Please Just Play the Adventure (One Shots)

[Fenris-77]

At least then they don't have the excuse that they were being clueless about the nature of the adventure hook. This couldn't be a failure of hook identification, this is outright and explicit denial to follow the hook.

In this specific case it's not even a 'hook', it's just the premise of the game. You're playing a one-shot dungeon delve where you search for the mobile of baby Vecna. If you don't like the premise don't play the game. Worse yet, don't sign up just for a chance to be a bloody wanker and play against the premise when everyone else is doing the opposite.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I have two bits to add.

The Heart RPG has a great bit of advice: don’t be coy. I think we sometimes let ourselves worry way too much about maintaining the “illusion” of an RPG. We shouldn’t do that. I think that contributed to the situation. Don’t be coy about what play is going to be or should be about.

The second is to find a reason for the characters to engage with the hook. For the players, the reason is to play through the scenario. But of there’s no reason for the characters, then some players will struggle to know why they should have their characters perform specific things. Often players will come up with goals or motivations for their characters that don’t align with the hook. And that’s a problem.

So you have to find a way to prevent (normally I’d say discourage, but for a comvention oneshot, let’s just say prevent…let’s not be coy!) the characters from simply looking at the dying rider and saying “sucks to be you” before they walk off whistling happily.

Make them merchant guards. Make them employed by the local lord to keep the roads safe. Make them hired by the dying rider’s father to find him. And so on.

Don’t shy away from treating this like the specific scenario it is. Just accept that and then do everything in service to that scenario.

 

[Reynard]

In this specific case it's not even a 'hook', it's just the premise of the game. You're playing a one-shot dungeon delve where you search for the mobile of baby Vecna. If you don't like the premise don't play the game. Worse yet, don't sign up just for a chance to be a bloody wanker and play against the premise when everyone else is doing the opposite.

Yeah, it has only happened once or twice but every once in a while someone signs up for your con game that seems to have no interest in actually playing it. Which isn't really a problem unless they are actively working against the rest of the players doing so. I think that has happened once or twice in 10 years of con GMing.

 

[MNblockhead]

I'm a big believer in using pre-gens for one shots. On the pre-gen sheet you can state goals, specific-character knowledge and other information that can help avoid some of the issues discussed in this thread.

 

[MGibster]

I'm a big believer in using pre-gens for one shots. On the pre-gen sheet you can state goals, specific-character knowledge and other information that can help avoid some of the issues discussed in this thread.

I would never run a one-shot without pregenerated characters. If for no other reason, because we have a limited amount of time and making characters would eat into that. Particularly for people unfamiliar with the system.

 

[billd91]

The Heart RPG has a great bit of advice: don’t be coy. I think we sometimes let ourselves worry way too much about maintaining the “illusion” of an RPG. We shouldn’t do that. I think that contributed to the situation. Don’t be coy about what play is going to be or should be about.

The second is to find a reason for the characters to engage with the hook. For the players, the reason is to play through the scenario. But of there’s no reason for the characters, then some players will struggle to know why they should have their characters perform specific things. Often players will come up with goals or motivations for their characters that don’t align with the hook. And that’s a problem.

One example where I think convention games have done this well is with Pathfinder's organized play - the Pathfinder Society. Each scenario is a mission that the PCs as members of the Pathfinder Society get sent on by a Venture Captain higher up in the organization's hierarchy. And the assumption of even playing in the organized play program is that PCs will all participate through the PFS's motto: Explore, report, cooperate.
I'm going to emphasize that last one - cooperate. It means that PCs (and players) are expected to cooperate in getting the mission accomplished and not being problematic or contrarian because "that's what my character would do". The organized play program isn't coy about its expectations and every player mustering at the table has plenty of opportunity to know that or be reminded if they forget.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

That sounds like a real bummer. To me, especially at a game with strangers, you need to be willing to bit that hook and get going quickly. To see the opposite behavior in an entire group is especially egregious. I've only ever seen one or two players do this in similar situations and most of the time they get roped into following everyone else on the adventure or in rare cases the GM just cuts away to them doing whatever and then goes quickly back to the real action.

In my experience, this sort of thing doesn't happen en masse very often. Most of my experience gaming with strangers, they've been quick to pick up on the adventure thread and follow it. Regardless, I'm sorry you had to deal with it.

I did have one player that would routinely balk and try to sidetrack the adventure. He would just grind the entire session to a halt on some digression, or try to convince everyone to go do something else. To his mind, he was a skilled player testing the DM's mettle. To my mind, I eventually kicked him out of the gaming group.

So the whole experience kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. What bothered me most was a bunch of people signed up to play a game and when we got started didn't seem interested in engaging with the adventure. That's just super frustrating. It's a one shot, guys, just go with the flow. I don't mind if you surprise me, but surprise me by how you engage with the adventure rather than running away from it. Then there's the odd behavior. Why would you point a weapon at the guy you're ostensibly trying to save?

I hate when a single PC holds the whole adventure hostage just so they can argue for more money. It's annoying at home, but at a con game or other open table where we have limited time to get through the adventure. In most games, there's going to be some form of treasure baked in.

Yeah, I've had some problems like this. There was the guy who wouldn't accept any quest without reward... and then spent an age arguing over whatever reward was offered. There was the guy who refused to bite on any adventure hooks, and then complained that it was the GM's job to entice him. And I'm sure I've had cases very similar to the OP's description.

 

[hawkeyefan]

One example where I think convention games have done this well is with Pathfinder's organized play - the Pathfinder Society. Each scenario is a mission that the PCs as members of the Pathfinder Society get sent on by a Venture Captain higher up in the organization's hierarchy. And the assumption of even playing in the organized play program is that PCs will all participate through the PFS's motto: Explore, report, cooperate.
I'm going to emphasize that last one - cooperate. It means that PCs (and players) are expected to cooperate in getting the mission accomplished and not being problematic or contrarian because "that's what my character would do". The organized play program isn't coy about its expectations and every player mustering at the table has plenty of opportunity to know that or be reminded if they forget.

I think it depends. The Alien RPG may have strong reasons to not have PCs cooperate. They can all be involved in the scenario, and be cooperating to some degree, but have motives or goals that ultimately will conflict. I think that kind of dynamic is key to the feel of Alien. You need to have a Burke or a hidden android like Ash to complicate matters.

But yeah, aside from that, I think having all the PCs be members of an organization is a good way to handle the required focus of a convention game or a one shot. Anything that pushes the characters to engage with the scenario.

 

[Jer]

One example where I think convention games have done this well is with Pathfinder's organized play - the Pathfinder Society. Each scenario is a mission that the PCs as members of the Pathfinder Society get sent on by a Venture Captain higher up in the organization's hierarchy. And the assumption of even playing in the organized play program is that PCs will all participate through the PFS's motto: Explore, report, cooperate.

For one shot games with strangers I've come to believe that there is nothing better than the mission format for games. Brief the players on who they are, who they work for, and what the mission is, give them the layout of where things start, and then get started. The briefing can be in character or out of character but the important piece is setting a goal for the scenario of some kind. Most of the best con games I've played in have been in mission format - and most of the worst con games I've played in have started with an open-ended premise that expects the players to bite and engage in a particular way but doesn't telegraph it explicitly. It can work, but it really depends on who else is at the table and for me whether my blood sugar and sleep schedules are both aligned properly (And basically any adventure that doesn't lay out at least one explicit goal for the PCs to try to accomplish is a crap shoot as to whether the players on a given day are going to pick up on what the adventure wants them to do or not - even if the GM thinks its obvious, in the hands of random strangers what's obvious isn't always going to be apparent).

 

[Yora]

The whole idea of convention games started as "here's a dungeon, let's see how much treasure you can haul out of it."