When Player Driven Adventures Don't Pan Out

[zakael19]

Okay… but all (or maybe most) of the hooks are GM created content. Choosing from a menu of options certainly gives players choices of what to do, but I’m not sure if that’s player-driven. Or not as player- driven as it could be.

What are the motivations for the characters to get involved in any of these hooks? I mean I have no doubt that some can be interesting in their own right… but is there anything other than that to help motivate the players or their characters?

Ok, we did this for 700+ pages in that Sandbox thread last year. This is why I've been trying to say there's different styles of player-driven games, and the classic "treasure seeking adventurers" wandering off into a sandbox is certainly the oldest one, but isn't character driven in the same way as our newer styles imho.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Okay… but all (or maybe most) of the hooks are GM created content. Choosing from a menu of options certainly gives players choices of what to do, but I’m not sure if that’s player-driven. Or not as player- driven as it could be.

What are the motivations for the characters to get involved in any of these hooks? I mean I have no doubt that some can be interesting in their own right… but is there anything other than that to help motivate the players or their characters?

You and I mean different things by "player-driven". I mean that the players choose what their PCs do in the game. It doesn't necessarily mean they invented the thing they decide to do, and it definitely doesn't necessarily mean that they created the part of the world they decide to engage with. None of that is needed for a player-driven game. They just have to choose what they want to do in the world. I don't lead them down a path. I provide options to make choosing easier and to reinforce the setting as independently existing, but they can do whatever they want to do, including something I didn't think of, with the world their PCs live in. The kind of player-driven campaign you seem to be talking about doesn't appeal to me. You do you though.

As far as motivation goes, that depends on the PCs they make. I encourage my players to create characters with personal goals, and before we begin active play I find out what those goals are so I can make sure the setting has what would be needed for the PCs to potentially achieve those goals, but whether or not they try to do so is up to player choices and the rules of the game. And once the first active session starts, the players's power over the world is limited to what their PC is capable of.

 

[pemerton]

I think there's a lot of advice about GMing online and through other sources that says you need to have a whole world created, or if not a whole world, then an incredibly detailed starting area. And neither of those things is true. And neither will benefit a player driven approach.

I'd go so far as to say that that is probably bad advice.

 

[pemerton]

A stream is a lot to ask, but I’m genuinely interested in learning more. I’d like to do more player-driven campaigns, but the prep work was my Achilles heel.

Here are some examples - actual play reports - of player-driven RPGing:

* Burning Wheel, where I'm the player; you can see how the GM follows player-generated cues <Burning Wheel actual play>

* Burning Wheel, where me and my friend are both players and GMs (roughly, each frames the scenes and establishes the consequences for the other's character); again, you can see how the players' characters and actions generate cues that the GMs build off, in the sort of iterative way that @zarionofarabel describes <Played Burning Wheel today>

* Wuthering Heights, where I was GM; play unfolded from the players making their rolls on the "problems" table as part of PC gen, and then just snowballed from there <Played some Wuthering Heights today>

* Here (and in some other posts in this thread) is LotR/MERP play, using a fantasy hack of Marvel Heroic RP as the system - a mix of GM ideas about setting and antagonists interplaying with player decisions about character goals and choices <Middle Earth/LotR RPGing using Cortex+ Heroic>

* My most recent RPG session, Mythic Bastionland, which is fairly high prep but that prep has mostly been done by the game author via his rulebook <Mythic Bastionland actual play>​

I have other examples I can point to also. But these hopefully give you some ideas of how I and my group do things, across a bit of a variety of systems.

 

[Scott Christian]

I've been running player driven games for more than 30 years. My games always have consistent narrative momentum that makes sense. They also have clear ways for players to complete the objectives they have chosen to pursue.

That's awesome.

I have talked to a lot of GMs that run scripted plotline games that think they are providing all of these things for their players. However, alot of the time (not always, but more often than not) the particular methods they use don't really provide real agency, just the illusion of such.

I also find it interesting that so many GMs seem to think that the only way to run a successful player driven campaign is with an overwhelming amount of prep. Especially because I have been doing it with little to no prep since I started in the hobby in 1988. It makes me wonder if the successful execution of a player driven campaign is more about the GM than the players.

I am now confused. You do "little or no prep," but your players have "clear ways to complete their objectives." If they have clear ways, then how have you not prepped?

And I get what you are saying about other DMs thinking they offer player-driven campaigns, yet it is just the illusion of choice. (And there is a thought in the back of my head that it is all the illusion of choice, but that is neither here nor there.) That is exactly how I feel about consistency. Most DMs think they offer it, yet I have never met one that did - unless of course they ran a generalized Forgotten Realms style world or did a boatload of prep and work on their own.

 

[Scott Christian]

I think one of the main things to consider in this regard is to not commit to too much about the setting before involving the players. I think there's a lot of advice about GMing online and through other sources that says you need to have a whole world created, or if not a whole world, then an incredibly detailed starting area. And neither of those things is true. And neither will benefit a player driven approach.

That's funny. I see the exact opposite advice for the most part. And definitely in the real world, when I talk to other GMs (other than the ones I play with), they decry the build-first technique.

For the record: Most of them are paid GMs or under 25 years old.

 

[Scott Christian]

Which I think happens fairly organically considering how many internet memes I see about how players will always befriend the throwaway NPC with no name, and the importance of allowing players to do that.

There is a way around this - don't have any throwaway PCs. (Kind of true for some games, definitely not true for others.)

 

[Reynard]

What are the motivations for the characters to get involved in any of these hooks?

Character motivations are the responsibility of the players.