Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7933150" data-attributes="member: 16814">Not at all.  I'm talking about the plot you've set up to frame play.  I'm not sure what you'd call the story behind the prep but plot.  The example of the Prince being set up by an Illusionist is a plot, yes?  Even if you leave open how that plot resolves, you've still created a plot that will constrain that play.We could continue to take what others say in the worst light, as if they are criticizing our play, or we could try to understand how what they say could work -- what things must be true to make it work.  And, then, maybe we could accept that there are multiple ways and that one is not better but that they are different.And, there are multiple ways to appriach this example of play.  The one you're using, which is the GM preparing a plot for the players to resolve in play, is the default way D&D us played.  It's perfectly fine, I use it  myself for 5e even if I may be a bit looser about it.  But, it does put most of tge wirk on the GM's shoulders.  If that's not a probkem, cool beand.  If it is, then there's no way to both continue to prepare plots and reduce the workload.  Something must change.  The suggestions offered require that you don't prep the plot first, ir have the udea if what will feature in play, but instead build iff of player input a plot around that input.  You cannot have an idea that the Prince is franed and then get input -- this causes weirdness, as you note.  Instead, ask for input regarding the Court and then build a story based on that input.  The input should have all the hooks you'd need, you should just be able to start play from one of them by framing a situation and then bring in others as play progresses.  Maybe that's the Prince being framed, maybe it's something else. That's the point -- you can't have established plots (even if still unrevealed in the notes) and expect new naive input to align.I 100% agree, you should not expect getting NPCs from players to be less work if you have to align them to your prepped plotlines.  That's more work, don't do this.  If you solicit material from playerd, you need to do this before you prep a plotline.   An example.  I started a 5e Sigil campaign a year ago.  The constraints on PC gen were that they already lived in Sigil and they could work as a group.  Backgrounds could be anything so long as they ended in Sigil.  I told players to select an uncommon magic item to start (5th level start), but that we would resolve getting it in the 1st session.1st session, I went around the table, starting with a random PC, and put tgem in a situation regarding their desired item and one if the Sigil factions.  After the player engaged the situation, I complicated it abd then asked which other PC showed up.  That PC's player was then asked how the situation resolved with their help.  This made the PCs have an immediate conflict between a faction and their item, but also forged a stiry with another PC to jumpstart the party interactions.After that, we ran an adventure I'd prepped that had nithing to do with the player inputs because I needed to introduce the campaign themes. But, since then, I've incorporated player input, either by keaving blanks that I can ask to be filled in or building play on orevious inputs.  I'm still prepping plotlines, if loosely, because 5e lacks robust mechanics to drive play in the moment and because we, as a group, like the tactical combat game and so I need maos and encounters, both hard to do on the fly.Still, a great deal of my prep is offloaded by getting input from players, and my Sigil game is much richer for it.  It also helps that my campaign plotline is very vague so I'm not tied to it.  Heck, through play a minor fetch quest item has now assumed a huge place in the game because my players have decided it's important.  It wasn't, I had no plans for it, but now it is.  Why? Because my players kept earning failures so were doublecrossed, had to work extra hard to get it again (making a few unwise bargains), and then it ended up enmeshed with a player backgrounf.  2 sessions of planned play ended up being 4m3 months if weekly games through play, so darned right tgat thing better be important.  How is it important? No idea, yet.Yes, if you want to use screwdrivers you have to start with screws.  If you used nails, stick with the hammer.  The suggestions were how to reduce prep, but not how to do so if you want to keep the same level of prep you have now.  These tools to reduce prep require approaching play a different way -- if you keep to your (perfectly good, perfectly workable) current play, then they don't work.I think a large part of the confusion here is that the above is obvious to many proposing the different tools, but it really isn't.  It's not obvious because it requires a fundamentally different approach to play.  Making that leap isn't easy if you want to, it's harder if you don't even see the point.  And, that's fine.  No one is less for not "getting it."  It's kinda like a videogame with different characters that require very different playstyle approaches.  Most players are going to end up liking thise characters the "get" and not liking thise they don't, and will still have fun playing and can even be excellent players eithin their grokked stable of characters.  Other players may be able to understand more than one approach and have a wider stable of characters, but that doesn't mean they have more fun or are better players.  They just have more options, which is entirely unecessary to enjoy playing.But, techniques that one player uses will be if limited use to another player using a different character.  What's obvious here us that you can easily identify this and say 'that doesn't work for my character.'  This isn't as clear in this conversation, though, and people who are recommending a play tool are doing so with the unspoken assumption that a reader will understand that you have to change playstyles as well because it's obvious to them.  It's not, so let me say that you will, indeed, have to change characters to use these play tools.  They don't work with your current character.  If you like your current play, then don't worry about it, you're doing it the only right way -- that being the way you have fun.  There us no way to prep games for less work and keep the things you want to keep, thoug.  You have to change something.</blockquote>

Verification