Use of (Narrative) Archetypes in your campaigns

[Voi_D_ragon]

So, I recently stumbled upon quite a few interesting youtube videos and books that got me thinking. The essence is: all stories follow one of a few general archetypal structures, and you can rehash said structures into an almost infinite variety of individual forms. People, despite this (although some may not notice this underlying structure), will come back again and again to hear stories of how heroes defeat the big bad monster.

This, it is theorized, is because stories, to some degree, are a reflection of the real human struggle. Sure, not all of us battle dragons, but we did stand up to our shrewish mother-in-law once (or whatever). Following this logic, the oldest stories, not the newest ones, are the ones that most reflect human nature -the original story has been distilled for its truest elements, then the result has been distilled again, and again, etc. etc.-

So what I would like to know is: how much (if at all -consciously, since we all probably base ourselves off old stories on some level without knowing) do you base your campaign problems/narratives/themes around archetypal structures (ancient Greek/Oriental/Mesopotamian/Other myths or other similarly ancient sources -the Bible is a good example of archetypal storytelling that comes to mind)?

Also, if you have at any level, how has it worked out for you?

 

[Blue]

As a DM, I don't try to fit stories to archetypal structures - the stories are a collaboration with the players - I don't try to push. This doesn't mean that they don't end up like that.

But what I do is that I design my setting using mythic archetypes, big overarching trends that can be tapped into. I can't say these provide the same type of shaping, but what they do give is tropes that the players and their characters can hook into, ones that resonate.

 

[pemerton]

So what I would like to know is: how much (if at all -consciously, since we all probably base ourselves off old stories on some level without knowing) do you base your campaign problems/narratives/themes around archetypal structures (ancient Greek/Oriental/Mesopotamian/Other myths or other similarly ancient sources -the Bible is a good example of archetypal storytelling that comes to mind)?

Well, my last two really long-running campaigns (Rolemaster Oriental Adventure, 1998-2008; default 4e 2009-still going) both ended up being about saving the mortal world from struggles between the gods and those to whom they owe debts. To the extent that the drive for this has come from me as GM rather than the players, I would attribute it to my fondness for the Ring Cycle.

I am currenlty running a Cortex+ Fantasy Heroic game that involves the coming of the Ragnarok, but the actual themes of play have been less exalted (eg tricking giants, robbing dark elves).

I also have a Burning Wheel, a 4e Dark Sun and a Classic Traveller campaign active. None is really mythic in its themes or trajectory, at least as this stage. They're more personal in what they focus on.

 

[The Black Ferret]

I also try not to build adventures and campaigns around such archetypes. The main reason is that those old stories are more about promoting a moral lesson through the story, rather than the events of the story. The end is already preordained. Everything else is just details. I prefer to write my adventures as a challenge to be overcome with the goal being to succeed, rather then to lead to a specific conclusion. That might sound contradictory, but the difference is between "This is what you need to do" vs "This is what I want to happen". One challenges the players to create their own ending. The other tries to push a specific ending, irregardless of the character's actions. In my adventures, there is a story, but that story forms the background, not the manner through which the adventure takes place. There can be consequences to how it ends, but it isn't created with a built in moral or ending.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I use this type of approach in my game. Not for every story or at all times, but I definitely have a couple of themes that spring to mind as I think about it. One is kind of philosophical, and the other is aimed at one character.

The philosophical one is about free-will versus fate. Is the future written already, or are we shaping it with our choices? The campaing involves some time travel, and there are two NPCs involved in the time shenanigans and each has a different outlook. One tells the PCs that they are capable of changing things...that if they go to the past and kill the king as a child, then he will never rule. The other tells them that all is written...if they go back in time to kill the king, then they must have failed because the king is currently still alive. The PCs are working on trying to figure out which is true. And honestly, so am I based on what the players seem to think and want.

The other theme which involves the party fighter. When we began 5E, the player made the character with little thought to his backstory or much else. He was just made in order to test the system. He made the character neutral and said that he had been a mercenary. Over the campaign, the neutrality thing has bugged me a bit. The PCs are generally heroic, although very often not by choice...but he goes along with all the heroics, but then occasionally does something that just seems off and uses the neutral alignment as his justification. So I’ve started putting him in positions where he has to personally choose between right and wrong...a good act or an evil one, and I’m keeping track. Things looked pretty bleak when the PCs went to Ravenloft and he started leaning toward evil. The Amber Temple was very interesting. But he kind of made it through, and wound up using the Sunsword to help defeat Strahd. So he came out of it all with a Neutral Good alignment, and my little thematic approach seemed over.

But lately the character’s been real bloodthirsty...so perhaps I will revisit it.

I feel that with these kinds of themes or archetypal stories, if you go with it, you’ll be amazed at how mcuh of the game will lend itself to that approach. I think it enriches the experience.