What I've found is that I do less and less prep as I get on as a GM.

RPGPundit

Jibba's last post nailed it. Once he had the character of Black Bess firmly in mind, he introduced her to the players by proxy. This nailed her down to a portion of the game-world. You don't have to do this, but once you do decide where she "fits" (and where the action involving her pirates are focused), you shouldn't just slot her into whichever path the players pick. But, again, their choice to not encounter the pirates on the river has consequences.

Here's another thing I noted from the OP:

++ If the PCs decided to run away and leave the strangers to their fate, I was cool with it; they'd probaby have to deal with... ++

I think it's much harder (once you have read through a linearly presented adventure) to just *shrug* and go "If the players don't go for that hook, I'm cool with it, I'll just use it like this..."

YOU have already experienced the linear presentation (unless the module is a very abstract location-crawl). Get comfortable with that "I'm cool with it" instinct you have from improv gaming, and then when things get "missed" you need to make a choice to either extrapolate what would happen if the PCs didn't make it to that scene, or to re-purpose/re-skin it in later. If hookA/eventB has already been foreshadowed and the PCs ignore hookA, then eventB goes down without them. If the background for hookA/eventB hasn't even been introduced to the campaign yet, feel free to re-use it elsewhere.

Also, there was a quote from an interview between Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett that I think fits well with another technique mentioned up-thread. Note that these are two professional authors, and they are still using their own metaphors to describe the following process.

http://boingboing.net/2011/10/10/an-interview-with-sir-terry-pr.html

QuoteNeil G:   When you put your Vimes-writing head on, is there a difference in the way you view the world to, say, when you’re in your Rincewind-writing head, or your Granny Weatherwax-writing head?

Terry P:   Oh, yes, surely you know how it is. Once you have your character sitting right there in your head, all you really need to do is wind them up, put them down, and simply write down what they do, say, or think. It really is like that. It verges on the weird; you know you are doing the thinking, but the thinking is being driven by the Sam Vimes module. There is also a fully functioning Tiffany Aching module, too, which is rather strange.

With this talk of modules*, we're stumbling now into what I believe is the single best feature of top down setting design. By the time you're well into it, you already know how shit is rolling and once the PCs are on the scene it's the easiest thing in the world to just let things happen. Its a bit like a chemical reaction. Good prep can't make a good game, but it sure as hell can be a great catalyst. This is also why I believe there is no adequate substitute for diy.

*In the way Prachett uses the word, as described above, not the traditional D&D module.

It is sorta weird, as Pratchett said, that these "writing-heads," as Gaiman calls it (I'm rather partial to the more classic and even older "masks" myself), take a life of their own inside another's head. One might even call it spooky, that sort of suspended control leading to such a vibrant and alien identity. But that's exactly the sort of fun -- immersion, almost to dissolution -- I seek out when I role play. I guess you could say 'it's fun to ride the tiger,' knowing you are playing with something basic and yet potent about humanity.

It's a tangent, but it relates to how a bit of top down prep helps create a World in Motion. This avoids having to run players on rails to "catch up with the next connecting hook in the story." It also helps remove the problem of how to manage fixed encounters to keep things dynamic, because "imbued" NPCs organically become dynamic even when players aren't there. And it's rather exciting as a GM to wear the 1000 masks.

Quote from: Opaopajr;560595It is sorta weird, as Pratchett said, that these "writing-heads," as Gaiman calls it (I'm rather partial to the more classic and even older "masks" myself), take a life of their own inside another's head. One might even call it spooky, that sort of suspended control leading to such a vibrant and alien identity. But that's exactly the sort of fun -- immersion, almost to dissolution -- I seek out when I role play. I guess you could say 'it's fun to ride the tiger,' knowing you are playing with something basic and yet potent about humanity.

It's a tangent, but it relates to how a bit of top down prep helps create a World in Motion. This avoids having to run players on rails to "catch up with the next connecting hook in the story." It also helps remove the problem of how to manage fixed encounters to keep things dynamic, because "imbued" NPCs organically become dynamic even when players aren't there. And it's rather exciting as a GM to wear the 1000 masks.

This is much more my viewpoint.
Part of gaming for me is the creative process in between games; that comes in contact with the in-game situation and is somehow quickened once properly affixed in the World in Motion through gameplay.

Quote from: Opaopajr;560595It is sorta weird, as Pratchett said, that these "writing-heads," as Gaiman calls it (I'm rather partial to the more classic and even older "masks" myself), take a life of their own inside another's head. One might even call it spooky, that sort of suspended control leading to such a vibrant and alien identity. But that's exactly the sort of fun -- immersion, almost to dissolution -- I seek out when I role play. I guess you could say 'it's fun to ride the tiger,' knowing you are playing with something basic and yet potent about humanity.

It's a tangent, but it relates to how a bit of top down prep helps create a World in Motion. This avoids having to run players on rails to "catch up with the next connecting hook in the story." It also helps remove the problem of how to manage fixed encounters to keep things dynamic, because "imbued" NPCs organically become dynamic even when players aren't there. And it's rather exciting as a GM to wear the 1000 masks.

I am totally in agreement with 2 of my favourite authors no suprise there.

However I feel it frees me from top down Prep. If I establish the personality of the La Bess Noir, which I can do in about 30 seconds in my head, I already know how her cabin will look, the way she treats her men , what they think about that, I already know what tactics she will use and how she will try and turn the most corruptable PC to break up the party. Because I have built her all the associated stuff that comes with that is done as well. I just don't need to examine it very closely til it comes up in play.

The same is true of the Elves in the woods. I know how their royal court will look, I know how Sweet Sweet Robin will act and what he will wear and all that stuff because I have imagined him and so all of his other stuff is there as well to be looked at more closely if the PCs choose to. Now I could write that all down. A 2 page description of his bower, the way he whistles softly as he walks, the arrogant sneer to his lips and how he loves to watch his victims sacrifice the things they hold most dear for the most selfish of ends. But I don't really need to write it down as its all there already. Its a bit like a memory you see the scene in passing and you don;t notice the detail but under hypnosis you can count the number of marbles on the table read the magazine titles in the rack etc .

Now sometimes i do do prep, its a rare beast. But it will be at the Macro level I will build a world, geology, anthropology, history, culture , politics all layered one on top of the other. Then I might do some wandering monster tables for different regions. but I would never drill into a 'hex' and map it out. I would stop at the macro region level then for an adventure I would just build some NPCs and we're good to go.

By coincidence I've been writing a blog post for a while about my observations that improvisation, if not carefully managed, can lead to mediocrity. Anyway, noism's post about this thread inspired me to finish it, so here it is.

http://rolesrules.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/mediocrity-of-improvisation.html

For me the golden rule is to have tables, to use the dice. They can take you places that you'd never dare to think up.

Looking at this essential problem - how do you dictate a world while avoiding the appearance that your personal choice is responsible for the party's successes and failures - I see now that another way I pass the buck is to use other people's modules. Although I feel free to mod the hell out of them for my own reasons. The current party is adventuring in a One Page dungeon contest entry I'm using only the map from, looking for The Purple Worm Graveyard, has been to the Tomb of the Iron God, and on their sights is an elf tower which might be the first main adventure site I've made for them - though with creative input from random encounter tables.

Quote from: jibbajibba;560664I am totally in agreement with 2 of my favourite authors no suprise there.

However I feel it frees me from top down Prep. If I establish the personality of the La Bess Noir, which I can do in about 30 seconds in my head, I already know how her cabin will look, the way she treats her men , what they think about that, I already know what tactics she will use and how she will try and turn the most corruptable PC to break up the party. Because I have built her all the associated stuff that comes with that is done as well. I just don't need to examine it very closely til it comes up in play.

The same is true of the Elves in the woods. I know how their royal court will look, I know how Sweet Sweet Robin will act and what he will wear and all that stuff because I have imagined him and so all of his other stuff is there as well to be looked at more closely if the PCs choose to. Now I could write that all down. A 2 page description of his bower, the way he whistles softly as he walks, the arrogant sneer to his lips and how he loves to watch his victims sacrifice the things they hold most dear for the most selfish of ends. But I don't really need to write it down as its all there already. Its a bit like a memory you see the scene in passing and you don;t notice the detail but under hypnosis you can count the number of marbles on the table read the magazine titles in the rack etc .

Now sometimes i do do prep, its a rare beast. But it will be at the Macro level I will build a world, geology, anthropology, history, culture , politics all layered one on top of the other. Then I might do some wandering monster tables for different regions. but I would never drill into a 'hex' and map it out. I would stop at the macro region level then for an adventure I would just build some NPCs and we're good to go.

I think that is along the ideal I was speaking of.  I don';t need to write a lot of prep in the micro level; I write tons of macro level prep.  
And as I said, it trickles and synergizes downward, affecting things at lower levels all the time.

Your bit with the elves is like this.  You know how and why they got there;and why they are the way they are.   So you don't need to describe all of them...

Quote from: The Butcher;559066I have never, ever, in 19 years of gaming (20 in a few months) ran a published adventure.

*snip* -- come midnight the inn was attacked by a Chaos sorcerer and a pack of six Chaos Hounds (a critter I improvised on the spot combining stats from Dire Wolves, Giant Wolves and Chaos demons), vs. 4 PCs and 3 relatively unskilled NPCs.

 *cut*

It's probably the most hackneyed and unimaginative scenario ever, but it was my hackneyed and unimaginative scenario. I had all the wiggle room in the world because I ad-libbed the whole thing and didn't write down a single thing (even the monster stats were cooked up on the spot).
Let me know what you all think.

Chaos Hounds are a real thing.  You can find stats for them in the Warriors of Chaos army book.  



For those who don't have that, the translation goes like this:

Chaos Warhound                          
Move 7
WS 4
BS  0
S   3  
T   3
W  1
I   3
A   1
LD  5

That's on a 1-10 scale, while WFRP is on 1-100.  It's easy to figure this one out.  No additional special rules.  You can use Ld value x10 for Cl, Int, Fel or whatever else you need.

Quote from: Blackhand;561002Chaos Hounds are a real thing.  You can find stats for them in the Warriors of Chaos army book.  



For those who don't have that, the translation goes like this:

Chaos Warhound                          
Move 7
WS 4
BS  0
S   3  
T   3
W  1
I   3
A   1
LD  5

That's on a 1-10 scale, while WFRP is on 1-100.  It's easy to figure this one out.  No additional special rules.  You can use Ld value x10 for Cl, Int, Fel or whatever else you need.

Its not really real though
So his made up stuff is just as good as the made up stuff in the book and has the advantage of being instantly accessible and infinitely modable

Cool minis though

Quote from: jibbajibba;561014Its not really real though
So his made up stuff is just as good as the made up stuff in the book and has the advantage of being instantly accessible and infinitely modable

Cool minis though

Real as anything else I guess.  But not really real.  They will only eat your model soldiers and characters.

Not faulting the creativity or anything.  Sounds like a hairy scenario.  Might look good you know...in miniature.

It seems natural you would arrive at chaos hounds.  Seems like there would be chaos hounds, you know?  Like chaos ogres, chaos giants and chaos trolls.  I always use the stats as a guideline, though it should be noted wounds seem to be translated 20 to 1, so 1 on the profile is 11-19 actual rpg wounds.

One thing you might think of adding is chaos mutations, but not just the ones in the book.

For reference:
Champions get +1 WS, BS, A and Ld.
Heroes get +2, Lords get +3.  Add special rules per guidelines or to taste.

Quote from: Blackhand;561002Chaos Hounds are a real thing.  You can find stats for them in the Warriors of Chaos army book.

Thanks for the stats and conversion guidelines.

I must have read about them somewhere, or else I just reverted to the good old "creepy supernatural black dog" monster archetype.

I went with Dire Wolf stats, only I used the Giant Wolf's Agility (because Dire Wolves are slow), and added the Instability trait common to all Daemons. Poof, instant demon dog. And incidentally, not too far off from the stats you've supplied. Totally forgot about Mutations, though; that would have been a great idea, and it would have made the hounds more alien and horrific.

I have done my own game modules, writing upwards of 10-20 pages of material at times, to see it all become a winged adventure and go off in random directions I never intended for it to go and end in either a blaze of glory and fun or a burning wreck.  Other times I spend ten minutes with note cards and draft out some simple ideas and we have a blast and way more fun with a note card adventure then my 10-20 page grand week long adventure writeups do at times more often than not, so I tend to do the note card idea allot more often now.