Failing Forward

[Imaro]

Honestly, I think the whole "pre-authored" idea is somewhat of a tangent to the larger sticking point, which is "hidden backstory." It's about how often are things happening in the game world outside the influence of the PCs that can come up later and materially impact their odds of success. I know a lot of gamers who view NPCs pursuing agendas separately from the actions of the PCs to be the height of verisimilitude, and I think it's that playstyle that some of us find most in opposition to our preferences with narrative focused games.

I thought it was about whether the PC's were aware of those factors... not whether they impacted or didn't impact the chance for success...

 

[TwoSix]

I thought it was about whether the PC's were aware of those factors... not whether they impacted or didn't impact the chance for success...

If they don't come up at the table and impact the mechanics in some way, (which could be impacting the dice roll odds, changing the allowable stakes, or causing a different scene to be framed than would have otherwise) than what does it matter?

 

[Imaro]

If they don't come up at the table and impact the mechanics in some way, (which could be impacting the dice roll odds, changing the allowable stakes, or causing a different scene to be framed than would have otherwise) than what does it matter?

Yes but the key point is still whether they are aware of it or not. Otherwise you're saying even if the PC's are aware of the effect it still robs agency, which it doesn't... at least as far as I understand [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] 's explanation

 

[TwoSix]

Yes but the key point is still whether they are aware of it or not. Otherwise you're saying even if the PC's are aware of the effect it still robs agency, which it doesn't... at least as far as I understand [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] 's explanation

Oh sure. I'm just saying if you pre-author something that A) the players don't know about; and B) never comes up at the table, than it's not hurting anything for anybody's agenda.

 

[Aenghus]

I thought it was about whether the PC's were aware of those factors... not whether they impacted or didn't impact the chance for success...

Answering for myself, hidden backstory can invalidate a PC concept from the very start of the game, but the player him or herself may not discover that for ages. Mainly I'm talking dealbreakers here, situations the player will find untenable and will lead to characters being killed off, retiring or players leaving. The referee may or may not notice this. If s/he doesn't play proceeds until the big reveal happens, and the consequences kick in. If they do notice, they need to decide whether they prioritise player enjoyment or keeping secrets more. Early on player concepts can be nudged to more appropriate or less doomed directions without letting on exactly why, though players may guess right.

Lots of little obstacles do accumulate, and if the pro-activity of a player runs against the grain of a hidden backstory, they can inadvertently be locked into a cycle of failure, where the referee is reluctant to explain why so many things the player does seemed to be doomed to failure or turn out irrelevant. Even when their is no single dealbreaker, a consistent string of failures of pro-activity will sap the morale of most players (unless they enjoy tragedies). Too much dangerous hidden backstory turns the game into a game of minesweeper, where the player is forced to make blind moves and any move could be his or her last.

If and when the player finds out they can be very cross their playing time and character investment has been wasted by the referee (as they see it), who typically figures out before the player concerned that they will be displeased as to the turn of events, but may be reluctant to rock the boat and hope against hope that everything will work out right.

Hidden backstory is always a risk, a double risk as it's difficult to get prior feedback or buy-in from the players without blowing the secret. Tastes differ, and I've seen a high proportion of hidden backstory and plot twists blow up in the referee's face as a consequence.

For me the nub of the issue is whether a referee prioritises player proactivity or hidden backstory and secrets.

 

[Maxperson]

"I don't know about this Misty Lake, Scoob. Sounds creeeeeepy!"

Yeah, but they always end up going anyway

 

[Maxperson]

Answering for myself, hidden backstory can invalidate a PC concept from the very start of the game, but the player him or herself may not discover that for ages. Mainly I'm talking dealbreakers here, situations the player will find untenable and will lead to characters being killed off, retiring or players leaving. The referee may or may not notice this. If s/he doesn't play proceeds until the big reveal happens, and the consequences kick in. If they do notice, they need to decide whether they prioritise player enjoyment or keeping secrets more. Early on player concepts can be nudged to more appropriate or less doomed directions without letting on exactly why, though players may guess right.

This is not a problem with pre-authoring, though. It's a DM/player problem. The DM and players should be communicating what the PC concepts are, so things like that are avoided.

Lots of little obstacles do accumulate, and if the pro-activity of a player runs against the grain of a hidden backstory, they can inadvertently be locked into a cycle of failure, where the referee is reluctant to explain why so many things the player does seemed to be doomed to failure or turn out irrelevant. Even when their is no single dealbreaker, a consistent string of failures of pro-activity will sap the morale of most players (unless they enjoy tragedies). Too much dangerous hidden backstory turns the game into a game of minesweeper, where the player is forced to make blind moves and any move could be his or her last.

I think that happens to me about once or twice in a two year period. Not the string of unexplained failures, but any unexplained failures. I use the Forgotten Realms, so a bunch of pre-authored stuff there, and then when prepping the game I pre-author about 30-50% of the content and wing the rest, depending on circumstances. What you are describing is rare outside of DMs prone to railroading, and that's a bad DM issue, not a pre-author issue.

 

[Aenghus]

This is not a problem with pre-authoring, though. It's a DM/player problem. The DM and players should be communicating what the PC concepts are, so things like that are avoided.

I see it as a potential problem with hidden backstory, where the referee's concern about keeping secrets discourage them from revealing relevant information out of character to the player at character generation or early on when it could do some good. I think discouraging open communication and transparency counts as a potential downside. Whether it is or not depends on the particulars of the people involved and the game being played.

Myself, I am less and less enamoured of hidden twists and big campaign secrets. The big reveal is often much more important to the referee than any of the players, and sometimes it backfires badly. The price of such elements is secrecy and misdirection right now, that can affect play in unexpected ways even when everyone is making a honest effort to create a good game.

I think that happens to me about once or twice in a two year period. Not the string of unexplained failures, but any unexplained failures. I use the Forgotten Realms, so a bunch of pre-authored stuff there, and then when prepping the game I pre-author about 30-50% of the content and wing the rest, depending on circumstances. What you are describing is rare outside of DMs prone to railroading, and that's a bad DM issue, not a pre-author issue.

Again,I this context I'm addressing hidden backstory, campaign secrets and the potential damage to open communication between referee and players, not pre-authoring in general.

Bad DMs render any discussion of techniques moot. I prefer to focus on average DMs who make mistakes but aspire to do better. An awareness of the risks inherent in certain techniques can inform their use and help avoid errors.

 

[Maxperson]

I see it as a potential problem with hidden backstory, where the referee's concern about keeping secrets discourage them from revealing relevant information out of character to the player at character generation or early on when it could do some good. I think discouraging open communication and transparency counts as a potential downside. Whether it is or not depends on the particulars of the people involved and the game being played.

Open communication is not required. Simple communication is. I don't need to tell the player my hidden plans. Once I know what the PC concept is, I will also know if and what the potential conflict is. Then I can usually cure it purely on my side the the player will never know. If it's problematic, I can discuss with the player the concept and see if the player is open to changes. Usually, the player has a dozen awesome concepts he wants to try and my players know that if it was fixable on my side it would be, so they generally don't have an issue with tweaking the current concept or picking a new one. The number of time this hasn't worked out requires me no fingers to count. Transparency is not required to avoid these issues.

Myself, I am less and less enamoured of hidden twists and big campaign secrets. The big reveal is often much more important to the referee than any of the players, and sometimes it backfires badly. The price of such elements is secrecy and misdirection right now, that can affect play in unexpected ways even when everyone is making a honest effort to create a good game.

That's a personality issue. My wife also hates surprises, even to the point of often just telling me what she wants for holidays. For myself, it would ruin most of the enjoyment to know in advance. She reads TV show and movie spoilers. I go out of my way to avoid any chance of coming across them.

The key is to find like minded players and have a great time. My players really enjoy the mystery behind not knowing everything. You and those you play with likely don't enjoy things like that and want to know everything. That's okay.

Again,I this context I'm addressing hidden backstory, campaign secrets and the potential damage to open communication between referee and players, not pre-authoring in general.

Bad DMs render any discussion of techniques moot. I prefer to focus on average DMs who make mistakes but aspire to do better. An awareness of the risks inherent in certain techniques can inform their use and help avoid errors.

I only reference bad DMs because good and average ones will take mistakes and learn from them, so their mistakes are an acceptable part of the game.

 

[sheadunne]

Once I know what the PC concept is, I will also know if and what the potential conflict is.

This is where I have issue, not with you, but with the "PC concept." In a D&D sense (which I rarely play anymore), I wouldn't even have a concept in the works until level 5 or 6. I develop background during play not before play begins. I find it too restricting and want the freedom to develop the concept of character during play rather than before. I want the decisions made to influence and direct the PC's development. I don't come into play knowing any of that. I have a few personality traits, for example, grumpy dwarf, but not the why developed. Nor do I want it to be developed until I've been playing with the character a while. This is one of the reasons I don't find interest in pre-authored content. How can anything be pre-authored for my character when I don't know enough about the character yet. Frame him in a scene, see what emerges and what choices the character makes and move on from there.

I find pre-authored sandbox play the most frustrating type of play. Choices are expected to be made when character hasn't even been developed yet. And so PCs head in a "random" direction and encounter a pre-authored situation which isn't connected to any of the characters. Since there's no connection to the character, because we haven't framed scenes to aid in that development, the pre-authored content doesn't force choices of consequence. Rescue the princess or not isn't a good choice when, am I good or evil hasn't even been tested yet. Am I moral character or not? Do I value gold or magic or ale? What's my motivation? I prefer choices that test those attributes of character before we even start talking about big plot points. Maybe we find out at the third session that one of the character's motivations is to buy and own a tavern because he just encounter an interesting barkeep. How could we have pre-authored that, when the player didn't know that was going to be of interest? Maybe another character is struggling with the killing of creatures and his desire for a life of luxury brought on by wealth? How do we answer the question with pre-authored content when the player didn't even know at the time of character creation, that it was going to be a complication with the character? \

Anyway, I like a different type of game and a different way of having it played. I'm okay with that. But in 30+ years of gaming I have moved away from pre-authored games and now stick with the type I enjoy. As should everyone.