Campaign Planing and Structures

[weilide]

I always have this dilemma when I set out to do the prep work for a campaign: I've played enough to know that no campaign, no matter how well thought out, ever survives contact with the players. In any case, the vast freedom of the player is one of the delights of Amber. Still, my writerly (if not wiser) self always wants to write out as much as possible in advance, to get the description of the room, etc, just right because the stuff I come up with on the fly always falls just a little short of what I'd like...

This is all a roundabout way of asking how you all structure your story notes and the like going into a campaign. I don't have my copies of Mr. Wujcik's books in front of me now (I'm sitting in bed, which is in the wrong hemisphere) but if I recall the sample games adventures / campaigns therein correctly, he provides a lot of background to the big overarching conflict, discusses how all the affected NPCs are likely to feel and react, provides several nice mechanisms for sucking in the players, suggests a few possible avenues for resolution, and then simply steps back to watch the sparks fly.

That makes a lot of sense to me, but everyone is certain to be somewhat different in this respect, and I'd like to know what variations you folks employ, challenges you have surmounted, and so on. Thanks.

[Shoby187]

I think you are right, a planned story can never survive the players. A friend just ran us in a Runequest game. He was running us through an old D&D Model called Pharaoh set in the Desert of Desolation. It was supposed to be a big dungeon but during the first session my character figured out a way to bypass the entire dungeon and go right to the bad guy, we completed it in one night (but we missed all of the cool treasure spread throughout the dungeon. LOL, I DID make it out with all of the Pharaoh's gold though! 25,000 PP worth, whoo hoo!)

Having said that, when setting up a campaign I never plan out the story really. I might have a few scenes that I'd like to try to have but really the way I plan it is I write down each important NPC and Group in my game in my notebook. I then write down notes about what those NPC's know, what they are planning, what goals they have and what they are currently doing. I'm sure to leave plenty of room for further notes on the paper too.

So if I was running a game about the Ancient Gods escaping their ages old prison I might do something quick like:

Julian:
-Knows very little about the Gods or the Spikards
-Recently creatures from the oldest myths have been encountered in Arden. These are creatures that have escaped from the mists such as basilisk's, etc.
-Currently Julian is concerned about where these are coming from and has agents out looking into it. He would welcome any help.

Bleys:
-Knows more about the Spikards and the Gods then about anyone in Amber
-Has been communicating with Delwin through his spikard
-Is working to try to keep the Gods imprisoned. He pretty much knows he can't however.
-Is Jealous of Corwin and Fiona being seen as the heroes of Patternfall. Bleys can score a lot of points be being the hero of this conflict.

Fiona:
-Doesn't know as much as Bleys but knows about the gods being released.
-Wants to be able to learn what she can from whatever Gods will speak with her

Etc. . .

I'd also have something like:

Unseelie Gods:
Now that they are free they will set out collecting whatever power they can get their hands on. They will begin by invading nearby shadows and sacrificing the populace and binding their souls to a large power crystal which they can tap for their magic

Seelie Gods:
-Have sent out agentd to find out what the Unseelie are up to and how they are amassing power so quickly
-Finvarra, King of the Seelie has also sent out some of the minor gods to collect their different Spikards out in Shadow. Anyone with one of the rings will be attacked and an attempt will be made to get their rings. It will not be obvious as to why these separate people are attacked

With something like this setup, it doesn't matter what the characters do. Eventually they will stumble upon something that's going on in the story. They could easily be involved in one of the incidents. In one game, Merlin was the father of a player and had given him one of the two Spikards that he had. This character was attacked at the start of the game by a god seeking to take his ring back to Finvarra.

Also, if the players don't get involved then the NPC's things go off as planned. Shadow Earth could be raided and its entire populace sacrificed to the Unseelie, Delwin could be killed for his ring before being able to pass on valuable info, etc.

[RPGPundit]

Consider this: Zelazny, when he was writing Amber, had no notes or plans for how it was going to go. That is to say, in general, he was making it up as he went along.

In my own campaign, I have the two rulebooks in front of me, and a notebook that has notes on what some of the major shadows are like, a list of the different noble houses of Amber and the major Chaos clans (so I remember, because I'm forgetful), the character sheets of all my players, and a single page of notes that I prepare before each game. These notes include details on where every player ended up last session, and a few brief points of other important things going on, or events that are due to occur in that session.
That's it. One page of notes, half of which is taken up by "prior history".

To me, this is the best way to avoid the whole problem of "no adventure survives contact with the players".

RPGPundit

[Nihilistic Mind]

I work exactly the same way Shoby and Pundit work.

I come up with a threat and somewhat universal conflict. Then I lay out what different NPCs, factions etc., are doing about it or how they are involved. For the most part, I try to make things happen in front of the PCs and let them decide whether or not to risk involving the elder Amberites.

I write a three paragraph synopsis of what could happen if the PCs don't get involved.

After character creation, I use as much as the PCs give me as possible and make them the center of the story.

Then I lay out important places, what the PCs and NPCs do and run the 'simulation' in my head, since being a GM is being a super-computer that can improvise with a bit of primal chaos thrown in the mix... Or something like that.

If prior to the game I think of a really cool scene or place or antagonist, I try to place it when the right time comes along.

I also make lists of names and places to throw at the players on the fly. It's essential when improvising.
Let the game be a puzzle of conflicts and threats, increasing in a crescendo eventually involving the balance of the all Shadows and Primal Planes, by the hand of the PCs if possible.

Plan some, improvise some. I prepare for the story and I let it change after every session if the PCs affect events etc...

[Gavken]

For an Amber campaign I think I would have a sheet with an idea of what each NPC knows, what plots and schemes they have going on as well as a general idea of the overall plot. Amber is very different to other campaigns as all the elders have there own little schemes and predjudices that can turn things on their head. I think it's a good idea to have these in mind early on so that these little suprises can be sprung on the PCs when needed to keep them on there toes.

Amber is all about people, scheming and betrayal. Therefore I'd have more information on this than say details of all the Shadows since there are an infitnite number of shadows out there that you can literally make up on the spot.

Gavin

[jibbajibba]

I will admit to being a heretic... I never use the elder Amberites aside from Dworkin and Oberon (and maybe a few Chaosites). I just don't like having loads of NPCs that are tougher smarter and prettier than the PCs. So the PCs are the children of Oberon. I make up the numbers with NPCs (but ones that are not as familiar as Bleys and Corwin to the players and are of the same level of power as the PCs).
The Players then get to design their own Amber and shadows write their own legends and histories. Shoot they even get to design their own castle, albeit one that I severely influence a bit like directed deaming or something.
I will be running 3 plots in a campaign each focused on an NPC. They could be anything but in general they relate to what I would call the 3 main Amber themes. The struggle for the Throne, The destruction of the Universe and the War between Amber and Chaos. In one campaign it might be the noble princess, Oberon's favourite that is responsible for his strange illness whilst she sends the other siblings across shadow in search of the cure, or last time it was Dworkin himself that had decided to destroy the universe which on reflection he found imperfect.
Most of the plots though comes from the players as they all have their own ideas and aspirations using my experience system based on each player setting their own private objects (conflict driven of course...).
Usually, one of their plots takes over as the main driver for the day to day adventure bit as the NPC plots are more subtle and clever, cos I thought them up... the campaign elements usually turn up eventually.

[Shoby187]

Well, I tend to use the NPC's mainly because my players like getting them involved. But I came up with an easy solution to the players always being weaker then the Elders . . . I just gave everyone the same amount of points!

Everyone (except Dworkin, Oberon and anyone else that ancient) gets 300 points. It always seems to work out great. If you really want to see your players plot and scheme, if you really want to see them get involved, just put them on the same playing field as everyone else . . .

I have a website with all of the stats I gave everyone, feel free to check it out:

http://www.skyseastone.net/ancient_powers/

[RPGPundit]

I think there's a great benefit to having the Elder NPCs around, more powerful than the PCs.  It means the players initially have to strongly consider the alliances and patronages they form with the elders, and the consequences of putting themselves in opposition with "X's son" or "y's daughter".  
But most significantly, it means that later on in the long-term campaign your players get the pleasure of the experience of being able to outwit, outsmart, or outpower one or more of the Elders.

RPGPundit

[Shoby187]

I think there's a great benefit to having the Elder NPCs around, more powerful than the PCs.  It means the players initially have to strongly consider the alliances and patronages they form with the elders, and the consequences of putting themselves in opposition with "X's son" or "y's daughter".  
But most significantly, it means that later on in the long-term campaign your players get the pleasure of the experience of being able to outwit, outsmart, or outpower one or more of the Elders.

Well, I wouldn't say that just because the PC's have the same amount of points as the Elders that the Elders aren't more powerful. They've still been around longer, know a lot more and have had much more time to secure their power.

Also, I tend to build the Elders very arch-typical. So a lot of the elders are sort of min/maxed to do what they do. A player would usually be hard pressed to spend their points in a way where they'd be a better swordsman then Benedict or Sorcerer then Fiona.

Also, I think its all relative; If a player is a Psyche based Sorcerer he's probably gonna be more 'powerful' in that area then say Gerard.  

To me, having the players so weak compared to the Elders never made a lot of sense. I see no reason why a young Amberite can't be as strong as Gerard or as Enduring as Corwin. My personal view is that dedication is more important then experience as far as combat is concerned. I honestly think that Luke could have given any of the Elders a good match in a swordfight. That was just the impression I got from the books. I think it was pretty obvious that Dalt was #2 in Strength.

Personally, I love the scene in Prince of Chaos where the younger generation matches against the elder generations ghosts. I know Dalt got his ass kicked, but hey, he shouldn't have spent so many point in Strength and Endurance if he was planning on fighting Eric!

[jibbajibba]

I tend to use 250 points across the board. My problem with the elders is that they constrain the PCs. Even if the PC have the same points the Elders still have big advantages and there are so many of them. I mean if I was playing a game of Traveller, for example, I wouldn't want the players to be on a ship where there are 12 senior officers who are much smarter and brighter than they are. I don't like too many tough NPCs about (in James Bond I have never ever used James Bond for example).
Also to my way of thinking the elders represent strong archetypes and their existance kind of removes these archetypes fromt eh hands of the players. A PC can't be the ultimate warrior because Benedict has that role etc etc . Its nice to watch as well as the players try to eek out roles that have the mythic quality required of Amberites but they try and avoid being copies of the characters in the books. In my last Campaign for example the ultimate warrior was Arden. Did Arden struggle all day to improve himself? was he imbued with a Bushidoesque code? No he sat round all day in the gardens of the castle snoozing in a deck chair drinking lemonade. Sure he had a vast secret army a shadow's hope from Amber concealed in a fold of Shadow and he had recruited and trained some of the best officers you will ever meet but personally ... too busy relaxing. Its nice to mix up those archetypes and play with the Amberverse

[Trevelyan]

My campaign planning generally extends to nothing more than writing "X plans to do Z, with the consequence that Z will occur unless X is stopped."

I don't usually decide who X is until after the campaign has started, and I never quantify Y or Z more than is necessary to get things moving in the first place, purposefully leaving room to modify them as I, or indeed the players, come up with better ideas.

Other than that, I'm familiar enough with the existing NPCs and can make additional notes as new NPCs come up in conversation orin person. I like to have a few good names on standby, though, since I'm terrible at coming up with names at short notice.

Once the game starts I can insert additional plots, cabals and intrigues as the mood takes me, often relying on Ericks very god "just fudge/retcon it" advice.

[Ivanhoe]

I like the old saying "Give a player a hammer, give another a nail, and you have an adventure." My campaign started when I decided to make a first game that would be just a warm up to get everyone used to the system. I had one minor event planned in order to make stuff happen but I never had to use it. Once they met, the campaign had begun.

That's also the use for the elder Amberites : the relation between them and the PCs draw lines since day one. Eric's children and Corwin's children tend to have frictions, Fiona's and Bley's will be carful not to take sides, Random's and Benedict's will try to guard Amber, etc...

[Nihilistic Mind]

And parentage is also a good way for players to play off of other players' expectations.

In the Play by post game I'm running the characters' lineage is somewhat important at the moment, but it will become a whole lot more important in a little while, since it occurs during Corwin's imprisonment, at the beginning of the Patternfall war. For instance, Brand's child is actively helping newly crowned Eric in the defense of Amber. It is likely that he will be given the choice to turn his back on his current alliances in favor of his father's plans...

Another character, Corwin's lost son, raised by Benedict, is very involved with the King's daughter, and supports Eric's kingship in general, probably as much as Benedict does, anyway...

There's more to it, but it's fun to play off of the expectations of the players in terms of elder associations. For instance, why not surprise players with unusual dynamics?

On the other hand, I also enjoy games with less or no elders, simply because it forces the players to deal with Oberon more directly.

[RPGPundit]

I like the old saying "Give a player a hammer, give another a nail, and you have an adventure." My campaign started when I decided to make a first game that would be just a warm up to get everyone used to the system. I had one minor event planned in order to make stuff happen but I never had to use it. Once they met, the campaign had begun.

That's also the use for the elder Amberites : the relation between them and the PCs draw lines since day one. Eric's children and Corwin's children tend to have frictions, Fiona's and Bley's will be carful not to take sides, Random's and Benedict's will try to guard Amber, etc...

Welcome, Ivanhoe!

I think its really more a question of factions: You have Eric /Corwin/Deirdres squabbling faction who mostly fight with each other, the redheads who see themselves as a tightly-knit group set against everyone else, Caine/Gerard/Julian who see themselves as the natural governors and protectors of Amber (though not its king) and feel more entitled to handle Amber's affairs, Benedict who only cares about protecting Amber and staying above his younger siblings' squabbles, and Flora who just wants to be allied with whoever is "winning".  Llewella wants nothing to do with anyone, and Random was "Corwin's little buddy"/ally before becoming King, and is the slightly reluctant ruler trying to keep it all together after becoming King.

RPGPundit

[Ivanhoe]

Welcome, Ivanhoe!

Hello everyone, apparently there are no introduction threads so I jumped right in the middle of a discussion, I hope this is okay.