Please Just Play the Adventure (One Shots)

[pemerton]

Isn't it always going to be the case that the character are presented with a "choice" that isn't really a choice?

The best convention games I've played have been based around actual choices, focused on the (pregen) characters rather than "complete the mission"/"follow the breadrcumbs". And where there is no choice, they haven't created the illusion of one.

 

[Reynard]

The real issue is what, exactly, are they prepping, isn't it?

Not for a con game. A con game is allowed to be, even expected to be, a linear experience. If you can pull it off otherwise -- great! But you can't fault someone for preparing a 4 hour adventure for a 4 hour con slot.

 

[Committed Hero]

Isn't it always going to be the case that the character are presented with a "choice" that isn't really a choice? I could start the adventure with the characters standing at the entrance to a dungeon and tell them that they've been tasked with finding the Mobile of Baby Vecna, but if they don't "choose" to walk through the front door there's no adventure.

"Tell us why your character is looking for Vecna's mobile."

 

[Fenris-77]

Not for a con game. A con game is allowed to be, even expected to be, a linear experience. If you can pull it off otherwise -- great! But you can't fault someone for preparing a 4 hour adventure for a 4 hour con slot.

But isn't that very much the same as a normal one shot? Id say so

 

[Reynard]

But isn't that very much the same as a normal one shot? Id say so

Not if by "normal one shot" you mean for your regular game group, I don't think they are quite the same. that familiarity and rapport with your group allows for a different dynamic at the table, as does the potential that the one shot doesn't HAVE to be a one shot.

 

[Fenris-77]

Not if by "normal one shot" you mean for your regular game group, I don't think they are quite the same. that familiarity and rapport with your group allows for a different dynamic at the table, as does the potential that the one shot doesn't HAVE to be a one shot.

Well, having run more one shots for a group than I have for strangers, I'll disagree. Familiarity helps, but its not a panacea.

 

[MNblockhead]

Tournaments are really fun, but typically framed appropriately. Also, this doesn't work in non-fantasy RPGs where dungeon delving isn't part of the game.

I played in a Star Wars tournament game back in the late 80s and it worked quite well. Just about any set of objectives that can be fairly tabulated work well. I'm less of a fan of the "best roleplayer", "best team player", and other subjective measure, whether based on player votes or GM fiat. I find they create incentives for attention grabbing.

 

[MNblockhead]

I thought it started as "here's a dungeon, let's see if you can survive it." Treasure was just a pleasant reward for the survivors.

Well, sure, but gold was the reason the party risked their lives and was how you would award scores to the survivors.

 

[MNblockhead]

I find flexibility is the best thing in GMing or DMing. So what if they don't follow the planned route the adventure sets forth, there are MANY ways to get them to go there...and if they don't...well...improvise.

Some of the best adventures I've had are from improvisations which I came up with on the spot when the party decided to go the opposite direction.

Don't be afraid to let them fail and have consequences. Just today, the party failed to really talk or negotiate with a intelligent creature and led to a pretty major conflict in which they absolutely not only failed the quest and adventure, but brought about dire results for the surrounding countryside. They survived (well, for the most part, one is dead as an undead), but the entire point of the adventure was failed.

If they do something, go with the flow of it. I find being a DM/GM requires inventiveness, quick thinking on your feet, and great improvisation. With those as your tools it is VERY HARD to make an adventure go wrong. You can adapt to whatever they do most of the time.

For a campaign with friends or with people with whom you'll have time to build up a relationship, I agree 100%. Often the failures are the highlights. But this can be very hit or miss in a convention game. Some people are upset or frustrated at "failing" especially if they feel things were not clear or "fair." I don't run games at conventions because I don't think I have the ideal style and personality for it. But as a player in convention and organized play games, I've observed that most players prefer rather obvious and railroady one-shots. I can thoroughly enjoy a good railroad adventure. As a player, I'm a good date. I go with the flow and can generally read the room. And I can have fun with about any game, as long as there are no toxic people in the group (I've been lucky. I have no convention horror stories. There have been some people that were mildly annoying but never anything over the top.)

 

[thom_likes_gaming]

The problem are not the players, or the GM.

The problem is the adventure format.

It's said that 90% of everything is crap, but for published adventures it's more like 99%. And most GMs seem to base their idea of how to plan an adventure on published adventures. And as the programmers like to say "garbage in = garbage out".

RPGs are a medium in which the players are given the ability to make choices about what their characters think and do, and those choices have consequences that determine the story that is playing out. Published adventures don't understand that and instead write a whole story in which all the choices have already been made for the players. Without telling the players about it. Players might make the wrong choices, and so adventure writers come up with all kinds of ways to make sure no ideas of the players can work, except the one that they are supposed to take. That's railroading!

Those players sound great. They seem to play an RPG like an RPG is supposed to be played. They make judgements about how things look to them, and then make decision based on their interpretation of the information available to them. Published adventures don't want them to do that. They are written to make players guess what the writer wants them to do. And if the players actually play the game instead of just playing along with the script, the adventure breaks. Because it's garbage.

Any decent adventure worth playing provides situations that players can interact with in ways that they think best, based on their understanding of what is going on. Such adventures can exist, but they are almost unheard of in the publishing world. It's a struggle that the entire industry has been fighting with for almost 40 years but never appears to have realized what the cause of the problem is.
Don't write scripts that the players are supposed to act out while not having any idea what the script is.

I'm not sure, have you played convention one- shots? What you describe doesn't seem to apply to the OP's experience very well.