"How are the Players going to do that? Thats not my job. Thats their job. A lot of GamesMasters think of themselves as Story-Tellers but I prefer to consider myself a Conflict Designer. I create conflicts but I don't need to know how the Players figure their way out of the conflicts. That is where the story emerges and that is their department. My job as I see it is to provide an objective, location, antagonists and time-limit. Players drive the action with their decisions. I never know what my players are going to do. Maybe they'll kill the villain, maybe he escapes. Maybe they'll live, maybe they'll die. That's up to them and the dice. So why plan further than the next session? If I did I might be tempted to steer the game toward my preferred conclusion. But I don't want to do that. I want to be just as surprised as the Players."
Professor DungeonMaster, Dungeon Craft, YouTube, The Reviled Society, Part 1 (Ep.291)
Ok. What was the purpose of this post? Are you interested in who agrees with this or not?
It certainly seems like good advice. I have heard about people worrying about coming up with, or planning for different ways that players might try to solve problems presented to them, but it is the job of the players to "solve" the problems, complete the adventures, save the kidnapped people, slay the big evil monster, that sort of stuff, and then as the DM you just need to think about how things would play out, not pre-plan or railroad how stuff should work out.
More specifically, the subtlest of GM skills is incentivizing your players to do the things you want exemplified in your setting *without* removing player agency.
That's the balancing act - especially with players of different experience levels, adding to a third-dimension in terms of familiarity of the GM's modus operandi.
I have several noob players that truly believed they were roleplayers, but in reality they are just boardgamers that never really thought of their characters beyond a piece they moved around from encounter to encounter. So when I do my session-0, they're flabbergasted that we'd negotiate things they never experienced before in most of their RPG experiences.
Railroading is simply when GM's want to disregard player agency in order to force a very specific situation. This is reflexive from GM's that don't have the experience to make their worlds operate in a cohesive manner that goes beyond what most modules and AP's imply. They don't know how to fill in those gaps, and intially, they're *scared* to do so. But with experience, if they stick it out, they'll learn that's where the magic secret-sauce of great gaming is.
In regards to some of this, I have noticed that players get frustrated when their actions derail the plot, cause bad things to happen, etc. They then blame the DM/GM.
this is especially true with games that involve solving mysteries or problems (CoC, Top Secret, Necroscope, etc.) --if I play it straight as a GM, and the players totally miss clues, can't put the pieces together, or go off in a wrong direction, I can give them additional clues or hints, but the game is in their hands. It could go all wrong.
As a DM/GM you can be both storyteller and referee. You can be both judge and entertainer, but the agency is ultimately with the players.
The inverse is bottlenecking the adventure. I love coming up with a scenario and wondering how the players will contend with it. But I do like to have some idea of how they could solve it, or at least get around it. Just so I know it's not a dead end.
I actually disagree with that. The DM should be open to however the players choose to solve the problem, but he should never design a challenge that he doesn't see a way to overcome. Otherwise he risks setting the players an impossible challenge.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 12, 2024, 01:48:11 AMI actually disagree with that. The DM should be open to however the players choose to solve the problem, but he should never design a challenge that he doesn't see a way to overcome. Otherwise he risks setting the players an impossible challenge.
I'm very happy to have impossible challenges in my game, as long as the PCs are free to go do something else. I don't like the attitude of "It exists, therefore we can beat it". I love players who show some common sense and judiciousness in what they tackle. Of course they have probably picked up bad habits from railroad APs.
While it was not impossible, recently a PC group IMC came across a strong group of bandits waiting to ambush whoever came through a henge portal. The party was missing most of their Fighters, and most of the players are tactically weak. They could have eg left, or they could have waited until whoever it was appeared in the henge, then ambushed the bandits from behind. Instead they waited an hour, got bored, attacked the bandits. With little tactical skill the PCs split up, got surrounded, had the 2 Thieves in the thick of melee... it was a total mess. Complete lack of focus fire too. The hobbit thief's NPC goblin princess girlfriend was killed and they nearly lost several PCs. Luckily for them the enemy Fighter 2 leader only had 10 hp and eventually failed a morale check on 1 hp causing the enemy to flee. I'm fine with this being a "too hard" fight - and in fact it was the easier result, I could have rolled that the bandits arrived after the PCs at the henge and ambushed *them*. >:)
Quote from: MerrillWeathermay on December 11, 2024, 07:30:18 PMIn regards to some of this, I have noticed that players get frustrated when their actions derail the plot, cause bad things to happen, etc. They then blame the DM/GM.
I've seen it occasionally where players blame the GM for the natural consequences of their own actions. Usually players love a "plot derailment" though. When I used to run APs I'd occasionally say "That wasn't supposed to happen" and their eyes would always light up at the thought that they'd "broken" the AP, eg they'd killed the main villain early, turned a bad guy good; anything the railroading AP writer didn't want to happen.
I've also seen DMs get completely wrongfooted by their players doing something they weren't prepared for. You shouldn't be married to a single course of action, but its a pretty good idea to be at least a little prepared for the range of likely actions your players might take.
Quote from: MerrillWeathermay on December 11, 2024, 07:30:18 PMIn regards to some of this, I have noticed that players get frustrated when their actions derail the plot, cause bad things to happen, etc. They then blame the DM/GM.
this is especially true with games that involve solving mysteries or problems (CoC, Top Secret, Necroscope, etc.) --if I play it straight as a GM, and the players totally miss clues, can't put the pieces together, or go off in a wrong direction, I can give them additional clues or hints, but the game is in their hands. It could go all wrong.
As a DM/GM you can be both storyteller and referee. You can be both judge and entertainer, but the agency is ultimately with the players.
We have a different mindset in terms of scope of game. For my campaigns - there are a bazillion plots my NPC's are doing. But the only one that matters is the plot my PC's are engaging in on their own. Player Agency is King in my games. The Queen is Context. If my players have their PC's go off on a weird tangent in an investigation - so be it. It doesn't change anything, it doesn't mean that other clues to the original investigation might/might not be uncovered, it simply IS and the world moves on, and the game unfurls organically. Even if it means they fail catastrophically.
With the
World In Motion mindset, I'm never "unprepared". The reacts to the PC's, and its inhabitants act on their own. The "story" is what the players DO after the facts.
Taken to the extreme, of course it's bad advice. Coming up with problems that you, yourself as the DM have no idea how to solve, and then expecting your players to do it, is a quick way to end up with frustrated players.
That being said, I believe he's referring to the more conventional plot problems and ideas like... Okay let's say a group of villagers were kidnapped and taken to the local Dungeon by a tribe of Orcs. The Orcs kidnapped these people because they want the Village to hand over their grain harvest as tribute.
This *does* have an obvious answer... The Villagers give over their grain harvest and many of them starve over the coming winter.
But you can allow your Players to come up with a variety of different solutions for how *THEY* would solve the issue while saving the lives of the Villagers.
As DM you can throw some "Levers" that the PC's can pull to help them with this. Maybe the Orc Chief's number 2 wants to usurp him and take his place. Maybe the Orc Chief's daughter is also dying from a rare disease. Maybe the Dungeon they're inhabiting used to belong to a forgotten God and the right rituals can wake up the defenses.
You can come up with a couple of brief, plot threads that can "aid" different solutions to the PCs but ultimately leaves everything in their hands. They can still ignore all three of those elements I just named and come up with their own solution... Whether that be just going in and killing everyone, trying to enact some kind of negotiations between the two groups, or some other unforseen alternative.
As DMs we just have to make sure the world is immersive enough, outside of the Box thinking doesn't stimy our ability to run the game, while also not spelling everything out for the PCs. I think most of us here are Veteran DMs and are aware of this kind of stuff.
Now I do think it's good, mysteries have been brought up, because there is and should be only 1 correct solution for the mystery. If you know who the killer is, you don't let your players randomly decide it's someone else.
All that being said though, you have to make sure there are plenty of clues... MORE than you think is necessary to point out who the killer is. Players don't get to see the whole plot like we do, so in a mystery scenario you have to make sure there are ample opportunities to find clues (And you should never hide essential clues behind a skill check. Skill checks should only give Bonus clues)
It might sound good initially until you examine it further. And sure, if might work for basic games but if you are trying to craft a deeper experience, like a political Vampire game, or even a more complex fantasy campaign, one that has consequences from certain actions, then that simplistic advice just won't cut it.
I mean, I love it when players try and throw me, but at the same time, there are some things in certain games and scenarios that are immutable. Of course, there is probably several ways of accomplishing the preferred outcome. And that can be left up to the players.
Its excellent advice. I think alarms should sound when DMs talk about "story-telling" or "plot".
DON'T confuse this with "setting the scene/situation"
The DM should craft a situation that is occurring, the whys & hows & wheres, & have that play out.
The Players should then deal with that situation as they see fit.
Its fine for the DM to imagine how the players might deal with it, but never push or lead them towards the 'story' you imagined.
Thinking about this is essential actually because you might have missed an obvious flaw in the situation.
"why would the cult leave the escape cave completely unguarded, anyone could walk in!"
If the players rush in & fireball the tent containing the clues, & the actual excavation into the tomb, burying it all in flaming timbers - deal with it! (This happened to me btw)
Let the chaos happen, then place another clue that give the minimum to set them back on track.
They burned all the other stuff, tough.
None of us are perfect, we do make mistakes & oversights, players can completely go off on tangents, so dont worry if you do have to add some on-the-fly fix to get the game back on track.
But I do think its important for DMs to always be mindful they are the arbiter of the situation, not the story-teller.
Quote from: Riquez on December 13, 2024, 06:13:50 AMThinking about this is essential actually because you might have missed an obvious flaw in the situation.
"why would the cult leave the escape cave completely unguarded, anyone could walk in!"
I find this happens a lot when I'm running published material. Recently I started running Castle Whiterock megadungeon from Goodman Games. The suggested hook is "Lyssa the Apprentice has been kidnapped by slavers", and the slavers occupy the surface & the only known route into the megadungeon.
The PCs just went to the slavers, bought her back for 200gp (the highest sum I could reasonably come up with) and went home.
Luckily I'm running a sandbox with a ton of other dungeons, and after a quick recalibration the PCs were delving the Endless Tunnels of Enlandin. But I felt sorry for all the poor schmuck GMs who must have been blindsided by that over the years.
Quote from: Riquez on December 13, 2024, 06:13:50 AMBut I do think its important for DMs to always be mindful they are the arbiter of the situation, not the story-teller.
I agree. I think it's the fundamental difference between playing a role playing game and simply telling a story.
Quote from: GnosticGoblin on December 10, 2024, 10:31:38 AM"How are the Players going to do that? Thats not my job. Thats their job. A lot of GamesMasters think of themselves as Story-Tellers but I prefer to consider myself a Conflict Designer. I create conflicts but I don't need to know how the Players figure their way out of the conflicts. That is where the story emerges and that is their department. My job as I see it is to provide an objective, location, antagonists and time-limit. Players drive the action with their decisions. I never know what my players are going to do. Maybe they'll kill the villain, maybe he escapes. Maybe they'll live, maybe they'll die. That's up to them and the dice. So why plan further than the next session? If I did I might be tempted to steer the game toward my preferred conclusion. But I don't want to do that. I want to be just as surprised as the Players."
Professor DungeonMaster, Dungeon Craft, YouTube, The Reviled Society, Part 1 (Ep.291)
Oversimplified but generally good advice.
A GM builds the playground, what to climb on and how to play is up to the players.
Quote from: GnosticGoblin on December 10, 2024, 10:31:38 AM"How are the Players going to do that? Thats not my job. Thats their job. A lot of GamesMasters think of themselves as Story-Tellers but I prefer to consider myself a Conflict Designer. I create conflicts but I don't need to know how the Players figure their way out of the conflicts. That is where the story emerges and that is their department. My job as I see it is to provide an objective, location, antagonists and time-limit. Players drive the action with their decisions. I never know what my players are going to do. Maybe they'll kill the villain, maybe he escapes. Maybe they'll live, maybe they'll die. That's up to them and the dice. So why plan further than the next session? If I did I might be tempted to steer the game toward my preferred conclusion. But I don't want to do that. I want to be just as surprised as the Players."
Professor DungeonMaster, Dungeon Craft, YouTube, The Reviled Society, Part 1 (Ep.291)
That sounds very similar to my point of view. As a GM, I like to see myself as a facilitator, in the first place: setting pieces, establishing mechanics, and roll with it.
Isnt most of the fun of being a DM finding out how players react to crazy situations? I really dont want to tell a story as much as I want to be involved in the telling of a story I havent heard before.
GM stuff: ............................................................
GM question:
What do you do?
GM instruction:
Roll for initiative!!!
GM explanation:
The ....... gore's you with it's tail spike. You take 12 damage. Make a saving throw vs death. Ok, you're stable and you have 1 hit point left.
It really can be that simple.
Quote from: Riquez on December 13, 2024, 06:13:50 AMIts fine for the DM to imagine how the players might deal with it, but never push or lead them towards the 'story' you imagined.
This was being a point of disruption in almost every session of play my online group had in 2020. The GM was being upset when we would being finding our own methods for solving puzzles or finding solutions. In one of the climaxes, we were being decided that we should make peace with a character of whom the GM had set us up to fight, and he was pushing us to go against our own ideas so as to fight the NPCs. It was placing a sour taste in my mouth and I am feeling taught me a valuable lesson about the running of games in the future.
When you're writing an adventure there should always be a story. Designing with plot, pacing, setbacks, climaxes etc etc etc in mind makes for an exciting adventure. It's also the only way to know where to spend your limited prep time. You spend it on the activities you expect the players to actually do. Once the game starts the players are in the driver's seat. You'll get to use a lot of what you prepared and plotted out, but you also have to roll with the decisions they actually do make and improvise in the spots where you guessed wrong. In my entire DMing career there was exactly one time the adventure played out they way I had planned it ahead of time.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 01:48:58 AMWhen you're writing an adventure there should always be a story. Designing with plot, pacing, setbacks, climaxes etc etc etc in mind makes for an exciting adventure. It's also the only way to know where to spend your limited prep time. You spend it on the activities you expect the players to actually do. Once the game starts the players are in the driver's seat. You'll get to use a lot of what you prepared and plotted out, but you also have to roll with the decisions they actually do make and improvise in the spots where you guessed wrong. In my entire DMing career there was exactly one time the adventure played out they way I had planned it ahead of time.
https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/4147/roleplaying-games/dont-prep-plots
Quote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 01:48:58 AMWhen you're writing an adventure there should always be a story. Designing with plot, pacing, setbacks, climaxes etc etc etc in mind makes for an exciting adventure. It's also the only way to know where to spend your limited prep time. You spend it on the activities you expect the players to actually do. Once the game starts the players are in the driver's seat. You'll get to use a lot of what you prepared and plotted out, but you also have to roll with the decisions they actually do make and improvise in the spots where you guessed wrong. In my entire DMing career there was exactly one time the adventure played out they way I had planned it ahead of time.
I like to begin with a certain status quo. I have a sketch of a timeline for what non players will be doing when. Anyone the players do not interact with or interfere with will do pretty much what I had sketched out in the timeline. Anyone the players interact with will react as appropriate to the situation. Thus the world keeps moving and unfolds based on the players activity or lack thereof.
Quote from: Ratman_tf on December 14, 2024, 06:13:59 AMQuote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 01:48:58 AMWhen you're writing an adventure there should always be a story. Designing with plot, pacing, setbacks, climaxes etc etc etc in mind makes for an exciting adventure. It's also the only way to know where to spend your limited prep time. You spend it on the activities you expect the players to actually do. Once the game starts the players are in the driver's seat. You'll get to use a lot of what you prepared and plotted out, but you also have to roll with the decisions they actually do make and improvise in the spots where you guessed wrong. In my entire DMing career there was exactly one time the adventure played out they way I had planned it ahead of time.
https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/4147/roleplaying-games/dont-prep-plots
His articles frequently have good insight and advice but this time he's wrong. (And let's not get into his bad behavior - that's another discussion entirely) From my personal experience adventures run better when planned around a series of events rather than a sandbox. You can't do pacing and the dramatic structure from just a situation, and those are two things that definitely make for a fun adventure. In my experience planning a situation only works well in a limited environment, like a dungeon, due to prep time constraints. There's definitely a correlation between how much preparation I've put into an encounter and how fun it is. When needed I can wing it with the best of them, but the result are less consistent. He talks about wasting time on alternate plot lines. It's a much bigger waste of time prepping all of the situations that the characters might find themselves in. So yeah, I've found the way to go is prepare several of the most likely lines of events then turn the players loose to do what they want. I rarely guess badly enough in my planning that I have to do total improv.
After a while a DM sort of knows the players most likely actions and can prepare for them, that doesn't mean those are the only actions possible. The DM should prep for the most likely, and be ready to adapt to the unlikely (Quantum ogre be damned).
Quote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 03:48:44 PMFrom my personal experience adventures run better when planned around a series of events rather than a sandbox. You can't do pacing and the dramatic structure from just a situation, and those are two things that definitely make for a fun adventure.
From my personal experience, this is false. Players (especially experienced ones, but many newbies also fit under this umbrella) have a lot more fun when they feel like their choices matter, and "pacing and the dramatic structure" are the inverse of choice (not completely... but close enough in this case). My players enjoy best when they get to decide (by their actions) what the climax of the adventure might be (and when it occurs).
So, you have your experience, and I have mine. What next?
Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 14, 2024, 05:22:02 PMSo, you have your experience, and I have mine. What next?
You admit you're wrong? :-) Okay, prolly not
Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 14, 2024, 05:22:02 PMQuote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 03:48:44 PMFrom my personal experience adventures run better when planned around a series of events rather than a sandbox. You can't do pacing and the dramatic structure from just a situation, and those are two things that definitely make for a fun adventure.
From my personal experience, this is false. Players (especially experienced ones, but many newbies also fit under this umbrella) have a lot more fun when they feel like their choices matter, and "pacing and the dramatic structure" are the inverse of choice (not completely... but close enough in this case). My players enjoy best when they get to decide (by their actions) what the climax of the adventure might be (and when it occurs).
You're making an assumption there, that being that if a plot is used for planning purposes, it must also be used in actual play. Forcing a plot during play is just bad DMing. I'm saying use a story to design the environment then ignore it. As an example, you generally want the climax at the end of the adventure, otherwise the rest is a anticlimactic. So put the big bad at the spot in the dungeon furthest from the entrance so they'll likely encounter it last. If they find a shortcut or a back door, so be it. They still have choice and control. But most likely the big bad will be the exciting conclusion to the experience. An open environment, city, or wilderness can be done the same way, it's just a bit more complicated
Quote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 06:03:34 PMYou're making an assumption there, that being that if a plot is used for planning purposes, it must also be used in actual play. Forcing a plot during play is just bad DMing. I'm saying use a story to design the environment then ignore it. As an example, you generally want the climax at the end of the adventure, otherwise the rest is a anticlimactic. So put the big bad at the spot in the dungeon furthest from the entrance so they'll likely encounter it last. If they find a shortcut or a back door, so be it. They still have choice and control. But most likely the big bad will be the exciting conclusion to the experience. An open environment, city, or wilderness can be done the same way, it's just a bit more complicated
Ok. I was going to make a big reply, but I can at least understand this approach. I have used it myself. I still think that as a table top game, RPGs benefit more from being constructed as a situation and not a plot or story, but there are bits and pieces from conventional storytelling that can apply. They just have to be bent and twisted to fit during actual play.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 06:03:34 PMQuote from: Eirikrautha on December 14, 2024, 05:22:02 PMSo, you have your experience, and I have mine. What next?
You admit you're wrong? :-) Okay, prolly not
Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 14, 2024, 05:22:02 PMQuote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 03:48:44 PMFrom my personal experience adventures run better when planned around a series of events rather than a sandbox. You can't do pacing and the dramatic structure from just a situation, and those are two things that definitely make for a fun adventure.
From my personal experience, this is false. Players (especially experienced ones, but many newbies also fit under this umbrella) have a lot more fun when they feel like their choices matter, and "pacing and the dramatic structure" are the inverse of choice (not completely... but close enough in this case). My players enjoy best when they get to decide (by their actions) what the climax of the adventure might be (and when it occurs).
You're making an assumption there, that being that if a plot is used for planning purposes, it must also be used in actual play. Forcing a plot during play is just bad DMing. I'm saying use a story to design the environment then ignore it. As an example, you generally want the climax at the end of the adventure, otherwise the rest is a anticlimactic. So put the big bad at the spot in the dungeon furthest from the entrance so they'll likely encounter it last. If they find a shortcut or a back door, so be it. They still have choice and control. But most likely the big bad will be the exciting conclusion to the experience. An open environment, city, or wilderness can be done the same way, it's just a bit more complicated
That's not a "plot." That's adventure or lair design (and logic... the big bad usually wants to be as far from the danger as possible, if for no other reason than secrecy). A plot is a sequence of events in a story, usually presented in some coherent (often chronological) order. The entire point of a plot is that the
events of the story happen and are related. When you talk about the "dramatic structure," by normal meaning this refers to the pattern of rising action, climax, and falling action (denouement) as commonly found in literature. There is no guarantee that players will make choices that will follow that pattern. What if they find a way to neuter the big bad guy (BBG) without having to physically defeat him? What if they avoid the BBG completely? What if they jump directly to the BBG and don't follow any of the challenges?
You're going to have to explain your definition of these terms, because you are not using the standard definitions of the elements of a story. Creating an adventure that scales in threat level or features the BBG at the end (because he will almost
always be the end... the adventure usually ends when the motivation for it ends) is
not replicating the elements of a story. Replicating a narrative structure involves determining what events will happen and in what order... which is what Prof DM and the rest of us are arguing against...
To my mind, there's a very simple formula for how to write a good adventure scenario:
1. Here's the situation
2. Here's the parties involved
3. Here's what they want
4. Here's how they intend to achieve it
5. Here's what will happen if the players don't interfere.
I don't know if you'd call that a plot or not. There is a set sequence of events, but the whole point is that those events do not account for the players and the GM will have to change them in response to player actions.
Quote from: ForgottenF on December 14, 2024, 07:46:35 PMTo my mind, there's a very simple formula for how to write a good adventure scenario:
1. Here's the situation
2. Here's the parties involved
3. Here's what they want
4. Here's how they intend to achieve it
5. Here's what will happen if the players don't interfere.
I don't know if you'd call that a plot or not. There is a set sequence of events, but the whole point is that those events do not account for the players and the GM will have to change them in response to player actions.
That's not a "plot," per se, because you have constructed a motivation tree (here's what they want and here's what they'll do), not a series of events that will happen, regardless of the players' actions. The difference is in the forcing of events.
What you describe is similar to my process.
"Conflict designer" is a good way to approach. You want to create interesting situations without being attached to the way that they turn out. Sometimes this means PCs don't make it through the adventure, by the way!
It occurs to me that there's probably an interesting conversation to be had regarding what is the best starting point for designing an adventure:
-Location (e.g., a haunted castle, a witch's swamp, etc)
-characters (e.g., The grand vizier is plotting to overthrow the sultan)
-goal (e.g., rescue the princess, get the artifact)
-primary challenge (e.g, a heist, a castle siege)
-theme (e.g., horror, pulp adventure, mystery, etc.)
-plot (e.g., a tale of star-crossed lovers or whatever)
...and so on.
I think the most traditional way would be starting from location. You build your dungeon or hex map or whatever and then you find the "story" through the act of populating it. I've used all of the above at one time or another, but I think I've gotten my best results starting from either characters or primary challenge.
Greetings!
I've watched Professor DM for some years now. He's an "Old School" Gamer, and an excellent DM. He is usually right and very wise on everything.
I find it helpful to not take Professor DM out of context, and to interpret what he says and advises in context, and generously, in light of the broader issues he talks about and what he is getting at. He is intelligent, and thoughtful, with strong reasoning for whatever stuff he is talking about, or a particular take on a subject.
Professor DM always has good commentary.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: ForgottenF on December 15, 2024, 12:50:39 AMIt occurs to me that there's probably an interesting conversation to be had regarding what is the best starting point for designing an adventure:
-Location (e.g., a haunted castle, a witch's swamp, etc)
-characters (e.g., The grand vizier is plotting to overthrow the sultan)
-goal (e.g., rescue the princess, get the artifact)
-primary challenge (e.g, a heist, a castle siege)
-theme (e.g., horror, pulp adventure, mystery, etc.)
-plot (e.g., a tale of star-crossed lovers or whatever)
...and so on.
I think the most traditional way would be starting from location. You build your dungeon or hex map or whatever and then you find the "story" through the act of populating it. I've used all of the above at one time or another, but I think I've gotten my best results starting from either characters or primary challenge.
All I ever needed as a structure was right there on pages B51 & B52 of the Moldvay B/X rules. That and building on your experience as you go has worked for me.
Quote from: Exploderwizard on December 11, 2024, 07:30:37 AMOk. What was the purpose of this post? Are you interested in who agrees with this or not?
The purpose of this post is because I am new to the forum. I thought it would be an interesting ice-breaker. I came across it during a long period where I did not have time to connect with roleplayers though the forums but could still connect to the hobby by watching YouTubes.
This quote demonstrates something vaguely in the direction of how I go about DMing, too. As opposed to railroading players, their character decisions are what the story and world-building is founded upon.
There is a subtext in the name the Reviled Society, what else could that be referring to?
Thanks for the great quotes.
Quote from: mcobden on December 13, 2024, 04:55:03 PMIsnt most of the fun of being a DM finding out how players react to crazy situations? I really dont want to tell a story as much as I want to be involved in the telling of a story I havent heard before.
Yes! This. Exactly.
I use an over-arching metaplot, for events in the world which will happen with or without the characters. That's one thread. Each character arc is another thread. They all weave.
Most of my fun is inventing the new stuff where they have gone in their own direction and working that back around into the unwritten metaplot.
Quote from: ForgottenF on December 14, 2024, 07:46:35 PMTo my mind, there's a very simple formula for how to write a good adventure scenario:
1. Here's the situation
2. Here's the parties involved
3. Here's what they want
4. Here's how they intend to achieve it
5. Here's what will happen if the players don't interfere.
I don't know if you'd call that a plot or not. There is a set sequence of events, but the whole point is that those events do not account for the players and the GM will have to change them in response to player actions.
That's excellent.
Thanks for writing this.
You describe it perfectly.
Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 14, 2024, 07:34:53 PMQuote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 06:03:34 PMQuote from: Eirikrautha on December 14, 2024, 05:22:02 PMSo, you have your experience, and I have mine. What next?
You admit you're wrong? :-) Okay, prolly not
Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 14, 2024, 05:22:02 PMQuote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 03:48:44 PMFrom my personal experience adventures run better when planned around a series of events rather than a sandbox. You can't do pacing and the dramatic structure from just a situation, and those are two things that definitely make for a fun adventure.
From my personal experience, this is false. Players (especially experienced ones, but many newbies also fit under this umbrella) have a lot more fun when they feel like their choices matter, and "pacing and the dramatic structure" are the inverse of choice (not completely... but close enough in this case). My players enjoy best when they get to decide (by their actions) what the climax of the adventure might be (and when it occurs).
You're making an assumption there, that being that if a plot is used for planning purposes, it must also be used in actual play. Forcing a plot during play is just bad DMing. I'm saying use a story to design the environment then ignore it. As an example, you generally want the climax at the end of the adventure, otherwise the rest is a anticlimactic. So put the big bad at the spot in the dungeon furthest from the entrance so they'll likely encounter it last. If they find a shortcut or a back door, so be it. They still have choice and control. But most likely the big bad will be the exciting conclusion to the experience. An open environment, city, or wilderness can be done the same way, it's just a bit more complicated
That's not a "plot." That's adventure or lair design (and logic... the big bad usually wants to be as far from the danger as possible, if for no other reason than secrecy). A plot is a sequence of events in a story, usually presented in some coherent (often chronological) order. The entire point of a plot is that the events of the story happen and are related. When you talk about the "dramatic structure," by normal meaning this refers to the pattern of rising action, climax, and falling action (denouement) as commonly found in literature. There is no guarantee that players will make choices that will follow that pattern. What if they find a way to neuter the big bad guy (BBG) without having to physically defeat him? What if they avoid the BBG completely? What if they jump directly to the BBG and don't follow any of the challenges?
You're going to have to explain your definition of these terms, because you are not using the standard definitions of the elements of a story. Creating an adventure that scales in threat level or features the BBG at the end (because he will almost always be the end... the adventure usually ends when the motivation for it ends) is not replicating the elements of a story. Replicating a narrative structure involves determining what events will happen and in what order... which is what Prof DM and the rest of us are arguing against...
I'm pretty sure I'm using the terms in exactly the common usage. I was going to gin up an example to illustrate but realized I can't afford the time right now. Maybe after the holidays.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 03:48:44 PMHis articles frequently have good insight and advice but this time he's wrong. (And let's not get into his bad behavior - that's another discussion entirely) From my personal experience adventures run better when planned around a series of events rather than a sandbox. You can't do pacing and the dramatic structure from just a situation, and those are two things that definitely make for a fun adventure. In my experience planning a situation only works well in a limited environment, like a dungeon, due to prep time constraints. There's definitely a correlation between how much preparation I've put into an encounter and how fun it is. When needed I can wing it with the best of them, but the result are less consistent. He talks about wasting time on alternate plot lines. It's a much bigger waste of time prepping all of the situations that the characters might find themselves in. So yeah, I've found the way to go is prepare several of the most likely lines of events then turn the players loose to do what they want. I rarely guess badly enough in my planning that I have to do total improv.
I think you are mostly wrong, for the reasons others have stated, but if writing a plot/event based adventure for publication it's pretty much necessary to follow this advice. If it's homebrew, I find just having motivated NPCs and letting events play out as they will creates far more drama and interest than a pre-prepped plot/event series.
Edit: Also if you are weak at improvisation and/or at NPC creation/motivation you may have to GM like this to substitute for your weak areas. I just think such weakness is less common than a lot of people seem to believe.
"Conflict Designer" is an interesting way of putting it but it's a little bit of both "conflict designing" and storytelling. Wanting to be entertained by players and just letting them go do their thing can be done to an extent. I feel that players want to be entertained too by having at least some semblance of a story frame (or several) to follow. Mostly because we're all used to having a somewhat beginning, middle and end.
Quote from: xoriel77 on December 22, 2024, 05:38:58 PM"Conflict Designer" is an interesting way of putting it but it's a little bit of both "conflict designing" and storytelling. Wanting to be entertained by players and just letting them go do their thing can be done to an extent. I feel that players want to be entertained too by having at least some semblance of a story frame (or several) to follow. Mostly because we're all used to having a somewhat beginning, middle and end.
The story frame is whatever the players make it. Game play isn't a story. The story is constructed and told AFTER game play.
Quote from: GnosticGoblin on December 15, 2024, 09:06:54 PMQuote from: Exploderwizard on December 11, 2024, 07:30:37 AMOk. What was the purpose of this post? Are you interested in who agrees with this or not?
The purpose of this post is because I am new to the forum. I thought it would be an interesting ice-breaker. I came across it during a long period where I did not have time to connect with roleplayers though the forums but could still connect to the hobby by watching YouTubes.
This quote demonstrates something vaguely in the direction of how I go about DMing, too. As opposed to railroading players, their character decisions are what the story and world-building is founded upon.
There is a subtext in the name the Reviled Society, what else could that be referring to?
Thanks for the great quotes.
If you want to "break the ice" (this doesn't make any sense on a forum by the way, there is no social pressure on you to contribute), you have to actually present something that someone might want to discuss. Try asking a question.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 03:48:44 PMQuote from: Ratman_tf on December 14, 2024, 06:13:59 AMQuote from: Mishihari on December 14, 2024, 01:48:58 AMWhen you're writing an adventure there should always be a story. Designing with plot, pacing, setbacks, climaxes etc etc etc in mind makes for an exciting adventure. It's also the only way to know where to spend your limited prep time. You spend it on the activities you expect the players to actually do. Once the game starts the players are in the driver's seat. You'll get to use a lot of what you prepared and plotted out, but you also have to roll with the decisions they actually do make and improvise in the spots where you guessed wrong. In my entire DMing career there was exactly one time the adventure played out they way I had planned it ahead of time.
https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/4147/roleplaying-games/dont-prep-plots
His articles frequently have good insight and advice but this time he's wrong. (And let's not get into his bad behavior - that's another discussion entirely) From my personal experience adventures run better when planned around a series of events rather than a sandbox. You can't do pacing and the dramatic structure from just a situation, and those are two things that definitely make for a fun adventure. In my experience planning a situation only works well in a limited environment, like a dungeon, due to prep time constraints. There's definitely a correlation between how much preparation I've put into an encounter and how fun it is. When needed I can wing it with the best of them, but the result are less consistent. He talks about wasting time on alternate plot lines. It's a much bigger waste of time prepping all of the situations that the characters might find themselves in. So yeah, I've found the way to go is prepare several of the most likely lines of events then turn the players loose to do what they want. I rarely guess badly enough in my planning that I have to do total improv.
If you already know what events are going to occur, why should the players show up? Write a book.
Great advice.
Present situation.
Players decide what they want to do.
Referee decides what, if any, probabilities to assign.
Resolve the outcome.
Referee explains new situation.
Lather, rinse, repeat.