Meta Plot Discussion

[Mystery Man]

Fair enough, but I would like this to be a discussion rather than a kvetch-fest.

OK,

Off hand, if you're strapped for ideas you have a bigger source to pull and twist from.

 

[Pseudonym]

I run two games, one in Kalamar and one in the Forgotten Realms.

Kalamar's lack of a metaplot is refreshing, and in a way provides a sense of security and stability. For example, I don't worry that I'm going to pick up the next Kalamar supplement to find that Emperor Kabori was assassinated, throwing all of Kalamar into a civil war, like the situation that fubared Traveller years ago.

To go with the hypothetical Kalamar/Traveller analogy a bit more, I could just ingnore it, assuming Kabori is still alive in my game and continue along as I was, but if Kenzer assumes the assassination and civil war as a base line, then future supplements become of less and less use as the core world shifts from the world I DM. Less use in the "fluff" sense, in that the backround material pertains to things unrelated to my game; and in the "crunch" sense if the mechanics end generates feats or PrCs related to organizations that don't exist pre-civil war. Sure I could adapt the new material to the Kalamar I am running, but before I know it, I'll be a grumbling old grognard, clutching my dog-eared and scuffed Kalamar setting guide and ranting about the good old days on RPG.net.

In some sense metaplots can be positive. It could provide commonality to different campaigns set in the world. I can chat with other Forgotten Realms DMs and say "So, how did you deal with the return of the Shades in your game?" as even though they may be running a game in Sembia, and I in the Silver Marches, according to Realms "canon", each campaign local is impacted to some degree.

And on the plus side, I had abandoned the Forgotten Realms for Kalamar completely, but I started running a new Forgotten Realms game set in the Silver Marches when that material came out for 3E. The formation of the Silver Marches was itself a metaplot, but one that is generally better recieved by FR players and DMs.

I guess when it comes to metaplots, having them be destructive is more of a problem that having them be constructive, or changes in a "positive" sense. So the formation of the Silver Marches and the end of the Retreat are "good" metaplots, in that they don't cause any undue amount of chaos to an established game; while the destruction of Cormyr and the return of the Shades and their subsequent Fearûn-wide weather manipulation are "bad".

 

[RobNJ]

I simply cannot fathom why, if you don't intend to use it, a metaplot would be offensive to you (here I am speaking in the indefinite, plural "you", not to any specific person). If the rest of the game is good, you're free to ignore the metaplot, why should it matter to you?

I am somewhat clarified by Paka's statement to the effect of, "Why play a game that is antiethetical to your point of view?" But not totally. Because if the game is good, why should it matter that it has a metaplot that you won't use?

My perspective is if the game designers are also good writers (like in Trinityverse) you can get some good material with which to work. I also like the way in which they lend verisimilitude to a world. Great events go on, and the world changes, no matter what you're doing.

I am honestly sort of neutral on metaplots. If they're good, then good, I might want to use them (in part or whole). If not, then I won't. In this discussion I may seem more pro-metaplot than I am in life. It is only to be a devil's advocate.

My campaign setting has some over-arching history-in-the-making world-shattering extinction-level-events going on, but it's a homebrew, so I'm allowed to break it.

It's the type of stuff that the PCs won't be able to alter until Epic levels. Does that count?

-- N

So do the anti-metaplot people object to things happening in a world that are out of the direct control of the PCs, or is it that you object to its being provided by someone else? And why isn't, "Just ignore the parts you don't like," good enough?

 

[RobNJ]

That was pretty much the beginning of the end of my VtM days, btw.

Why instead wasn't it the beginning of the end of your days with that GM?

Your story was entirely about the war between the Sabbat and the Camarilla, you had the power and the ability to affect the outcome. Why didn't your ST in that chronicle allow you to do what was within your power to do? And why is his failure the fault of White Wolf?

 

[Paka]

Rob,

I guess my problem with meta-plots comes down to a question of energy. If a game puts alot of creative and textual energy and time into creating stories that don't put stories on my gaming table or put plots into my player's laps, I don't want to pay for it nor do I want to own it. I realize that I have free will and can kill Drizz't, ignore any number of novels or make Elminster a cross-dresser but I don't want a world in which energy and text have been put forth in areas I see as useless to my game.

I don't want my gameworld designer to show how he is a frustrated novelist.

I want a world poised on the brink of adventure.

I don't object to things happening that aren't in control of my PC's but I object to time and money being used for text that doesn't give my players story.

I think this is where we will find our breach. Pro-Meta folk will say they can ignore anything they want to and the meta-plots give them background and the world depth.

Those who are anti-meta-plot say, "Why should I have to?"

I might be ready to say that I've found where we differ and move on to greener pastures.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Do you use it in your game?

I don't. I may start with a setting but I pretty much ignore new material once my game starts. After it finishes I might switch to using the "new" variant of the setting, but never in mid game. I generally don't even steal ideas from them because I tend to diverge rather drastically.

Now I have been in games of people who follow the metaplots. Most of them run either metaplot-related module series (the DragonLance adventures, for instance) or keep the players away from the key locations so it turns into backdrop.

What happens when the meta-plot and your game's plot diverge?

I've seen brutal ret-conning occur; once in an FR campaign a couple of key personalities were killed before anyone knew they were pivotal. The GM went back and renamed the dead characters so that while someone died, it wasn't the critical person.

I've also seen people slowly rectify the universes. Dead King? Have the new King do the same things. Kill off the Prince? Bring in a cousin to fill the role. Makes it a bit more difficult for new gamers to get involved if they are up to date on the "official" world but it can be done.

 

[Desdichado]

I think you're not finding many pro-meta-plotters because there simply aren't very many of them out there. It seems to me that the only folks meta-plots really appeal to are the armchair gamers who read a lot of game books but don't actually play them. If that's the case, the meta-plots can potentially be interesting. That's where I was with Werewolf: the Flea-dip not long ago; a setting that I still think is interesting, but I have no interest in actually playing.

But when you're actually using the setting in your regular game, metaplot is very unlikely to add anything much to your game and quite possibly will end up contradicting stuff you've had going on so you're left with the bad choices of either furiously retconning your game to fit the new metaplot advances, or ignore them at the price of missing out on future supplements.

 

[fusangite]

Initially, I was surprised by the definition for "metaplot" for the purposes of this thread. However, given the definition that has been provided, I am totally opposed to a metaplot. I like to design worlds in which the characters can change the world, not just assistants to the major NPCs who move a world along a pre-programmed course.

The best/worst example of metaplot was the failure of the original MERP by Rolemaster. By choosing to set its adaptation of Tolkien's Middle Earth in the middle of the third age, they effectively killed any sense of meaning or agency in the characters' actions. No matter what the characters did, Sauron would wax and the Dunedain would wane.

Also, I think the prefix "meta-" is being poorly used here. I use the term "metatext" to describe a way of looking at the plot in a more total and abstract fashion (the way the term "metagame" is used) than a simple engagement with the events that make up the storyline. I think the thing you guys are describing should not be called a metaplot but a "macroplot" or a "magnaplot" -- you're just describing a bigger plot that overwhelms the one the characters are in.

 

[barsoomcore]

fusangite had the right idea, but you didn't go far enough -- "meta-plot" is being used here to describe something more properly known as, er, "plot".

The question under discussion appears to be "Do you like buying campaign setting material that includes plots?" That is, do you want your store-bought campaign material to include NPC actions and to update the "state of the nation" as those actions are carried out?

I note that nobody complaining is running a home-brew campaign -- because this question doesn't really make sense for a home-brew campaign. And since I've never run anything but homebrew, and never played in anything but homebrew, the whole conversation seems a little weird to me.

But anyhow, to answer the question: I don't care AT ALL. I buy campaign setting material purely to scavange ideas for my own black hole of a campaign, so plot ideas are every bit as valuable as crunchy stat blocks, maps, encounters, everything, pretty much.

It it's GOOD, I like it.

 

[fusangite]

fusangite had the right idea, but you didn't go far enough -- "meta-plot" is being used here to describe something more properly known as, er, "plot".

The question under discussion appears to be "Do you like buying campaign setting material that includes plots?" That is, do you want your store-bought campaign material to include NPC actions and to update the "state of the nation" as those actions are carried out?

I note that nobody complaining is running a home-brew campaign -- because this question doesn't really make sense for a home-brew campaign. And since I've never run anything but homebrew, and never played in anything but homebrew, the whole conversation seems a little weird to me.

But anyhow, to answer the question: I don't care AT ALL. I buy campaign setting material purely to scavange ideas for my own black hole of a campaign, so plot ideas are every bit as valuable as crunchy stat blocks, maps, encounters, everything, pretty much.

It it's GOOD, I like it.

Brilliantly put Barsoomcore. You have identified what is actually being discussed better than I. I'm in accord with your analysis and your comments -- although I don't buy campaign settings as I prefer other scavenging grounds.