I'm still struggling with, as a GM, turning an idea or a goal into an activity with challenging, multiple steps. This is a problem for me REGARDLESS of whether the goal/activity is generated by me or the players, and REGARDLESS of whether or not I'm pre-planning OR improving (based on a "Situation"). Both my players and I find this unsatisfying.

EXAMPLE:

we have the goal "rescue the people kidnapped from the tavern by Orcs" turns into "follow the Orks trail, then deal with them to get the hostages" which isn't even two scenes of activity.

TRIED:

Creating Antagonists w/ Goals (in the above example, Orc doesn't wants to keep his captives as slaves, but that doesn't turn into anything for the players to do besides rescue them).

Creating steps for the Antagonists a la Fronts/Dangers (Orc kidnaps people and takes them back to lair).

The problem is that you're setting up pins for them to knock down. Instead, take a different approach.

1. Come up with the basic problem situation (orcs have stolen some people)

2. Add detail. Where do the orcs live? What's the world like in between? Where were they stolen from? What other groups are nearby? Who else cares that the orcs are being bad? Who is interested in propping up the orcs, if only for selfish reasons? Who else wants the stolen people back, but is controlling, manipulative, and/or has secondary goals that might threaten the mission?

3. Now up the difficulty. What if there are too many orcs for them to take in a fight? What if the orcs are few, but tough? Do the orcs have layers of defense? Flunkies? Are they moving soon? (Have they already moved?) Who can they call on for help? What else would try if you were a group of orcs and some badasses shows up to try to steal your lunch?

Don't solve the problem for the players (even in your head), that's their job. Let them thrash around a bit looking for allies, clues, obstacles, advantages.

Quote from: PencilBoy99;940206we have the goal "rescue the people kidnapped from the tavern by Orcs" turns into "follow the Orks trail, then deal with them to get the hostages" which isn't even two scenes of activity.

Maybe you need to come up with a more complex situation than arriving at a tavern where a few hours ago a bunch of orcs dragged hostages into the wild.

For example

A bunch of orcs raided a roadside tavern three days ago. This section of road is not patrolled well. The local baron been pocketing some of the royal funds that supposed to go to hire guard. The PCs happened to come across the tavern and find out from the tavernkeeper about the raid. He quite worried about his own reputation and throw himself on the mercy of the PC. He has some coin but best he can do is offer a room as a regular place to stay for free for the party.

The PCs goes off and find the days old trails and starts investigating. They manage to track the trail back to a small hamlet of orcs on the edges of the Blood Forest. After a sharp fight in which the PC triumph, they find out the hostages were sold as slave to one Ogg the Bold, an ogre who lives deeper in the forest. They also learn enough to get a sense there is an entire evil society living in the forest. That Ogg the Bold is a small but important slave merchant.

Luckily the PCs learn where Ogg lives. They have a window of opportunity to get the victims back but need to be properly equipped and prepared. They go back to the tavern and get geared up. During the course of explaining things to the tavernkeeper, one of the baron's men overhears. The conversation is reported and the Baron is worried that the PCs will eventually talk to a Royal Offical. So he begin preparations.

The PCs leaves and enters the Blood Forest. After a challenging adventure they managed to liberate the hostages and kill Ogg. Also learning more about the Blood Forest including the fact that a Hill Giant Chief, Matdock, is planning a pillaging raid on the Baron's Keep. When they bring the hostage outs, they are met by a small force from the Baron who have been ordered to intercept the PCs and kill everybody covering up his incompetence.

Comment

I realize that I wrote this as a story but what you do is setup the pieces. The tavern, the baron, the orc hamlet, the ogre steading, the blood forest, the hill giants. Come up with the plans and the interconnections. Then develop the initial event, the kidnapping.

Then afterwards you play it by ear. It may be that the party slaughters the orc hamlet and totally misses the fact that the hostages were sold to an ogre. Or any number of possible problems or failure mode.

But by detailing all this you create a mini sandbox that could go any number of ways. To make things easier you can use your experience to make predictions about how you think your players will act. Add a little leeway and prepare accordingly. Just don't be welded to a particular chain of events.

See what Fuseboy said? That's what you do.

You're looking at your own idea as two-dimensional binary options, and not giving your own creations their own motives and breathing space.

All the things Fuseboy said are spot on. The extrapolations from those very questions which lead to your situation are themselves potential situations unto themselves. That's how your game gains its own momentum and starts to live and breathe within your sandbox.

The GAME is what emerges from your PC's interacting with these situations.

So the orcs kidnapped the villagers. Why? What are some possibilities that would motivate the orcs to do this? If you make it black and white - well they're orcs they like kidnapping people in taverns - you're creating your own problem. Add a dash of complexity to the nascent adventure - a dragon is forcing them to do it. Or they've been incentivized to do so by some other party (wizard, dragon etc.) - that leads to the *real* adventure. Maybe the orcs have a good reason to do it? They needed help only someone in particular in the tavern - (orcs can't tell them apart so they took everyone) - so when the adventurers catch up to them, the kidnapped people are actively trying to help the orcs from some threat under the guidance of their intended target.

I could go on and on. The point is - let your players approach these plot ideas at their own pace. But you need to feed it and know why these things are happening as cause-and-effect and your campaign will start, in many ways, to run itself. You just provide the space and flesh it out as you go.

Quote from: fuseboy;940210The problem is that you're setting up pins for them to knock down. Instead, take a different approach.

1. Come up with the basic problem situation (orcs have stolen some people)

2. Add detail. Where do the orcs live? What's the world like in between? Where were they stolen from? What other groups are nearby? Who else cares that the orcs are being bad? Who is interested in propping up the orcs, if only for selfish reasons? Who else wants the stolen people back, but is controlling, manipulative, and/or has secondary goals that might threaten the mission?

3. Now up the difficulty. What if there are too many orcs for them to take in a fight? What if the orcs are few, but tough? Do the orcs have layers of defense? Flunkies? Are they moving soon? (Have they already moved?) Who can they call on for help? What else would try if you were a group of orcs and some badasses shows up to try to steal your lunch?

This, so much this.

Quote from: fuseboy;940210Don't solve the problem for the players (even in your head), that's their job. Let them thrash around a bit looking for allies, clues, obstacles, advantages.

This trick is, still giving them a chance to pick a strategy that will work, or maybe bending a little when they want a specific one to work.

The key element is multiple ends for the same goal.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;940214This trick is, still giving them a chance to pick a strategy that will work, or maybe bending a little when they want a specific one to work.

The key element is multiple ends for the same goal.

Agree with this!  There is a goal - rescue hostages - just because You know how to get it done best, does not mean you have to give that info to the players or push them into that direction.  

Sometimes we as GMs know it was orcs, but do the townspeople know the difference between an orc, elf, or troll?  Do they even know or have ever interacted with orcs?

If they are getting close to the goal for you too early, did the orcs sell the townspeople as slaves, meat, other?
Can the Orcs hold off the players by asking for a favor for release?

Remember with an RPG (as some of us forget at times) leave no path blocked, no door closed, and no outcome off limits.  Let the players run off on a side mission, get distracted by a treasure hunt, or just get it all wrong and let them go with it.

From your opening post it looks like you at least have an idea that you are supposted to be doing whats been suggested but end up not.  

I dont have that problem.  I have two suggestions.  First more prep.  Very much like suggested above.  Second try making a random table of complications.  Any time your adventure looks too linear make a roll or two.  Actully that sounds like something pundit or Geaser might already have.  

Hope this helps and not what but how.

Quote from: fuseboy;940210Don't solve the problem for the players (even in your head), that's their job.

Just making sure this doesn't get overlooked.

You create the situation and then you REACT to what the players and their characters do.

So.... why do the players care?

If the kidnapped people stay kidnapped, or get killed, or whatever, what reasons do the PCs have to care at all?

Thinking in complications helps too. Just be careful not to overcomplicate the adventure.

Maybe the Orcs get back to their lair and find that some Bugbears have decided to move in while they were gone.
Or one of the kidnapped villagers is actually working with/for the orcs.
I agree the orcs need more motivation as well. Are the going for ransom? Are the villagers special somehow? Why would the orcs risk the anger of the townspeople?

Well, MAYBE the Orcs did the kidnapping, maybe they didn't. Maybe there's multiple tribes who could've done it. Maybe they were hired.

The discussion, above, about motivation is important, as are the comments about approaching the Orcs from the standpoint of how they think. I assume if it's a straight grab and dash, they have to know someone's going to come looking, so they're going to be prepared for it. If it's a lot of someones, they might even be dealing with a large, armed contingent.

We have a somewhat similar situation in our current campaign involving the disappearance of the Mage's mentor. On the surface, the obvious kidnappers look like a sketchy temple/cult active in spreading doomsday notions, and sporting symbols linked to a second campaign thread. Of course, the Temple DOES want the guy. But so does the cult the players don't know about, the disease-spreading sect planted not far from town, the ones responsible for the latest outbreak in their home town.

Neither of them, however, has the guy. The person responsible for the kidnapping is an opportunistic merchant who knows both will pay big for the guy, so he's pitting them against each other. Just to be safe, he's had another pair of associates take charge of hiding the mentor in a location he doesn't know. He gets a little protection and some deniability if someone tries to connect him. Eventually, he'll drive the price up, get the loot, then get word to the local Lord about the disease cult, so they can be wiped out (he's not THAT bad a guy, he thinks). He doesn't know what the Temple is up to, but, to him, they look harmless enough--buncha crazies spreading their nutty message (but, if they get ahold of said mage, then we have a MUCH bigger problem in the offing, in the form of some nasty-ass ancient magic shit, the location of which said Mage knows, and has been waiting to share with his protege--if they ever actually find him).

Anyhoo, the party has done just enough spying on the merchant (a business rival of the Halfling in our group) to have seen the merchant's associates arrive in town one night, stay over, then leave before dawn. The party caught wind of  the same two guys again when they headed south for a completely unrelated task. Found out the dudes belong to a bandit troop that's been knocking over caravans (then kicking back some dough to the merchant, who's been providing them selected deliveries--this they DON'T know--yet). As of this writing, they're planning to look into the bandits, which would lead them right to the mentor--unless the Mage convinces them they need to pay a visit to the temple to check for his mentor there (where they ALL believe the guy is).

Okay, so that's a long, boring example of what's happening, but, from the campaign standpoint it has certain advantages, not the least of which is personal investment--they KNOW the missing person. So they're motivated to pursue the lead. Second, they've also had run-ins with the temple priest and the rival merchant. So they want to stick it to them, if they can. Third, they've seen signs of the disease (which the cleric has deduced is not natural, and really wants to look into, but can't because he's already agreed to help with the missing Mage [and he's a goody two shoes]). As the merchant associates are on the radar because halfling PC really wants to stick it to his rival, HE'S pushing to find out what they're up to, and pursue THAT lead, which is closer to their current location (they think). Through mistaken ID, he's already gotten hold of a delivery schedule (which the banditos are gonna figure out really quickly, and come looking for THEM). In the end, there are several points of entry into this web, any of which could turn the whole thing a different direction.

So, I guess my point is, no matter who's doing what, if you know WHY they're doing it, and how that plays into the PC motivations, it makes it easier to weave additional threads to complicate your tapestry.

The simplest answer to me, though, is to put yourself in the adversary's shoes, and play them intelligently (if they're actually cunning). One would think your Orcs would either (a) cover their tracks to avoid future problems with snoops, or (b) leave a wide open trail, because, hey, they're so damned bad ass, they're DARING someone to come along to take their "tiny canon," er, I mean, victims. The PCs want to succeed in their aims. So do their enemies. When there's no telling who's gonna come out on top, that leads to some great gaming.

If you play computer games, think of it this way: don't try to design a main questline, just design sidequests.

As others have said, create a little world where there are a bunch of people with real personalities - simple ones, but real nonetheless - and real histories, all living in a land with real geography. Conflicts are always happening, and the PCs find out about them and decide where they'll step in. For example, "rescue the hostages from the orcs" can have a bit more to it.

Count Barnacle rules a small county on the seacoast, with its capital his keep and market town, known as Seaview. A rare kind of fish is found here, the Babelfish, it tastes awful but its liver is used in a Potion of Speak In Tongues which lets the two people drinking it understand one another despite no common language. It gets mixed in with wine when two merchants sit down to bargain, there's a bit of ritual around it. Taxes on this bring in a steady revenue. Count Barnacle has two children, a 16yo son Johann and a 20yo daughter Marie. They don't like each-other much. As daughter, Marie would not inherit the county unless there were no male heir.

Further up the river is a much smaller county, the March, ruled by William the Ugly. The Babelfish actually spawn in his part of the river, but the King granted the right to harvest them to Barnacle, so what can he do. William is unmarried, and has his eye on Marie. A woman can rule alone, but if she marries, her husband will rule.

Seaview sits beside a river that comes down the valley from the mountains, with its main source on Mount Finicky, so-called because it's rocky and hard to traverse, impossible on horseback. It's also bleak as fuck and nothing grows there. Of course this is where the orcs live in a series of underground caverns and dungeons. In ancient times, dwarves lived in those hills, but they are all gone now. Sometimes the orc tunnel into those old dwarven ruins but the undead and traps take their toll.

The orcs recently had a new chief come to power - he killed and ate his predecessor - Bagolog Stonefist. One day one of Stonefist's raiding parties took a young woman, Sally, who was the daughter of Barnacle's engineer, Harold. From her he got an idea - why not get Harold to help digging into the dwarven ruins? So one day his orcs captured a work party working on a bridge over the river, and took Harold prisoner.

So now the Count wants his people rescued, and especially his engineer. His son Johann wants to prove himself. Barnacle is considering sending 50 of his men-at-arms to deal with the orcs, with Johann leading them. Marie argues that it would be better to send a small group of adventurers, but Johann doesn't want to be associated with rabble. However she strongly urges that Johann go out into facing hundreds of orcs with a small group of armed people. Can you think why?

The party must travel through the March to get to Mt Finicky, by the way, and will need to stop for rest and provisions along the way. The river sometimes flood and there are rockfalls along some of the passes, it would help to have a local guide from the March. Count William would be glad to provide one. Can you think why?

You can also think, will Chief Stonefist mistreat engineer Harold, or will he pay him well and give him access to captured wine and food, or women if Harold is interested? So maybe the guy they're rescuing doesn't want to be rescued? And willing or not, will his advice help the orcs have better defences against assault?

So let's say the PCs go in and kill some or all of the orcs and rescue the prisoners. Did they save them all? Or not? Will this change how the various nobles feel about them? Will the PCs want to go in and explore the deeper dwarven ruins themselves?

And so on and so forth. You create real people with real motivations and real geography, conflicts pop up and the PCs can get into all that. On the other hand they could just charge on into the ruins, kill things and take their stuff. It's up to them.

Think sidequest, not mainquest. In computer games it is what it is. In tabletop games, a mainquest is just a sidequest that went on longer than expected.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;940288If you play computer games, think of it this way: don't try to design a main questline, just design sidequests.

As others have said, create a little world where there are a bunch of people with real personalities - simple ones, but real nonetheless - and real histories, all living in a land with real geography. Conflicts are always happening, and the PCs find out about them and decide where they'll step in. For example, "rescue the hostages from the orcs" can have a bit more to it.

Count Barnacle rules a small county on the seacoast, with its capital his keep and market town, known as Seaview. A rare kind of fish is found here, the Babelfish, it tastes awful but its liver is used in a Potion of Speak In Tongues which lets the two people drinking it understand one another despite no common language. It gets mixed in with wine when two merchants sit down to bargain, there's a bit of ritual around it. Taxes on this bring in a steady revenue. Count Barnacle has two children, a 16yo son Johann and a 20yo daughter Marie. They don't like each-other much. As daughter, Marie would not inherit the county unless there were no male heir.

Further up the river is a much smaller county, the March, ruled by William the Ugly. The Babelfish actually spawn in his part of the river, but the King granted the right to harvest them to Barnacle, so what can he do. William is unmarried, and has his eye on Marie. A woman can rule alone, but if she marries, her husband will rule.

Seaview sits beside a river that comes down the valley from the mountains, with its main source on Mount Finicky, so-called because it's rocky and hard to traverse, impossible on horseback. It's also bleak as fuck and nothing grows there. Of course this is where the orcs live in a series of underground caverns and dungeons. In ancient times, dwarves lived in those hills, but they are all gone now. Sometimes the orc tunnel into those old dwarven ruins but the undead and traps take their toll.

The orcs recently had a new chief come to power - he killed and ate his predecessor - Bagolog Stonefist. One day one of Stonefist's raiding parties took a young woman, Sally, who was the daughter of Barnacle's engineer, Harold. From her he got an idea - why not get Harold to help digging into the dwarven ruins? So one day his orcs captured a work party working on a bridge over the river, and took Harold prisoner.

So now the Count wants his people rescued, and especially his engineer. His son Johann wants to prove himself. Barnacle is considering sending 50 of his men-at-arms to deal with the orcs, with Johann leading them. Marie argues that it would be better to send a small group of adventurers, but Johann doesn't want to be associated with rabble. However she strongly urges that Johann go out into facing hundreds of orcs with a small group of armed people. Can you think why?

The party must travel through the March to get to Mt Finicky, by the way, and will need to stop for rest and provisions along the way. The river sometimes flood and there are rockfalls along some of the passes, it would help to have a local guide from the March. Count William would be glad to provide one. Can you think why?

You can also think, will Chief Stonefist mistreat engineer Harold, or will he pay him well and give him access to captured wine and food, or women if Harold is interested? So maybe the guy they're rescuing doesn't want to be rescued? And willing or not, will his advice help the orcs have better defences against assault?

So let's say the PCs go in and kill some or all of the orcs and rescue the prisoners. Did they save them all? Or not? Will this change how the various nobles feel about them? Will the PCs want to go in and explore the deeper dwarven ruins themselves?

And so on and so forth. You create real people with real motivations and real geography, conflicts pop up and the PCs can get into all that. On the other hand they could just charge on into the ruins, kill things and take their stuff. It's up to them.

Think sidequest, not mainquest. In computer games it is what it is. In tabletop games, a mainquest is just a sidequest that went on longer than expected.

This setup is better than any module WotC has ever written.

"Don't design a main quest, design a bunch of side quests."

Perfect advice.

Also, REMEMBER:  In every scene, each individual wants something, and they will attempt to move the scene in a way that gets them what they want.  SO, what do the Orcs want, and why does capturing humans help them get it?  Figure this out and the rest will fall out naturally.  In fact, that's all you need for this adventure:  "Some Orcs captured some villagers for the reason of X."  There's your adventure writeup.  Ready, set, go.

>"Don't design a main quest, design a bunch of side quests."

I love that advice.

I've actually had players complain that there's no "main quest" for them to focus on before.