Homebrew Metaplots?

[SWBaxter]

One definition I've found online is "A widely-used term for an overarching plot which appears over many published books in a series." Which pretty much makes the term "homebrew metaplot" an oxymoron.

Seems overly broad. To me, that's just a plot. A metaplot is a plot that's driven by "metagame" considerations. So if two characters go on a long trip and aren't seen for a while because that's what makes sense in the story, that's just plot. If they do so because the two players behind them are a couple expecting their first child who can't attend sessions for a while, that's metaplot.

Published settings tend to have metaplot rather than plot because the meta-reason for the existence of the storyline is to drive product sales. Often events purposely go off in unlikely directions because that helps convince people to buy all the updates, rather than because that's what makes the most sense in context. There are a few published settings with little or no metaplot (Harn is a good example, since there's no advancing timeline in the published material). Homebrews often have both plot and metaplot, but the latter has a much different motivation since the audience is so much smaller and generally no money is involved.

 

[Izerath]

I think the proper term, one often used in script writing, is "story arc." If you observe any serialized TV series, there are often season-defining story arcs, multi-show story arcs and stand alone episode plots. Put another way there are season plots, multi-part subplots and stand alone episodes.

I run my campaigns exactly like this. I define a main story arc that I want to tell.
I define subplots by linking a few adventures together, and the results of those linked adventures form a clue about the main story arc.

When I create the main story arc and subplots, I do so as if the players would never have any role in them. Then as we play the players get clues and if they follow them, they can change the outcomes of the story arc; Sometimes they change things for the better, and other times, well, matters get worse.

My favorite story tool, though one I do not overuse, is when the players perceive a "victory" in a sub-plot to the main story arc, when in reality, their actions help to drive the villian toward his goal. Later, when it is revealed that they actually helped the villian, it makes for some GREAT roleplay!

So, to answer the question, do I love story arcs? Hell yes! However, I think published materials should sow the seeds of stories to tell by planting "hooks" in their material for GMS to nurture and grow themselves, particularly stand-alone settings.

As for a published setting to be driven by it's own stories? Well, I think that's something to think about, and has both plusses and minuses. Has anyone ever approached the development of a setting more like a story, where as books get published, the "plot" moves and the world becomes ever-more defined? Only a few have; The new incarnation of Warhammer Fantasy is doing it now. Other have in the past, perhaps inadvertently, but never with purpose.

The closest examples this latter phenomenon are the Greyhawk Wars (which was just an excuse during the launch of 2e) and later in the Forgotten Realms: The Avatar Cycle and the death of Azoun the IV come to mind. These two novel series defined events that later became part of FR lore. - Was it "planned" that way? Nope. Did TSR/WotC capitalize on it? Yes, through sheer luck and popularity of the material written after the fact, they wrote RP game books on those events. I don't think they planned it that way though. In some ways, its less risky. Your story could flop, and then your books don't sell. But hey, business is risky. It's the nature of the beast.

Notice a trend? The world development was derived and driven by NOVELS, not the publication of the setting itself. Think back on how many RP books you saw written because of novels or RP books that used extensive material from fiction that came before it. I bet you find many. Furthermore, I'd wager that those same books were best-sellers for that publisher.

Well, I've rambled enough. "Metaplots," as TAG put it, are worth it, when done right.

 

[ForceUser]

The campaign metaplot(s) is one of the first things that I do in world design, what do thers do with them?

If the intent is to run a campaign, I think that a metaplot is an important element to drive the adventure. It doesn't have to be terribly obvious to the players, but the DM should have an idea of the direction his campaign is headed.