I absolutely think it depends on the players, and than also (though less so) on the DM. As a player and and DM I have taken great joy in the flexablity of both styles. It is great fun to take an obvious storyline and run with it(if your DM has a sense of humor, that is) and have often played a hack and slash game by making friends with the monsters I'm suppose to kill and joined forces with the bad guys I'm suppose to destroy. I try and be grentle with DM's that simply aren't prepared for someone to run south when all the signs point north, but as a DM I can run either style. Some players simply don't know what to do without hooks, others hate being "lead" and like to excercise their "free will." The best way to have this flexiblity is to a) have a well developed and detailed world with "world events" (what previous posters have called an Uber Plot) something the PC's can get involved with or, if they think their characters wouldn't care, can ignore at least until it effects them personally. b) the other key is to pay attention to your players. Have they made up interesting characters with back grounds and plot hooks, or have they simply recorded stats and skills? Is one player roleplaying more than the rest? Is one player strangely quiet during the games? Do you players use game mechanics talk during combat rounds or do they just describe what their character wants to do? These things can give you clues as to whether the PC's need more or less direction. The First game that I ever loved was the one where the DM gave my character a special task that *only* she could do. The worst game I ever played was the one where the DM told me what my character should be feeling. Two sides of the same coin.
story or world campaigns
Oh... I forgot to mention.. there is also a C) one that I'm not so good at. If you have a story based game, be prepared to have your pet NPC killed, the heros lose and the Garden of Edan invaded. I have lost more of my favorite NPC's and story lines when I assumed which path the PC's would take.
Eosin the Red
First Post
Good Thread
I liked the Buffy/Angel analogy. I always use the Babylon5 analogy myself.
I usually think of it as each session being an independent story that is sometimes a "filler episode" driven by the players and sometimes a "story arc" adventure that furthers the campaign story.
The campaign story will happen regardless of the players actions, but they do not usually start out directly involved in it. INstead they begin to collect hints of something else going on. Eventually, their actions will determine the success or failure of the Evil Villian(tm) plan.
I liked the Buffy/Angel analogy. I always use the Babylon5 analogy myself.
I usually think of it as each session being an independent story that is sometimes a "filler episode" driven by the players and sometimes a "story arc" adventure that furthers the campaign story.
The campaign story will happen regardless of the players actions, but they do not usually start out directly involved in it. INstead they begin to collect hints of something else going on. Eventually, their actions will determine the success or failure of the Evil Villian(tm) plan.
DungeonKeeperUK
First Post
What I tend to do with my campaigns now is set a loose background of what is happening in teh world that the PC are playing in, how much they get involved within it is up to them.
I've taken to writing up a series of small notebooks, supposedly written by a mage/bard.. whatever, detailing with subtle clues what is happening/happened with the world, in here are clues linking most things together, adn subtly nudging them in teh direction I would like them to go...
But if they choose to follow the clues leading them to the lost trasure in teh swamps rather than facing the possible threat to teh elven nations... well its up to them.
I know what is going on in the world, and those events will continue, its up to the PC's how they wish to react to them
I've taken to writing up a series of small notebooks, supposedly written by a mage/bard.. whatever, detailing with subtle clues what is happening/happened with the world, in here are clues linking most things together, adn subtly nudging them in teh direction I would like them to go...
But if they choose to follow the clues leading them to the lost trasure in teh swamps rather than facing the possible threat to teh elven nations... well its up to them.
I know what is going on in the world, and those events will continue, its up to the PC's how they wish to react to them
Here is what I don't get: Lets say I spend my 2-3 hours of game prep time making a game so the characters can rescue the Elven Nation and the characters go after the treasure. Not only has my time that I spent making up the First game been wasted but I do not have a detailed adventure for the lost treasure. I understand that the characters should have "Free Will" but as a gamemaster do I need to map out every possiable choice the players make? That seems a bit much!
Eosin the Red
First Post
Good Thread
I liked the Buffy/Angel analogy. I always use the Babylon5 analogy myself.
I usually think of it as each session being an independent story that is sometimes a "filler episode" driven by the players and sometimes a "story arc" adventure that furthers the campaign story.
The campaign story will happen regardless of the players actions, but they do not usually start out directly involved in it. INstead they begin to collect hints of something else going on. Eventually, their actions will determine the success or failure of the Evil Villian(tm) plan.
I liked the Buffy/Angel analogy. I always use the Babylon5 analogy myself.
I usually think of it as each session being an independent story that is sometimes a "filler episode" driven by the players and sometimes a "story arc" adventure that furthers the campaign story.
The campaign story will happen regardless of the players actions, but they do not usually start out directly involved in it. INstead they begin to collect hints of something else going on. Eventually, their actions will determine the success or failure of the Evil Villian(tm) plan.
Desdichado
Hero
X-files was a really good analogy for me: for a long time they did an "every-other" plan, every other episode was a "campaign" episode, while it's alternate would be a "one-off."
Another good trick is that you really don't have to plan for everything the PCs could think of to do. You can have three or four canned responses that will be appropriate no matter what they do, and that way you can control things without them feeling railroaded. You can also make sure things work out without railroading PCs. If they don't seem to want to go north and save the kingdom from the orc hordes (to use a bad example) make sure the invasion happens anyway. Give them consequences for not doing what they should. Sooner or later, they'll usually come back to the sandbox and play, but they get to do it on their terms. That way both of you win: the PCs get to make the decisions, the DM (after a little free-wheeling) still gets to have the adventure or whatever that he planned, maybe slightly modified (I'd punish the PCs somewhat for this, though: if they ignore obvious clues, it will be a lot harder to go back and fix things after the fact.)
Lord Vangarel
First Post
I've run all sorts of campaigns over the years with most taking the epic quest route guided by a strong storyline, the problem however is that once the quest is completed the campaign struggles to reach such epic heights again. Occasionally I've run games with no long term plot and these sometimes struggle to maintain momentum. Once I even tried a campaign where the players would set their own goals but that didn't work out either.
My current campaign has an overriding plot but I'm purposefully keeping it in the background and only letting little snippets of it become known occasionally. When planning each adventure I look at where the players are, what if anything they might be doing or want to be doing (their goals), and what if anything might be going on in the area. If none of the player's have current goals I look to the npcs and location for an idea of what the adventure should be about. Sometimes, if a player wants to achieve a specific objective then there is nothing else important going on, most times something else is going on and I end up with an A and a B story like Star Trek often does (mostly on TNG, DS9 episodes).
On the whole the current approach seems to be working reasonably well, every now and again an adventure contains a clue as to the greater whole, sometimes the clue is the adventure. One other thing I have done is slowed down the experience rate. I've done this for one reason only which is so I can better plan what monsters/npcs to put against the party for their next level. it used to be that sometimes I wouldn't be able to properly detail an npc/monster because the characters advanced to the level before I'd had a chance to detail enough npcs effectively. I still don't have enough time but at least now I have a bit more than in previous campaigns.
My current campaign has an overriding plot but I'm purposefully keeping it in the background and only letting little snippets of it become known occasionally. When planning each adventure I look at where the players are, what if anything they might be doing or want to be doing (their goals), and what if anything might be going on in the area. If none of the player's have current goals I look to the npcs and location for an idea of what the adventure should be about. Sometimes, if a player wants to achieve a specific objective then there is nothing else important going on, most times something else is going on and I end up with an A and a B story like Star Trek often does (mostly on TNG, DS9 episodes).
On the whole the current approach seems to be working reasonably well, every now and again an adventure contains a clue as to the greater whole, sometimes the clue is the adventure. One other thing I have done is slowed down the experience rate. I've done this for one reason only which is so I can better plan what monsters/npcs to put against the party for their next level. it used to be that sometimes I wouldn't be able to properly detail an npc/monster because the characters advanced to the level before I'd had a chance to detail enough npcs effectively. I still don't have enough time but at least now I have a bit more than in previous campaigns.
Henry
Autoexreginated
bolen said:
Hence the "matrix" idea, as proposed by both Joshua. Coming back to the idea of "only prep what you need," general responses and plots are better than ones that are specifically detailed out. You cannot, no matter HOW good you are, plan for what your players are going to do every time; even good DM's will get stumped. (I hope Piratecat can see this and comment on this one - the Defenders of Daybreak would drive me nuts!)
However, you can plan for most eventualities in broad terms, and learn to develop your skills at improvisation, being sure to take notes soon after you are done, so that you can remain self-consistent.
I once found an excellent resource on the Internet, of someone giving good tips on how to be a better DM - it contained suggestions such as "plan a hiking trip in the woods" "learn the basics of horseback riding" "read a wide variety of genres, not just fantasy" "visit a natural history museum" et cetera. It had tons of useful ideas besides these that anyone could do. Sadly, I lost the link long ago, but would love to find it again.
One interesting guide for suggestions is found at:
http://members.aol.com/essuncius/cover.html
While I don't agree with all his suggestions, He posts some very cogent arguments about planning ahead and "winging it."
I hope some of this is helpful.
Similar Threads
