On DMing and "writing books"

[Harr]

The "book writing" metaphor is right on the money and is neither rude nor anything except good advice for newbie DMs who don't know exactly what they're doing and try to railroad adventures with the best intentions.

It refers not most of the time, but *all* of the time to stuff like:

DM: You need to break into the castle. You know that there are secret sewer passages that can get you inside.
Players: We try to climb the walls and get in through a window!
DM: All the windows are closed. There is an open grate leading into the sewers right beside you, however.
Players: The thief lockpicks one of the windows to open it!
DM: All the windows are spellbound with locking spells far above the ability of any mage to Knock or and thief to pick. The sewer grate lies open.
Players: God, we dont wanna go in the sewers that's lame, we try to bribe the guards into letting us in.
DM: The guard is impervious to bribes, and pushes you away, in the direction of the open sewer grate which is wide open.
Players: umm... we're going to try to disguise ourselves as travelling troupe of actors to perform for the king and try to sneak in that way.
DM: Oh sure... as you look around for a disguise to buy, the ground opens up under you, and you fall into the hole. The ground closes back up after you land. You are now in the sewers. The waters carry you in the direction of the castle above.
Players: ...

Now, I agree with all the rest of your OP, but as for the book-writing metaphor, it is very apt when applied as meant to be applied.

As a DM, I love setting up really interesting beginning scenarios and lettng the players do what they will with the monsters and traps inside. But I do have a problem with endings, since I never think abotu them, and have been told a couple times that a certain quest was underwhelming because of how it ended (because I was totally just making something up at the time). It's something I definitely have to work on, but I don't think the way is by writing a whole story of how it's going to go... maybe a list of possible outcomes or something.

 

[Insight]

I'd like to pile onto my own post a bit, but briefly. I think if you fashion yourself a writer and you're wearing the DM hat at your game table, it doesn't necessarily mean you're going to be a bad DM. What it means is that you need to use your "writer" instincts when you're laying out the setting/backdrop and motivation for your adventure. But as soon as the "rubber meets the road", you have to back off those instincts and become a DM only.

An adventure laid out by a "writer" is going to be more immersive, and I think, ultimately, more interesting than someone who comes up with ideas 5 minutes before the game session starts. Don't think you have to pen yourself in and not ever use those instincts and ideas. The surest railroad, however, comes from a "writer" at the game table.

 

[Insight]

As a DM, I love setting up really interesting beginning scenarios and lettng the players do what they will with the monsters and traps inside. But I do have a problem with endings, since I never think abotu them, and have been told a couple times that a certain quest was underwhelming because of how it ended (because I was totally just making something up at the time). It's something I definitely have to work on, but I don't think the way is by writing a whole story of how it's going to go... maybe a list of possible outcomes or something.

This is where just about everyone gets hung up. It's a bit of a two-edged sword. On the one hand, everyone wants a great, climactic ending to an adventure. On the other hand, forcing the ending to be what you planned almost never works out.

The best you can really do is set up the ending that you want by laying out the right nuggets in the foundation of the adventure, and "winging it" once the adventure gets going. You'll have to be at your improvisational best when it comes to the final encounter, and don't be afraid to toss your notes on the fire if following them would lead to an unsatisfactory ending.

 

[Baron Opal]

I never actually got around to playing amber. Isn't there an ultimate decider in that game as well? I know it's not dice, but isn't there something that resolves "question" moments in the game? I thought it had to do with cards or soemthing?

The ultimate decider is the DM.

For example, I used to run an Amber game. One situation was the characters had to cross a bridge and it was guarded by an alien knight in power armor. When one of the characters came forward he would have to describe how he was going to defeat the knight. The description was very important as the knight would not be defeatable through a straight contest of arms. His weaponry, size and strength were simply superior to that of the characters. It would take strategy to win the crossing.

I always found Amber a very fatiguing game to run, constantly juggling and adjusting odds and translating that into where that would fall on the attribute scale. Then, translating those odds into keywords or stratagems that would be needed to win contests.

I considered pairing it with the Everway fortune deck, but never got around to figuring out exactly what the cards would do / mean. I found that I greatly dislike the holistic means of outcome resolution.

 

[justanobody]

I have been DMing to write a book, but the darn players won't stay together long enough to get more than a few chapters together.

 

[Darrin Drader]

One of the best campaigns I've ever run was actually very tightly scripted. However, despite the fact that the campaign was planned out with a very definite beginning, middle, and end, each adventure in the series was an adventure, not a railroad. OK, I take that back. There was a three month break we had to take one time, so I did railroad the group somewhat that one time because I wanted the fate of one character to be extremely uncertain. In other words, I left them on a cliffhanger, which I later found out was very effective because the whole time they were away, they were thinking about what was going to happen to their characters.

But normally, each adventure is set up within the usual framework of an adventure. There would be major plot points left to lead them from point A to B to C and so on, but the PCs had the free will to not follow the bread crumbs, do something entirely unexpected, or outright fail in their mission.

I think the trick in making a story heavy campaign work is by sticking to the adventure format and not trying to dictate too much to the players. Do it once or twice and it will usually work, but if you take away their ability to contribute, you'll bore them.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

The DM and players are all writing a collective story.

I would prefer to say, "collectively creating a story," rather than say that you're writing one. Writing shares certain aspects with RPG's but they are NOT the same thing and certain aspects of writing are BAD to apply to an RPG. In writing the author has complete control over all the characters - what they do, what they say, how they react. In an RPG though the DM has a great deal of creative control, is the primary source of what happens in the world, etc., the main characters - the PC's - are voluntarily placed BEYOND his control. It is the players who decide what the main characters do, say, think, and feel. I heartily believe that it is important to keep that distinction VERY clear, because failure to understand it and live by it leads to problems.

The dice decide the ultimate direction the story takes.

That is incorrect. The dice are the random element, not contollers of the game, and DEFINITELY not controllers of the choices of the PC's and NPC's. They simply add randomness to the success and failure of what the characters attempt to do, mostly IN COMBAT but also generally in measurable skills especially where there is random chance for success/failure. Much determination of success and failure is simply given over to the DM.

As for the OP, the response of, "go write a book," can be rude, but then it's meant to be because of what draws that response. It isn't at all disingenuous as it is an accurate, visceral response to DM's who exert excessive control of the unfolding and outcome of plots where it is not needed or wanted, especially in interfering with the strictly hands-off area of PLAYER character decisions.

It's one thing to plan the adventures and GUIDE the story, but by definition players have a great deal of control over the actual direction of the game as well. Now players don't particularly realize this as a matter of course and don't ACTIVELY exert the control they do have. That's why the DM is there - to keep the players influence over the story from being aimless, disorderly, even counterproductive - but not to NEGATE it.

That's what is meant by, "go write a book." It's an admonition to a DM to allow the players/PC's influence upon the story to have meaningful, sensible effect, not simply made to conform to the DM's unshakable, predetermined course of events.

 

[Dausuul]

I never actually got around to playing amber. Isn't there an ultimate decider in that game as well? I know it's not dice, but isn't there something that resolves "question" moments in the game? I thought it had to do with cards or soemthing?

There are mechanics involving auctions and the like, but Amber makes a point of not including any random element in the rules. No dice, no cards, no nothin'. You might be thinking of the Trumps, but those are an in-game element - a deck of magical cards with which Amberites can communicate and travel.

Back to the original topic, I'll add that it is not necessarily a bad idea to have a heavily pre-plotted campaign. My most recent campaign arc ran on a pretty well-defined set of rails, and the players seemed fine with it. All three of the big climactic scenes came off as I planned them, and both I and the players were very happy with two of them. (The third one, I felt, worked less well, but that wasn't because it didn't come off as planned - the plan just wasn't very good.)

Nevertheless, it was not like writing a book. During adventure planning, I spent a lot of time trying to get into the heads of my players; to see things from their perspective and consider things they would be likely to try. (First rule of adventure planning: Anything you expect the PCs to talk to, they will attack, and anything you expect them to attack, they will talk to.) And then I had to keep in mind the fact that they would undoubtedly come up with things I hadn't thought of or planned for, and be ready to improvise on the fly...

...actually, that kind of is like writing a book, for me. The characters in my books are always doing things I didn't expect, too. Sometimes they trash my original plot in the process, and I have to come up with a new one in the middle. Maybe I'm arguing the wrong side here.

 

[skinnydwarf]

For me it's fun. I get to act out the NPCs and see how the player change the world.

I think this refers to module writers, which isn't the same thing as DMing.

That would be a biased DM and detrimental to roleplay. Do you really want to play a game where the DM let you win? Or made you lose? No unbiased middle ground? In my experience the answer has always been: No.

With the last few lines I believe you are making the mistake that DMing is telling a story. This falsity pretty much only exists in the tabletop roleplaying community (EDIT: and LARPing, almost forgot). It simply doesn't exist in other roleplaying communities.

What other roleplaying communities are there that have DMs, other than tabletop and LARPing?

 

[Afrodyte]

I find roleplaying more akin to improv theater than anything resembling prose fiction.