out information for further adventures. Perhaps that is the key. Publishers write an adventure. At the end they have five or six suggestions for further adventures. They then write those suggestions into adventures with further suggestions at the end of those (some of which may tie back to earlier suggestions). The hard part with this is that the adventures then need to be easily scaleable to the current party level. (Hmmm. Published online, DMs can sign up as a subscription allowing x number of downloads per year as needed or just purchase them one by one.) Sorry, going off on my own little tangent here...

 

[Remathilis]

I personally think that video games (gasp) are the wave of the future.

videogames have made many improvements since "pong". Games like Final Fantasy, Everquest, Neverwinter Nights, and Knights of the Old Republic have expanded upon the basics of role-playing in ways PnP cannot. FF allows me nearly movie-level experience, mixed with interactive puzzle solving. EQ allows for a more social experience of hundreds of live players. NWN and KOTOR are grand examples of both combat and plot interwoven into great narratives.

To compare them to novel-writing is ludacris; they are seperate medias with thier own strengths and weaknesses. To deny either has had an influence on the hobby is equally ridiculous. However, I assert the video games will continue to influence PnP design much as the the authors of great fantasy did in the 70s.

To address the other point: YOU DON"T NEED RULES TO ROLE-PLAY. You need them for combat and task-resolution. Theoretically, Regdar and Mialee don't need stats to parlay, to solve a puzzle-plot, or to chat about the weather, the need them to search for secret doors and beat the snot out of each other. WotC I think realized the a Good PC/DM can role-play for hours without thier intervention, but when they fight, they want clear rules and quick resolution.

If I have a character with an 18 dex, and max ranks in balance/jump/tumble, I don't need a feat to call him "acrobatic" and say he grew up in a circus trapeeze troupe, but secretly fears heights; I need a feat to give me a +2 to balance and tumble checks. Thats why few feats do not provide some tangible bonus/ability and why flaws are not part of the STANDARD game. (You're character is ugly; here's your free feat).

I guess its why I get so frustrated with the assumption that 3.x = combat; it doesn't any more than 2e or 1e. Combat is a crucial element in all forms, but role-playing is its own reward. (This is why I don't hand out XP for role-playing, its subjective and counter-productive.)

So, I'm glad D&D is hands-off on RP and only really concerned with combat/task resolution; I can handle the RPing without any rules, but need rules for combat.

 

[The Shaman]

However, to get a good noncombat, conversation-heavy session ready, I do a lot more work, coming up with what the NPCs know, what they'll say, what they won't say, how they will react to such and such, what they think of the PCs, how honest they are, and all that for each one, takes me far longer than setting up a combat. It also makes for a long session, which is very, very nice.

Rather than try to figure out what the NPC will or won't say or how s/he'll react, I spend my time on the NPC's history, allies, goals, methods, and attitudes. When it comes encounter time, I simply play off the adventurers based on that preparation.

For example, the guy who waits tables at the inn has worked for the innkeeper for about 10 years, serves in the local militia, wants to get with the innkeeper's daughter in the worst way, sneaks food from the guests' plates, and thinks adventurers are looney. Roleplaying this character is pretty easy, and allows me to introduce some elements that the players can play off of: for example, an adventurer wonders why his roast chicken is short a leg when it arrives, then sees the guy with a leg bone sticking out of the corner of his mouth while staring at the innkeeper's buxom daughter (is there any other kind?) tending bar - if the adventurer confronts the thief, he'll be frightened and may run outside to call for help from his compatriots in the militia (who all know he's a food-snitch but hey, he's a townie, and the adventurers are strangers...).

I don't set up something like this as an encounter - I let it flow from the NPC description and the player characters' reactions. The description gives me enough material to gauge the NPC's actions/reactions, and to stir the pot a little to prompt a response from the adventurers. My prep for this NPC and a possible encounter was about 30 seconds and five sentences of text.

I don't know if this adds anything to the discussion or not... :\

 

[JBowtie]

So just brainstorming here....
The way that books and novels unvail hidden plot elements is to have a cut scene that features the villians.

If this is adapted directly(I have tried it) the DM just describes what happens in a scene, an the players just sit there. (smoe listen/some dont)

What about giving each PC a few details about the motivation of the villian or people the villain is interacting with, and having them play out the scene. Then taking whatever resolution they came to and weaving it back into the plot.

Could this work?

What I do in my game is essentially this. I give the players some temporary characters that will interact with the main characters during the cutscene; each temporary character has a main goal (obtain or divulge some piece of information, use a feat, successful skill check, extract a promise/favour) and I award a hero point or XP to the regular character if the goal is met.

They might also a have a paragraph of backstory to help provide motivation/characterization.

This is a great way to provide an interactive cutscene while still retaining a modicum of story control.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I tend to read novels that are complex enough to be interpreted in multiple valid ways. So, no, what you seem to be insinuating here is not at all what I meant.

Video games are often complex enough to be interpreted in multiple valid ways, as well. The FF series, for instance, is in some circles INFAMOS for it's use of deep philosophical questions of meaning and paradise and being and non-being.

I strive for that level of storytelling in my p-n-p experience.

An MMO such as World of Warcraft can be played in different ways as well. Some will play it to pit their skills against other players (PvP), some will play it to develop a skill tree and socially interact (PvE), and some will do it to immerse themselves in a role and deeply connect to the storyline (RP).

I would say that D&D does need methods to build tension that aren't combat-based, but I think that blaming the problems of D&D on video game influence is missing the mark entirely.

 

[Simplicity]

Rather than try to figure out what the NPC will or won't say or how s/he'll react, I spend my time on the NPC's history, allies, goals, methods, and attitudes. When it comes encounter time, I simply play off the adventurers based on that preparation.

I think one major thing that can be done to bring in more conversation is to detail the major NPCs in an adventure in a different way.

Right now, each NPC has a stat block (which is essentially a *combat* stat block). Each NPC could also have a relationship-based stat-block that describes what the players can learn or gain from the NPC if certain relationship milestones are achieved. For example:

Bob the Blacksmith:
"I ain't got nothing for you, now git..." (Attitude: Unfriendly)
"Sure, I know whar Fred is..." (Attitude: Helpful).
"Y'all look like the type who might need some *real* weapons..." (Offers to sell longsword +1)(Attitude: Helpful).
"Alright, alright. I stole the pie..." (Diplomacy DC 15 or Intimidate DC 11)

Giving the DM some inspiration as to why the players might wish to interact with their fellow characters might help...