D&D 5E Help me understand & find the fun in OC/neo-trad play...

[prabe]

I wonder if my GMing style is neo-trad? I make frames for the campaign and arches, sketching potential baddies and their activities. My session to session prep is modifying those frames depending on the characters actions, maybe create a set piece, adding and further develop NPCs, and setting up/preparing potential complications in the players way based on the players plans and action. In session I just improv and let the players do their thing.

It's a very reactive GMing style, kind of a sandbox with defined but dynamic frames. And all of it is based on the fact that my creativity can never match the players fears, paranoias, bizarre conclusions and wild planning based on wrong and insufficient facts. I just tap into that for my prep and campaign development.

I agree with @pemerton that your approach/method does sound similar to mine. I, at least, would say that you're GMing in a neotrad way (insert qualifiers like "probably" or "mostly" to taste).

My own prep tends to happen in clumps--I prep something, and it takes the players a little while to play through it. I also have an advantage in that I have someone in my group who takes extensive in-session notes: I build my prep mostly on those, because the player-side experience (or memories of the experience) is sort of my most relevant touchstone.

 

[bloodtide]

I know which hook is more likely to get buy-in from the players. It’s not unrealistic to think that players and characters are more motivated by issues they have told you matter to them.

This also has the big point of most Neo T players playing characters as themselves. And most Traditional players are deep role playing a character.

How is that not random? How could the players possibly ever determine the difference between "the DM got a random hair up their hindquarters" and "the DM has a secret master plan"?

Independent events are fine. DMs shoving crap down the players' throats exclusively because the DM feels like it, with zero care or interest in what the players would find interesting or exciting or memorable or curious, is not fine, not in neotrad.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Traditional play: DM does whatever they want on their whim. Neo T: see above.

You are absolutely bashing it. There is no other description for this. This is not brutal honesty. It is simply brutality for brutality's sake.

How? Where?

"DM whim" has little to no place in neotrad, that's true. But that's because DM whim is hostile to the ideas that go into neotrad. Having events occur that are independent of characters' actions or goals is perfectly fine in neotrad. Having events that are pure "DM whim" with no rhyme or reason other than "purely because the DM felt like it, if you don't like it BEGONE!" is not fine in neotrad.

I agree that the DM's whims have no place in Neo T. And it has nothing to do with being hostile. Though I wonder how you say it's fine for "events to occur" in Neo T, as long as they are not at the DM whim? How do you tell them apart? Player whim?

As usual, your severe bias is showing here Bloodtide. I don't run a neotrad game, I run a "story game," because it's Dungeon World. But my players are perfectly happy with, for example, being caught by surprise when the Raven-Shadow assassin cult kills someone important while they were out and about. Yes, in theory, they could have stopped the killing if they'd been there, but they weren't there.

But wait, ok, you say you run a story game...that 5th(?) type of game on that website list that I did not mention? Ok...

What is key is you have to do this reasonably. That means, you can't just be constantly inserting such intrusions all the time, because then it feels like the players are being punished solely because their characters can't be in seven places at once. You can't do it egregiously, because that feels like being punished for not being omniscient enough to know which threat was the "real" threat and which was the "not really all that bad" threat. You have to consider what makes an interesting event, not just a shocking or frustrating one.

Reasonably. I'll take it.
Traditional game: The DM does whatever they want on a whim. End of Line.
Neo T and Story games: The DM can only take reasonable actions, as defined by all the players.

In other words...you have to not just do things SOLELY because you feel like it. You have to think about what the impact of your choices as DM will be. The events that occur are not simply for your enjoyment. They're for everyone's enjoyment. For the good times to be especially sweet, sometimes there need to be bad times--but too many bad times will sour the good ones far worse than not having enough would.

This is just the two paths to the same goal though.
Traditional Game: The DM does things based solely on their own judgment of what will make an enjoyable game for everyone.
Neo T Game: All the players of the game decide together what will make an enjoyable game for everyone.

Got any data to back this up? No games I know are like this. Its bad gm advice

I have not seen you give any data for anything?

This is opposed to truly traditional games and old modules where the characters and their origins do not matter at all.

This is true of Classic, not Traditional. .

Though the big point is you are only talking about mechanics. If a game has detailed character arc rules then it is Neo T.

Though note "characters and origins" do matter in a Traditional game. They just are not in the rules and woven into the adventure.

You show only the difference between what you imagine neo-trad to mean and what it actually is in reality. If I ever saw a table playing the way you describe neo-trad I would run away in a hurry. Luckily I've never seen anything remotely resembling what you describe

Seems odd.
I say a Traditional game is where the DM can do whatever they want on a whim.
And a Neo T game is where the DM can't just do whatever they want on a whim.

And you have never seen that? I mean I guess you might have seen a game where a DM could do anything....but they chose to act like a Neo T dm?

 

[TwoSix]

I wonder if my GMing style is neo-trad? I make frames for the campaign and arches, sketching potential baddies and their activities. My session to session prep is modifying those frames depending on the characters actions, maybe create a set piece, adding and further develop NPCs, and setting up/preparing potential complications in the players way based on the players plans and action. In session I just improv and let the players do their thing.

It's a very reactive GMing style, kind of a sandbox with defined but dynamic frames. And all of it is based on the fact that my creativity can never match the players fears, paranoias, bizarre conclusions and wild planning based on wrong and insufficient facts. I just tap into that for my prep and campaign development.

Yea, that's pretty close to my default DM style. I just imagine various interesting scenes, some of which are of interest to specific players, some of which are outgrowths of the current environment.

When I have more players, scenes tend to be more setting specific and general interest; if I have less players, I can make scenes that really target specific players more often.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Traditional play: DM does whatever they want on their whim. Neo T: see above.

So, just to be clear, you do realize that the word "whim" specifically refers to a "capricious notion or desire; a sudden or freakish fancy," right? "Whim" means something with no justification AT ALL except "well, I felt like it." Using it to describe your own stuff has the strong implication that you don't care, AT ALL, about the consequences of these actions.

How? Where?

Your repeated insistence on portraying the neo-trad DM as little better than a slave to the players, for example. Your repeated insistence that it's impossible for there to be events that occur which aren't caused by the players, when that is demonstrably false.

I agree that the DM's whims have no place in Neo T. And it has nothing to do with being hostile. Though I wonder how you say it's fine for "events to occur" in Neo T, as long as they are not at the DM whim? How do you tell them apart? Player whim?

You tell them apart because "DM whim" is a capricious fancy. Events occuring without the players being the direct cause is a perfectly normal part of having a fantasy world that exists and evolves. The key...as I explicitly said...is that it comes from reasonable choices, and is considerate of the players. Being considerate does not mean the players are causing it, any more than your spouse would be "causing you" to care about cooking the dinners you decide to cook, or any more than your friends would be "causing" you to bring up conversations you find interesting and that you think would interest them, while avoiding conversations you think would upset or unnerve them.

This isn't hard. People choose to be courteous to others, not because others are mind-controlling or domineering them into only ever saying nice things, but because people WANT to be nice to others, and want to engage with them on things that will be received well rather than poorly.

Reasonably. I'll take it.
Traditional game: The DM does whatever they want on a whim. End of Line.
Neo T and Story games: The DM can only take reasonable actions, as defined by all the players.

Yes. But, again, "whim" refers to being capricious, sudden, and without any justification--it's just freak desire that happens. Like if someone suddenly has a craving very specifically for shortbread cookies and caramel or the like. It's out of the blue.

"Reasonable" decisions don't have to be submitted before committee or signed in triplicate or pre-approved by the players. It's...y'know, being a reasonable person. Being considerate of what others like and think. Avoiding things that would be liable to cause problems. Showing that you care about others.

This is just the two paths to the same goal though.
Traditional Game: The DM does things based solely on their own judgment of what will make an enjoyable game for everyone.
Neo T Game: All the players of the game decide together what will make an enjoyable game for everyone.

.....yes. That's the whole point, Bloodtide. These are two different styles that both aim to achieve the same thing.

I have not seen you give any data for anything?

You're the one making numerical claims about a style you don't like, don't understand, and have repeatedly insulted over the past year or so.

Seems odd.
I say a Traditional game is where the DM can do whatever they want on a whim.
And a Neo T game is where the DM can't just do whatever they want on a whim.

And you have never seen that? I mean I guess you might have seen a game where a DM could do anything....but they chose to act like a Neo T dm?

Because you keep doing two things.

1: You keep presenting "the DM can do whatever they want on a whim" as though it were something good. It very much does not come across as something good. It comes across as a tyrannical jerk doing things capriciously, contradicting himself whenever he likes, and being generally just troublesome to work with. Because when everything is on a whim--driven by absolutely nothing at all except "well, I felt like it in that second, so that's what happened then, but I don't feel like it in this second, so it's not happening now."
2: You keep presenting the "neotrad" DM as someone enslaved to player demands (a running theme across many of your posts, here and elsewhere), where the only possible way to not be so enslaved is for the DM to, as above, do whatever they like, whenever they like, for as long as they like, for literally any reason or no reason at all.

Both of these things are counterproductive.

 

[niklinna]

As someone that made a neotrad thread a month or two back, I'm more than willing to say that yes--Neotrad does have at least a bit of preplanning going on. Usually vaguely when it's far in the future but I've had my fair share of 'alright so your right-hand man is gonna confront you about your crimes-""Oh mention about that prince I clawed to death""Kk, here we go"

In fact I think some form of Character Arc making/Player-led railroading is perfectly in the wheelhouse of OC/NeoTrad. Sometimes even mechanized, like if a game has 'Make This Plot Happens' button(Some of Fabula Ultimas quirks are a bit like this) that's in the hands of a PC then yeah I can consider that a bit of Story Before rather than Story Now. People here won't like it but knowing the destination doesn't ruin the journey IME.

And while I have read a few Free League core rulebooks, I really don't consider them NeoTrad supporting games from the(admittedly not a deep) reads. Chronicles of Darkness splats, Chuubo's, 13th age, the Lancer-likes, Fate, those are games that I think really support Neotrad.

---

As for how to enjoy Neotrad: Simple, an undersaid element of Neotrad is that it's also performative. The PC's are thrown good bits(for comedy) and plot material(for drama) or engaging fights(for combat) and then see them act it out infront of you.

Old RPG Gamers and The Streaming Youth - From a Dark Forest

Another question from the dark forest, which is essentially creaky old people muttering about how much better it was back in the day. I tri...

jdcspot.blogspot.com

Lot of the discussions here focuses on plot, but the main joy as a player is Character Fulfillment. If a character have a generational conflict between them and their father, then you're supposed to give them that duel or confrontation sooner or later but also if there are warriors in your part then you really want to make sure that there are very little flying ranged enemies in your combat encounters.

My sincere thanks for linking that blog post. I learned several new things from it, and gained a much clearer understanding of several more.

 

[bloodtide]

So, just to be clear, you do realize that the word "whim" specifically refers to a "capricious notion or desire; a sudden or freakish fancy," right? "Whim" means something with no justification AT ALL except "well, I felt like it." Using it to describe your own stuff has the strong implication that you don't care, AT ALL, about the consequences of these actions.

Well, I'm using the common defination of the word "whim", like the one found on Dictonary.com: " an odd or capricious notion or desire; a sudden or freakish fancy: a sudden whim to take a midnight walk." There is nothing about caring.

Your repeated insistence on portraying the neo-trad DM as little better than a slave to the players, for example. Your repeated insistence that it's impossible for there to be events that occur which aren't caused by the players, when that is demonstrably false.

And looking back I typed "most" and "many" and all other such conditional words and not absolutes...

You tell them apart because "DM whim" is a capricious fancy. Events occuring without the players being the direct cause is a perfectly normal part of having a fantasy world that exists and evolves. The key...as I explicitly said...is that it comes from reasonable choices, and is considerate of the players. Being considerate does not mean the players are causing it, any more than your spouse would be "causing you" to care about cooking the dinners you decide to cook, or any more than your friends would be "causing" you to bring up conversations you find interesting and that you think would interest them, while avoiding conversations you think would upset or unnerve them.

I see this as a good split. You see Neo T as using "reasonable choice" and "considerate" as per the groups definitions of each word. The Traditional DM just does whatever they want too. But both DMs are trying to make a fun game. But words like "considerate" just float around, until you give them a meaning.

This isn't hard. People choose to be courteous to others, not because others are mind-controlling or domineering them into only ever saying nice things, but because people WANT to be nice to others, and want to engage with them on things that will be received well rather than poorly.

This is the old Black Hat/White Hat. The Traditional DM is in on way doing anything bad to the players.....but acting as the DM of the game, they have no limits as to what they will do to a character.

Yes. But, again, "whim" refers to being capricious, sudden, and without any justification--it's just freak desire that happens. Like if someone suddenly has a craving very specifically for shortbread cookies and caramel or the like. It's out of the blue.

See above.

"Reasonable" decisions don't have to be submitted before committee or signed in triplicate or pre-approved by the players. It's...y'know, being a reasonable person. Being considerate of what others like and think. Avoiding things that would be liable to cause problems. Showing that you care about others.

This goes back to having a group that just agrees with you on nearly everything. Then sure the things you do will be fine with them: they are pre approved.

1: You keep presenting "the DM can do whatever they want on a whim" as though it were something good. It very much does not come across as something good. It comes across as a tyrannical jerk doing things capriciously, contradicting himself whenever he likes, and being generally just troublesome to work with. Because when everything is on a whim--driven by absolutely nothing at all except "well, I felt like it in that second, so that's what happened then, but I don't feel like it in this second, so it's not happening now."

It is. Though as you typed above, you only see the bad jerk DM side. It's like saying fire is bad as it burns people and things, and ignoring that fire also keeps us warm and cooks food.

2: You keep presenting the "neotrad" DM as someone enslaved to player demands (a running theme across many of your posts, here and elsewhere), where the only possible way to not be so enslaved is for the DM to, as above, do whatever they like, whenever they like, for as long as they like, for literally any reason or no reason at all.

Both of these things are counterproductive.

Well, the Neo T game is all about the character's first...and the players are the ones with characters. And the players are the ones making arcs for their characters, and telling the DM. Then the DM runs the game based on that.

To run down the quick list: Would you ever randomly kill a PC? Have the PCs be captured? Have the PCs loose items and equipment? Have the PC be subject to a long lasting effect they can't undo? Would you mind control a PC?

Now, sure, it's easy to say "oh, I had a PC loose a copper spoon in my last game" to say that loosing things happens in a set game. So, for some more details:

*Have a PC loose their major part of their character build. The classic is the wizard loosing the spellbook.
*Have the PC be lost, with no easy way home.
*Have the PCs be captured. Loose all their stuff and then try and escape.
*Have PCs tumble off bridges, walls or cliffs and loose times that can't just be replaced.
*Have the PC transformed into an animal, and now must play the game as that animal.
*Have the PC under the effect of a major curse, like they can not heal, that they just can't "remove" easy
*Have the PC under mind control for an extended time, at least a game session

All of the above is common in Traditional game play....but rare in Neo T. Most Neo T players and DMs don't even like most of the above, and would not put them in any game. Many DMs feel they need to ask permission before they have an event like capturing the PCs. And even if the PCs agree, they will have conditions......like all the characters stuff must be in a box right next to their cell so they get all their stuff back.

For many of the above, a Neo T player would just quit the game. The traditional player just plays through it.

 

[Charlaquin]

There's also been significant norms changes around fanfiction throughout the 2000s. It went from something authors persecuted (either from a perceived need to defend their brand or a real distaste for people touching their things) to something that was tolerated and eventually even celebrated. Now there's even ascended fan fiction writers publishing original works and calling it out as how they started, like Naomi Novik.

Well, there have always been ascended fan fiction writers, it’s just that now they’re comfortable being open about it.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Well, there have always been ascended fan fiction writers, it’s just that now they’re comfortable being open about it.

Douglas Adams started writing with Doctor Who fanfics...

 

[DrJawaPhD]

*Have a PC loose their major part of their character build. The classic is the wizard loosing the spellbook.
*Have the PC be lost, with no easy way home.
*Have the PCs be captured. Loose all their stuff and then try and escape.
*Have PCs tumble off bridges, walls or cliffs and loose times that can't just be replaced.
*Have the PC transformed into an animal, and now must play the game as that animal.
*Have the PC under the effect of a major curse, like they can not heal, that they just can't "remove" easy
*Have the PC under mind control for an extended time, at least a game session

I have seen all of these things happen many times in neo-trad games, with the exception of mind control lasting "an entire game session" (mind control yes, but that duration is excessive). The difference would be that all of these events would occur as part of a tractable challenge with an interesting storyline that the characters had to overcome to escape / get items back / remove the curse / etc, which may not be the case in traditional games (but still probably is?)

You seem to think that neo-trad means there is zero challenge in the game, the players dictate all events that happens, and the DM sits there without any control over the game. It's just not true.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

Another thing to add to the list to separate Traditional from Neo T. How do the players react to events happening in the game that effect them directly that they did nothing at all to trigger. This is a big split:

Traditional: the game rolls on and the characters deal with it.

Neo T: The players hate it, and often will vote to make it go away. Though also most Neo T DM hate it too, so they don't do it.

No? In fact, I would say the opposite. In games I run, when my players ignore the problem, that is also treated as their decision, that will have consequences.

This so much. The kind of gameplay "neotrad" seems to describe requires games where without fail a single player can trivially grind them to an immediate collapse towards death spiral of the game itself if they drop the ball in ways like you describe. That death spiral of play either takes the form of superman's world of cardboard where it doesn't fit or everyone else at the table losing interest because they are shifting gears from anything world & character focused to keeping bob from destroying the game.

With it out in the open that the "vast majority" of people discussing it "aren't involved with it, don't like it, and only know it second hand" I feel confident highlighting those kinds of results because I do like and have run so many games☆ that should fit under what neotrad claims to be (various flavors of fate, savageworlds, fiasco, etc). When the "neotrad" writeup along with so many descriptions of it not even hinting at such things makes understanding how it could possibly work incredibly difficult. So much of what gets written about what "neotrad" as a play style really feels like trying to describe those types of games while only having experience with d&d or similar and using that experience to fill in the blanks after hearing about them. Looking at it through that sort of lens clears up a lot of the conflicting & confusing writeups

☆more than one of them was an ongoing weekly game open to anyone who shows up to play it at a flgs too

How about you get off that high horse, reread the article and see the author flat out says THIS DOESN'T APPLY TO GAMES but to the way individual people or fandom communities view them? You can easily run any type of game in Savage Worlds and you're doing some real no true Scotsman here by deciding that if people who run character-focused games didn't run it in the right system, it doesn't count. I run Blades in the Dark, which is very character driven. Yet several examples I have used in my previous post were from my d&d games. I have played my first Fate session with a guy who would run it in a way that DELETED all my agency and, not knowing the system, I only realized this is GM issue when the same guy ran me Only War, a system I knew, exactly the same way. Six philosophies are not about a specific game, it's not a cut and dry what game is or isn't this or that category. GMs can embody a philosophy, fandoms can, maybe creators and designers. It's not about individual games.

Also, you completely mispresented, in the most insulting way, my point about how this type of game requires cooperation between GM and players to tell a story together to naughty word on this sytele ald claim it allows one bad apple to destroy it, when my point was that in properly run character-driven game this bad apple will not happen.