Story in RPGs

[Tinker Gnome]

I have been reading on various blogs and forums about how the GM of a game having a story of sorts planned out for the game is bad. And how they should just let the story flow out from the players actions, even if it is not a coherent story at all.

I myself am kind of fond of the idea of a story emerging from play. I guess I am sort of in the middle between those who like to have a complete story mapped out and those who believe that there should not even be a real story. I like for their to be some sort of grand plot, but it should arise out of both GM planning and PC actions. The GM should have a story planned, but he or she should adjust it as the PCs act upon their world.

 

[Ariosto]

It is a subject with nuances of context. Dungeons & Dragons (as originally conceived) emphasized player-directed exploration, whereas Call of Cthulhu from the start dealt in more narrowly defined scenarios.

The main thing to remember is that the G in RPG is for game. If you're looking for a medium in which to tell a particular story you have in mind, then look elsewhere. The interest in a game lies in players' ability to shape a new sequence of events; the greater the potential variation, the richer the game.

Arbitrarily preventing players' choices from making any significant difference is called "railroading", and that is bad.

 

[Crothian]

There is nothing wrong with a DM Story. It's all in how it is done. A DM can have his story and allow the PCs the freedom to do what they want. It's a delicate balance and there is compromise on both sides.

 

[Davachido]

I can't talk about all game systems but with regards to D&D and WOD most of the story is really PC driven. If you let yourself get bogged down by the set story you want to tell then PCs can't do the crazy ideas they want to act out. (I've had this experience as a player and it sucks, too much deus ex machina flying about.)

However that isn't to say there is a larger plot in your story going on, vet DMs have told me that the best thing you can do usually if you want a grand plot in play is plan out a timeline of events. These aren't set in stone, these are the events that will happen IF the PCs don't do anything about it. However if the PCs do try to change what's going to happen, deviate from the timeline and see where it'll go.

Another way to have a larger plot is write a setting, factions and NPCs. Have all of these with their own hint of flavour and see what the PCs do when interacting with them and the story seems to develop itself when new ideas get inspired by the PCs actions.

 

[karlindel]

I think it depends a lot on the group (both players and DM) and what they want to get out of the game.

Some players prefer very freeform games, and will actively work to create action and drama. These players can feel stifled if they are forced into plotlines that don't make sense for their characters.

Other players prefer having solid goals laid out for them. They don't like flailing around without clear guidance on what to do.

Similarly, some DMs prefer freeform games in which the players drive the action and the DM merely sets the stage for the story to unfold. Other DMs prefer to have a solid overarching plot to provide a frame for the characters to act in, to try to ensure an appropriately epic and cohesive story at the end.

Of course, most players and DMs fall somewhere between these two extremes. One of the most important part of a DMs job is to try to balance out their desires and those of the players, and try to create the best experience possible. If the players are all freeform types that will work to drive their stories forward, it might be a good idea to have them create characters and backgrounds before doing more than cursory world creation, to avoid wasting effort on areas and events that the PCs wouldn't be interested in. Alternately, giving them background so that they create characters who are likely to become involved in your plotlines is a must.

It's always a balancing act between railroading the PCs into plots that don't work for them and making it seem that their choices don't matter, and ending session after session with everyone feeling that they're just doing a lot of random stuff with no actual accomplishments involved.

Personally, I tend to start a campaign with a skeletal overarching plot with a few organizations, NPCs, and events set up, and I know generally how things will go if the players are not involved. Then I see what the players do, and adjust things accordingly. I also frequently make changes to portions of the setting and plots that the PCs haven't seen, in order to try to make things more interesting and personal to their characters.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Just remember that in a developing campaign world there is no "grand" plot.
Individuals, and groups of NPC's may have plots of thier own but the world itself will generally not (unless the world is a sentient being- a rather interesting concept )

As the PC's interact with the various plots they will change. Some may be destroyed, some altered, and others aided. If the actions of the PC's have no impact on these plots then there really isn't a need for a game system at all.

 

[tyrlaan]

A side note to what folks are saying is that you can feel free to let a plot conclude even if the PCs decide note to follow it. For example, just because the PCs don't take the bait and storm the haunted crypt of Count Bloodsucker McBadguy doesn't mean some other adventuring party doesn't do it. Or perhaps McBadguy pulls off some dastardly deeds and becomes a greater threat as a result of the PCs overlooking him. And so on.

Just be careful not to build scenarios where the PCs feel punished for not following out plots. Letting a Bad Thing (tm) happen should produce more opportunities for the PCs to kick butt and take names, not make them feel like they're being railroaded.

 

[Engilbrand]

I'm DMing for 2 guys. They decided that one of them would be the focus, while the other is the protector. The main person decided his character knew a special dance, and there were others. Over the first few sessions, we started to decide where to take the game and what was important. It took a while, but I eventually was able to create a major metaplot involving forbidden dances.
This was my first time truly DMing something meant to last that was character-focused. And it was a 2 person Eberron game about dancing. I have thrown myself into the idea of letting the players decide where things are going.

 

[Scribble]

I usually include a metaplot, but it's always more like a rough outline then anything really concrete.

The main "idea" of what's going on, and a rough background (that sometimes changes if no one has uncovered it yet... or if I need it to change later I let them find out the history they knew was somehow incorrect.)

The PCs are free to interact with it however they see fit.

 

[Janx]

every session you play is a story, the goal then is to make it a story worthy of retelling.

One of the first steps is to make sure the story is about the PCs.
That means, you don't write a game about Beowulf, and how the PCs help him through HIS story.


You write a game where the PCs are in a similar situation as beowulf.



You write your hooks in a way that relate to the PCs in a believable fashion that the player will accept and willingly pursue.

In a private detective story, the story happens because the PC is hired to do his job. Inherently obvious PC to plot hook connection.

In a fantasy campaign, a story can happen because the PC wants to pursue treasure gain, so he runs into opportunities that become more complex than he first knew.


Make reasonable motivations and connections for the NPCs to interact with the PCs. Don't just make "yet another random orc" encounter. Make that orc be looking for the man who shot his pa, which he believes was a PC. The orc has a 1 line motivation AND it connects him to the PCs (even if he's wrong, he has a reason to be seeking them out).

These elements form the background of telling a story.

From there, let it proceed as the PLAYERS choose. Don't force them into a path where they HAVE to clear their name with the orc, accept that it may go either way, and allow for FUN to happen.

Don't make every choice a screw-job. Wherein if the PCs don't help the orc, they become the bad guys. Allow for the fact that the players want to win, and they may not see the situation the same as you. let them shape how that happens and make it challenging along the way.