Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ved 06-14-07, 01:52 PM	I think a lot of players, myself included, dislike the methods commonly used as a DM to keep the plot moving. If it's done right, you feel like you're being presented with a multiple choice question with nearly infinite choices, except you know the next question will be the same no matter what you choose. If it's done wrong, it's railroading, and no one likes being lead by the nose in a tabletop game. If you wanted a predetermined story, you would read a book. I think a lot of DM's, myself included, dislike the methods they have to use in order to keep the plot moving. The average player seems unwilling to act on their own accord, so you must present them with something to react to. To make matters worse, they then have the audacity to complain that you aren't giving them enough freedom. You gave them freedom, and they didn't do anything with it but look for plot hooks (if Good), wander off in a random direction (if Neutral), or kill and loot everyone and everything nearby for no reason at all (if Evil). I think both problems have the same solution, and that is what this thread is all about. First things first, please make a throwaway character described in at least two sentences. Don't give us a biography, we don't have all day. :D React, using that character, to the following situation. Again, you don't have to be detailed with it and you don't have to think things through, just do whatever you would do as a player in such circumstances. You and your compatriots arrive in the city of Cireneg after four days travel on horseback. Everything you can expect to find here is here, from a tavern, to the Cireneg Kingdom castle. The burstling populace goes about their daily lives, primarily composed of humans, halflings, and orcs. Nearby, in the city outskirts, a troll is arguing with a fish merchant for some reason. Night falls in two hours. After that's done, discuss what you will and I'll join in. I have a point to make here, obviously, but I want at least a couple responses to cite as examples before I bring it up. Go!
Comus 06-14-07, 02:24 PM	Alright. I'll take the bait and see where you're going with this... Character: Bludbayn Vaughn Doum, Paladin. In short, the kind of guy who knows that Good doesn't have to mean Nice. He makes snap decisions and follows through with violence - he thinks a decent decision now is far better than the perfect decision when it's too late. Think Judge Dredd. What I'd do (assuming I am not currently on a quest, and am thus free to fall into routine): As with all of my characters, priority one would be securing lodging. I'd try the local temples first and see if they'd be willing to put me up for the night, and also to let them know I'm in town and am available to help them with any problems they might be having.
Emjaysmash 06-14-07, 03:46 PM	Character: Udi Cherik-Rogue-Kender-acts like an 8 year old. Exremely Curious, and annoying. Udi moves though town, steals an apple, and goes to eavesdrop on the Troll and Fish merchant.
RealSorceror 06-14-07, 04:08 PM	Character: Ojike the Rat Lord, Nezumi Urban-Druid. Enjoys people watching, and collecting secrets and information to sell for moneys. I'd scitter about, checking the back alleys, sewers, and ghettos for anything of interest: crime syndicates, hidden cults, a discarded bagel (people throw away the tastiest things), and normal local gossip. Around 1:00am, assuming nothing caught my attention, I'd find someplace nice to sleep (well, nice for a giant rat).
Pyro_Azer 06-14-07, 04:18 PM	charecter: Rissonat the elf rouge. Specializes in doing jobs that require arson. C-N and acts like it. Walk into the tavern and try and bluff the barkeep into giving me a free meal and free lodging. The make sure i am fully stocked on arson supplies (flasks oil, alc. fires, ect.) Might try and sleight of hand the merchants coin purse away.:D (oh and Rissonat= anagram for Arsonist)
Zaver 06-14-07, 04:30 PM	Galen: Half-elf fighter NG. Very naive and positive he can defeat evil in the world. Thinks adventuring is just like what the bards sing about. I'd find an inn, take a bath order some good food and boast about what I've done on the road.
RealSorceror 06-14-07, 04:34 PM	We have a Paly, two Rogues, a Druid, and a Fighter. Wheres our mage? :D
Sunic_Flames 06-14-07, 05:18 PM	We have a Paly, two Rogues, a Druid, and a Fighter. Wheres our mage? :D Sure, why not? Jikar - male LN human wizard. Mostly a good guy but doesn't suffer fools at all. Harsh but fair, and good with his words (for a wizard). I'd find any other respectable wizards in town and talk shop, trade knowledge, and so forth. Perhaps something more if the other is female, attractive, and willing.
Pyro_Azer 06-14-07, 05:30 PM	A cleric would be good about now.
AAB 06-14-07, 05:41 PM	Ulric Stonehead - LG dwarf cleric- gruff and grumpy, the way dwarves ought to be. believes that nuttin's right unless a dwarf did it first. Ulric would try to find a local temple to the dwarven deities. failing that he'd check the blacksmith and alehouses. he'd get all blustery and demand to know why those strong young dwarven lads hadn't dealt with the "monster problem" already.
DrMorganes 06-14-07, 05:45 PM	Roofshadow, human rogue, Chaotic Neutral with Good tendencies. She's out for herself first, her purse second, and most others a distant third. However, her conscience has a tendency to get in the way of perfect selfishness - particularly where downtrodden women and children are concerned. After four days on the road, with night two hours away, Roofshadow pauses to listen to the merchant's argument with the troll. (Listen Check is made, perhaps a Sense Motive Check as well) After all, it's not every day one sees a troll take the time to argue with anyone, let along someone possessing food. If the argument fails to pique her interest, she makes for the nearest inn, secures her room, and calls for a bath, a board of bread, cheese, and fruit, and a bottle of wine. If there appears to be an opportunity for profit in interfering, Roofshadow approaches the pair. She's prepared to side with the merchant; odds are - for good or ill - he has more coin than the troll. Better odds are he'd be willing to part with it in exchange for ... protection. Side note: the DM's style will have a large impact on the selection. Some DMs don't include unrelated encounters. As such, the oddity of the troll/merchant situation would be a flag for a plot hook. If the DM is more freeform - as I'm assuming with my post above - than I give him options. If the Listen Check fails, Roofy's not interested and moves on to rid herself of the road grime. If the check succeeds, we may have an encounter on our hands... or at least a hook for an encounter down the road.
Ved 06-14-07, 05:49 PM	Nice turnout! I should visit here more often. This is plenty of examples, but keep 'em coming. Fortunately, most of you went for a reaction that's consistent with my theory. I could very well have just been completely wrong, I don't have half as much experience in D&D as most the people who probably responded. :P Strap yourself in and hold on tight, 'cause here comes the tirade! A few characters went rooting around for plot hooks in temples and back alleys, and a couple were content to fool around in taverns and whatnot. Only one actually set out with a specific goal in mind, something that didn't have a direct relation to the material presented. Rissonat may not be the most stable individual, but hey, you have to hand it to the guy; he knows what he wants. And because of that the party has some direction, blatantly destructive though it may be. But that's just one goal, and it doesn't get much done. Burnin' stuff to the ground is certainly enjoyable now and then, but eventually at least one person is going to want to do something else. What I want to see, is a character who has situational and arbitrary goals. Maybe after coming to Cireneg, Bludbayn notes a gap in wealth. Some citizens live in hideous poverty, while the King is wealthy beyond belief. Being a Paragon of Justice, he promptly decides the proper course of action is taking the matter straight to the top. Naturally, the king isn't going to like that. So Vaughn Doum goes at the problem from a different route. If reason isn't going to work, more drastic measures must be taken. And just like that, you have a plot. A really good plot, if I do say so myself! It's a complex problem, with a number of solutions limited only by the imagination of all those involved and the setting in which it occurs. Perhaps to equalize Cireneg, you could simply usurp the throne and put down new law. Simplest route, but it requires some serious muscle. Where are you going to get that kind of power? Why, from the neighboring troll village, of course, where the party can attempt to rally military support and overthrow the kingdom with a trollish army. That will require befriending the trolls, and that's another plot in and of itself. So ask yourself this. Would you rather your DM makes a big show of the gap between nobles and peasants so you'll know he wants you to do something about it, or would you rather one of your friends fabricates that problem and asks for your help in rectifying the situation? Would you rather a wandering elderly man in brown robes mentions the troll village to the south as a possible source of allies, or would you rather do the legwork yourself by looking at a map of the area and decide that's the place to go for what you need? I'll tell you this right now, one style is a lot easier for me to DM. Edit: There were like five posts made while I was writing this monster, gimme a second to read 'em. :P Edit more: Whew! My idea is not yet undermined. Continue!
Comus 06-14-07, 06:12 PM	Here's the problem - no matter what, the DM is still setting up a plot hook. There's a troll village on the map? It's because the DM put it there. There's a disparity between the wealthy and the poor? The DM decided that's how the society works. The players go out looking for monsters to hunt? The DM puts the darned monsters there, too! As a DM and a player, I don't think it's really possible for a player to do more than one of two things - look for a plot hook or react to the situation they're in. Looking for a plot hook is the only active role they can take, because unlike the real world, the DM ultimately decides everything that happens and the motivations, actions, and existence of every living thing in the world. The closest the characters can come to being active is to suggest things to the DM, or to have a hand in creating the world themselves, or to have some kind of limited authority. Taking the arsonist as an example - let's say he decides he's going to go set buildings on fire for fun. That's active, right? Not really. He's hunting for a plot hook. Maybe the plot hook is really shallow, like "start a fire to draw the guard while you loot a building across town." Maybe it'll be a little deeper, like "you get caught in the act by the guard and must now escape from Alcatraz!" Perhaps it'll even end up being a really deep plot hook he's found, like "corpses of inhuman things are found in the rubble, and a network of tunnels is uncovered in the basement by people at the scene. The authorities of the city claim nothing unusual is going on and are covering up the truth. What connection do they have to this menace, and how many other covens of unhuman beasts are living in the city?" Really, can anyone provide an example of a player being truly active with their character, to the point where the DM didn't need to include plot hooks in the story?
Ved 06-14-07, 06:19 PM	I can indeed. It was an elvish sorcerer and a lizardfolk crusader, who happened upon a troll village where they had made some unsuspecting man a god-king against his will. They had him set up on a stone throne and everything. So the lizardfolk, Lorsh, decides to capitalize on the gullible trolls by disguising the elvish sorcerer as a more convincing god and shoving him out there to put that 18 charisma to work. Worked beautifully. We ended up getting the trolls to build a wagon so we could haul all their tribute (of gold and various meats) out to the nearest town. All kinds of fun. That's my one and only real example, but again, I haven't been playing long.
DrMorganes 06-14-07, 06:51 PM	I'm not sure I understand the thesis. You (the DM) have given us (your players) no plot whatsoever. We're starting out fresh, as it were, arriving in town just before dusk. You - the DM - have given us no reason to be here, no inkling of what is supposed to happen next. Fine. Each player indicates his character does something ... in character. I think a lot of DM's, myself included, dislike the methods they have to use in order to keep the plot moving. The average player seems unwilling to act on their own accord, so you must present them with something to react to. To make matters worse, they then have the audacity to complain that you aren't giving them enough freedom. You gave them freedom, and they didn't do anything with it but look for plot hooks (if Good), wander off in a random direction (if Neutral), or kill and loot everyone and everything nearby for no reason at all (if Evil). I'm not sure what you're expecting. In a purely freeform adventure, the players make the plot - but we have to know what the environment is. Telling me I've just spent four days on horseback only to arrive at the city gates a megre two hours before sunset barely gives me enough time to enter the city before the Watch closes the gates for the night and find an inn before they fill up. Honestly, after four days on the road, I want a bath and a bed! I'll pick up on adventuring on the morrow, thank ye very much. There's plenty of time for making contacts, casing shops, and setting up cons. If you were expecting me to do anything else, put me at the city gates at sunrise fresh from a good night's rest beside a cool stream. The Dungeon Master is, by definition, responsible for creating the world and providing the players with interactive elements. Expecting the players to entertain themselves makes you irrelevant at best, and lazy at worst.
Jagyr Ebonwood 06-14-07, 06:55 PM	So ask yourself this. Would you rather your DM makes a big show of the gap between nobles and peasants so you'll know he wants you to do something about it, or would you rather one of your friends fabricates that problem and asks for your help in rectifying the situation? Emphasis mine. This is exactly why things don't happen the way you would want them to. No player (I hope) is going to be presumptuous enough to walk into a city and say "Look at the huge socio-economic disparity here! I must rectify this!" when the DM has said nothing to indicate that such a thing exists. If the DM had a bit of flavor text such as "...grubby beggars line the fringes of the markets and major roads while well-to-do nobles ridind bejeweled geldings wind their way through the throng of peasants." then I'd feel justified having my character express concern over the economic state of the city, even though the DM hasn't specifically said that a problem is evident. Similarly, I wouldn't have a character set out to kill/unseat the evil despotic king until the DM gave me some reason to believe that the king was evil. The best you can hope for in this situation is to have players who know their characters really well (and you said earlier not to describe the sample PCs very much) and would ask questions of the DM about the city (and you said not to think things through) to find out about things interesting to their character. It's the DM's job to provide an environment for the PCs. The players may help to flesh out the environment by asking questions of the DM and being exploratory, but it is not the player's job to take the initiative and say "X exists here."
DrMorganes 06-14-07, 06:59 PM	I can indeed. It was an elvish sorcerer and a lizardfolk crusader, who happened upon a troll village where they had made some unsuspecting man a god-king against his will. They had him set up on a stone throne and everything. So the lizardfolk, Lorsh, decides to capitalize on the gullible trolls by disguising the elvish sorcerer as a more convincing god and shoving him out there to put that 18 charisma to work. Worked beautifully. We ended up getting the trolls to build a wagon so we could haul all their tribute (of gold and various meats) out to the nearest town. All kinds of fun. That's my one and only real example, but again, I haven't been playing long. While a wonderful piece of roleplaying, this is NOT an example of what Ved is after. The DM provided the troll village. He provided the unwilling god-king. What Ved seems to be after is the players telling the DM that the village exists, contains an unwilling man setup as a god-king, and that they're going to pull some crafty hanky-panky to make off with the loot. That's not D&D. That's sitting around telling stories. D&D is an interactive experience. Players give ideas to the DM through their character histories and actions in-game. The DM gives the players plot hooks based on those ideas, plus ideas of his own. The game breaks down when it becomes one-sided - in either direction. Granted, it's far more common for players to become passive, though in my experience they do so because their past DMs haven't engaged them to be interactive. Tossing out plot hooks isn't railroading. It's the DM's job. If you're tired of it - and believe me, EVERY DM gets tired of it occasionally - step down for a bit and let someone else have the Big Chair.
Comus 06-14-07, 07:01 PM	I can indeed. It was an elvish sorcerer and a lizardfolk crusader, who happened upon a troll village where they had made some unsuspecting man a god-king against his will. They had him set up on a stone throne and everything. This is a Plot Hook. So the lizardfolk, Lorsh, decides to capitalize on the gullible trolls by disguising the elvish sorcerer as a more convincing god and shoving him out there to put that 18 charisma to work. Worked beautifully. We ended up getting the trolls to build a wagon so we could haul all their tribute (of gold and various meats) out to the nearest town. All kinds of fun. That's my one and only real example, but again, I haven't been playing long. This is what you did with the Plot Hook. You didn't take an active role, you merely reacted to the situation.
Zankue 06-14-07, 07:11 PM	Benek Oolong CG Human Barbarian- Benek is a huge alcoholic and after being on the road for a few days his keg is nearly out of ale and his "water" skin is empty. He immediately rushes to the nearest bar and orders his keg to be filled and than challenges the sturdiest looking dwarf there to a drinking contest. Vesdroas NG Elan Shaper- Having at this point in time been in a dark forest for nearly a month Vesdroas bids farewell to the rest of the party and goes off to find the nicest inn in the city. He orders a bath and a large expensive dinner to make up for all the days he had to save rations for the party by not eating. The next day he goes out to buy magic items with his cut of the loot.
Ved 06-14-07, 07:31 PM	There we go. This is where my point falls to pieces. Allow me to explain. I have nothing against DM's providing something for the players to react to. Plot hooks are fine so long as you don't force anyone to take them, which I'm sure most don't; that would be railroading. I'm not tired of doing that as a DM, that is my job, but that isn't my only job and it isn't the job I put the most importance on. As for Comus's argument, that has a lot to do with semantics. I may think of plot hooks as a more specific thing than you do. In that case, the plot hook had nothing to do with trolls in my mind; the plot that the DM was hooking us into was rescuing the god-king, which only occurred incidentally. And where did the "players deciding that something exists" thing come up, anyway? That's not what I'm endorsing, here, I just want to see more initiative. Unlike Jagyr Ebonwood, I would love to have a presumptuous player like that so long as they had enough forethought to ask beforehand if there's any basis at all for their character's deluded conclusion. There are a lot of you ripping my idea to shreds here, now, so I apologize if I missed one of you. I see DrMorganes has taken issue with my example situation, so now might be a good time for someone to write one which better exemplifies the kind of thing we're discussing here. I can still edit the original post, right? I'll update it when someone writes a new situation. That means I get to respond this time! :D
DrMorganes 06-14-07, 07:45 PM	lol. Apologies for the vitrol, Ved. Taking an active part in the story is something every DM wants of his players. I'm not sure that your examples are clearly illustrating your point of view, however. To me, ALL of the examples given in this discussion are actively participating in the adventure. Choosing to blow your reward on ale and ladies of questionable repute is just as valid an action as trying to overthrow a tyrant. However, in the absence of input from the DM there is no reason for the player to realize the king is an evil tyrant, let alone want to depose him. Honestly, as a DM I can find a dozen plot hooks from a night at a tavern that will engage the players more readily than dropping the massive suggestion that the Lord of the City must be thrown down... As I said before, this is an interactive game. The DM is responsible for the world and how it reacts to the players. The players are responsible for giving the world a reason to react.
Comus 06-14-07, 07:58 PM	So, basically... you're saying you're really looking for the Players to do things the DM didn't expect, not for them to take a (probably impossible) role that's more active. See, here's the important thing - the players only know the world through you. If they think King X is evil, it's because you let them know King X exists and you gave them cause to think that. Even if you're running a preexisting setting, the events only occur because the DM decided the outcome. Maybe I've not gotten the real cut of your jib, though. Can you explain your idea more concisely, perhaps in a single paragraph, a single sentence if possible? I want to make sure I'm on the same page, and not attacking the back cover for it's obvious plot holes while the story itself is ignored.
Ved 06-14-07, 08:26 PM	To DrMorganes: Duly forgiven. And for the record I do agree with you, my examples could certainly be improved upon. I'd just like someone else to do the work. :P To Comus: I can try, but the WotC forums seem to put me in Verbose Mode. In broad terms I'm asking for players to try and make the game better for all involved, and suggesting one method of doing so that I happen to like. That isn't really what you're asking for, though... let's see... I like when player characters take initiative and do something without being prompted, especially if that something happens to prompt the other player characters. All I can take issue with is this: Even if you're running a preexisting setting, the events only occur because the DM decided the outcome. Phrase that better. Some outcomes, and I would like to say nearly all, are determined by player choice and die rolls with little to no decisions being made by the DM.
windscar18 06-14-07, 08:31 PM	But then, what are the consequences of those actions? Who decides them? The DM.
Ved 06-14-07, 08:34 PM	And the dice. If you think I'm suggesting the players decide the outcomes of their own actions, then I've described something horribly wrong somewhere.
Emjaysmash 06-14-07, 08:49 PM	Some outcomes, and I would like to say nearly all, are determined by player choice and die rolls with little to no decisions being made by the DM. Those decisions (soon to be outcomes) are in reaction to outcomes (prior Decisions) made by the DM. It's a bit like a chess game. One side moves, the otherside reacts, and makes a decision, and on goes the game.
Ved 06-14-07, 09:04 PM	I could easily accept that analogy. So I will. I refuse to argue any more semantics, however!
Pyro_Azer 06-14-07, 09:52 PM	sometimes not doing something is good also. Having a goal is good but at times it is also good to have no plan what so ever. I have had more fun sometimes by making random descisions at the drop of a hat than if i had a plan. Mabye players shouldn't decide the outcome but they should decide their actions.
Jagyr Ebonwood 06-14-07, 09:53 PM	And where did the "players deciding that something exists" thing come up, anyway? That's not what I'm endorsing, here, I just want to see more initiative. Unlike Jagyr Ebonwood, I would love to have a presumptuous player like that so long as they had enough forethought to ask beforehand if there's any basis at all for their character's deluded conclusion. There are a lot of you ripping my idea to shreds here, now, so I apologize if I missed one of you. 1) Not ripping to shreds. You have a valid point to argue, methinks. I'm enjoying the debate. It's what forums are for :) 2) I think we're actually on the same page, but for the semantics. a. On "players deciding something exists." I inferred this from your wording about a fellow player "fabricating the situation." I took this to mean that the player made up the situation without any input or consent from the DM. b. On having "enough forethought to ask beforehand if there's any basis" for the idea. This is exactly where we agree, I think. If the player knows that his character would respond strongly to a certain situation, and he asks the DM questions to see if the situation applies, that's wonderful. That's players making their own plot hooks. I too would love to have a player that has clear goals for his character, and looks for ways to achieve them in the game world. What I wouldn't want is a player who walks into town and says "I go straight to the local thieves' guild and ask to sign up", or "I see some thugs robbing an old lady, I give chase!" What I would like is a player who walks into town and says "I surreptitiously ask around the lower class areas of town to see if there's a thieves' guild in this city", or "Does there appear to be any suspicious looking characters in the marketplace?"
Ved 06-14-07, 09:58 PM	Did your spontaneous decisions make the game more fun for everyone, though? Plans aren't a prerequisite for what I'm talking about, but you do have to put thought into what you want out of your actions. And what you want should always be, with no exception, "fun". For me, that precludes taking the beaten path.
Ved 06-14-07, 10:15 PM	Just about missed Jagyr's post due to using threaded mode. Never again. Yes, we happily agree. I said that the character fabricated a problem, if I remember right, which means they imagined a problem that isn't there. A player fabricating a problem is quite different, and equally as unacceptable to myself. They just fabricated it in their mind, see. It isn't obviously a problem. Yeah. That's it. Edit: Nnnope. I said "one of your friends fabricates the problem". Apologies for the vagueness.
Zaver 06-14-07, 11:58 PM	The problem I've always had is that your sitting around a table being told you're in a large city what do you do. We don't see any buildings or people, we imagine them but unless the DM wants something to stick out they don't say anything about it. The playes are basically left faced with a giant unknown and expected to pull a campaign out of their hat.
AAB 06-15-07, 02:17 AM	Ulric still wants to run them orcs/trolls outta town. durned filthy creatures make it so a dwarf can't even enjoy a decent drink. not that anything in a human town can even compare to the frothy goodness of dwarven stout, but what can you do?
Dazzer 06-15-07, 03:17 AM	I believe I have a solid example of a player who ACTIVELY engaged the story. My player, who is playing a Tiefling Bard/Druid/Rogue (soon to be Fochlucan Lyrist), continuously devours all information she can get her hands on. The situation is thus, The party is on an island, where they were asked by the local druid to help find out what's wrong with this island (very big island, huge human population). The druid essentially told them, bad stuff is happening...please find out why! (DM plot hook, taken up by the players) So the party investigates and finds out that 14 families of nobles control the island, only 13 are currently active. The high priest has recently been murdered and a new one has taken his place. And the nobles all have their own goals of some such and the like and are all acting upon them. The priesthood (also nobles), seems to be the offending party here, and must be dealt with accordingly to save the island etc... (DM plot-hook, taken up by the players). The DM (me) has given each noble, 2 solid goals, and a personality, and an aligment. Also he's approximated their level and class but hasn't statted them otherwise yet. So the players ask the villagers which nobles are in town, then seek them out and ask them questions. (This was how the players thought they would find stuff out about what was wrong). One player (the bard/rogue/druid). Decided that she was going to assume that non-priest nobles, hated priest nobles. She then was going to go up to the "rated best wizard" on the island noble, GHAYLE (as his name is) and get to know him. She starts asking him more in depth questions than the normal, and makes the DM (me) have to think about more backstory for the noble. It kindof went like this. Amiriss(bard): So, your grandfather must've been a powerful wizard like yourself, I've heard your father didn't like it, so he must've taught you right? Ghayle: No, he died before I was born, but his name is spoken in many circles, I decided not to study my grandfathers area of focus and strike out on my own in terms of my research, to differentiate myself. Amiriss: You must be quite good then, having it in your bloodline. How often do you have to use your wizardly powers here on this island? Ghayle: Ahh, quite often, you'd be surprised. Especially recently. Amiriss: Oh? Why? Priests asking you to do stuff? Ghayle: No, actually I think they're trying to stop me from doing things, I've used my powers in self-defense 3-4 times in the last 2 weeks. (DM already determined this part!) Amiriss: And your family? How are they? - This is where the DM's planning has ended. Had she asked about how he was, and what he thinks, etc... I wouldof had more INSTANT answers ready, because she branched out that if he is under attack, his family is therefore also under threat, this is all new ground for the DM, but ground that is easily recoverable. - I thought, sure, he's a nice guy, he has a wife, and...3 children, A son and 2 daughters. The daughters will be Fraternal twins, and his son will be the eldest. They came under threat once. From this, I thought, perhaps the wizard dislikes being on the island where his family is constantly under threat. Also, his grandfather was a specialist conjurer, who once saved the island single-handedly, and this guy is always living in the shadow of his grandfather. So now GHAYLE wishes to leave. Back to conversation. Amiriss: Well, then you must want them to get to safety? I realize you are rich, but leaving this island would remove most of your immediate wealth and starting anew is quite difficult. How do you plan on doing this? Ghayle: I'm unsure, I haven't many resources other than political ties here, and they don't stretch to other nations... Amiriss: Well, you have your grandfathers tomes, but they aren't so many from what you make out...perhaps your grandfather has more secret...hidden tomes that you don't know about or can't get to? I could help you look for them - player taking initiative to help an NPC - I realize, that everything from this point on, from the PLAYERS perspective, must look like a plot-hook (I'm quite quick at determining whether or not things exist and where and how to get to them) But in reality, the player took an initiative that this NPC, was nice, and therefore she would help him. Then she determined from previous information (ghayles grandfather = powerful wizard), that more tomes must exist and therefore ghayle would be able to move to a country the player had been to, in which magical tomes were worth ALOT of money. Hence, he'd be able to start anew there! So, she convinced the party that this was worth doing, and then they went and searched the basement of Ghayles house (using the party's excellent searching resources to find a trap door of somekind). They found one, it led to a basement which led to a series of tests meant for Ghayle, which the party and ghayle completed together, and then at the end of it, his grandfathers ghost (also newly fabricated by myself) was there. He had his summoned pet Chaos Dragon as a final combat test of the party and Ghayle, and then let them peruse his vast research tomes and take them away. Now I realize that fabricating quick quests like this are a DM's job, but the player, forged the plot-hook in this case. Instead of the plot-hook existing, and then the player chasing it. The player instead inserted a possible plot-hook in the DM's mind, and the DM decided that yes, this plot-hook is a good one, and he can very easily fabricate a side-quest around it, and therefore it exists and Ghayle will be compliant etc.... I'm not sure if this is what you mean, but I hope it is!
DrMorganes 06-15-07, 08:36 AM	See - this is exactly what I'm talking about! When the players are encouraged to be engaged in the DM's story, fun things happen if the DM is willing and able to adapt his story to take advantage of the players' ideas.
Sunic_Flames 06-15-07, 08:55 AM	OOC: A little lost here... unless I majorly missed something every character either went to seek out information in their own way, Jikar for example believed wizard = smart = knowledgable so that's where he looked, or failing this went and did the other natural thing given the time and conditions, got some rest so they could take care of that the next morning once sufficently refreshed. And the problem is... we didn't make up our own plot hook? :confused:
Jagyr Ebonwood 06-15-07, 10:09 AM	Edit: Nnnope. I said "one of your friends fabricates the problem". Apologies for the vagueness. Quite all right. :) Dazzer: This is exactly what I was looking for. The player didn't assume anything, but saw a possibility for a hook, and investigated to see if it existed. The DM gave the player enough information to work with to get ideas, and then collaborated to bring those ideas into the actual plot. The DM wasn't forced to create hooks to shove down his idle players' throats, and the players weren't forced to start making stuff up to fill in huge blanks left by the DM.
Jagyr Ebonwood 06-15-07, 10:17 AM	OOC: A little lost here... unless I majorly missed something every character either went to seek out information in their own way, Jikar for example believed wizard = smart = knowledgable so that's where he looked, or failing this went and did the other natural thing given the time and conditions, got some rest so they could take care of that the next morning once sufficently refreshed. And the problem is... we didn't make up our own plot hook? :confused: Yeah. The difference can be seen below: Response 1: "I go to the local libraries and find a wizard, and do research, because my character likes knowledge." Response 2: "I go to the local libraries to research, and seek out an experienced wizard, to research a way to enter the Plane of Shadow, because I need to gather undiluted Shadow Essence to try a new magical experiment with." In Response 1, you're giving the DM chances to give you plot hooks...he still has to come up with something and feed it to you, basically. In Response 2, you've pretty much created your own quest. The DM just has to roll with it.
moriarty13 06-15-07, 11:08 AM	I think I see what the point of this thread is, but I have to disagree somewhat with the idea that railroading is inherently bad. Having the players come up with their own goals and direction is probably not always going to work that well. If you have a group of 4 players and present them with a city and no guidance or "hooks", they may very well end up each going off and doing their own thing. And a plot hook isn't necessarily bad. If the group is in a city, there may be a hundred minor things going on. But if there is an evil vampire lord living in the sewers because the DM put it there, then that's a story. Plus, as a DM who often makes things up as I go along, having the players come up with their own goals on the fly makes for a worse game 90% of the time. The DM has nothing prepared, which slows things down a lot. I would suspect that VERY few DMs are capable of continually running a free-form game well.
Phrennzy 06-15-07, 11:12 AM	Mordian Sethanos - half drow Wizard Gimli Ironhand - dwarf Fighter Ira Sorenson - half elf Wizard/Fighter Peter Morningstar - human paladin All have been travelling for the last few weeks as a group, and arrive in town. Mordian: I seek out the most powerful wizard abode or guild - I am curious about gathering information about the Plane of Shadow for the creation of magic items. Gimli: I look for a Blacksmith - I hope its a dwarf - for repairing my armor and gathering information on the closest nest of orcs or trolls that I can clean out. Ira: I go to the inn and take a bath, then I quietly inquire with any scummy sources about how to contact the local theives/assassins guild. I want to hire an assassin to take out Lord Squaamish for insulting me at that party a week ago. Peter: I head straight to the church of Pelor and speak with the head priest. I want to pull together a group of clerics and holy fighters to go back and clear out the rest of that undead ridden graveyard we past three days ago. As a DM, I would not be overly thrilled with this turn of events simply because it is effectively splitting the party to the four winds. Each PC has defined their actions & goals, and each would make a good plot and game, but they don't work together. Who do you put off? I can see tying in certain aspects of each plot with each other, but after a bit the tie ins seem forced and ridiculously conincidental: There is a portal to the plane of shadows in the lowest level of a catacomb in the graveyard. This area is infested with ravenous undead. The energy of the portal has also spurred the growth of Deathshade plants, which the assassin would like to use as the poison but is unable to harvest them because the mausoleum they grow around is also the lair of a large group of trolls. The trolls feast on the Deathshade because of the euphoric effect it gives them. I've just tied in all 4 plots - and it took me about 10 minutes of thinking/typing. But it just doesn't ring true. Think of how this would play out: The group meets at an inn the next day: Mordian: I have to go to the graveyard we passes a couple of days ago. Gimli: Really? Me too! Ira: Really? Me too! Peter: Really? Me too! Mordian: :confused: I'm going there for a planar portal. Gimli: I'm going because there are a bunch of trolls. Ira: Yeah, they eat a flower I need to harvest. Peter: I'm going to put the smackdown on some undead. Mordian: Doesn't it seem a bit coincidental that the portal I need and the plant Ira needs are in the same area as trolls and undead, which just so happen to be the monsters that Gimli and Peter wish to face? As a group: Yes. There must be some hidden mastermind behind it all.
CCS 06-15-07, 12:04 PM	First things first, please make a throwaway character described in at least two sentences. Don't give us a biography, we don't have all day. :D React, using that character, to the following situation. Again, you don't have to be detailed with it and you don't have to think things through, just do whatever you would do as a player in such circumstances. You and your compatriots arrive in the city of Cireneg after four days travel on horseback. Everything you can expect to find here is here, from a tavern, to the Cireneg Kingdom castle. The burstling populace goes about their daily lives, primarily composed of humans, halflings, and orcs. Nearby, in the city outskirts, a troll is arguing with a fish merchant for some reason. Night falls in two hours. Go! OK. Hmmm, 4 days travel by horseback - plus sleeping on the ground in a bedroll, & eating trail rations, and maybe fending off wandering monsters, etc.... Despite casting prestditigiation (sp?)x2 (clean & smell better effect) on myself just prior to approaching the gates, I'm sure I'm not at my Bardic best.... So once inside I either use my various knowledge skills to locate a quality inn or I simply ask around starting with the gate guards. I go there; get a room, get a hot bath and then proper food/drink. Depending upon where I've ended up I might also give a free perfomance. Somewhere during the food/drink/possible performance step I'll have begun to aquire local info & casually flirted with any available women (especially the serving wenchs/barmaids). This is (ussually) followed by getting a good nights rest. In our current canpaign that's my bards standard M/O.
CCS 06-15-07, 12:57 PM	Nice turnout! I should visit here more often. This is plenty of examples, but keep 'em coming. Fortunately, most of you went for a reaction that's consistent with my theory. I could very well have just been completely wrong, I don't have half as much experience in D&D as most the people who probably responded. :P Strap yourself in and hold on tight, 'cause here comes the tirade! A few characters went rooting around for plot hooks in temples and back alleys, and a couple were content to fool around in taverns and whatnot. Only one actually set out with a specific goal in mind, something that didn't have a direct relation to the material presented. Rissonat may not be the most stable individual, but hey, you have to hand it to the guy; he knows what he wants. And because of that the party has some direction, blatantly destructive though it may be. But that's just one goal, and it doesn't get much done. Burnin' stuff to the ground is certainly enjoyable now and then, but eventually at least one person is going to want to do something else. What I want to see, is a character who has situational and arbitrary goals. Maybe after coming to Cireneg, Bludbayn notes a gap in wealth. Some citizens live in hideous poverty, while the King is wealthy beyond belief. Being a Paragon of Justice, he promptly decides the proper course of action is taking the matter straight to the top. Naturally, the king isn't going to like that. So Vaughn Doum goes at the problem from a different route. If reason isn't going to work, more drastic measures must be taken. And just like that, you have a plot. A really good plot, if I do say so myself! It's a complex problem, with a number of solutions limited only by the imagination of all those involved and the setting in which it occurs. Perhaps to equalize Cireneg, you could simply usurp the throne and put down new law. Simplest route, but it requires some serious muscle. Where are you going to get that kind of power? Why, from the neighboring troll village, of course, where the party can attempt to rally military support and overthrow the kingdom with a trollish army. That will require befriending the trolls, and that's another plot in and of itself. So ask yourself this. Would you rather your DM makes a big show of the gap between nobles and peasants so you'll know he wants you to do something about it, or would you rather one of your friends fabricates that problem and asks for your help in rectifying the situation? Would you rather a wandering elderly man in brown robes mentions the troll village to the south as a possible source of allies, or would you rather do the legwork yourself by looking at a map of the area and decide that's the place to go for what you need? I'll tell you this right now, one style is a lot easier for me to DM. Edit: There were like five posts made while I was writing this monster, gimme a second to read 'em. :P Edit more: Whew! My idea is not yet undermined. Continue! Give me a break. All you told me was that I'd been traveling by horse back for four days to reach this place, that it has everything in it, and that I arrive 2 hours before nightfall. But you didn't say anything about WHY it's my destination & I know nothing of your campaign. Yes, I caught that it's obviously an important place due to having the Kingdoms central castle contained in it.... And I'm assuming that I've come here for a reason. But I'm also assuming (because of that lack of background info) that my reason for being here isn't one of immediate Must-Act-RIGHT Now import. So there's a wealth disparity in the kingdom. So there's God knows how many other things potentially floating around to get involved in....Guess what? They (or something else) will still be there in the morning - after I've gotten cleaned up, had a good meal, begun learning the local info, & have swayed a few minor NPCs reactions more in my favour - even if it just gets my beer-stien refilled faster. Oh, and if this were happening in the campaign I'm currently in? Assuming we didn't have (or encounter) any pressing bussiness, you'd be looking at about a months worth of almost pure RP sessions out of my group as we tried to explore your city. Unless we began as natives of this city....Then it'd be a bit shorter as we'd already know about random monument #12, could go directly to the most choice Inn, and would have a fair idea of where to find things etc etc etc. We'd play this way for several reasons: 1) We have a RP/social heavy group. 2) We'd be curious to see how detailed you made your city. 3) We like watching the DM squirm/adlib whenever we sense that we've deviated from what he thinks the plot is. (he's catching on through) But we'd have still started off at a quality Inn.
Ved 06-15-07, 02:31 PM	moriarty13 and Phrennzy: That would be a poor turn of events, if every single player immediately decided to go out and do their own thing at the same time. They shouldn't do that, and more importantly they know they shouldn't do that. If they want to play together they should have the common sense to keep their characters together, and may RP their way into that situation accordingly. That's strictly a player-made and player-solved problem.
Ved 06-15-07, 02:44 PM	CCS: Okay. Breathe, man. Breathe. This is why I asked for a "throwaway" character, so no one would be bothered later on when I knew I'd basically be attacking all of them. Don't let my ill thought out presentation aggravate you. Move on. Specifically, move on to talking about the utility of player characters being proactive. And yet cooperative! Co-DM's, in a way, except they don't handle the ultimate decisions of what's where and who's who. They just look for specific things, things which they know will lead to a plot they'll be interested in.
Dazzer 06-15-07, 03:13 PM	This is a character from a game that kindof crashed 6 sessions in. Ikael Dolvich, Human Paladin 3, Lawful Good Feats: Skill Focus Diplomacy, Negotiator, Sub-dual Strike (non-exalted) Upon seeing the town, he smiles at the thought of a warm bath and the ability to take off his breastplate in a place where it will be cleaned once he does. However there is something important to do first. Ikael will actively seek to join the argument between the Troll and the Fisherman and diffuse it. This is due to the fact that a Troll (large sized) can easily pound the fishman, and likely Ikael, into dust. Once the argument is swayed towards them both disliking Ikael for interfering, he will then talk them into an agreement over whatever it is they are arguing about. Then he will go to see what major religions are accepted in this town. Ikael originally worshipped Dol Arrah, so he will look for a deity of that nature (LG likes chit-chat over arms drawing). If he cannot find one, he goes to a nice tavern, pays to have his stuff cleaned, pays for a bath (alone!), and tips genorously. The next day Ikael knowing nothing of how this city works, will talk to the priests inside the largest and most popular temple to find out the lay of the land. This is how I would play my character given that above situation. The more details, the more detailed I would be. If the party or a member of the party needed help performing their desired action, Ikael would normally agree and help them instead (with the exception of the troll situation, that had one desired ending from Ikael). For instance, if the Rogue wished to find out about the local thieves guild, and asked for Ikaels help, he would gladly help. Thieves are normally chaotic, not evil, so Ikael dislikes their practices, and they would not show him what they do if they were sane, so although he knows they break the law, he cannot prove it and thus would do nothing about them unless other information came up (they steal from orphanages?!).
Phrennzy 06-15-07, 04:51 PM	moriarty13 and Phrennzy: That would be a poor turn of events, if every single player immediately decided to go out and do their own thing at the same time. They shouldn't do that, and more importantly they know they shouldn't do that. If they want to play together they should have the common sense to keep their characters together, and may RP their way into that situation accordingly. That's strictly a player-made and player-solved problem. So the whole group should decide as one to do something without any real input from the DM? I see that as the pendulum having swung too far from the railroad. Its the DM's job to provide plot hooks. It is the Player job to work with the DM during background writing to develop plothooks. It is the Player's job to be open to accepting plot hooks.
Ved 06-15-07, 05:09 PM	That's my point, though. Why do the players need input from the DM? Their characters should be able to function as a group without meta-game interference, and that cuts the DM right out of the equation unless they happen to have a persistent NPC. I hate persistent NPC's, for the record. If you ask me, the pendulum hasn't swung too far from the railroad until the DM stops presenting plot hooks entirely. It's okay with me if no one ever takes a plot hook, so long as they're there. And let me put extra emphasis on the fact this is how I prefer my D&D, and only a suggestion for anyone reading this. If it sounds good, make it happen.
Comus 06-15-07, 05:45 PM	That's my point, though. Why do the players need input from the DM? Their characters should be able to function as a group without meta-game interference, and that cuts the DM right out of the equation unless they happen to have a persistent NPC. *blinks* Why do they need input from the DM? So they know what's going on in the world! Deciding to pick the lock on a door is a player decision, but it's made in the context of knowing several things. First, that there's a door. Second, that it has a lock. Third, that it is locked. All of those things come from the DM. The players also need input like "You see a town guard come around the corner" and "You hear glass breaking in the distance". Now, what I think you're really arguing for is the players having characters that have goals and desires beyond "follow the plot like a dog on a leash". If so, then... then you probably should be arguing the point from the Characterization direction, and not from the DM/Player standpoint.
Ack 06-15-07, 06:49 PM	In any good roleplaying game, as in real life, you are faced with a series of options. Some are just more beneficial and/or attractive than others. You: "Hmm.. weekend. I might go and see that new movie that's just come out ... and don't forget the game at Joe's in the afternoon. So if I go to the cinema at midday, I can still get to Joe's in time." Your character: "Ahhh... town. Right, where can I get a bed, a bath and a good meal - not necessarily in that order? Better make sure the stables are good quality too; Thunderhoof picked up a nasty foot infection in that last dive I stayed at." <checks coin pouch> "Ugh, getting low on gold. Hm ... I could see if they're taking hires for manual labour around the place. I saw them fixing the road on the way into town; that could be good for a few coins. Or maybe I can get in on a game of dice in the tavern; I'm pretty lucky with the bones. Might see if they've got a Mercenary's Guild hall here in town..." In the 'character' example, the character is just going over what he knows he needs to do. A good GM can drop in a plot device in just about anything he decides to do - so long as he decides to do something. The character could hear interesting rumours among the road workers, or he might get in a fight with some crooked gamblers (loaded dice, anyone?) and end up thrown in a cell with some unsavoury characters. Heck, maybe the hoof infection will flare up again and he won't be able to pay the veterinarian for the potion needed to cure it once and for all, so he'll get referred to someone else who needs something done. I prefer to lay out the world for the players, and let it react to what they want to do. Sooner or later, they'll trigger a plot :P
Ved 06-15-07, 06:52 PM	Comus: I don't mean input like "a description of what's going on". Give me some credit, I don't completely lack common sense! I'm referring to what Phrennzy said, with players deciding to do something of their own accord. They usually have to act on something the DM mentioned, but they can extrapolate. There's a town with a temple. They can ask if there's a blacksmith in the town instead of going to the temple. At least, I got the idea that's what Phrennzy took issue with. But yes, Comus. The thing is, characterization is something the players do, and it's up to them to make a character that does what they want. I'm not saying players should personally suggest to the DM a certain plot hook, I'm saying characters should go looking for a certain plot hooks that serves their own imagined purposes. I think you know exactly what I'm talking about, but you're trying to make me clarify and I'm not doing a great job of it. If you try clarifying it yourself, working under the assumption that we agree on a good way for players to behave, I might be able to communicate with you more meaningfully. Right now we're in a one-way argument, and it isn't going anywhere. :P
Ved 06-15-07, 06:55 PM	I think Ack and I see eye-to-eye. Characters who engage in abstract thought (all players do, being sapient creatures) are a resource to be nurtured and cherished.
UltimateReality 06-15-07, 08:41 PM	I'm saying characters should go looking for a certain plot hooks that serves their own imagined purposes.Wait...are you saying characters should have in-game goals that they pursue?
Ved 06-15-07, 09:34 PM	Yes. And they should help each other with said goals! And make a lot more goals as time goes on! Little goals, big goals, petty goals, grand goals. I like all kinds of goals. All kinds of goals!
Comus 06-15-07, 10:28 PM	Okay. I think I am on the same page as you. Basically, there are some characters that have absolutely no motivations of their own. Instead of playing a character in a world, they're just playing a game, and giving the PC as much characterization as a Monopoly piece. It is, obviously, tiresome to be a DM of such a character. It's just grinding, then, and probably makes little difference between a carefully prepared plot and a couple random encounters. On the other hand, characters that do more than just wait for the next stop on the plot train, who have actual goals and look for the plot hooks the DM (hopefully) set up for them are a lot easier, as you don't have to resort to having the mountain come to Mohammad. Or at least that's the rumor.
UltimateReality 06-15-07, 11:06 PM	Yes. And they should help each other with said goals! And make a lot more goals as time goes on! Little goals, big goals, petty goals, grand goals. I like all kinds of goals. All kinds of goals!Ooooooh! Okay, I get you now! I agree completely. Big Shiny Goals are awesome. :)
On_the_wings_of_TPK 06-16-07, 02:11 AM	The things is most characters will have some kind of a goal or something they are going to pursue. Every single character that replied to your thread was presueing some kind of goal. And they were also actively looking for the plot. Be it contact in the alley, or over hearing a rummour in the tavern. heck the on guy who tried to bluff the in keeper out of a free meal. The inn keeper could have exchanged the meal for taking care of the rat problem in his basement. Which leads to an underground complex (read your dungeon) which is in habited by a beholder (The BBEG). Fact is that the PCs are always going to be looking to the DM to feed them hook untill the dinamic of the player DM roles is changed. So lets say that my character is a wizard, and has the goal of setting up a guild somewhere. In your above example I'd tell you that I'd seek out the local wizards guild. Hoping to actually not find one so as I could open a chapter house for my guild here. However if you were change the basic roles of DM player so that players are more responsible for their own hooks you may end up seeing more of what you want. For example when the rogues enter the bar. You could say that they recognize someone form their past, and then proceed to have uncle Stan deliver the plot hook, or you could say something like, "Sitting in the corner you recognize someone from your past. Who is he, and what does he want?" For your earlier example you could say as your riding through town you notice something odd about the populace of your town. What is it? The thing with this is that you have to be able to roll with whatever the players come up with. So lets say one of the rogues responds that the person in the bar is her little brother, and he is in trouble with the local mob. Or perhaps he is her estranged lover stalking her. Or maybe he is an old business associate in need of her serves again. Same goes for you poor populace example. One of the PCs may respond that they look horribly poor. Or they may respond that all the people have a vacant stare about then and radiant a strong aura of necromancy on the detect magic spell. Either way your players just handed you their next adventure.
Thecolorblue 06-16-07, 04:39 AM	The problem is that the act of describing a place is done with metagame knowledge. It doesn't matter what it is, if the GM is describing it, then it must be important to the characters. Most people see this as a plot hook. "As you near the wall, you see that it is made with smooth grey stone. The large double doors through the wall are swung wide, but you can see they have been recently mended. The guards look over your armed and armored party as you walk through the gates, but let you through without a word. All along the street are large and fancy houses and inns, and yet the street is lined with beggars, some missing arms or legs or eyes. The large majority of the beggars have a blue ribbon tied around their upper arm, if they still have one. At the square ahead where the road splits off into 3 branches, a man is standing on the base of a statue shouting to the passing crowds. From where you are, all you can hear is what sounds like rants of impending doom. What do you do?" Now, any player would reason that my made up description means that there was recently a battle or seige on this city. They would probably assume that the beggars are veterans who for some reason didn't get pensions or pay for being injured during battle. Plot hook! What would you do right away? I'd expect you to go up to the man speaking and listen to some of what he has to say. Plot hook! Even if you didn't listen to him, the DM put in that phrase of "impending doom" which is a huge Plot Hook! or at least foreshadowing. Plus, the GM didn't even describe the statue. So we know it has nothing to do with the adventure. Anyway, what if nothing of that is important to the campaign? Absolutly nothing of what the GM described is railroaded into the next adventure. The characters go to the inn, find their contact, and leave town even before nightfall. But does that make sence? If the GM wanted to add flavor with a doomsayer, he could have put the guy on the other side of town. A player wandering around would have found him, but he wasn't shoved in their face. However, at the same time, you can't expect a player to go wander town looking for interesting things if all they hear upon entering is "This town is about medium sized, and there is crowds of people walking the streets". Nothing to go on. The player naturally assumes there is nothing interesting going on, and does his business with whatever quest he's on at the moment then leaves. Now, let me talk about the other side of the coin. Its all fine and dandy if the GM describes everything in great detail, but what about what the players think about it? Players are going to naturally ask questions about what they see. Someone might ask about the statue, and the GM will have to describe it. A player could ask if there are obviously wealthy people on the streets. A player could ask if the people are largely ignoring the beggars or if they seem to be handing out money. All of these are very good questions. They expand on what the GM has described, and gives him ideas of what the players are interested in. But he ultimately decides if he will turn any of their questions into a plot hook. That is my entire point in this long post. The players interacts with the GM, but it is ultimately up to the GM to create and hand out plot hooks. It doesn't matter how much a player pesters an npc, if the GM decides the npc has nothing that needs doing then that is the end to it. You can spend an entire evening talking to an npc and not get a single plot hook out of them if the GM doesn't want to give you one. However, I want to state again that players who attempt to push the story along by asking piercing questions are the best kind. Otherwise, its just the GM reading the players a story.
Sunic_Flames 06-16-07, 09:16 AM	Yeah. The difference can be seen below: Response 1: "I go to the local libraries and find a wizard, and do research, because my character likes knowledge." Response 2: "I go to the local libraries to research, and seek out an experienced wizard, to research a way to enter the Plane of Shadow, because I need to gather undiluted Shadow Essence to try a new magical experiment with." In Response 1, you're giving the DM chances to give you plot hooks...he still has to come up with something and feed it to you, basically. In Response 2, you've pretty much created your own quest. The DM just has to roll with it. Perhaps, but the latter approach is a bit heavy on the assumptions. Not too much so, but I feel like I'm overstepping my bounds as a player and this feeling probably isn't limited to me. Also, circumstances led to my finding one reason where railroading is necessary to make anything happen. For example, playing a Star Wars d20 game, without being familar with the Star Wars universe or ever having played anything remotely like this (futuristic games). This is a true story from me as a player. So what pretty much happens is, the DM has to lead me by the nose, because I am so nearsighted due to me not having any plausible idea of what I can do in this world so that I can't just randomly go do stuff. This is not a pro railroad thing, actually not liking it that much because I'm so hopelessly lost, just that if this were not done, nothing would be happening at all.
Ved 06-16-07, 11:27 AM	Okay. I think I am on the same page as you. Basically, there are some characters that have absolutely no motivations of their own. Instead of playing a character in a world, they're just playing a game, and giving the PC as much characterization as a Monopoly piece. It is, obviously, tiresome to be a DM of such a character. It's just grinding, then, and probably makes little difference between a carefully prepared plot and a couple random encounters. On the other hand, characters that do more than just wait for the next stop on the plot train, who have actual goals and look for the plot hooks the DM (hopefully) set up for them are a lot easier, as you don't have to resort to having the mountain come to Mohammad. Or at least that's the rumor. Yes! I absolutely agree with you right up until around the word "hopefully". That's where our thinking begins to diverge, but let me be honest: I had to think twice about the example you first gave in order to realize it wasn't The Thing I'm After, just because it was so unusually considerate of the DM in a whole other way. I think where we're hitting a snag is that you are, or prefer the Prepared DM, whereas I am, and prefer the Dynamic DM. A character asking around town for the location of a graceyard is far less preferable to a Prepared DM than a character asking around town for "happenings", whereas it's just the opposite for a Dynamic DM. Ideally you want a DM who does a bit of both, and I think most do, but I lean more toward one side and I think you lean more toward the other. So in the end, here's what I say differently: On the other hand, characters that do more than just wait for the next stop on the plot train, who have actual goals and seek out what they need to accomplish them, are a lot easier because they've already done the basic work of where to go next and all you have to do is add an element of uncertainty (Oh it's a graveyard, alright... but it's covered in bees! The guy who gave you directions set you up!).
Ved 06-16-07, 11:35 AM	The things is most characters will have some kind of a goal or something they are going to pursue. Every single character that replied to your thread was presueing some kind of goal. And they were also actively looking for the plot. Be it contact in the alley, or over hearing a rummour in the tavern. heck the on guy who tried to bluff the in keeper out of a free meal. The inn keeper could have exchanged the meal for taking care of the rat problem in his basement. Which leads to an underground complex (read your dungeon) which is in habited by a beholder (The BBEG). Fact is that the PCs are always going to be looking to the DM to feed them hook untill the dinamic of the player DM roles is changed. So lets say that my character is a wizard, and has the goal of setting up a guild somewhere. In your above example I'd tell you that I'd seek out the local wizards guild. Hoping to actually not find one so as I could open a chapter house for my guild here. However if you were change the basic roles of DM player so that players are more responsible for their own hooks you may end up seeing more of what you want. For example when the rogues enter the bar. You could say that they recognize someone form their past, and then proceed to have uncle Stan deliver the plot hook, or you could say something like, "Sitting in the corner you recognize someone from your past. Who is he, and what does he want?" For your earlier example you could say as your riding through town you notice something odd about the populace of your town. What is it? The thing with this is that you have to be able to roll with whatever the players come up with. So lets say one of the rogues responds that the person in the bar is her little brother, and he is in trouble with the local mob. Or perhaps he is her estranged lover stalking her. Or maybe he is an old business associate in need of her serves again. Same goes for you poor populace example. One of the PCs may respond that they look horribly poor. Or they may respond that all the people have a vacant stare about then and radiant a strong aura of necromancy on the detect magic spell. Either way your players just handed you their next adventure. I'm not saying this is a bad idea, but it isn't what I have in mind. In that situation, the players are collaborating with the DM to create the environment. Comus was right to say this is more a matter of characterization; I'm an avid roleplayer, and I feel roleplaying can play a much bigger role in D&D than it usually does (which is, really, quite big to begin with). I don't want a player to decide who the person is they're talking to, I want a character to decide who the person is they want to talk to and then look for them. Chances are, there won't be a wizened monk who can tell you where your life has gone wrong in this particular area, but it shouldn't be too hard to get some rumors about where such a monk might be found.
Ved 06-16-07, 11:42 AM	Thecolorblue: I think you're the first person who completely and legitimately disagrees with my idea on a fundamental level. You, as a player, want to do whatever the DM wants you to do because you know that will be the most detailed and rewarding experience. I, as a player, prefer to sacrifice detail in favor of easing the DM's burden and gaining more control over where the story goes in the process. Neither method is inherently "better", obviously, but some DM's will be more comfortable with one than another. I encourage talking to them about it, and even if you're the DM I encourage talking about it with your players. There is something valuable to be learned from both sides, even if you don't take either to the farthest extreme, and you can only learn what that is when you know what the people you're playing with like.
Dracomortis 06-16-07, 12:11 PM	Well, don't know if you still want these, but... Ferris Doomshadow, N male hellbred truenamer. Although well-spoken and knowledgeable in a wide range of fields, Ferris rarely speaks and tends to get straight to the point when he does. Still haunted by the sins of his past that have led to his existence as a hellbred - of which he has only faint memories - Ferris seeks a way to escape the damnation that awaits him upon his death. Constantly hounded by devils, Ferris keeps few companions and remains constantly on the move. "It was dusk as I entered the city, and I took a look around to get a feel for the people. Humans, mostly, with a fair share of halflings and orcs mixed in. Odd for a city as large as this to contain so many orcs, generally savage and untamed in nature, but it is located quite far from most civilization, I suppose. Not that I'll be staying here long enough for it to matter, anyway." First, I would head to the local library and research any notable heroes or figures of importance in the immediate area, specifically those still living. Of course, if at all possible I would be interested in any tomes dealing with truenames, although past experience has taught me that unfortunately such volumes are exceedingly rare in public institutions. If the librarians seem to be at least somewhat helpful, I may inquire about such tomes, but if they show confusion or otherwise don't seem to know of what I speak I quickly lose patience and set off on my own research yet again. I am driven by a quest to find as many truenames as I can - or, more specifically, those of devils. After my transformation into a hellbred, the angel responsible was cast out of Celestia for going against his superior's orders and aiding me. Thus, abandoned by heaven and marked by hell, my fate seems certain. However, after some initial research into the realm of devils, I have learned one key point of information - Faustian Pacts are written in terms of truenames. My quest leads me on a search to discover the truenames of key devils so that, in time, I might find that of the devil with whom I bargained my soul away. Once obtained, my hope is that I can use the power that such knowledge would bring me and somehow render the contract struck between us null and void. Unknown to me, of course, is that there is a way to change one's own truename, which would immediately invalidate the contract. "With the sun setting, I sought out an acceptable inn to spend the night; experience has taught me all too well what lurks within the cold embrace of night. Entering the first inn, I approached the bartender and inquired as to the cost of a room for the night. After we agreed on a price, I took my belongings - what few I have - and locked myself in my room. By candlelight, I recited many of the truenames recorded in my tome; those words that, after years of experience, still occasionally prove beyond even my ability to pronounce. After a decent night's rest, I left the inn, prepared to set out on my quest once again." At this point, if I had found out any information on any individuals of interest, I would attempt to seek them out and learn of any unusual events that have occurred recently. I've heard rumors of devil-worshipers and witches in the region, and my thoughts are that those in positions of authority would be most likely to be aware of such happenings. Likewise, I would search out anyone who may have combated such fiends, to learn more about what I might soon be up against. If my searching picks up any leads, I set out to find the source. Thus begins the first steps of my unending quest for knowledge.
Jagyr Ebonwood 06-16-07, 03:03 PM	Perhaps, but the latter approach is a bit heavy on the assumptions. Not too much so, but I feel like I'm overstepping my bounds as a player and this feeling probably isn't limited to me. I'm sure its not limited to you. I know that example was slightly exaggerated, but it was illustrating the point, I think. And I think it can be assumed that the DM is aware ahead of time of the goals of the PCs, so when one of them says "I want to go to the Plane of Shadow!" it's not a huge surprise.
Jagyr Ebonwood 06-16-07, 03:07 PM	Thecolorblue: ... You, as a player, want to do whatever the DM wants you to do because you know that will be the most detailed and rewarding experience. I, as a player, prefer to sacrifice detail in favor of easing the DM's burden and gaining more control over where the story goes in the process. Neither method is inherently "better", obviously, but some DM's will be more comfortable with one than another. Very good point. It certainly bears noting that each play style will sit differently with different DMs. My uncle is the kind of DM that likes Ved's style, very player initiated. While I also enjoy this style, there are times when I've crafted a plot I'm particularly proud of that I'm happy that my players go along with it.
Comus 06-16-07, 07:17 PM	I think where we're hitting a snag is that you are, or prefer the Prepared DM, whereas I am, and prefer the Dynamic DM. Hah! Quite the opposite. I don't prepare a blessed thing in advance, and most of my adventures come from things the players have said. As an example, I rolled a flesh golem random encounter a few weeks ago. They decided to see just who made the darn thing and set it loose, and that turned into last week's adventure. Heck, I even designed the wizard's tower on the fly.
Ved 06-16-07, 10:21 PM	Dracomortis: You know, this is a quite good example of what I've been talking about. The character has a big, ultimate goal, but also smaller, more general goals. And of course, they're going after both. I like it.
Ved 06-16-07, 10:27 PM	Comus: ... Then you have the kind of players who do exactly what the whole thread is about. And of course, you're a DM I'd enjoy playing under. I want those players. I should go to the online game classifieds again.
Thecolorblue 06-16-07, 11:21 PM	Thecolorblue: I think you're the first person who completely and legitimately disagrees with my idea on a fundamental level. You, as a player, want to do whatever the DM wants you to do because you know that will be the most detailed and rewarding experience. I, as a player, prefer to sacrifice detail in favor of easing the DM's burden and gaining more control over where the story goes in the process. (Quoting so you know what my response is to.) First of all, I was playing devil's advocate. However, a person only plays devil's advocate when they agree to that point of view at least partially. As I expected, my point was not fully gotten across. This isn't bad, since the point I did make was obviously understood and enlightening. In a very real sence the DM is the player's 5 senses as well as their "gut feeling" about wether someone needs help, or someone is about to try to kill them. The players expect this, so the DM delivers. In the same way, the DM expects the players to read deeper meanings in his words in order to move the plot without the feeling of railroading. This way of doing things is easy on all parties, because the only way for a player to know anything without the DM's explicit explanation is to know the world as well as the DM. By definition that is impossible. Maybe I see it this way because of the types of DMs I've had. I've had a total of 3 that DMed for more than a session or two. The first loved the backstory, and would spend pages writing hours about characters. He also wrote the plot, and at one point we even had the characters watch as two gods (not avatars) dueled in front of us. My cleric actually casted Heal on my own god, but that is another story. Total railroad. The second DM loves grand adventure. He is very much into roleplaying, but dislikes it when the attitudes of our characters changed from his vision of us as a group. He is good at adapting to what our characters do, but not our motivation. Our characters think what he wants them to think, but does what we (as the player) wants them to do. Epic adventure and glory > all. The third DM is a hack and slasher. Honestly, I like hack and slash. Our motivation is usually very simple with him as DM: treasure. However, the entire group makes very interesting and in depth characters in his games. I think we all sense that we won't be forced into an organization or mission for some greater good unless we decide to do that. The DM gives us encounters, and not much else. Phat lewt ftw! Anyway, after that pointless psychoanalysis I want to restate my point: The DM and the players have to work together to make a fun and active game world. The example by Dazzer of the PC assuming background about the NPC is what I'm talking about. While it is true that the player acted independantly from any DM hints, he also forced the DM to create a backstory to the npc. From the example given, the DM created a plot hook because he saw the player interested in this npc. I'll state that again: The DM created a plot hook. It certainly sounded like a fun side-quest, and it would not have exsisted unless the PC was very nosy into the npc's past. The player gave the DM a good idea, and the DM ran with it, expanding on the idea and plot through good roleplaying. That sounds like a good DM to me, but we all have to remember that sometimes npc are just people with nothing for you to help them with. Anyway, enough rambling.
Ack 06-17-07, 12:51 AM	Just for contrast, this is an exerpt from a game run by a GM who barely qualified for the title. Background: this city is run by a religious rulership - Church = State. The head honchos are these really powerful clerics who seem to need lowly adventurers to go out and do their dirty work for them. Occasionally when the PCs are overmatched, they'll turn up and Deus Ex Machina them out of trouble. GM: "The head clerics of the city call you together and tell you that there's a major artifact that they want brought into the city for safekeeping. It's in a cave about thirty miles out of the city." PCs: "Uh..." GM: "You're all supplied with horses and your equipment lists are made up." PCs: "Uh..." GM: "In just a few hours, you're on your way out of the city." Me: "Wait, we don't have a healer with us." GM: "Uh, yes, you do. Three junior clerics have been sent along with you." Me: "What are their names?" GM: "Uh..." <laughter from everyone else around the table> Me: "Are they going to be doing any fighting?" GM: "Uh, no..." Me: "So they're just here for the sole purpose of healing us." GM: "Uh, yeah..." Me: <sigh> "Okay, just so we've got that straight."
Dracomortis 06-17-07, 01:34 PM	Just for contrast, this is an exerpt from a game run by a GM who barely qualified for the title. *snip* That sounds like exactly the kind of game that Ved (and myself) are against: the DM decides everything the characters are going to do, and they just roll along with it. Granted, Ved is talking more about players who expect the DM to run this sort of game, but perhaps it is because they've had experiences like yours and have come to think that's the only way to do it. Dracomortis: You know, this is a quite good example of what I've been talking about. The character has a big, ultimate goal, but also smaller, more general goals. And of course, they're going after both. I like it. I've found the dual-goal approach to work the best for any type of campaign. The larger goal gives your character a purpose for being in the game, and provides the grounds for a reasonable backstory to expand upon. It also gives the DM a lot of room to work so that he can tie in your character's goals with the main story. In this example, the DM doesn't have to send the entire party on a library raid so that I can fulfill my character's goals - maybe he chooses to occasionally have devils harass us while adventuring. It's also broad enough that it allows the character to easily mesh into the group - because regardless of where he goes, he's just as likely to find something of use to him. The smaller goal, on the other hand, provides the reasoning for being in the immediate area. Rather than just saying "Okay, you're all in a bar and a fight breaks out", I have an actual purpose that ties into the larger goal behind my character. Now, that small goal may (and most likely will) change depending on the events the DM throws at the group, but it at least justifies the character in the beginning. Most likely, our goals could cross or even lead us to the same end. Maybe while at the docks, one of the other players gets into a fight with the troll. Hearing the disturbance, I leave the library to investigate. The player who decided to stay at the inn and take a warm bath probably hears guards rushing by his window, and the fourth player that headed down to the church of Heironeous would certainly want to help restore order - and right there we have our initial meeting.
Eridrau 06-17-07, 02:36 PM	Goals, goals, THAT"s what my characters have been missing. Thank you very much for starting this thread, Ved. You've helped in the growth of a novice player to advanced player.
zzo38 06-17-07, 03:31 PM	You and your compatriots arrive in the city of Cireneg after four days travel on horseback. Everything you can expect to find here is here, from a tavern, to the Cireneg Kingdom castle. The burstling populace goes about their daily lives, primarily composed of humans, halflings, and orcs. Nearby, in the city outskirts, a troll is arguing with a fish merchant for some reason. Night falls in two hours. I don't know what character, but probably most characters (but not necessarily all) I would play would do as I wrote underneath: About the troll arguing with the fish merchant, I would probably look from far away and probably ignore it, unless they started fighting or something like that. If I was traveling on horseback for 4 days I might want to rest as well! The next day I could do such things as go to castle, give advice, get advice and figure out what the next adventure is somehow. A wizard character (mostly I play wizard character) would probably go to library as well to learn about more spells and stuff Now, if more important things happen I would obviously do more things, even things nobody expects, because then it would be more complicated. At the time you describe it is simple and so the action is simple.
BillTheManiac 06-17-07, 04:24 PM	Myeto, Human Good Incarnate. *glossing over the boring bath/stable/inn parts* He tries to help people who have minor problems, while preaching about the Shining Fountain (religious beliefs). He might try and challenge some lower-ranking clergy of nongood religions to a nonlethal duel as a test of their deities' respective mights.
Ved 06-18-07, 12:46 PM	Goals, goals, THAT"s what my characters have been missing. Thank you very much for starting this thread, Ved. You've helped in the growth of a novice player to advanced player. Woo! Now the whole thread has been worthwhile. I'm happy. Make us proud. ... The players expect this, so the DM delivers. In the same way, the DM expects the players to read deeper meanings in his words in order to move the plot without the feeling of railroading. This way of doing things is easy on all parties, because the only way for a player to know anything without the DM's explicit explanation is to know the world as well as the DM. By definition that is impossible. There are a lot of assumptions being made here, which I won't go into because I've noted one crucial omission from your theory: I feel fairly confident stating that every DM, throughout the history of the game, has at some point elected not to so much as hint at something important. Maybe they had some motive for keeping their players in the dark, maybe the thing in question didn't exist until a moment ago, or maybe they just plain forgot, but the fact remains; if the players had done a little digging, they would have found something that wouldn't otherwise have seen the light of day. This isn't the kind of thing I've been trying to talk about, mind you. I'm just making the point that the DM is nowhere near a complete set of five senses, even in the limited world they provide insight into. The players, and their characters, should still think of what they want to look for at least as often as they blindly make Search checks. I don't like the level of importance you put on a DM's words. If the entire game is driven by whether or not the nearby fruit vendor is mentioned by the DM, I sincerely believe that there's something to be improved there. As a sidenote, there shouldn't be any kind of line drawn between "flavor text" and "plot point". We aren't playing a video game, we don't have invisible walls, there is no arbitrary universal law preventing us from asking the questions we want to ask or doing the things we want to do, and "unimportant" NPC's have more than one non-sequitur line to speak. They have whole lives, even if they're made up on the spot. There is a world around you whether or not the DM makes you aware of it. Roll a Search check.
Jagyr Ebonwood 06-18-07, 01:50 PM	There is a world around you whether or not the DM makes you aware of it. Roll a Search check. Sigged. :thumbsup:
Ved 06-18-07, 09:38 PM	Sigged. :thumbsup: :ayyyy!: