Quote from: CRKrueger;745303Whether to railroad you or let you explore a World in Motion is always the decision of the GM, no matter how retarded the game designers and the players.  WoD players, of course went a little overboard since not really having many adventures, just city sandboxes full of characters and rulebooks and novels full of metaplot, the implication was, tour guiding through the metaplot was how it was done.

To tell you the truth though, the metaplot railroading of WoD is one of those internet myths that is greatly exaggerated.  The LARPers were all into that, but I always played in awesome city sandboxes, and a whole lot of Trenchcoat & Katana.

I think right. Much (not all) of the criticism against metaplots struck me as passive, non-gaming consumers of the game's fiction whining against some metaplot point or another.

Now the "signature characters" well, those really got on my nerves.

And my actual play experience mirrors your own.

Quote from: CRKrueger;745303I played Shadowrun, Deadlands, World of Darkness, all the major sinners of the Metaplot Decade, and the metaplot never ran over anything the characters did.  Sometimes they crossed with it, sometimes they didn't, sometimes they didn't even know about it, or care if they did.  All an extremely rich metaplot does is give you a great tapestry to hang behind you as you play, and can fill in a lot of work for a GM, or if you're a GM like me, who likes to have stuff I can riff off of, a whole library of idea kickstarters.

Whether to railroad you or let you explore a World in Motion is always the decision of the GM, no matter how retarded the game designers and the players.  WoD players, of course went a little overboard since not really having many adventures, just city sandboxes full of characters and rulebooks and novels full of metaplot, the implication was, tour guiding through the metaplot was how it was done.

To tell you the truth though, the metaplot railroading of WoD is one of those internet myths that is greatly exaggerated.  The LARPers were all into that, but I always played in awesome city sandboxes, and a whole lot of Trenchcoat & Katana.

As usual, you get it.

As a GM, I create a few over arching campaign plots/stories, that are the big-picture Tapestry that are behind everthing.  (great term, btw).  
Now, I've been doing this a while.  So, as a setting designer, there are local plots that are 'side effects/symptoms' of the major ones (as well as some not related) that create the Local World in Motion with the more static 'set piece' that is the players local area.
And I play the rest of the world without bias, frankly hoping like hell they eventually intersect and interact with the local bits that run into the larger metaplot.  But if they don't, I don't force it, I just continue playing the rest of the world and advancing all natural effects of the Metaplot..because they move, with and without player agency.  My games go on for years and years, and I love it when the PCs get those lightbulb moments.

Because not only CAN players affect metaplot, but in a long term sandbox, that is actually the desired outcome...we want them to get into it and muck it up.  My PCs in my igbar game, after about 11 years of play, are still dealing with maybe 1 level up from the local symptoms of the metaplot, with a few links still in between.

Frodo was a PC.  We want him mucking about with the metaplot.  Good thing he didn't hang around to loot barrows for 6 months of game time.

Quote from: CRKrueger;745303To tell you the truth though, the metaplot railroading of WoD is one of those internet myths that is greatly exaggerated.  The LARPers were all into that, but I always played in awesome city sandboxes, and a whole lot of Trenchcoat & Katana.

The big railroady part only came up in the end of times books. That's where the railroading started. I think the problem with owod was that it was way too detailed. And nwod was way too sparse with details. Instead of giving a very broadly detailed setting with a zillion different area's and a zillion different organisations, but not fleshing them out beyond one or two pages per area or splat. That would have been the solution. Breadth instead of depth.

Trechcoat and katana or gone btw. It's more modern horror now. It's "matured" and serious. Actually I like the tone better without all the geekiness.

Quote from: The Butcher;745360I think right. Much (not all) of the criticism against metaplots struck me as passive, non-gaming consumers of the game's fiction whining against some metaplot point or another.

Now the "signature characters" well, those really got on my nerves.

And my actual play experience mirrors your own.

Yep signature characters overruling the players are the worst. Makes them a bunch of extra's in a movie.

Edit:
I see now why I like Hellfrost. It has many regions and many organisations. Those organisations all have clearly defined goals. Very easy to sandbox straight from the box.

Quote from: LordVreeg;745173No.
Or, at least, if you'd read any of the posts previous, you'd se many who consider Metaplot to be the large-scale stuff the GM sets into motion (often at different levels) to enhance the World in Motion ideal, for the PCs to interact or not interact with at different levels.

"World in motion" should not be "metaplot", unless the DM is doing it wrong.

Quote from: RPGPundit;745917"World in motion" should not be "metaplot", unless the DM is doing it wrong.

Right.
My two live games are 19 years and 11 years old.  With the original Metaplots ongoing and affecting the play even today.  If this is doing it wrong, maybe I don't want to do it right.

(and yes, my online games are in the same setting, so the metaplots are active there as well.)

Read through it again.  Metaplot is not considered World in Motion, it's the over arching plotline that enhances World in Motion.  All plotlines moving though time logically, affected by player agency or not, create the feeling of motion.  Metaplot is just the biggest one.

Quote from: LordVreeg;745950Right.
My two live games are 19 years and 11 years old.  With the original Metaplots ongoing and affecting the play even today.  If this is doing it wrong, maybe I don't want to do it right.

(and yes, my online games are in the same setting, so the metaplots are active there as well.)

Read through it again.  Metaplot is not considered World in Motion, it's the over arching plotline that enhances World in Motion.  All plotlines moving though time logically, affected by player agency or not, create the feeling of motion.  Metaplot is just the biggest one.

Yep, agreed. I think Pundit has a bit of a blind spot for it. The over arching plotline can make it more interesting, wether it's canonical or from the GM's mind. If the plot makes the actions of the players redundant, then it becomes a nuisance.

The "overarching plotline" should be entirely the product of "world in motion'. There shouldn't be any infusion of GM-interference on NPC choices there, or events outside of cosmic chronology.

So it should be a case where there is no difference. The "overarching plotline" is produced by you having NPCs with initial priorities when they first appear, then proceeding to follow those priorities.

What else needs to be added there?

Quote from: RPGPundit;746415The "overarching plotline" should be entirely the product of "world in motion'. There shouldn't be any infusion of GM-interference on NPC choices there, or events outside of cosmic chronology.

So it should be a case where there is no difference. The "overarching plotline" is produced by you having NPCs with initial priorities when they first appear, then proceeding to follow those priorities.

What else needs to be added there?

I get what you mean. There shouldn't be any story written in advance wether it's done by the GM or the writers.

In a sandbox the story or plot is produced by player actions and NPC's reacting to that. Or player actions and the NPC's doing something else at the same time.

I will be playing a game like that in the near future with the WoD. It is surprisingly functional as a sandbox. Just look at those city books. It's all districs, neighbourhoods and locations on one hand and a list of NPC's and factions on the other hand.

Only thing missing is NPC/faction motivations and goals. They do always write about NPC relationships. Swap that out and replace with goals and it's a sandbox.

Quote from: Old Geezer;743840"Metaplot" to me means "Luke Skywalker will fight Darth Vader, who will then kill the Emperor.  NOTHING the players do will, or can, alter that."

Of course, it's a big galaxy, and in the Tapani Sector, Dahail Sunfire, first of the New Republic Jedi, was much more famous than that Skywalker kid.

That is metaplot, and metaplot has no place in my games.  When I ran Deadlands or Shadowrun in the 90's I deliberately trampled on the metaplot.  Stone was killed immediately, as was that dragon asshole Dunkelzaurous.

Quote from: RabidWookie;747203That is metaplot, and metaplot has no place in my games.  When I ran Deadlands or Shadowrun in the 90's I deliberately trampled on the metaplot.  Stone was killed immediately, as was that dragon asshole Dunkelzaurous.

It's funny - one of my players created a character who has a personal vendetta against Stone. He is rich, so he is keeping in his private train a genius mad scientist, who is building for him The Large Hadron Collider, aiming to create a little black hole to send Stone somewhere in the cosmos

Quote from: RPGPundit;746415The "overarching plotline" should be entirely the product of "world in motion'. There shouldn't be any infusion of GM-interference on NPC choices there, or events outside of cosmic chronology.

The thing is, metaplot doesn't assume GM interference on NPC choice any more then the presence of NPC motivations and events that will occur if the PCs do nothing is a railroad.

Quote from: RPGPundit;746415So it should be a case where there is no difference. The "overarching plotline" is produced by you having NPCs with initial priorities when they first appear, then proceeding to follow those priorities.

What else needs to be added there?

Nothing needs to be added, and metaplot doesn't necessarily add anything.

Take Shadowrun and one of the "signature characters" Dunkelzahn.  I've played Shadowrun for decades and aside from one character who took a Dragon Trivia skill, my characters have had no connection to him at all.  Now, as Dunkelzahn affects the world, the players have that as a backdrop, the tapestry behind the campaign, that can be as important or unimportant as the latest Seattle Mariners scores.  If Dunkelzahn, through supreme self-sacrifice gets other immortals like Ehran the Scribe to rethink their past plans and look to new ideas, what effect is that going to have on the game?  Probably nothing, especially if noone knows about it.  The local corporate and organized crime movers and shakers probably matter more to your character's lives and interests.  What might matter though is that if other elves from Tir Tairngire don't like that Ehran joined the Draco Foundation, then there might be some Telestrian Industries johnsons who have some jobs against the Draco Foundation.  If a character does become exposed to metaplot secrets, it's really more like insider trading knowledge.  If you get some inkling a shadow war is coming, you can position yourself to take advantage of that knowledge as an Operative who might get hired by either or both parties.

The tapestry will always be there.   There will always be people beyond your character's ken doing things beyond their immediate knowledge, concern, or control (even if your character is an absolute dictator).  Whether it's one of 100% your making or not does not change it's purpose, and if you decide to use it like a locked-in roadmap - that decision is yours and yours alone.

Now Deadlands did a lot more then give you just metaplot, they had very specific "epic campaign adventures" that were supposed to have certain outcomes that affected the three historical lines Deadlands, Hell on Earth, and Lost Colony.  They were telling a story through game supplements.

The Shadowrun version of that is telling a story through novels, and then having originally, normal style modules that didn't have anything to do with the story, and then later, campaign style adventure supplements that were about "this event happens, here's X number of different ways you can try and use this material in your campaign and have your characters affect the outcome".

If you're running sandbox style, then the world will move as it would if the players weren't there, but will be affected by their actions to the degree of their in-character power.

You, as the GM, can decide on story elements that you might want to emphasize, but those story elements should remain consist with the setting. We know, in Glorantha, for example, that Harrek the Berserk has a big hate on for the Red Emperor and will most likely kill him barring PC intervention. If you want to have Harrek interact with the PCs and it makes sense for the PCs to do so in the setting's context (for example, the PCs want to become Wolf Pirates and must prove themselves to Harrek), then you can explore themes and such from there. But the game play must be emergent and not scripted.

You can have plans, but having plans and ideas as to what you *want* to see is not the same thing as pre-determined plot that happens in some other styles of RPGs, if you game sandbox/sim style.

Do you consider the 50 fanthoms plot of the curse of the three seahags metaplot? Or the crashing of the serpent in Days after Ragnarok? Or is that backstory? I think it is. SW is perfect in that way. Most books start with a few pages with plot that makes it interesting, without being über detailed.

You know what, new wod of darkness misses some sort of overarching plotline. I don't know if that's the same as metaplot. Just look at the X-files. It had monster of the week episodes. And there were myth-arc episodes which had an overarching plot, which expanded on the canon of the setting. Those myth-arc episodes made it interesting. Period. Same as in Supernatural.

New wod is like the x-files without the myth-arc episodes. I don't really know if playing it like a sandbox solves that problem. I need an overarching plotline. Which comes from sandboxing probably. Not from being written in a book. It would help if there was a short piece of backstory in the books which could lead to an overarching plotline, but there isn't.

Edit:
Metaplot leads to an expansion on the setting's canon, right?

Quote from: CRKrueger;747346The thing is, metaplot doesn't assume GM interference on NPC choice any more then the presence of NPC motivations and events that will occur if the PCs do nothing is a railroad.

No.  If you have a 'timeline', where certain things will likely happen, that doesn't necessarily cause interference.  If you have NPC plans where they will "likely" do A, B, and C if all goes according to their intentions, that won't necessarily cause interference.

But if you have Metaplot, where certain things MUST happen, then no matter what the PCs do they cannot avoid that "must" from happening, and that is very much an interference.  Its railroading on a larger scale.