D&D 5E The importance to "story" of contrivance

[werecorpse]

Much of what you refer to as contrivance is just "in games" plans being put into effect. The op refers to the Rohirrim arriving on the dawn of the third day as if it's some sort of author based contrivance. In fact Gandalf leaves before the siege commences so he can locate the Rohirrim and says look for me on the dawn of the third day - so it's not some amazing conicidence that the Rohirrim turn up. It's a plan by a guy who is pretty clever. If that was a game I was running the issue would be can you survive until dawn of the third day when the cavalry are literally expected to arrive.

My "contrivance" that I use in running plots is to have it that the paths of the bad guys and the PC's keep crossing. Each time they may meet or may not. But that's because the story we are telling is about them, not some other bunch of heroes who are presumably meeting some other n'er do wells in some other plot line. If the PC's ignore or fail to stop the bad guys they just advance the evil scheme a bit.
For example here is the outline of a plot where a bad guy plans to bind a demon to himself to gain power
1. Bad guy steals magic book with ritual from players mentor
2. Bad guy obtains necessary weird ritual stuff - a manticore skin (a manticore happens to be an enemy the players meet in another adventure)
3. Bad guy captures sacrifices and holds them somewhere
4. Bad guy performs ritual in a certain spot at a certain time (by a lake on the full moon say)

At point 1, 2 or 3 the players might figure out who the bad guy is but at least will get an understanding of the plot. They might rescue the captives and foil the preparations etc. by the time 4 happens they have a pretty good idea what is going on and where it's likely to happen so the, turning up is just good sense. But if they don't, that's fine I have a bad guy who then starts another plot - to summon a death knight servant or dominate the local Duke etc.

If they never stop him he eventually succeeds in his plots and lives evilly ever after.

Let's say the players figure out where the ritual sacrifices are being kept by the bad guys hobgoblin allies. They free them and find out who the bad guy is and go kill him. That end isn't contrived except that it was contrived that they would cross paths - but that's because that bad guy needed the mentors book, and the skin of manticore they happened to kill etc etc. we are not telling the story about the Orc necromancer who finds some relics that enable him to build a bone colossus - that story is the story of that other group of NPC adventurers.

In my world amazing things are happening all over the place - but the story we are telling is just about the players bit of amazingness.

 

[robus]

Here's my simple position.

This game is about adventure. Adventure requires heroes to regularly face dire peril and live to tell the tale. The PCs bring the heroics and the DM contrives the peril.

 

[pemerton]

This game is about adventure. Adventure requires heroes to regularly face dire peril and live to tell the tale. The PCs bring the heroics and the DM contrives the peril.

I'd add a couple of things:

* The mechanics play a significant role in determining whether or not the PCs live to tell the tale (see eg hp, saving throws);

* As well as peril per se, dramatic or romantic adventure requires that there be emotional pressure on the PCs - and the GM is responsible for ensuring this.

 

[pemerton]

The op refers to the Rohirrim arriving on the dawn of the third day as if it's some sort of author based contrivance. In fact Gandalf leaves before the siege commences so he can locate the Rohirrim and says look for me on the dawn of the third day - so it's not some amazing conicidence that the Rohirrim turn up.

You seem to be confusing the Battle of Helm's Deep with the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.

 

[werecorpse]

You seem to be confusing the Battle of Helm's Deep with the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.

You are absolutely right, mea culpa.

In the case of the latter battle the set up is that Gandalf had:
1. Convinced the Rohirrim to ready to march to help Minas Tirith
2. Caused a signal to be sent from Minas Tirith asking for help
3 worked to keep the morale up of those holding the wall

So if I call for help and it arrives and helps that's what I hoped would happen. Would Lotr be a "worse" story if Minas Tirith had been sacked and the cavalry arrived too late? Different, darker but Aragorn would still have lead his ghost buddies on an Orc killing spree.

I guess my view is that after the fact everything looks like contrivance but history and fiction are both made up of hundreds of these sort of things. Iirc the non French forces won the battle of Waterloo because a force of Prussians turned up just in time in the late afternoon & turned the tide of battle; & the battle was still going because rain had delayed the French from starting until midday or thereabouts and Napoleon was worried about his artillery. Rain + Prussians arriving in the nick of time contrived to end the reign of Napoleon.

If the rain hadn't happened or the Prussians arrived the next day we would talk about how that was an amazing coincidence. But maybe speaking French.

Luck and coincidence happen all the time. But when they don't, that's a lucky coincidence too.

From a gaming point of view having the good guys figure out what's going on and either
1. Arrive early and set up a trap
2. Arrive in the nick of time to stop the event
3. Arrive too late and have to follow the freed demon/mummy or rescue the doomed city, help the refugees etc

Are all good stories, you could say any of the arrival times were contrived.