Let The Players Manage Themselves Part 3, waitaminute...

[Daniel D. Fox]

1. What types of game do you run?

As others have stated, player-driven plots in a sandbox. I am blessed with very motivated players who take genuine interest in the world around their characters. Their choices heavily shape and mold the storyline from their perspective. Our focus is mostly on cooperative storytelling, with combat as the last resort for conflict resolution.

2. What is the overarching goal of your game? What feel do you want and what experience should your players have?

The goal of the campaign is to shape a cooperative piece of literature from different perspectives through suspension of disbelief as players take upon the persona of their character at the game table. I present a believable world from a low fantasy perspective, intermingled with real-world issues and the players combat those issues on a personal and a macro level. 4E used for the metamechanics of what players can do, but consequences are rarely rules-driven so much as story-driven. Establishing alliances with personalities within the campaign world and making choices based on personality traits influence what the player can do and cannot do, thus driving the story. Since the game is reflected in varying shades of gray when it comes to the world around them, the players are also fairly complicated when it comes to morality. It reflects a dark reality where players are pitted against foes that cannnot be necessarily defeated outwardly through combat. Politics, religion, urban conflict, factuous wars, gritty violence, low magic, low fantasy and low horror - these themes are the backbone of the story. No one person is a villain or a hero in a general sense, it's all a matter of perspective.

Most importantly, what steps do you take to change the way the game plays, and in what way do they contribute to your goal?

The players chose their own goals. Each and every player in my game has a story to tell about themselves and their past, and I've worked with each player in secret to slowly expose who and what they are throughout the lifecycle of the game by creating plots that bring to light their pasts to one another. Simply put, no one player knows the alignment, the personality traits, the real name or the true history of their comrades (you have to read my campaign story to understand why this is Deismaar: Year 200 / Gothric Campaign). They are allies out of neccessity, fighting for their own survival. It is a very nonstandard storyline that takes influence from George RR Martin and Fritz Lieber with a heavy dose of David Mamet, creating very complex yet rewarding storylines. There is very little handholding on my part to drive my players.

We employ some light houserules to support the gritty nature of the world including changes to healing surges, resting and wounding. Otherwise, no rules changes are required as combat resolution, the skill system, rituals and the like fit my setting perfectly. 4e works out very well because it mirrors my homebrewed system we'd used before switching over to 4e (Saga/3.5 hybrid). Without "fanboying" it up, I'd say 4E is one of the best iterations of D&D to date because it feels familiar to my players and I.


Cheers~

 

[Greg K]

Wow. It amazes me that you have such motivated players.

Every group I have ran has been sacks of unmotivation. I have to design the campaign, I have to push them in directions, I have to get the players to organize rides with eachother. I had to write their own damn powers on power cards. Forget them deciding on a GOAL or a THEME.

And this has been multiple groups.

Not to seem flippant, but, perhaps, you should choose the people you game with more carefullly. I'd rather not game then play with unmotivated people.

But then, I can't ever keep a campaign going before it falls apart due to life for people, so maybe it's just life experiences. .

Real life happens. After 8 years, two of my players moved cross country. We replaced them with high school students. About six months later, one had to move with her family and the other moved 200 miles to be with her significant other. Both come to visit a few times each year, hang and game.

But the way people talk here, they want a serious, justifiable chance of just utterly failure.

Some chance of failure, imo, is necessary. If there is no chance of failure (including death), I might as well go watch a movie or read a book.

 

[Rechan]

Not to seem flippant, but, perhaps, you should choose the people you game with more carefullly. I'd rather not game then play with unmotivated people.

Gaming is really my only opportunity for social interaction here, along with a few other factors.

I only found these players after busting my hind end to get them.

 

[Rechan]

The world is not a set of encounters scripted for their benefit.

I wanted to touch back on this.

If the world doesn't exist to cater to the group that's playing in it, if NPCs and plots and things exist beyond their control or even awareness, then what's really stopping you from justifyingly saying "Well, game is over. See, one of the plot hooks you didn't follow up on lead to the end of the world. You weren't there to stop it. Sorry."

 

[Greg K]

What if they don't?

Do you just simulate the common real-life situation where strangers meet, fail to hit it off, develop mutual mistrust and go their separate ways?.

If that is what happens. However, I try to find common threads and overlaps in motivations when setting up the initial situation. I also supply players with information that other pc's won't have. In some instances, depending upon background, this information may be useful to other characters.

The previous fantasy campaign started with the the rogue out on the docks watching potential "marks" disembark from a ship. Among the disembarking passengers, he spotted the paladin, barbarian and druid,. The three were among the various passengers that stood out and they were looking around with the interest of someone arriving to the island's shores for their first time.

Recognizing the paladin by his vestments, the rogue decided to avoid him based on the order's reputation ( I fed the player this information, because the order was well known in several nations). So, he "marked" the barbarian and druid.

The rogue's introduction to the other characters was a failed attempt to cut the barbarian's purse that led to him being on the outs with the other PCs. The druid spotted the rogue attempting to cut the rogue's purse and prevented him from escaping. A fight nearly broke out when the barbarian challenged the rogue to a duel, but the Paladin intervened.

The druid, following the Paladin's lead convinced the paladin's lead, convinced the barbarian that there would be no honor in killing the rogue.

They let the rogue go. However, there was no reason to expect that the rogue would be accepted by the others. He just tried to rob them.

The rogue, however, was not about to give up and was determined to get his money. He just needed to wait for the right opportunity (now, I am fairly sure that this was the player buying into the game and determined to get his character into the party). He tailed the three foreigners through the crowded streets and, along the way, learned that the druid and barbarian were looking for what the rogue took to be a "princess" being held on the island. This hooked into several of the rogue's motivations- screw the mages that ruled the island, get off the island without having to sign on as a shipmate (too much work), and get rich (hey, she's a princess so there must be a reward).

The question was how to make amends with the other characters and be accepted into their group. And, as fate would have it, the rogue had information they needed- information as to where where the "princess" was being held ( a bit of knowledge that I fed the player prior to the start) and knowledge of the city.

He approached the party with an apology and offered to share information of her location if he could help liberate her.

The party (the Paladin already offered his services to the druid and barbarian in exchange for their future aid) had suspicions. However, the rogue had information they needed, he knew the city, and he could always turn them in to the Mageocracy. It was better in the party's opinon to keep him close.

Granted, relations were tenuous at best, but that led to some really good rp interaction even after the rescue and escape from the island

So, why keep the rogue afterward?

First, the barbarian and druid had agreed to reward the rogue (they just never promised anything as lavish as what the rogue was picturing in his own mind). Being honorable, they were obliged to pay him once the "princess" was safely home.

Second, The escape itself ensured that the party stayed together. In their escape, the party killed a minor mage and a few guardsmen. Now, they had a mage's guild after them and needed each other more than ever- especially, after the rogue lifted an ornate ring from the dead mage's corpse and pocketed it (it was a long time before the party discovered how the mages kept tracking them). They needed each other for survival- safety in numbers. Plus, , in the minds of the other PCs, who were all men of honor, it would have been dishonorable to leave the rogue on his own- and, the rogue used this to ensure his own safety while claiming he was just along to get paid.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

And real life generally doesn't make for good stories.

There's a rather large thread elsewhere in these forums about real life people who were a thousand times more awesome then any D&D character could ever be. Real life can and is plenty exciting and does make for some truly awesome stories - just not the life of you and me. But then again, we aren't adventurers.

 

[The Ghost]

I'm curious how those of you who don't agree with the way the games are run approach your own games. "I don't agree with this" and "This isn't how I like my games" is too vague if you don't talk about what you like in games, so here are some questions:

1. What types of game do you run?

I enjoy large sandbox style games where the players are placed in a world and they follow their whims to wherever.

2. What is the overarching goal of your game? What feel do you want and what experience should your players have?

I want to be able to look back and say "Do you remember when..." For us, that comes through watching the characters interact with the world I created in unexpected or unintended ways. Our best stories have come from interactions that I never thought would occur. But, through dice rolling and random chance - it happened! They should feel the excitement of completing their journey, but, also experience the thrill of knowing that the world is both dark and dangerous.

3. Most importantly, what steps do you take to change the way the game plays, and in what way do they contribute to your goal?

Well, there are a number of things that I do to better fit the feel of my world.

1. Magic Items - Are more than just things people find/buy. They are stories unto themselves. They grow in power as the characters learn more about the legends surrounding them.

2. Experience - Characters earn experience by completing goals not by killing monsters.

3. Monsters - I have changed the flavor on monsters. Creatures are not necessarily what is written in the Monster Manual - they are unique to the world.

4. Languages - I try to make the names of people, places, and things work off of location and not race. And have similar sounds throughout.

In general, I want my players to feel like they are in a world that does exist. Creating something and watching how the characters interact and grow with it - To me, that is part of "The Fun".

 

[The Ghost]

Something else I'm getting the impression of is what people expect, or think the game is About. I've always had the impression that the players (and thus, the characters) are going to win. Their success is all ready pre-written. The only thing that gets in the way is the damn dice. And it's the DM's job to let them win in a way that doesn't look like it's scripted for them to win. But the way people talk here, they want a serious, justifiable chance of just utterly failure.

For me, I cannot experience the joys of success without also being able to experience complete and utter failure. I want to know the thrill of having everything I have done hang in balance due to a bad roll of the dice. I want to know the thrill of that moment just before you roll a save knowing that failure means certain death. It makes success that much sweeter.

 

[justanobody]

I don't really agree with any of these people trying to dictate what is and isn't fun, or should or should not be done. When they are the DM they can do what they want for as long as they can maintain players. Their views most often never reach my gaming tables as they are completely opposed to what I and other player think.

The fact that you do have thriving worlds that feel like they do exist in your imagination is one of the biggest parts of D&D, otherwise you just have some board game. I already have a few board games for D&D Like Dragonlance, and a better D&D board game called Hero Quest. I will play those if I want that feel, but they even seem to bring the world to life.

 

[Adso]

I don't really agree with any of these people trying to dictate what is and isn't fun, or should or should not be done. When they are the DM they can do what they want for as long as they can maintain players. Their views most often never reach my gaming tables as they are completely opposed to what I and other player think.

The fact that you do have thriving worlds that feel like they do exist in your imagination is one of the biggest parts of D&D, otherwise you just have some board game. I already have a few board games for D&D Like Dragonlance, and a better D&D board game called Hero Quest. I will play those if I want that feel, but they even seem to bring the world to life.

I can’t speak for others, but when I write my columns, it’s all about explaining what works for me and other DMs I know and chat with. I write about it in a definite manner, because I am a believer in writing with a strong voice, not to squash or drone out other opinions or methods.

DMing, like any skill or art, usually starts with a suggestion or guidance, and then moves on to wisdom forged through practice. Then, when you have wisdom, you spread it by explaining your thoughts, ideas, and experiences to others. People find guidance in those explanations and stories, build upon it with their own experiences, and the cycle repeats.

I don’t write my columns to be the end-all-be-all of what you should do as a DM, but to help new or frustrated DMs, and to move forward the conversation. That conversation is important, and I'm glad it is going on here and elsewhere.

I think most the folks offering up suggestions and counterpoints here on points in my column or the follow-up conversations probably feel the same way.