Writing useful game material efficiently

[Ry]

Just like with E6, I've used this myself and it's vastly improved my game. Just like E6, I have a hard time figuring out how to introduce the idea to others over forumspace. If I just said "All you need are problems threats resources and rewards, check the sig for some." they'd call me a loony.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think that your method is interesting, but you forgot "Context" and "Consequence".

A reward is a type of consequence. It is not the only type of consequence.

Context is information/set up with which decisions can be made, and the results of decisions (i.e., the consequences) be guessed at with varying levels of success. While arguable no one wants to listen to King Blatheringhammer go on for 20 minutes about why he's invading Overthereland, it is nonetheless possible that knowing that there is an invasion going on might well be important for PC decisions. It might also supply context for the more interactive elements.

In short: if it comes time for the DM to add some element to the game, and it's not a problem, threat, resource, or reward, it's a waste.

I can't agree with you here, because this statement seems short-sighted to me. Let's look at your examples for a moment:

You: "Here's the prince of Roundheria, he's thinking of invading the peaceful land of Overtheria, but you can't convince him not to."

Me: "Roundheria is invading Overtheria, which is why there are so many soldiers on the road. In fact, there is a general call for specialists, and you could probably gain field commissions if you desired. You might also be dragooned if you try to both keep a high profile and stay around these parts."

NOTE: Lots of potential adventure hooks, gives the players clear context in which to act, presents choice of sides (or to avoid the whole thing, if possible), suggests possible encounters....in essence, a good setup to the interactive elements.

You: "Here's the dragon of the west mountain, but he's so powerful he'll kill you all instantly, so listen to his monologue before he flies off to what I've already decided he's doing, OK?"

Me: "You have long heard of the dragon of west mountain, though some have thought him a myth. Lately, travellers say that he has been raiding east of the mountain, an inhospitable region that had once been given over to villages of hobgoblins. In turn, the hobgoblins are coming east. The dragon is obviously far too powerful for you, but the village asks your aid in turning a hobgoblin invasion."

NOTE: Potential adventure hooks, gives the players clear context in which to act, presents a clear foreshadowing of later adventure (avoiding the whole "where did these high level critters come from all of a sudden?" syndrome)....in essence, a good setup to the interactive elements.

Your examples of

"You're in a town. There's an inn. No, nothing interesting is happening."

"Elminster talks to you for half an hour, here's his 20-page explanation of why he's not going to help you. No, you can't convince him."​

suggest that there is a problem with having towns, inns, and Elminster, but they require you to determine that there is nothing of interest and include a 20-page read to make your point. IOW, it isn't that these things are a waste, but that anything taken to an absurd length is a waste. Likewise, interacting with NPCs isn't limited to saving them from threats, helping them with problems, using their resources, and earning rewards from them.....that is a really limited view of how the game can be played.

I do think that you are correct in saying that good design puts an overwhelming majority of active elements before the players, with additional elements that are designed to add context to the active elements. In a way, contextual elements may be considered indirectly "active" in that they supply information that the players can act upon. In this way, both information and misinformation become (effectively) a form of resource....something your examples would seem to deny.

RC

EDIT: After reading your expanded flowchart, the information about situation, what happens with the dwarf, and what happens with the bear prior to PC involvement is all exactly what you suggest is waste in your prior post. While it is true that you need the inactive elements to lead (directly or indirectly) to active elements, it is a mistake to imagine that the inactive elements are not needed.

 

[Scribble]

I think maybe to get people to see the merit in this approach a little more, you might want some examples of how to turn bad approaches into good approaches, or how your method avoids them in the first place.

How for example, using your method, would one fix the Prince of Roundheria adventure?


As they are, they don't seem to really relate much to your method.

They're examples of bad game design, and railroading sure, but these can be fixed simply by knowing what constitutes bad design.

(I'm in no way trying to knock your idea, just trying to delve a little deeper into your thought process.)

 

[Ry]

I hate doing the multi-response thing but this one I'm stuck for.

I think that your method is interesting, but you forgot "Context" and "Consequence".

I see consequence as an upshot of play, not of prep. Of course, it's a good idea to prep problems that follow on previous situations. For context, you just have to make sure your problems, threats, resources, and rewards are developed sufficiently.

Me: "Roundheria is invading Overtheria, which is why there are so many soldiers on the road. In fact, there is a general call for specialists, and you could probably gain field commissions if you desired. You might also be dragooned if you try to both keep a high profile and stay around these parts."

This is a resource and a problem.

"You have long heard of the dragon of west mountain, though some have thought him a myth. Lately, travellers say that he has been raiding east of the mountain, an inhospitable region that had once been given over to villages of hobgoblins. In turn, the hobgoblins are coming east. The dragon is obviously far too powerful for you, but the village asks your aid in turning a hobgoblin invasion."

This is a problem too. The information about the dragon is a resource, the dragon itself is a threat.

In this way, both information and misinformation become (effectively) a form of resource....something your examples would seem to deny.

That's not what I'm trying for here - information is a resource, absolutely. False information is a complication (i.e. a problem inside a problem).

After reading your expanded flowchart, the information about situation, what happens with the dwarf, and what happens with the bear prior to PC involvement is all exactly what you suggest is waste in your prior post. While it is true that you need the inactive elements to lead (directly or indirectly) to active elements, it is a mistake to imagine that the inactive elements are not needed.

The players expect a coherent universe, so the problem had to have more detail than I put on the flowchart (i.e. "the bear's regular trainer is drunk, the dwarf who got him drunk is going to try to do the act. the PCs see the dwarf poking him with a stick.")

 

[Ry]

Here's a big ol' example using a threat as the base, and building PTRRs out from there:

So let's say we have a threat - a crotchety old Manticore that eats children near an abandoned mine. To add depth, make related problems, threats, resources, and rewards.

Problem: The land around the manticore's lair is prone to rockslides. (Players might turn this into a resource).[sblock=Related PTRRs]Problem: Rockslides may block the PCs' path to the manticore's lair, placing them in a vulnerable position if they are detected.

Threat: Goblins in the area love pushing rocks down at their victims, shooting arrows at them from high above.

Resource: During a rockslide, the bats lairing with the manticore will be disoriented (DC 20 Knowledge (nature) check). If the PCs can keep the sound going they might only have to deal with the manticore.

Reward: After the PCs avoid the worst of a rockslide, they see a path has opened up above; taking this path gives them a good vantage to look at the Manticore's lair, and also reveals a cave with hard rock back where it would be safe to camp for the night.[/sblock]
Threat: The mine is filled with bat swarms that scavenge off of the remains of the manticore's various victims. The bat swarms know well enough not to attack the manticore.[sblock=Related PTRRs]Problem: The knee-deep bat guano at the bottom of the cave creates a noxious fume. DC 17 fortitude or become sickened.
Threat: There are scorpions crawling around in the guano. Stepping in the guano provokes them (Reflex 16 or get stung once per round), and they have a nasty (Str 1d6 / no secondary) poison (Fort 15 negates).

Resource: Towards the back of the cave, some of the manticore's bramble materials have slid down into the cave. These materials are flammable. Players will notice their torches flaring brightly in the smell of the bat guano.

Reward: If standing back and using a shovel, the scorpions can easily be collected; their poison is also long-lasting and can fetch a good price with an alchemist.[/sblock]
Resource: An old mountaineer keeps deadly, trained birds. He lives not far from the manticore, but doesn't want to provoke the manticore because he lives there with his granddaughters.[sblock=Related PTRR]Problem: The mountaineer moved away from a large city because of his bad debts long ago, and if the PCs approach he is suspicious and could even sick his birds on them.

Threat: The mountaineer's wife passed away some time ago, and has unfortunately risen as a ghoul. She's not very aware of her surroundings, and goes about chattering and singing to herself until something warm comes close. There are a few ways to use her: she could be sitting by the well in front of the mountaineer's house, hiding behind the shack, and so on. The mountaineer will thank the PCs if they deal with her.

Resource: The manticore has had a nasty run-in with a few of the old man's trained crows, and is waiting for an opportunity to swoop down and attack. He's "contracted" a goblin to spy on the mountaineer's cabin to pick a good time to attack. If the PCs catch the goblin he knows a secret way into the manticore's lair, but bargains for more than his freedom (he wants the spear he saw in the manticore's lair).

Reward: If the PCs take care of the manticore, the mountaineer, Jepp, happily gives them one of his finest attack hawks.[/sblock]

Reward: The manticore has a magical spear from an old adventurer it slew before it moved to this region. The spear is embedded in the brambles in the manticore's lair, but could be removed by a DC 20 strength check.[sblock=Related PTRR]Problem: The spear has a minor curse; when gripped with two hands, it moans in pain; anyone within 30 feet can hear it clearly, but beyond that it sounds like the wind.

Threat: The adventurer's family is searching for the spear - his older brother, Gappus, is a much more talented barbarian and will immediately assume the PCs stole it. If defeated, Gappus may listen to reason, but only if the PCs are very persuasive.

Resource: After scrapping with goblins, players find a crude goblin map to the manticore's lair; it mentions the spear is in there. Any goblin captive can tell the players that the spear makes the holder the goblin chief.

Reward: Gappus' brother, Chak, was the owner of the spear. Before approaching the manticore's lair he stowed his sack of travelling goods under a heavy rock. PCs who search the area can see that the rock was pushed from the spot it used to be positioned. Of course, the rock can't be moved without a lot of noise (and if rolled down the hill, it can cause another rockslide.)[/sblock]

 

[GlassJaw]

Here's a simpler way of looking at it:

http://www.treasuretables.org/2006/09/encounters-a-simple-formula

Just browse around some Treasure Tables threads and you'll find a TON of great resources and advice.

 

[Raven Crowking]

The players expect a coherent universe, so the problem had to have more detail than I put on the flowchart

Exactly my point.

While I agree that consequences arise in play, the reality is that your flowchart determines what you believe to be the most likely consequences of reward and failure, and that the more complicated a situation is, the more you need to consider consequences of likely actions.

Likewise, the elements that make you say that my revisions are problems, complications, etc., rely upon the idea of what you first called "waste" elements.

I think that you have a very useful idea going here; I just think that you need to expand it somewhat (or explain it more thoroughly).

RC

 

[Ry]

Likewise, the elements that make you say that my revisions are problems, complications, etc., rely upon the idea of what you first called "waste" elements.

Sorry, how do they rely on those elements?

Let me say that the DM should prepare problems, threats, resources, and rewards, but doesn't need to hamstring himself by thinking they can't write the details of those elements.

I'm still not sure about prepping consequences, though. How are consequences different than presenting a new (related) problem?

 

[BiggusGeekus]

It's a useful perspective.

I run a very "game-ist" RPG. Its a habit Iron Heroes has gotten me into. My group meets very, very infrequently and we're all over 30. High role-play is simply out of the question. Problem solving has to be done in minutes or its no fun. So I'll just come out and say: the bear has a leash, if you grab it, you can tie it to something to restrict the bear's movement. Then its Rope Use time for the PCs or a DEX check with some kind of penalty if they don't have Rope Use. That gives the PCs an option that they can use or dismiss as it pleases them.

In the past, I would have just described the bear as having a leash and let the PCs come up with ideas. But when you're over 30, have had two beers, and it's 11 at night ... good ideas can be hard to come by.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Sorry, how do they rely on those elements?

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. What are waste elements in your view?