• Welcome to The Campaign Builder's Guild.
 

so you all meet in a tavern...

Started by Slapzilla, January 05, 2008, 12:07:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

LordVreeg

You know, this has got to be one of the most average, boring Aussie Shiraz' I've had ion months...Wht do I waste my palate and time with this tripe?  EEHHH!

Mr. Slapzilla, I think it much of the first session contiguity comes from how much work and time you put into that first session.  I don't say this to be basic or boorish, But if the players are given some kind of group idea ahead of time, and create their characters with that in mind and in the ideal of creating a long-term playing situation  (and this is a lot of the issue...my average group averages some 8+ years), the results can be startlingly satisfying.  If you start the thing with the idea of long-term investment, players tend ot behave better.  If it is a little one-off, they don't care as much.  
The best books have a great foundation.   You mention the paladin in the group of CN druids...could be a great story, but the players had better figure that out ahead of time.  Put the onus on them from the beginning.  You'll be amazed at what happens when the players become responsible for keeping the group together.
VerkonenVreeg, The Nice.Celtricia, World of Factions

Steel Island Online gaming thread
The Collegium Arcana Online Game
Old, evil, twisted, damaged, and afflicted.  Orbis non sufficit.Thread Murderer Extraordinaire, and supposedly pragmatic...\"That is my interpretation. That the same rules designed to reduce the role of the GM and to empower the player also destroyed the autonomy to create a consistent setting. And more importantly, these rules reduce the Roleplaying component of what is supposed to be a \'Fantasy Roleplaying game\' to something else\"-Vreeg

Lmns Crn

There's a really interesting "this is how you know each other" mechanism in Spirit of the Century, and you all might find it interesting.

Everybody sits down and makes characters simultaneously, and the bulk of the character creation process involves novels. You make your character, and then you write the back-jacket blurb of a novel your character starred in, about one of your previous adventures.

Then everybody passes their sheets to the right, and you write how you co-starred in the novel you just got handed. Then you pass to the right once more and repeat the process.

So if I'm creating a character who stopped a mad scientist in the events recalled in "Harold Krebs and the Terrible Secret of Space," there are two of the other players who, right off the bat, were involved in that as well. Similarly, Harold Krebs participated in two other "novels" started by other characters, so the whole group has a big history of mutual association in heroic-type endeavors.

I don't think that the "you meet in a tavern!" idea is totally without merit, but I think it needs a certain finesse and a certain amount of player investment. My big worry would be that players would sense the cliché and not try to make the group make sense.
I move quick: I'm gonna try my trick one last time--
you know it's possible to vaguely define my outline
when dust move in the sunshine

Slapzilla

The Spirit of the Century mechanism is a neat idea.  I'll have to think about that some more....

LordVreeg, sir, you are not basic nor are you boorish.  I realize now that I have put perhaps too much onus on the characters working out together without providing that much structure for them to work within, just normal game session stuff.  Trusting to the players to figure it out without giving it extra oomph on my part.  I think I've played with too many players who don't care how the come together works and I am quite fed up with it.

I do tend to think mid to long term from the beginning.  I once sat around for an afternoon trying to think of the gnarliest creature I could.  Ended up modifying the Chimeric template and combining one Great Wyrm of each of the 5 colors to create a wannabe Avatar of Tiamat that then became a dracolich.  An Epic challenge to be sure, so I had to get this new group of characters up 20 or more levels without losing interest, impetus or imagination.

So I planned my strategy.  Each character needed not just a back story, but a biography including details of where they grew up, who influenced them towards their chosen path and how.  This was a tremendous asset bringing them together, each with a goal.  I had 'homework assignments' for them, too.  Envision your character at 15th level; write out the most dramatic scene you can think of your character starring in; create the perfect feat; map out your 15th level self's home base compound, and such.  I was ready to mine everything I could from these bits of info to keep 'em hooked for the next 20+ levels.  I was ready for the long term.  When they did come together in a lonely frontier fort and the caravan master's daughter went missing, they as individuals acted according their characters, then as a group acted.  They ran off in search of the kidnapped.  No problem, right?  Nobody introduced themselves.  No-one questioned the motives of the others and is wasn't until the third day out when they began to exchange names, almost as an afterthought.  It just annoyed me.

I suppose that is the difference between story and plot.  Story involves character development within the plot construct and plot is the skeleton upon which the story plays out.  Plot is events, story is inner monologues.  It's more expansive than that, of course but you all get my thrust.  I'm trying to get story out of a plot and sometimes it seems easier to get a tear to roll from a troll's eye.

I've been trying out a new DMing style, one that is more a group storytelling with an arbitrator than a traditional DM/Player dynamic and the players are long time console RPGers but completely new to the dice and pencil experience.  So far, so good.  They each came across the same group of goblins and kicked them around for a bit.  I made sure each character had enough of a beef with goblins to give them common cause and after exchanging names and mini bios, they decided to go hunting together.  Maybe it was the players, maybe it was the situation... probably both, but I don't think I did so much different, but it seemed to work.  Just couldn't figure out how.  Getting them together is was got me thinking about the topic in the first place.

Sometimes it works without so much planning and sometimes it doesn't despite it.  (Grumble).

Anyhow, thanks for listening!

...

Gilladian

I think that part of your problem may not be "the scenario" but the actual "at table" interactions. My group is small, and they're playing their 3-4th campaigns together. When we started the most recent game (teenagers in a village), they all looked at me and said "okay, what's the story, what framework are we using to create this party?" (more or less).

If you don't have that level of familiarity, I think it really helps to sit down as a group and have a discussion about what the framework of the campaign is, what people see as "fun" and what they want to do. I've had groups that spending 3 hours on backstory and local color was a necessary minimum, and others where everyone would have left before the first hour was up.

It all depends on what the group is going for in a game, not what you as a DM choose...
Librarian, Dungeonmaster, and Cat-person

Slapzilla

True enough.  I've been trying to move that exact way and the most recent start worked out pretty well.  A little more 'what do you all want to do?' beforehand should smooth things out too.  Thanks all!  
...