TRPG General Chat

GreySage

20:00

@Zachiel Indeed, but it is the direction I am getting from @godskook, and I am trying to understand it

godskook

@GreySage That'd be explicitly outside the social contract for the game, but.....if they ALL wanted to do it, we'd be in an interesting and new territory for me.

Zachiel

I wouldn't be opposed to PCs deciding that, I would be opposed to players deciding that they want their PCs to do that. (Then again I probably shouldn't be playing a character that just wants to be an artist. But it's not really D&D, so it kinda works)

Delioth

@GreySage "Okay. Your lives as turnip farmers go pretty well until the archlich duke Ferdinand raises an undead army two years from now. You are promptly murdered and are made part of the mindless horde. Next Campaign?"

6

godskook

@GreySage, here's the prep-notes I had set up for the PCs for the second "mission" they were going to do this summer:

Episode names:

1.No soul is forgotten

Sarah "Manapaws" Lavoie, the half-Shifter mutt has always struggled coping with loss. Dutiful and agreeable, Manapaws followed her Father as a Druid mystic among the people. When she showed an aptitude for shaping incarnum, she gained fame throughout the Starpa as the first Druid in Starpa, since the scarring, to achieve this discipline crossover.

Yuuki

@Delioth But if the adventurers kill Archlichduke Ferdinand, do they start Magic World War I?

godskook

20:03

@Yuuki Only if they do it in front of the Sandwich shop, with a revolver.

Zachiel

I think... well, that isn't really the direction. He knows his PC party will do things that are adventurous and they will stumble on what's happening (and be given missions that make them stumble on the "main plot". It just isn't a conventional plot, because it doesn't wait for events to unfold in a certain way.
I'd suggest reading the ruleset of Dogs in the Vineyard, especially the part where it talks about "don't suppose PCs will go there and witness some ritual. What if they don't, then?"

Yuuki

@godskook Are they required to have tried to kill him with a bomb sometime earlier in the day?

godskook

@Yuuki Maybe?

Papayaman1000

On second thought, make it 7 or 8 Specters. Yeah, that might work. Then do that several times.

GreySage

Ok, so your objection to "plot" is basically that it assumes a "correct" ending, wherein PCs are forced into some specific course of action regardless of what they want to do. Or instead of "ending" some other point during the course of the game. Is that correct?

Yuuki

20:07

Basically that players should be allowed to "fail" the campaign?

godskook

@Yuuki That's a different rule I have.

Zachiel

I will let Godskook answer to that, but I will also add this: if you know why your villaing is doing what it is doing, and why his allies are helping, you will know (theoretically!) what they will want to do when the PCs interfere.

GreySage

@Yuuki Do you mean players can die, or that they can fail at stopping [villain], and do you mean that one of those is plot or not plot?

godskook

@Yuuki Don't point a Villain at your campaign setting unless you're willing to shoot.

Yuuki

I actually don't feel like players should be allowed to "fail" the campaign.

Delioth

20:09

@GreySage Pretty much. Plot implies more than just a frame, it implies a "correct" way to do "correct" things. While having the threads for this isn't necessarily bad, thinking the whole thing through can lead to railroading.

Yuuki

In the sense that if they "miss" things, then you change the goals of the campaign.

BESW

i discovered the dungeons n doggos tumblr today, and now i'm obsessed: https://dndoggos.tumblr.com/ https://t.co/po00ngUMs4

Tweeted by beccahallstedt on July 24, 2017 at 3:43 AM

GreySage

@Delioth I think my confusion was because I have a much looser definition of the word "plot".

Yuuki

@godskook Well, that's why I like lower stakes settings tbh. Feels more believable when you avert "bad guy overruns a town" as opposed to "bad guy rewrites reality".

godskook

@Yuuki Yeah, that's what I end up doing, too. Although nation-building by conquest of a DM the players didn't stop is good too.

Er, of a Villain the PCs didn't stop.

GreySage

20:13

@Delioth Do you have a good example of a bad plot campaign? I am trying to wrap my head around how or why anyone would purposefully make that

nwp

Villain, DM, same thing.

godskook

@GreySage Plot assumes that, roughly, there's a sequence of events the PCs WILL follow, more or less. Maybe there's multiple plot-lines, that the PCs choose between, maybe there's a few plot-lines that are interwoven, but inherently, there's a line of events going from A to B, that you as the DM know ahead of time.

I don't prepare those.

Delioth

@GreySage Well... GM's don't normally intentionally railroad (exceptions exist, but I think everyone here knows that railroading is bad). It's one of those "accidental" things that can happen without noticing sometimes ...

(I planned these encounters, so those will happen no matter what; if they don't go through the forest to find the werebears, the werebears will be on the road, or in the tavern... and then that'll point them to the competing werewolves to exterminate where they can find clues for the big-bad's scheme and they'll have to go stop him, and if they don't the world ends next week.)

godskook

I prepare Villains, with schemes that they plan to attempt, or are attempting.

BESW

[amused] Railroading is not an inherent evil. It has a bad reputation because it's often used without communication so that it gets in the way of unspoken playstyle goals of other participants.

godskook

20:18

@Delioth Railroading in various measures of the term, isn't always bad. Railroading only gets bad when it starts eliminating all player agency and they're just audience to the DM's storytelling.

Yuuki

@Delioth I dunno, one could argue that it fueled the Industrial Age.

And led to the US becoming a major world power.

BESW

And, yeah, some people use "plot" to mean the emergent story.

Yuuki

I've honestly enjoyed the story more in more linear and "railroaded" games like Halo than open-ended sandbox games like Far Cry.

Delioth

Yes yes of course; railroading in smallish chunks isn't bad. I guess in my eyes I don't consider small "keeping on the tracks" as railroading, I only consider it railroading (with the bad connotation) when it takes agency

BESW

I've had success with a number of different prep styles, on both sides of the screen, scattered all across the spectrum of pre-determined events and GM control.

godskook

20:22

@BESW Well, we're specifically talking about "things a DM could prepare before a session" for most of this, so "plot = emergent story" wasn't coming up.

Yuuki

@Delioth I dunno, it really depends on what you mean by "player agency".

GreySage

And the rabbithole deepens...

Yuuki

> "I wanna stab the guy in the face."
> "... but you only just met him."
> "I wanna stab him."
> "But why?"
> "Because I haven't stabbed anyone yet."

BESW

I usually approach prep with some version of establishing what would happen if the PCs weren't around: who are the major influences, what are their current situations, their goals and plans, etc. Then I let the PCs loose to do their thing and everything goes sideways in the most delightful way.

Yuuki

Which is fine, I guess, if the player had established his character as a raging psychopath but it doesn't work so well when they've been playing the all-loving cleric.

BESW

20:25

By prepping the current situation and the NPCs' plans, I can respond to PC unexpectedness more efficiently.

Delioth

@Yuuki I think that's a discussion best left to each group, or even to each campaign (some campaigns call for more agency (i.e. sandbox), while others don't really want much (i.e. we want to follow a set storyline that we can't screw up)).

BESW

@Yuuki That's not really a prep/plot issue, is it?

GreySage

So, would the room consider it bad (or railroading) if, say, the PCs were free to undertake a number of sidequests, or even run through the woods at random, and every so often would find clues leading them to a specific villain, no matter what they did (as long as they at least somewhat succeed at what they are doing)?

BESW

That's more of a "I don't think everyone at the table is playing the same game" issue.

Yuuki

I dunno, I get weird when people talk about player agency. Mostly because every time I hear it talked about a lot, I always get this sense that "player agency" means "I want to be able to do whatever the f--k I want to do when I want to do it and damn the consequences for everyone else".

BESW

20:27

@GreySage Been there, done that, worked quite well until the campaign disintegrated for unrelated IRL reasons.

Delioth

@Yuuki Oh, player agency shouldn't outrule consequences. It's more of letting them do what they want and not stonewalling a course of action. Now, if the player murders the mayor under guard, they're either getting executed or locked up for a long time, because their actions have consequences.

nwp

@Yuuki Guards incoming. If there are no guards around right now there will be a group of them investigating and possibly arresting or killing the PCs. The townspeople will be afraid to talk to strangers until the mystery has been solved. The PCs might not get caught, but should definitely learn to be more careful.

@Yuuki Clerics are easy, if they go against what their deity stands for they lose their powers until they make amends.

Yuuki

@nwp I have definitely seen "player agency" wonks argue that this violates agency and shouldn't be done.

godskook

@GreySage That's certainly more railroady that I suggest, but not an unfun level of railroading. I'd play that game.

BESW

@nwp That seems like a story-level response to a table-level problem, which I've never seen work every well long-term.

A story-level response validates the action, no matter what the response is.

nwp

20:32

@BESW It does. Players are allowed to be murder hobos and murder hobos get hunted down. The rest of the party can decide if they want to abandon the face stabber and have him/her/it rot in jail alone (roll a new character) or side with the face stabber, free him/her/it and have an adventure hiding from the general public.

I mean people do that because they are bored with the campaign and want to do something more interesting. Letting them do that seems appropriate.

Yuuki

@nwp That feels like it might have a chance of causing out-of-campaign arguments.

godskook

@nwp Which entirely depends on your table's social contract. At my table, this would be a pretty clear violation.

BESW

Yeah, I've played in very few groups which would be okay with a player choosing to unilaterally change the kind of game being played without consulting everyone else.

Whether that player is the GM or running a PC.

Delioth

@BESW Well, if the other PCs don't choose to help the face-stabber then nothing has changed, except they have a different party member

Face-stabby got sent to jail and had to roll a new character

BESW

Really? in the above scenario the PCs are now known associates of a murderer, and an NPC who was probably significant to their goals is dead.

That sounds like a status quo shift to me, even if they were already playing a game where killing random people wasn't a massive change in the theme and tone.

eimyr

20:41

@Delioth @Delioth Yep, I would, if the game is about adventuring and the players decide to go outside the scope, it's no longer the game we set out to play.

BESW

And, of course, any ongoing stories tied to that one PC are also dropped/severed.

eimyr

also, hi, everyone

BESW

[wave]

eimyr

@Delioth However, I definitely would not end it in this manner, it's a bit jarring and obnoxious to just inflict death on players due to out-of-universe exasperation

Delioth

Oh yeah, they'd likely get to go through their murder conflict, but they're then poorly-armed turnip farmers against a horde of undead. Actually probably more than that, they'd get a few warnings of rumors they're hearing about a lich and some undead stuff (at which point they could take up arms and re-adventure or they could move or they could stay and resign their fate)

eimyr

20:45

but why even go to that length?

players effectively said "we're bored of this adventure, let's do something else like a slow-paced turnip farming thing"

GreySage

I don't know how to quote, but BESW said: " In my D&D days, one of my favourite 'tricks' was to fake a sandbox campaign but use "all paths lead to the same plot eventually" to make it an invisible railroad." This feels like what I naturally am inclined to do

nwp

@Delioth Maybe they get saved last minute by some adventurers. How ironic.

eimyr

I believe the most appropriate reaction is to respond with "sure, let's pick a good game to make that interesting" or "nah, I don't want to do that. let's pick a good game we can all play"

BESW

@GreySage Paste the permalink to the quote in a line all by itself and it'll onebox.

GreySage

Jan 16 at 5:34, by BESW

@RollingFeles In my D&D days, one of my favourite 'tricks' was to fake a sandbox campaign but use "all paths lead to the same plot eventually" to make it an invisible railroad.

Huzzah!

nwp

20:48

Am I the only one who has to manually remove the #-part every time?

Delioth

@GreySage Do note that it is still a railroad and may leave you unprepared to improvise if players do something surprisingly witty or awesome. Also players might catch on and feel [peeved, angry, mischevious, ...].

It is a nice trick, but it's best used sparingly

BESW

@Delioth The context I linked above is helpful; the web wasn't a meta-level construct but an artefact of the kind of story I embedded in the world.

GreySage

@Delioth Well, the only things they could do (that I can think of) are: go explore some other location, which leads to more clues, solve the mystery right away, which just moves the adventure along, or leave the area entirely

Delioth

@GreySage And what happens if they leave the area entirely?

GreySage

@Delioth Then they have abandoned the campaign entirely, give me a week to prepare a new campign

BESW

20:51

@Delioth Social contract. When I started the Knave Port campaign I said "This is a story about the Island of the Scale. I need you to make characters who have a reason to be on the island, and if they leave then they're leaving the story."

GreySage

@BESW I should be explicit about staying in the area of they want to play the game, that is a good point

BESW

For the two campaigns in which I used the conceit most aggressively, the "railroad" was simply that there was a wide and deep conspiracy of some sort, which they'd stumble onto pretty much no matter what they did. PCs are, especially in the systems I was using then, chaos machines. I introduced an orderly world that would push back against the disorder they'd inevitably create: instant plot.

@GreySage Islands work especially well for this. [grin]

godskook

The way to sell that kind of campaign is with plot-kites. Small, known plots that each PC has and tries to fly, until the plot-kite gets sucked into your plot-engine when they're least expecting it.

Delioth

@GreySage I guess this is where we differ. I'd recognize that my players probably just don't want to be constricted and are much more likely to want to sandbox for a while. At that point they probably go off and do pirate things or something. Until the world ends, at least.

doppelgreener

@BESW [takes notes] Telling my players a couple of things along these lines would've headed off some difficulties a recent story faced.

BESW

20:55

And, well. How many groups go East in a West Marchs game?

godskook

Bill is looking for his wife.

Sally is researching ancient archeology.

Mega-Destroyer-1x825 is looking for his teddy-bear.

Delioth

@godskook I'm not sure if I can believe that. Bill certainly has more pressing issues than his wife.

Yuuki

@godskook I'm pretty sure the FAA has regulations on flying kites that high.

BESW

@godskook In a few campaigns, I had an Adventuring Guild they could join. Among other perks, it included access to an "adventurers wanted" notice board they could use to choose what they'd do next.

@Yuuki Ping @Shalvenay.

Delioth

@Yuuki plot-engines are heavy, they weigh down the adventure-zeppelin quite a bit

doppelgreener

20:57

We had an important location and theme to deal with. In a five-character group, two characters had no visible reason to care about the location, and one character had no visible reason to care about the theme or the location (but came up with a reason for the latter afterwards when asked).

BESW

@doppelgreener It's kind of amazing how easy it is for us to not just explain the base assumptions necessary for a game to work.

godskook

@BESW The "get the adventures from your guild" conceit is more or less what I do these days. Its great for setting certain aspects of the table's tone without spoiling the plot.

GreySage

@Delioth How is that any different? Both of us suggested that the players "do something else".

Delioth

@GreySage Aye, but you seem to talk about drafting a new campaign. I'd likely just continue improvising with whatever they try to do.

BESW

@doppelgreener One of the things I like about a lot of the games we play now is that they come with the built-in assumption that players will work together to have reasons for their characters to be interested in what's going on.

(eg, Umdaar specifically asks for an aspect explaining why your PC risks life and limb in the wilderness looking for old junk; Bubblegumshoe asks what drives your Sleuth to solve mysteries.)

Misspent Youth's character creation is basically all about defining your characters' drives.

doppelgreener

21:04

@BESW Yeah, I do like that! :D

Yuuki

@BESW I solve mysteries because I never found out what happened to that stick of Trident in grade school (it got stuck to my shoe).

GreySage

@Yuuki that one hurt

godskook

@Yuuki Are you trying to tell me, your eye wasn't for public viewing?

@GreySage this is similar to what I do:

thealexandrian.net/wordpress/4147/roleplaying-games/…

Zachiel

21:20

@godskook I'm now curious about which published adventure he describes.

godskook

@Zachiel So am I....

Zachiel

@godskook I will post it as a question on the main site.

godskook

@Zachiel it probably belongs on Sci-Fi&Fantasy, no?

Zachiel

21:49

@godskook Product identification at its purest.

nitsua60

Absolutely fair--there are a lot of defined terms earlier in the book that would help to have seen, and even then it really only made sense to me putting it into play the first time. Basic rundown, though there are others in the room who can probably correct/clarify any/all of this:
A front is a setting/narrative structure: it's a description of an entity, its goal, the resources it has to pursue that goal, the doom that will befall the adventurers/world if that goal is met, and the harbingers of progress toward that goal. The entity could be a villain, a faction, an impersonal force....

GreySage

@nitsua60 I see, so it's a tool for building more robust {villain, faction, impersonal force}'s.

Shalvenay

22:36

@Yuuki see FAR 101 Subpart B -- otherwise, your kite might get dragged off by some soon-to-be-annoyed bloke in a Cessna :P

nitsua60

@GreySage Yes, though I wouldn't even call it a tool. It's a prompt (a) to think about these things (that you're probably already thinking of) in a player-facing way, and (b) to keep them moving, even "offscreen," in ways that will engage the players (eventually).

Transcript for