D&D General Railroads, Illusionism, and Participationism

[pemerton]

They do as I mean it.


It's this.

The "this' is not part of DW or AW. (Except for a small handful of particular playbook moves which won't typically be in play, because of the variety of moves.)

 

[prabe]

4e D&D advocates player-authored quests. Could this be done in 5e?

So I don't know the mechanics of these in 4e, but it seems doable. If one wanted mechanics (as opposed to, just a motivation the player was, well, playing out) I'd imagine one could start in the Bonds, Traits, Ideals, and Flaws (which are with rare exceptions like Madnesses player-authored) and hook the quest into Inspiration. I don't think it would be a satisfactory replication--at least I suspect you'd find it wanting--but that's where I'd start, coming from a place of total ignorance of 4e (and also not much liking the 5e mechanics around Inspiration).

 

[FrozenNorth]

Sure, I agree. My point is specifically about the AP style games. Which is most of modern D&D.

Is it most of modern D&D? I would have thought modern D&D was mostly people running their own games rather than APs.

 

[prabe]

Is it most of modern D&D? I would have thought modern D&D was mostly people running their own games rather than APs.

I don't have numbers to hand, but it seems clear that 5e exists primarily to allow WotC to sell hardcover adventures, in roughly the same way that Pathfinder exists to allow Paizo to sell Adventure Paths.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Those are spectrums, but the difference between a goal as a premise and a genre as a premise is not on the same spectrum. The goal can be more or less specific, the genre can be more or less specific, but a goal does not exist on a spectrum with genre.

Monster of the Week is a PbtA game. Its premise is that the players are a squad that hunt down the Monster of the Week. That seems to be a pretty specific goal. As a matter of fact, each adventure has the GM create a monster for the characters to hunt down.

 

[pemerton]

[.

So I don't know the mechanics of these in 4e, but it seems doable.

The only mechanical element to a quest in 4e D&D is that completing a quest earns XP. In practice, that means that the game progresses more quickly when the PCs are engaged on quests.

4e uses "quests" as an organisational concept for play. From the PHB (p 258) and DMG (pp 102, 122):

Most adventures have a goal, something you have to do to complete the adventure successfully. The goal might be a personal one, a cause shared by you and your allies, or a task you have been hired to perform. A goal in an adventure is called a quest.

Quests connect a series of encounters into a meaningful story. The simplest adventures revolve around a single quest. . . . Most adventures are more complex, involving multiple quests.


Quests are the fundamental story framework of an adventure - the reason the characters want to participate in it. They’re the reason an adventure exists, and they indicate what the characters need to do to solve the situation the adventure presents. . . . More complex adventures involve multiple quests, including quests related to individual characters’ goals or quests that conflict with each other, presenting characters with interesting choices about which goals to pursue. . . .

Don’t be shy about letting the players know what their quests are. Give the players an obvious goal, possibly a known villain to go after, and a clear course to get to their destination. That avoids searching for the fun - aimless wandering, arguing about trivial choices, and staring across the table because the players don’t know what to do next. . . . Thinking in terms of quests helps focus the adventure solidly where it belongs: on the player characters. An adventure isn’t something that can unfold without their involvement. A plot or an event can unfold without the characters’ involvement, but not an adventure. . . .

Completing quests earns rewards for the PCs. These rewards primarily take the form of treasure (both money and items) and experience points, but quests can also have less concrete rewards. Perhaps someone owes them a favor, they’ve earned the respect of an organization that might give them future quests, or they’ve established a contact who can provide them with important information or access.​

Both books also speak about player-authored quests. From the PHB (p 258) and DMG (p 103):

Sometimes a quest is spelled out for you at the start of an adventure. . . . Other times, you figure out your quests while adventuring. . . . You can also, with your DM’s approval, create a quest for your character. Such a quest can tie into your character’s background. . . . Quests can also relate to individual goals . . . . Individual quests give you a stake in a campaign’s unfolding story and give your DM ingredients to help develop that story.

You should allow and even encourage players to come up with their own quests that are tied to their individual goals or specific circumstances in the adventure. Evaluate the proposed quest and assign it a level. Remember to say yes as often as possible!​

The first paragraph in the second block of quotes (which is from the PHB) illustrates three approaches to establishing quests: GM-dictated ("spelled out . . . at the start of an adventure"), player-established based on the prior events and revealed backstory (an example given on the DMG p 103 is the players deciding what it is that their PCs want to do with the escaped prisoner they have come across), and player-established based on their own PC goals and backstories.

If the GM approves/allows the lattermost sort of quest (which as you can see they are encouraged to do) then they are committed to building adventure elements - setting, encounters, treasure, etc - that will allow that quest to occur. It's basically a formalised system for channelling suggestions from players to the GM who has the actual authority over those bits of the fiction.

 

[Campbell]

Monster of the Week is a PbtA game. Its premise is that the players are a squad that hunt down the Monster of the Week. That seems to be a pretty specific goal. As a matter of fact, each adventure has the GM create a monster for the characters to hunt down.

It's also not really a Story Now game in my opinion. It's a pretty traditional game where GMs write or use adventures players expected to play through.

Not a dig by the way. I have had a ton of fun playing it, but it is not a game where your character is terribly important to how things turn out.

 

[prabe]

@pemerton Seems as though in 5e one could accomplish something like those quests by awarding XP for doing things to advance the characters' goals. Story-based leveling seems to be intending to do a similar thing, I think, at least if the DM levels the PCs based on their pursuit of their own story-goals. (I level the PCs when I think they've done enough things, and I try to be quicker if they're pursuing the goals they've set for themselves.)

It also seems as though one could do Quests in 5e without using Inspiration, which honestly makes me happy.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The "this' is not part of DW or AW. (Except for a small handful of particular playbook moves which won't typically be in play, because of the variety of moves.)

It isn't? Those examples of player action declarations causing dwarven forges and hunter lodges to appear certainly could have fooled me!

 

[pemerton]

@pemerton Seems as though in 5e one could accomplish something like those quests by awarding XP for doing things to advance the characters' goals.

What about the lattermost category - of having the GM build encounters, setting etc to enable a player to pursue his/her PC's goal?

EDIT: This relates directly to what I posted not far upthread:

It's trivial to do so. DW and AW, for instance, if played in accordance with the principles and agenda that are espoused in their rulebooks, will satisfy @Ovinomancer's criterion. And neither has "narrative level" mechanics except in a few distinct playbook moves which typically (given the variety of playbooks, and of moves-per-playbook) won't be in play.

The reason it doesn't need "narrative level" mechanics on the player side is because, in a typical RPG authority structure such as is found in D&D, Prince Valiant, Classic Traveller, AW, DW, etc the GM has the requisite "narrative level" power. That it to say, the GM can frame scenes that speak to player-authored PC dramatic needs, can narrate consequences in the same fashion, etc.

Player-authored quests are a device for having the GM use their authority in accordance with a certain principle, namely, build setting, treasures and encounters so as to render player-established PC goals able to be accomplished.

This is 4e D&D's version of the general proposition stated in my self-quote: that most "story now" RPGing doesn't need "narrative level" mechanics, but rather needs the GM to exercise their authority in accordance with a particular set of principles.