Back in late May the Spriggan's Den wrote a very nice post entitled Making RPGs live up to their promise. I let it simmer more a month and while I don't have a lot to add to the good parts I thought I'd make a somewhat responsive post to address some of the points raised.
The author begins by observing that
"When anyone first tells new people about roleplaying games and what makes them such a cool activity, it’s nearly always about how you can play characters who are free to do anything and go anywhere, and how your choices create a unique story as the GM has the NPCs and the world react naturally and logically to whatever you can come up with. This is the promise that RPGs make to players, and I think that we all should expect these from any campaigns we play and don’t accept any campaign that doesn’t. Because what’s the point of all of it then anyway??
So there's the premise (or rather, promise) of the article. Why is this so often NOT so. And can we MAKE it so?
The author's next point was that there was a lot of "do not do these things" advice and it GREATLY outweighs the "do these things" advice. Boy howdy. Because the "dndtt" advice applies to virtually ALL tables while the "dtt" advice can be VERY table specific. The last few months I've started spending WAY to much time on YouTube WATCHING this advice. There are content creators I NEVER have to watch again. There are others that I rewatch on the reg. And there are some that I wonder "what the hell are they even doing on the inter-webs?" They seems to be clowns, playing D&D. And their game is terrible. But for THEM? They love it. And I'm sure their viewers do. But if 95% of the DM's out there are watching it there is a serious Cargo Cult problem.
We then proceed to a series of premises.
#1. The player characters are the protagonists. Well .... yes. But as the author observes in published adventures the PC's are essentially henchmen, helping the king save his kingdom or the princess or whatever they're supposed to be saving. And who wants to play a henchman?
#2. The players decide what the characters do. But in most railroad games the players DO decide what to do but it's a decision without a difference. The decision's players are given aren't driving the story. They're deciding whether take the high road to the demon's cave or the low road. Again: a problem with most published adventures.
#3. Players decide where the players go. Short answer: so long as it's in the 24 pages of the published adventure. And the author recognizes that as well. Riding off into the night abandoning the demon-plagued village to its own devices MUST be an option.
#4 Players decide who they side with or against. Don't like the quest giver? Awesome. Go join the other side! As the DM - present the world. Let it unfold. And let the players decide which side of the fold they take.
#5. The players decide which causes to pick up. I've been through this recently in my game. The party decided to let the wood elf war refugees fend for themselves and to let the blighted forest spread unabated. They're headed west to The Crossroads to see what else is "out there." And "out there" there's a whole social structure with people and groups who have a wide range of goals and drives. And this was AFTER they took a stab at setting up a protection racket.
#6. They player characters are the champions of their cause. See #1 above.
#7. The Antagonists of the Story are within the PC's means to challenge. As the author observes, think Seven Samurai.
It’s set in a world of constant civil wars with raiding armies and roaming bandits destroying and plundering all the villages they come across. There is a tale happening somewhere in that world about one warlord rising to the top, defeating and subjugating all the other warlords, and establishing a strong state that cracks down on the bandit problem. But The Seven Samurai is not that story. The heroes of that story do not have fight and defeat all the warlords and their armies to be victorious. They are just seven samurai with no resources and there is no way for them to win the civil war for the control over all of Japan. But that is not their story. Their story is about destroying a gang of some 30 bandits raiding a single unprotected village. This is a threat that the seven samurai are perfectly able to deal with and win against. Great warlords and their armies exist in this world, but they are not the antagonists of the story.
Not sure I'm as married to this one as the others but it DOES make for a great campaign. And it doesn't always have to be about saving the world. Sometimes it's just about beating the Urbania Cowboys.
#8. Failure is always an option. Failure reinforces that each eventual success was NOT a given but rather was the result of their own hard work.
#9. False conclusions are the fault of the players. Or SHOULD be, if the DM is doing their job.
I also left a comment at Spriggan's. We'll see what discussion ensues.
No comments:
Post a Comment