thecasualoblivion
First Post
Forked from: "HF" vs. "S&S" gaming: the underlying reason of conflict and change in D&D
This is a bit rambling, so forgive me.
I've been rather engaged with that thread, and this thread happens to coincide with the departure of one of my gaming group, who is the DM for one of our two 4E campaigns. As I imply in the title, the original thread got me thinking about the underlying theories of RPGs, prompting me to scan the Grognardia blog from beginning to end. As I am now inheriting our Friday game, and am going to have to heavily revamp sundays game to deal with his departure as a player, I am at a crossroads.
First off, I'm running 4E and that isn't going to change. Years of modern RPGs, from Vampire: the Masquerade to D&D 4E, combined with two decades of computer and console RPGs have made interesting character creation and progression a requirement. Sadly, AD&D and retro clones fall well short of this requirement, no matter how much I appreciate how rules light they can be. The lack of balance, lack of transparency, and amount of DM hassle involved in 3E and its variants make those even more of a non-choice to me and my group.
What I am rethinking is the story first philosophy. Well, not entirely, but at the very least the concept of the adventure path. Reading the writings of the old school D&D fans has me thinking they might have a point. While the ongoing epic saga of the "adventure path" is great in theory, I've rarely seen it executed well in practice. Looking back at my experience, a lot of my experiences go along the lines of trying to cram a square peg into a round hole. It also doesn't help that the D&D system in any edition really doesn't support this. I say that because the "game" progression of D&D is kill monsters, get xp and loot, and as a result become more powerful. That progression doesn't entirely fit in the epic saga/adventure path paradigm IMO. While 4E gives some tools towards promoting the ongoing saga like quest xp, the game is still very much kill/loot/powerup and I'm not convinced that the game is wrong for being that way. I am also of the belief that no story survives contact with the players, and the amount of railroading an adventure path entails(even a homebrewed one) is too much.
Also, the HF vs. S&S has a hidden point in it, in regards to 4E. The system is completely disconnected from any sort of alignment, or morality for that matter. Aside from some player and DM advice on playing the "good guys", there is no morality contained in the game system. Combine this with the kill/loot/powerup progression, and the game pretty much follows a violent and selfish path by default. Again, I'm starting to think there is nothing wrong with this. I've noticed over years of gaming that left to their own devices, players tend to play somewhat amoral, moderately violent borderline sociopaths. You often have to beat them with a stick(either the DM or other players have to) to keep them on the "good" path, and the game(D&D) doesn't really help you. The S&S archetype of a somewhat amoral hero out for adventure and profit fits well with both player behavior and how the game runs, and isn't really at odds with modern tropes for that matter such as the modern brooding antihero, action movie characters whose behavior would result in arrest in the real world, anime badasses who are more concerned with stomping face than the consequences of their actions, ect.
Mostly what I'm saying is that reading these old school comments has me feeling like I'm trying to swim upstream, and that it might be better to just embrace and work with what the game is at the core. Story first came into being for a reason, but I'm starting to think the epic saga and adventure path wasn't the reason. Much is made of the "emergent storyline" and I'm starting to agree with that theory. I also believe that while the emergent storyline is at odds with the adventure path, it isn't necessarily at odds with story first.
Basically, what I'm looking at for the two games I run is this:
1. 4E characters are resilient, and while this goes against old school gaming, 4E character creation/progression(as well as the character creation/progression of most modern RPGS) is a rewarding endeavor and invests the players in their characters. As players are invested in their characters from the beginning, I see nothing wrong with the level of plot-protection 4E gives them.
2. I'm thinking along the lines of a halfway point between adventure path and sandbox. Kind of an episodic, location based story. Instead of a big sandbox, a series of small sandboxes. Instead of an adventure path, focus the story episodically on events and locations which happen independantly from but can be influnced by player actions.
3. Episodic breaks, not unlike pulp S&S novels. Keep character progression based on the treasure parcels system, but give out more treasure during the adventure, which by DM decree will be blown by the PCs(the PCs are encouraged to tell how this happens) before they start the next episode penniless and in search of adventure.
The funny thing is that I used to run this exact game. Back during my 2E/Vampire: the Masquerade/Rolemaster days this was pretty much my DM philosophy, and I'm not quite sure when or where I got away from it.
This is a bit rambling, so forgive me.
I've been rather engaged with that thread, and this thread happens to coincide with the departure of one of my gaming group, who is the DM for one of our two 4E campaigns. As I imply in the title, the original thread got me thinking about the underlying theories of RPGs, prompting me to scan the Grognardia blog from beginning to end. As I am now inheriting our Friday game, and am going to have to heavily revamp sundays game to deal with his departure as a player, I am at a crossroads.
First off, I'm running 4E and that isn't going to change. Years of modern RPGs, from Vampire: the Masquerade to D&D 4E, combined with two decades of computer and console RPGs have made interesting character creation and progression a requirement. Sadly, AD&D and retro clones fall well short of this requirement, no matter how much I appreciate how rules light they can be. The lack of balance, lack of transparency, and amount of DM hassle involved in 3E and its variants make those even more of a non-choice to me and my group.
What I am rethinking is the story first philosophy. Well, not entirely, but at the very least the concept of the adventure path. Reading the writings of the old school D&D fans has me thinking they might have a point. While the ongoing epic saga of the "adventure path" is great in theory, I've rarely seen it executed well in practice. Looking back at my experience, a lot of my experiences go along the lines of trying to cram a square peg into a round hole. It also doesn't help that the D&D system in any edition really doesn't support this. I say that because the "game" progression of D&D is kill monsters, get xp and loot, and as a result become more powerful. That progression doesn't entirely fit in the epic saga/adventure path paradigm IMO. While 4E gives some tools towards promoting the ongoing saga like quest xp, the game is still very much kill/loot/powerup and I'm not convinced that the game is wrong for being that way. I am also of the belief that no story survives contact with the players, and the amount of railroading an adventure path entails(even a homebrewed one) is too much.
Also, the HF vs. S&S has a hidden point in it, in regards to 4E. The system is completely disconnected from any sort of alignment, or morality for that matter. Aside from some player and DM advice on playing the "good guys", there is no morality contained in the game system. Combine this with the kill/loot/powerup progression, and the game pretty much follows a violent and selfish path by default. Again, I'm starting to think there is nothing wrong with this. I've noticed over years of gaming that left to their own devices, players tend to play somewhat amoral, moderately violent borderline sociopaths. You often have to beat them with a stick(either the DM or other players have to) to keep them on the "good" path, and the game(D&D) doesn't really help you. The S&S archetype of a somewhat amoral hero out for adventure and profit fits well with both player behavior and how the game runs, and isn't really at odds with modern tropes for that matter such as the modern brooding antihero, action movie characters whose behavior would result in arrest in the real world, anime badasses who are more concerned with stomping face than the consequences of their actions, ect.
Mostly what I'm saying is that reading these old school comments has me feeling like I'm trying to swim upstream, and that it might be better to just embrace and work with what the game is at the core. Story first came into being for a reason, but I'm starting to think the epic saga and adventure path wasn't the reason. Much is made of the "emergent storyline" and I'm starting to agree with that theory. I also believe that while the emergent storyline is at odds with the adventure path, it isn't necessarily at odds with story first.
Basically, what I'm looking at for the two games I run is this:
1. 4E characters are resilient, and while this goes against old school gaming, 4E character creation/progression(as well as the character creation/progression of most modern RPGS) is a rewarding endeavor and invests the players in their characters. As players are invested in their characters from the beginning, I see nothing wrong with the level of plot-protection 4E gives them.
2. I'm thinking along the lines of a halfway point between adventure path and sandbox. Kind of an episodic, location based story. Instead of a big sandbox, a series of small sandboxes. Instead of an adventure path, focus the story episodically on events and locations which happen independantly from but can be influnced by player actions.
3. Episodic breaks, not unlike pulp S&S novels. Keep character progression based on the treasure parcels system, but give out more treasure during the adventure, which by DM decree will be blown by the PCs(the PCs are encouraged to tell how this happens) before they start the next episode penniless and in search of adventure.
The funny thing is that I used to run this exact game. Back during my 2E/Vampire: the Masquerade/Rolemaster days this was pretty much my DM philosophy, and I'm not quite sure when or where I got away from it.
