• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Macguffin quest without a macguffin, how would you respond?

Would you be okay with a Macguffin quest with no Macguffin?

  • Yes, I would be okay with it no matter what.

    Votes: 15 15.2%
  • Yes, I would be okay with it if it didn't make everything I'd done useless.

    Votes: 79 79.8%
  • No, I wouldn't be okay with it no matter what.

    Votes: 2 2.0%
  • I would have quit when I thought it was a Macguffin quest.

    Votes: 3 3.0%

Kahuna Burger

First Post
I am considering running a game loosely based on a series of books I think have a good setup for a long term campaign, but I have one concern. The history which the characters of aware of leads just about everyone to assume that the evil they are facing was defeated at their last rising by some weapon or tactic of the ancient people. In the books, and I would predict in the game, a great deal of research and adventuring is devoted to finding this weapon or clues to its nature so it can be recreated. What they find instead when enough information is known is that there was no weapon last time, Ye Olde Ancient Evil (YOAE) simply rises and falls on a schedule unrelated to humanoid efforts.

Now, I could see this discovery being a bit, ehem, unfun depending on how much had been invested in the search. I hope to cushion this by making sure that there are other intermediate campaign goals and victories other than "find macguffin, defeat enemy" and the truth about YOAE is useful to formulating their own strategies. But I'm curious how folks here would feel about this sort of switch.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Doug McCrae

Legend
It could be quite funny to spend the best part of, say, 100 sessions on a macguffin that has no chance whatsoever of working. I'm not sure all the players would be laughing though.

As you say, if the main focus of the game isn't the macguffin hunt, but it's just a side quest, or mentioned in passing, I don't see too much of an issue.

I once played in a game where the GM revealed at the end that we'd had no chance of stopping the bad guy. I didn't mind at all, for me it was the journey not the destination, but the other two players were p-ssed.
 

Kahuna Burger

First Post
Doug McCrae said:
I once played in a game where the GM revealed at the end that we'd had no chance of stopping the bad guy. I didn't mind at all, for me it was the journey not the destination, but the other two players were p-ssed.
Ack, I'd be with the other two players. Or at least part way in between...
 

Tumbler

First Post
It doesn't sound very fun for the players to be unable to alter the development of the evil. What, then, is the point?

I definitely like the idea that they search for something to stop it and then find that there isn't a something, but there should be some way for them to affect the world.
 

Nifft

Penguin Herder
If the MacGuffin was a phony, that'd be fine.

If I had zero chance of affecting / hindering / ablating the big nasty thing that I've been geared up to fight, that would not be fine.

Basically, changing the goal is cool, rendering my actions meaningless is uncool.

Cheers, -- N
 

Much like Nifft. I'd be fine with the "not really a Macguffin.

I would not be fine with "Ye Olde Ancient Evil (YOAE) simply rises and falls on a schedule unrelated to humanoid efforts."
 

Imp

First Post
On the reveal, can you make it portentous enough that the players have to shift focus from stopping the evil to helping as many people or as much territory survive the evil as they possibly can? Perhaps they find out that the ancient tale of stopping the evil was in fact really sanitized and the event was more horrific than the tales said? In other words Ye Olde Ancient Evil goes out with a bang and not a whimper.

In any case the strategy seems to be, keep them from going "aw crap, it just fixes itself?" and make 'em go "oh sh--, it's worse than we thought!"
 

Mouseferatu said:
Much like Nifft. I'd be fine with the "not really a Macguffin.

I would not be fine with "Ye Olde Ancient Evil (YOAE) simply rises and falls on a schedule unrelated to humanoid efforts."

Aye.

Part of the point of heroic adventuring in D&D is that the character's actions (player's actions) can influence the outcome. If YOAE is completely independent ... what's the point?
 

Nifft

Penguin Herder
I just thought of a way that it could be kinda cool.

What if the PCs wandered far and wide, visiting ancient places far from civilization, gaining powers and goodies, but not finding the MacGuffin. Crestfallen, they return to civilization... only to find the land in ruins, the Ancient Evil already on the wane, and the real trouble just beginning -- as all remaining men have turned on each other to scavenge the few remaining resources.

Now the PCs must decide who to save, where to rebuild, and how to rule.

Hell, you could do it in Eberron, with the setting almost unchanged. "Last War" becomes "Last Rise of the Dark", and go from there.

Cheers, -- N
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top