[apologies in advance if this is the wrong forum.]

The short version:

My local group has become very indecisive in games. I'm looking for a few low-fantasy adventure ideas that will help break us out of the mold.

The long version:

Two of us are GMs for our 'group'; both of us have noticed (as have many of the players) that our sessions are suffering from indecisive play and inactivity. For example, in one of our games we (I was a player this time) broke into a warehouse and finished off some smugglers. Now's the time to go through the many boxes & bags and see what we got. As per normal, the group 'leads' start hemming and hawing, and finally decide to open a single box. In this game I play a very simple tank w/o an agenda, because I'm rarely in that campaign and would rather just play a supporting role when I join up. Normally, I'd just keep quiet; I'm a tank, and not paid to think. However, at this point I got fed up with the slow play, and truly frightened that we may argue over every container in the place, so I told the GM that I proceed to go break-open and rifle through every box & sack in warehouse.

Sounds trivial, right? It was. Every tiny little step in our games has become accompanied by enormous decision making, and it's gotten rather silly.

Now, I'm not going to over-analyze the situation: a lot of it has to do with the fact that the people are working long-hours, married, children, and only meet once a month so the flow is lost. There may be other factors, but those probably account for the bulk of it.

What I do want to do is try to break people out of the mold in my upcoming session. In this session, the group (Riddle of Steel, home-grown low-fantasy gritty world w/no magicians in our party) is transporting an artifact (not wand of orcus, just an ancient item) from point a to point b over a very long distance. What I'm thinking is that "something happens" along the way that prompts a series of very quick events. I'll even pull the old "you see x, y, and z. What do you do? 10...9...and so on." to get them making decisions quickly.

Right now, in my mind's eye I see a storm forcing people to take refuge in a tower, but my inspiration has died there. Anybody have thoughts on a simple adventure seed? I just want to bully them along a bit, present simple, clear decisions, and generally take a break from some of the drudgery we've experienced lately.

-Jeff

P.S. When I use "group talker", "no group magician", and other gamey stereotypes I'm trying to condense the story. It's not as simplistic as that, but the description works for what I'm going for.

P.P.S. I don't normally make linear adventures. I generally have an overall world-view that moves along, and for sessions I develop the detail for the like area(s) that the players will investigate, move-through, or whatever. I usually try to keep things open for all types of play. The group loves fighting and general adventure (sneaking into buildings, etc), but often gets caught up in politics and intrigue. I definitely want to avoid the politics this time.

Hi Jeff,

Have you tried Kickers?

Can't recomend them highly enough.

You'll find full descriptions both in Sorcerer and all over these boards with a but of work with the search engine. And, if requested, I'm sure someone will get back to you (meaning me, if no one else), if you need a fresh break down on the matter.

The advantage of Kickers is that the Players themselves have defined what matters for their characters, so they've got every reason in the world to keep pressing forward.

This will work espeically well for RoS since the SA's become a clear and vibrant conduit for channelling all that Kicker energy.

As has been pointed out before, players tend to, in the long run, react poorly to being given choices that they may or may not care about -- and I don't think putting them under the gun on the matter is going to help. This is why adventure seeds (and modules of any kind) though still a habit of thinking in the hobby are usually useless -- Many times they simply exist outside the interest of the players at the table. One seed might not be better than another.

Because the Kicker is defined by the player, makes it explicit what sort of adventure the player wants to participate in, and gives an open-ended storyline with a resolution the player gets to search for -- it encourages absolute activity on the part of the player. And if you can't get a player to come up with a Kicker, then they have no pulse anyway.

Kickers. A GM's Best Friend as far as I'm concerned.

Take care,
Christopher

I have no idea what a kicker is, but I'll take a look.

There's a strong "gamist" streak in our group; we're board wargamers also. I'm certain they won't mind a series of challenges for a change of pace.

-Jeff

Hi Jeff,

This one:

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1359&highlight=kicker

this one:

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1310&highlight=kicker

and this one:

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1126&highlight=kicker

In that order, might be the most helpful. Also, as Ron wrote the rules for Kickers, you'll save some time scrolling down to his name on the threads. He defines and clears things up pretty fast.

Take care,
Christopher

By the way Jeff,

I don't think there's anything inherently non-gamist about kickers -- tho' I might be wrong.

If the group you're playing with really wants to play out RoS like a boardgame, the issue might be: are there clear gamist rewards for rolling forward? For example, in AD&D (real AD&D, haven't seen the new stuff), you get experience for killing and looting. So you kill and loot. Very simple, the players know what to do, they do it. (A la Squad Leader, Diplomacy, whatever)

Since RoS rewards experince via SA, I think something like a Kicker would get the ball rolling great. But if this insn't the case, have you guys tweaked the rules enough so that 1) completing the mission 2) performing certain strategic victories and so on provide the oomph of "winning"?

And, as a side note -- and I'm not sure you think this way, but I feel like pointing it out for all the folks watching at home -- there's certainly no conflict between Kicker and Combat. (There seems to be someone spreading this rumor tha if you care about *story* and *character* you don't care about combat. I wish this person would go home.)

Most of the *stories* I love (from epic poems to todays movies) all involve violence -- but the best ones involve all the elements of great stories as well.

Since the Kicker was designed in part to help focus player action and keep things moving along (ie, keep everyone decisive), it might really help you indecisive group. If, however, you want to use RoS as a great single-man Squad Leader game, I think some rules tweaks are in order so everyone "gets" what the night's session is about.

In sum, then, something's stalling your players. It seems to me they'll be either be served by pursuing a) something to do with the story (kicker) or b) brownie points doled out for quick decisive behavior as in a board game. Either way, I've found a neat story hook won't matter much if the players don't know why, or care if, they're taking specific action moment to moment. These two options provide both clear rewards and focused choices of actions to keep things moving forward and decisive play.

Take care,
Christopher

On a different tack, I've observed that this behavior often arises in groups where the GM tries to be tricky or devious. I've had DMs where I knew that a good number of the magic items we'd find were cursed. Net effect MANY hours wasted being extra careful not to get screwed by the DM.

I don't know if this applies to your group but I know stupendous amounts of caution has been bred into many gamers (10' poles and iron spikes anyone). If this might be a source of the trepadation, as GM you need to be clear upfront that quick decisive action by the players will not be used by the GM as a opportunity for smack down...even if the decisive action is a little ill thought out.

The first time I saw Attack of the Clones, at the very beginning when Obi-Wan leaps through the window, grabs the droid, & gets taken for a ride high above the streets of Coruscant, I thought, "Why don't PCs do stunts like that? If it were most of the games I've played in, the PCs would stand around, discussing what to do, figuring out the safest way to follow the droid." Talking about with my gaming group, we hit upon why: We've grown up with games that don't encourage or reward that kind of decisiveness.

So, like Christopher said, give some sort of tangible reward for decisiveness rather than just pushing them to, by counting down from 10 when giving them a choice. I'd say give them both a carrot AND a stick--give them rewards for being decisive, but also present things in such a way that the immediateness of it hits them. "Suddenly, a group of swordsman bash through the door, point their blades at you, & yell, 'Traitors!' What do you do?" And don't let them dither about it--but also reward them for not dithering.

And as Ralph pointed out, a lot of GMs don't make the Players feel safe being decisive--you're character makes a decisive action, gets killed, & is taken out of the game. Bam. No fun. Let them know that being decisive won't result in them "losing".

Hi Everybody,

Just an observation based off Jeff's comments that his group is "gamist" and from his posts down on the RoS board:

Bigtime Star Wars action might not be what Jeff's looking for. I'm seeing more BlackHawk Down action -- which involves caution, panic, and tough choices.

What I would offer as a game/scenario tweak for RoS (for RoS: Blackhawk Down) is this:

They're carrying the artifact. Successfully getting it across the desert is worth so many points. Failing is a loss of so many points.

They're also escorting a princess and her entourage. Each member is ranked in terms of how much you get for getting them across the desert, how much lost for losing them.

Each PCs life is worth so much as well, in the final tally.

There might be two possible foes. Killing one foe is fine, because the folks who've hired the PCs hate them. But the other foes are currently in negotiations -- so not killing these guys gains you more points.

I'd also (video game style), add Gamist Bangs -- for example, the PCs might see a fortress in the distance. GM announces: If you take the fort and leave a garrison from your forces, it's worth 1,000 points. Now the players have to make a choice. If the GM doles them out when needed it gives the PCs more to go for. They know what the consequences are and so on.

I'd say certain games really do encourage nutty behavior -- DC Heroes up to Adventure! (and even Sorcerer with the totalling successful dice bonuses).

But that's one kind of narrative energy. Blackhawk Down style plays says, "I really want this, but I really could die... Oh, fuck it, here we go," and the tension resulting in taking a really risky action but knowing "This is what I gotta do."

Just some thoughts,
Christopher

So, like Christopher said, give some sort of tangible reward for decisiveness rather than just pushing them to, by counting down from 10 when giving them a choice. I'd say give them both a carrot AND a stick--give them rewards for being decisive, but also present things in such a way that the immediateness of it hits them.

I've observed that this behavior often arises in groups where the GM tries to be tricky or devious.

Hmmm. I like adding a carrot to the thing: any examples?

Points? We're not that bad. :-)

The only reason I brought up gamist is to point out that a more structured environment won't bother people for a night. We've been led around by the nose before, and haven't suffered for it.

Most our sessions are very wide-open to give the characters their freedom, but I was hoping that a more focussed environment will reduce all the "noise" that goes into decision making.

-Jeff

One possibility depends on your players willingness to seperate IC and OOC information. A very valid technique (with the right group of players) is to never let the PLAYERS be surprised by the traitor. I've played in games where the players knew all along who the villain was, but they didn't let that color what they were doing as characters.

Frex in another thread I mentioned a group where the players highly discouraged secret player to GM communication. The type that usually went (I'm going to try and steal his boots of speed as soon as he takes them off for the night). Rather this group was perfectly happy to have the thief attempt (and even succeed on occassion) to steal the boots as long as he announced it in front of everybody and everyone enjoyed watching the scene play out.

Thats kind of extreme, but the point I'm working my way around towards is this. If you're looking to get the players out of the rut of worrying about the stable boy, start the game session by letting them know that for this game you absolutely will not be using such tactics and that they don't need to worry about it (of course that presupposes that you actually *aren't* planning on using those tactics.

Suggestion #2 would be to use Anti Spirit Attributes. Award Hesitant Coward Dice when players have their characters dicker around in noticeably unheroic ways...then use them...

Alternatively, reverse this stick into a carrot (or do both) and reward 7th Sea style Drama Dice whenever the characters leap before they look.

Hi Jeff,

I saw the smiley face, but I feel compelled to point out that I don't think points in a tactically minded RPG would be "bad" at all. I think it could work really well, in fact. (We are of course, creating "characters" with lots of numbers and rolling dice to determine results. I have no embarassment about using more numbers to create a more of a "gamist" game. That said, from your comment, I get the feeling you're group is more Sim... But ultimately that's neither here nor there...)

So... Since points seem the wrong way to go, I'll cut to a blunt matter.

When you write:

We've been led around by the nose before, and haven't suffered for it.

What I do want to do is try to break people out of the mold in my upcoming session. In this session, the group (Riddle of Steel, home-grown low-fantasy gritty world w/no magicians in our party) is transporting an artifact (not wand of orcus, just an ancient item) from point a to point b over a very long distance. What I'm thinking is that "something happens" along the way that prompts a series of very quick events. I'll even pull the old "you see x, y, and z. What do you do? 10...9...and so on." to get them making decisions quickly.

Right now, in my mind's eye I see a storm forcing people to take refuge in a tower.... I just want to bully them along a bit, present simple, clear decisions, and generally take a break from some of the drudgery we've experienced lately.

I've actually already put the choice (to use kickers) out there for them - we're discussing in an email stream. I'm sure people here would be amused by the misunderstandings of what a kicker actually is. I quoted some clear description (like you said, stuff Ron wrote), and gave some examples, but the whole concept is still eluding many of them. Anyway, I'm going to see what shakes out. I'm certainly up to try different things.

I'll tell you this, though; the "every player has his own unique story" thing died with us awhile ago. We're a group of people who barely get together once a month, and the game is a minor concern to most. No one really remembers a whole lot from one game session to the next, even when I send out a synopsis (and ask for comments, and feedback, yada). When last we had everybody-with-a-different-story, running off on their own and so forth, it simply became impossible to manage. Remembering the basics of one storyline with a few twists is bad enough: fighting to recall details of 5 different stories, as well as the basic effect on the world, became insane. (Btw, that was Amber. Everyone liked the system and the game, but we had to stop because it became too much.)

RE: Sims

If I get it correctly, we are Simist in preperation; people expect the world to make sense. We are narrativist in play; people expect the heros to be focal points, escaping the jaws of death and generally being "better" than most of the world (but not all, some enemies can be bad too). Our gamist streak runs underneath both areas - the world better not be easy to beat, and the games better have some challenges and some rewards.

RE: Kickers again

I do have a negative comment about kickers. I don't mind the idea as a whole, but it has a bad side, at least to me. The problems is that it allows players to dabble with the 2% inspiration side of things, but leaves the 98% persperation in the hands of one person. It's reflective, in part, of a lazy attitude that I can't stand. (I sense I just got in trouble.)

RE: Led by the nose

What I was trying to say is this: if I told the players I adapted the Tomb-of-Horrors (pick your favorite dungeon), and was going to run them through it, they'd probably love the idea. Sure, it makes no sense in regards to character motivations and what-not, but they'd each know exactly what to do and how to fit in. Many such adventures would get stale, but a little blast like that wouldn't hurt. Well, ToH would probably kill everybody in a Riddle game, but that's another story. :-)

-Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Lots of important stuff is going on here, I think. Lemme see if I can help at all.

1) I guess the first thing is all the GNS jargon. But I want to emphasize that this is just a side note, and not something we need to delve into. (A) It seems to me as if the players aren't really too Simulationist - just wanting plausibility isn't, itself, a Sim-thing. (B) Narrativism seems straight out of the picture, as you say. (C) Given the Tomb of Horrors comment, it sounds like a lot of Gamism to me - they want a challenge, they want a fair shot, and they want to work out tactics and so on about it during play. Sound right?

2) You're not in trouble about Kickers, but it's kind of interesting that you see them as extra work for the GM, whereas I see them as less work for the GM. The fact that (in your view) your players would use them as some kind of cheap/lazy tactic is reeeeeaally interesting.

I also think that Kickers are most useful (if not uniquely so) for Narrativist play, so they probably aren't going to be very interesting to your players. After all, if their goal is to identify the opponent or problem and then smack it down, then they're not really out to invest in the problem's creation emotionally or creatively.

(Let me know if I'm misreading your players, by the way. I make no claims to be able to "read" people's play from a distance, as recently verified by Psychopompous on the TROS forum.)

Best,
Ron

Hi Jeff,

Yes. Kickers are often difficult to get a handle on. (Note that there's a whole *new* thread covering them up in RPG theory.)

And speaking of that:

RE: Kickers again

I do have a negative comment about kickers. I don't mind the idea as a whole, but it has a bad side, at least to me. The problems is that it allows players to dabble with the 2% inspiration side of things, but leaves the 98% persperation in the hands of one person. It's reflective, in part, of a lazy attitude that I can't stand. (I sense I just got in trouble.)

Hi,

I cross-posted with Ron's post...

And if he's right and all I've been advising is wrong, I'd go back to my first idea:

A scenario with meaty rewards and penalty for stratetgic and tactical objectives. I really think there's no shame in this at all. Of course the players characters will still be heroes, of course there will be the veneer of reality... But I think it'd be really cool to give them the focused mission briefing, let them know what the wins and losses are, and let them rock and roll.

It would be focused, it would suit the fun the players want (from what I've read), and it would solve these problems.

That seems good, doesn't it?

Christopher

As I recall, you're looking for adventure ideas. Here's one I run with folks at demos. It's short, sweet, and gamist (I think...)

Start your characters out a caravan. They aren't chained up, but they are equipment-less and inside of a locked wagon (remember that scene from Dragonlance: DoAT?). Outside are Marmuluks (or whatever else fits your world/setting). They get to choose what to do, but be explicit inletting them know that they're off to be sold, and that the "point" is to get out and get home. Give them an SA reason to go home, like a lover or a king or something. It'll allow that to come into play as well.

Throw one or two other people in the wagon as well. Preferably at least one girl.

How do they get out? I've run this about 5 times, and I've seen swidling, lockpicking, board-breaking, singing, and all kinds of wierdness. Be sure to include a fight--preferably a duel or some other stuff. Let them sneak around the marmuluk camp at night killing sleeping guards...let them have a grudge against the caravan leader, or an amor for the caravan leader's concubine...

It's a pretty "cliche" old trick ("You wake up in the back of a prison wagon...what do you do?"), but hell if it doesn't work.

Jake

1) Regarding GNS, I think we're seeing the same things. The dirty details are that I'm more simist (along with another player), a couple others are more narrativist (draw pretty pictures, write complex and continuing backgrounds), two others are pretty gamist, and all of us fall back on gamist habits (round down? might as well put that point here instead -or- do I get the points now? can I spend them?).

It's not all black-and-white. When everybody's alert (the good-ol-days), all of us were pretty much simists, with some more game oriented and others more narrativists. We played aftermath, ICE, and Powers & Perils.(Hah, know anybody else who played tons of P&P?<g>)

Now, with less time on our hands, we tend to fall back on quick & dirty challenges & rewards, with the strong narrativists still playing their hands, and the strong simists playing their's.

Btw, I assume that simist refers to the story setting as well as simple physics: people react "normally/believably" -or- the city does have a water supply because that many people would really need a lot of water.

2) Kickers.

Let me explain. Simplistically, as the GM, I come up with an idea and then design the world. Sometimes that's an overarching idea and the whole damn universe; other times, it's the motivations of a noble, and the layout of his castle and town.

The latter parts of that, laying out the castle & town, along with the important people inside and so on, I consider to be work. I may spend hours drawing that up and writing it out. The other part, the ideas, I consider easy. I just daydream along until an idea comes; damn, now I got to go to work.

Along comes kickers. "Next adventure, a noble from Rohan invites me to his villa, offering me a place to rest and some supplies for our journey. He'd like my help in a certain matter, but will explain more when we arrive."

Grand, just grand. Now I've got to come up with a noble, a villa, including all the rooms, outlying buildings, grounds, and what have you, a matter in which he needs help, an explanation of why a Rohan noble has a villa in Gondor in the first place, and try to make it something up that player's alley.

Oh, and that's just one player. I've got hours more effort for each. Great.

That's what I'm saying. I'm willing to give it a try and see how it turns out, but man there's going to be work.

RE: Player input

I typically grab for inspiration from the players anyways. If a narrativist PC writes something up in his private journal that seems important, I may just grab it and run with it. Likewise as to player speculations regarding the universe, metaplot, minor plot, or what have you. If I hear something that fits & sounds fun, I'm as likely to grab it as anything else.

-Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Well, this is way off topic (off the board to boot), but I'll just say, as far as I can tell (and this GNS stuff is new to me too) narrativist play has nothing whatsoever to do with "draw pretty pictures, write complex and continuing backgrounds". All the GNS stuff is about what players actually do during actual play.

As far as your understadning of the Kickers goes... well, again. A lot of these ideas take a while getting used to... And one has to guage one really needs to spend time getting used to them. But if you are curious about them, there's a couple of notches of understanding left to go.

But that's neither here nor there.

I'm hoping my posts, in some sort of dribbling logic, will be of help -- perhaps as ideas for what you don't want to do. If not, know they were meant with the best of intentions.

Good luck with the game.

Take care,
Christopher

PS If "draw pretty pictures, write complex and continuing backgrounds" is what everyone thinks of narrativist play, no wonder those of us who love it are seen as idiots. :-)

Well, this is way off topic (off the board to boot), but I'll just say, as far as I can tell (and this GNS stuff is new to me too) narrativist play has nothing whatsoever to do with "draw pretty pictures, write complex and continuing backgrounds". All the GNS stuff is about what players actually do during actual play.

I'm rather sorry to have missed out on most of this thread. This is some really good stuff. If you are playing only once a month, do remember that a long, overarching story is unlikely to work out. It's much worse than trying to take mythological epics of 14.000 books and slam it into an hour long pilot TV movie. Bite sizes, ok?

My highest recommendation that will allow you to compromise the different play styles, whatever they may be: Start by giving your players a definite goal. Let them "know" how its going to end, generally... You can do it very easily by either doing a flashback, or a journal.

For example" June 14, 8th Year of the Fallen King, the sacred mirror was restored to the holy temple of Behem. I write to chronicle the living and the dead, and of that night in the tower...." And then play it out. Everyone knows at least one person makes it back, but noone even knows who it is, or what is going to happen as far as the game. They don't even know if the journal is being written by an NPC. For Sim folks, the history angle is fun, Nar folks will like the story, and it gives a definite goal for the Gam folks to keep them on track.

As far as the overcautious player syndrome, I completely and totally blame the instant kill-ness that D&D has trained into everyone. If you let everyone know that they will never play that character again(no point in coveting precious xp), if you give dice or mod bonuses for cool actions and decisive choices, and remember style over physics, you can really loosen folks up. Feng Shui is a great game for doing that.

Also, if you get a chance, check out scene framing, its really great. It keeps up the tempo, and your players will have to act and will want to.

Chris

Hey Chris,

That framing device gave me chills. That was fucking great. I am doing that next time I get to GM a one-shot.

Thanks,
Christopher

Chris--

I've often thought about starting a scenario (either long-term or short-term) with that kind of prologue, but was never sure how to really make it work. You just solved that for me. Thank you.

Ah, very cool. I used basically the same framing device for an Everway game I ran at a con a few years back. My take was to use a wizened old storyteller for the prologue: "Come here, children. Closer, closer so you can hear me. Today I shall tell the tale of the siege of the White City and the heroes who fell there, long ago, before your parents were born. It was the Year of the Spotted Horse...."

This technique provides a pretty darn versatile tool. You can use journals, spoken stories, monologues, dreams, and even epic poetry for your initial frame. It's great way to start a game. I once wrote and performed a twenty minute monologue that re-enacted the verdict and judgment of a trial in which the characters' past lives were condemned to death. Rationale was that it was a common nightmare plaguing their characters in the present.

Best,

Blake

Actually, what gave me that idea was Bungie's Myth games, which are the best example of "Humans vs. horde of undead evil" done right ever. Each mission began with a journal entry and a great bit of voice acting that totally provided the grim and dark atmosphere.

I highly recommend that you check out the site (http://myth.bungie.org/legends/journal/index.html) and look at the journal examples... They kick ass.

Also, I found that most of game time ends up in trying to find out "What are we supposed to do next?" as opposed to actually doing it. If you give people a definite goal, it frees them to actually doing it. This is one thing that helps avoid the "check every inch and pump info till the npc is dry" syndrome.

Chris

Jeff,

You're afraid that all you're prep will go down the drain? Becasue the players will ignore what you have prepped? Would that stop the game from getting played, or would the play just happen in a less well defined atmosphere? The latter I'll bet. You just end up winging it a bit, right? I mean do players always stick to your well designed plots and maps all the time anyway? I'll bet you've had to develop some of those winging skills like almost every other GM.

So, don't do all that map-making prep and whatnot. For real.

This is one of the advantages to Kicker style play, you see, and why we think it's comical that you feel that you'll have to do more prep. In actuality you have to do less. Since the players already have a good idea of what to do, they don't have to have maps to tromp around, and preplanned plots to encounter. None of that.

Instead, just make up a number of NPCs that are interesting for their characters to get involved with (the good NPCs, with real motives), and several encounters or events that can be thrown in anywhere, in case things do slow down. Stuff that will challenge the players as they like, and still make sense to the backdrop (no wandering monsters, here, just well designed encounters).

For real fun make sure these NPCs, encounters and events all allow the player to say something about the character's Kickers. Frex, if one player has a Kicker about being the best warrior in the realm, come up with a rival that shows up repeatedly and have the rivalry build to a head over time. Again, just give them material to play their Kickers against.

BTW, if you use Kickers in TROS, they should be directly linked to SAs. I hope somebody mentioned that, already. But I'll repeat it anyhow. SA's are like unformed Kickers. Once you decide how to address the matter that the SA is about via the Kicker, then you'll really be off an running. So if my SA is "Duty to the King" my character's Kicker should be something like "Borob has found evidence of an assassination plot amongst the nobility to kill the King. It must be stopped!" Remember that a Kicker for a "Campaign" style game should take several sessions to resolve, don't jst make it the subject of a session. All you need to do for this Kicker, is think up some bogus reason why some nobles want to kill the king (or why the character has been misinformed!) and what their plans are. Simple.

Then let the players drive the game direction. As Chris says, this requires some getting used to, but once it gets going, you'll find that your job is much easier. And you'll find that the player apathy about story fades, and that they come to each session remembering everything that happened last time, even if it was a month ago. Because it's important to them. Because you let them choose something that was important to them, and you let them drive their character's trail through your fantasy world instead of leading them around uninvested in what's going on.

It works. Really. You just have to try it.

Mike

A little thing...

But since we've got a Chris here [Bankuei], I'm going to keep being Christopher. I know, I know, it's five more letters. But I know y'all can do it.

Thanks,
Christopher

Hah, this is funny for me to read.

I used to do it. I used to run not only on-the-fly games, but I made up an entire campaign on the spot on a challenge from a friend (one of those college nights where no one else was around, and we wanted to roleplay). But it didn't stop there - I listened to the characters very carefully, tried to get the feel of where they were going, and changed stories on the fly. I used to tell them things like "don't just ask if there's a spoon in the room, tell me what you're thinking, why you want the spoon, and I'll let you know if there's something close, even if it's not a spoon." What I didn't say was that I was pumping them for more information so I could keep a plot running.

Two things have changed. I still do things on the fly, and I'll still mutate the game towards a line more in keeping with the player's thoughts, both to mesh better and to challenge. However:

a) We don't have time. I can't keep track of everything, nobody else can help, and I lose details. In the past, when we played more than once a week, it was easy. When a month or more goes by, I just can't remember every little twist and decision. That's why the prep work, so I have the dumb things recorded already.

b) Player feedback. My players like maps. They like tactical situations. They like continuity. If I setup a city, it better have a water supply, source of food, leadership, and what have you. They want details. And if they come back to that city two years later, it better be the same, or the differences better be reasonable and not obvious mistakes on my part.

There's nothing about me that's wedded to anything in my campaign other than some very abstract ideas, and the building blocks. So, I've introduced 3 religions, but if someone were to push (or even hint) at another, and the other sounded interesting, I'd chomp it up. If someone pondered a split of opinion in one of the churches, that might become a subplot. And so on.

Let me a few related thoughts:

1) You're barking up the wrong tree. I'm the guy who'd play with kickers in a heartbeat. It's the players who are, at best, lukewarm about the idea.

2) Trust me, your desire to throw out design time is comical to me as well. It's like you're one of the bad Star Trek writers who makes plot mistakes and continuity errors, all in the name of some story. "But how do we unage her?" "I dunno, use the transporter or something." "But then why don't we just return everyone to their youth?" "That's not important - what's important is how she faced growing old, and how she grows as a person through the experience." I despise that attitude, the one that says a writer isn't responsible for reason & detail in their writing, and I won't carry that attitude into my gaming. Besides, my players would crucify me if I did.

3) You seem to think the group has the time to have 4 people wandering around on all their little side-quests. We don't, and we all recognize it.

4) Many of the respondants here (not all) seem to be deliberately disingenious, and in many ways downright rude. I think I've made it painfully clear what kind of group we are, and what the specific need was. However, rather than have a simple discussion around my very direct question, you've twisted this into some sort of crusade to beat narrativism into my soul. The stupid part of it is that narrativism's there, and rather than type all that out, all you had to do was a) give me a specific idea, and b) suggest that I look into the idea of kickers, found in such-n-shuch threads, and trust that as a human with half a brain I could figure out all by myself how to use them.

5) Ok, that last paragraph was harsh, but I'm keeping it because I think some people here could stand to have a bit of water tossed in their faces. Not every issue needs to turn into a massive game theory discussion. You could have just spun off some adventures for a fellow GM looking for inspiration. It's not a bad question.

6) Indecision and apathy are two different things. In both nothing happens, but in the second players don't care. My players do care, they're just vacillating.

7) To the person who discussed "railroading" at length. In a way, you are right about the larger issue. The players simply aren't as in-tune with the game world right now, and that can happen when I've done a lot more reading on it then they have and at the same time we're all learning a new game system. They've told me repeatedly that they like the world, they want the campaign to continue, and I should keep going. I just want to cut down their environment a bit so they can get used to a piece at a time.

Probably enough talk for now, that should give people some ammo. :-)

-Jeff

P.S. It's not throwing away "my" design time that worries me. It's creating (to steal your kicker), the nobility, the king, the plot itself, and all the environment for the plot that has me worried. Ok, it's not that 1, it's 4 of them at the same time. We'll never finish anything, and I'm not sure how I'll prepare it all in time.

Jaif wrote: 1) You're barking up the wrong tree. I'm the guy who'd play with kickers in a heartbeat. It's the players who are, at best, lukewarm about the idea.

2) Trust me, your desire to throw out design time is comical to me as well. It's like you're one of the bad Star Trek writers who makes plot mistakes and continuity errors, all in the name of some story. "But how do we unage her?" "I dunno, use the transporter or something." "But then why don't we just return everyone to their youth?" "That's not important - what's important is how she faced growing old, and how she grows as a person through the experience." I despise that attitude, the one that says a writer isn't responsible for reason & detail in their writing, and I won't carry that attitude into my gaming. Besides, my players would crucify me if I did.

3) You seem to think the group has the time to have 4 people wandering around on all their little side-quests. We don't, and we all recognize it.

4) Many of the respondants here (not all) seem to be deliberately disingenious, and in many ways downright rude.

I think I've made it painfully clear what kind of group we are, and what the specific need was. However, rather than have a simple discussion around my very direct question, you've twisted this into some sort of crusade to beat narrativism into my soul.

5) Ok, that last paragraph was harsh, but I'm keeping it because I think some people here could stand to have a bit of water tossed in their faces. Not every issue needs to turn into a massive game theory discussion. You could have just spun off some adventures for a fellow GM looking for inspiration. It's not a bad question.

6) Indecision and apathy are two different things. In both nothing happens, but in the second players don't care. My players do care, they're just vacillating.

It's not throwing away "my" design time that worries me. It's creating (to steal your kicker), the nobility, the king, the plot itself, and all the environment for the plot that has me worried. Ok, it's not that 1, it's 4 of them at the same time. We'll never finish anything, and I'm not sure how I'll prepare it all in time.

So Jeff,

I agree with you, as a matter of fact, that the focus on Narrativist play in the last few posts are not addressing the issues you raised. My posts in this thread did not suggest such an approach - I saw, and still see, that you are dealing primarily with Simulationist issues of GMing and (now that you're clarified the players' views) playing.

So let's back it up. The goal here is to meet your needs. First thing is to toss out the Kicker thing - someone suggested it, you reacted, people reacted, blah blah. OK, fuck it. No Kickers, not what you want, all done. (Just to ensure that you don't feel universally attacked, see my post that already said so, way back there.)

Now what? Looking back in the thread, both Ralph and Josh suggested rewarding the players for decisive actions, so that they perceive decision as "better" than the outrageous caution you describe. That means reviewing your own behavior to see whether you have tended to smack'em for being bold, in the past. (I don't know whether you have or not. Just reflect on it, that's all. Could be "no.")

Also, in all this Kicker-this-and-that, I think Christopher made an excellent point with his Black Hawk Down example. It struck me as the immediately most practical approach, and especially well-suited for TROS.

Now for some behavior/courtesy issues. Saying "... some people here ..." won't do. Give the respect of addressing someone you disagree with by name, and further, do not fling insults even when you feel insulted. That's flaming.

Finally, Jeff, you must realize, no one here can read minds. It's really hard to have someone say, "Help me with X," and you say, "Try this," and the person flips and says, "Don't criticize my intelligence, that's not what I want." Hell, how's anyone supposed to know that? If you're courteous to the person and explain how it doesn't apply, when he's way off base for your needs, then maybe that person will turn around and provide the perfect solution.

Best,
Ron

Hi Jeff,

In the realm of computer game design, one of the first things we ask ourselves about gameplay is, "How do we want players to address risk?" In a massively-multiplayer context, we want players to take risks, because risk-taking is a big part of the fun of gameplay. If we make penalties for character death too nasty, the players will exercise waaay more caution than necessary, thereby diluting the fun adventure factor. You can't be Indiana Jones if you're always fleeing the first hint of danger.

Of course, if you want a suspense-laden game -- think Thief from the computer gaming analogy, a game that was very stealth-oriented -- then you want the consequences to discourage balls-out, in your face risk-taking.

So Ron's right on the money in my opinion. Aside from wanting some adventure seeds, you might want to examine the rewards v. consequences metric in your games to see what kind of behaviors you might inadvertently be reinforcing. Along the adventure seed route, take a look on the net for plot hooks and plot types. The taxonomy of X number of stories may suggest some great ways to get your players moving.

And just to reiterate another point of Ron's, I think you've gotten a lot of sincere, well-meaning feedback here. If some of it has rubbed you the wrong way, take a deep breath and read it again with a more charitable eye. I say this because some of the most embarrassing incidents I've had over the last decade came from reading aggression and criticism into notes and correspondence where the other person meant nothing of the sort. *shrug* Absent the paralinguistic cues, it's really easy to take things the wrong way.

Hope this helps.

Best,

Blake

Ron,

The short version:

My local group has become very indecisive in games. I'm looking for a few low-fantasy adventure ideas that will help break us out of the mold.

You're afraid that all you're prep will go down the drain? Becasue the players will ignore what you have prepped? Would that stop the game from getting played, or would the play just happen in a less well defined atmosphere? The latter I'll bet. You just end up winging it a bit, right? I mean do players always stick to your well designed plots and maps all the time anyway? I'll bet you've had to develop some of those winging skills like almost every other GM.

Righty then,

All points about whose tone "meant" what, and who reacted how, may be left behind us, then. It helps if anyone is to apologize, that they do it by name, but to do so at all is good, and I appreciate that.

So! It looks like your conclusion is based on what the players want/need, and that they're uncomfortable without knowing that they're solving The Problem or whatever in their actions.

"... I want to make a tight adventure with clear choices, and some easy ones to get them started."

Cool. Tell you what ... if you're still soliciting ideas (and I'm not sure you are, any more), maybe a new thread is best? Just so people can get started on it without negotiating the minefield this one turned out to be, a bit?

Best,
Ron

This might be coming from way out in left field, but if your players are that visually oriented and have a strong desire to "see" with maps and figures what's going on around you, you may want to consider playing around with Neverwinter Nights when its finally released. The ability to put each player into a setting that they can actually see might make for an interesting experiment for your group. Not that that helps your immediate issue, unfortuneately.

Hey Jeff,

I don't have a special need for maps. My players do. They don't want me to say "a water supply"; they ask questions like "what is it", "where is it", "are there guards nearby", "how far away", and so on. One player asks for a map or drawing of almost every situation, even when he's just haggling in the market. I've even taken to putting GURPs cardboard heroes on the table, because they use them to setup the story so they can see it, and even aid me in moving them around. (They were doing this with dice and coins before.)

Just out of curiousity, how do you think your players would react if you suddenly started handling things and presenting detail to the players like movies do, and you explained it to them that way. Say they're in a market, pursuing a suspicious NPC, and it looks like a gunfight is going to break out. They begin asking questions about whether their line of sight is obstructed, if there are innocents in the way. And you paint with a broad brush, maybe just by using positioning gestures with your hands relative to each other. "You're in this area. The guy is over here. There are some booths and stuff obstructing your view a bit." When they start getting crunchy, positioning pennies and stuff and asking for confirmation that they've got things right, you explain that you don't want to do it that way, that you just saw Heat or Platoon or Tombstone or something, and that you want to try and handle things more cinematically. Movies don't kick up a map when a gunfight breaks out to establish everyone's position. They deliver a blurry shot of some people who may or may not be in the way. Perspective is distorted, so you can't tell exactly who among the good guys is closest to individuals among the opposition, or how far someone has to move to the side to get a clear shot. What happens if you do this with you group?

Paul

Just out of curiousity, how do you think your players would react if you suddenly started handling things and presenting detail to the players like movies do, and you explained it to them that way.

Hi Paul & Everybody,

Listen. Jeff has been fairly explicit about the kind of material and style his players want. They want tactical and strategic detail. They want to make the hard choices in tough situations. They want to know all the options and risks so life and death decisions are made with all the ramifications of Special Ops training. While everyone here's been offering all sorts of options with the best of intentions, they're not looking for movies. Movies are something completely different. Movies are about "entertaining moments" for lack of a better phrase. Combat is about getting the job done right with minimal loss against the greatest gain. (The victories won along the way are also "entertaining," but in a way very different than movie moment entertainment.)

I personally have enjoyed both styles, have played both ways, and -- specifically -- have in this case, tried to respect both styles. So.... Since we now know what kind of game Jeff's group wants to play, I'd recomend we focus the suggestions to that kind of play.

If you're still having trouble mapping this in your imagination, this might help: leave movies behind. Don't think nutty adventure fun. Think: your life is on the line. No, your life -- not some super-duper Jedi who we know is going to last four more movies. There's a place for that kind of entertainment, but we're looking for a different kind of entertainment.

And then feel out how would you build an experinece with that kind of intensity, fear, risk, and triumph into scenario and rules. It sounds like the RoS rules bring us more than half way there. Now let's respect the scenario end of things, the style of play to match that, and we'll stop putting Jeff on the spot of having to say endlessly, "No, but thanks again."

Jeff,

If I've misrepresented your group's needs, I apologize 'aforehand. From the outside, what I've describe above certainly seems to be what will jones the group. I feel this perhaps pathetic need to make it clear -- one more time -- that in no way am I denegrating this style of play, see nothing wrong with it, and have enjoyed it in the past myself.

Take care,
Christopher

Hi Jeff,

I know you said maps aren't the issue. Still... Campaign Cartographer or some of the other map generation software may help speed up prep time to provide more easily detailed sets. Given your players' needs, I don't see how you'll be able to avoid the tactical information a map provides. I've also used whiteboards to depict tactical positioning, and that's worked fairly well, though drawing the maps out tends to knock down pacing in what should be a tense situation.

If I may ask: how much prep do you usually put into a game session? How much would you like to put in ideally? Realistically? A buddy of mine used to put in about four hours of prep per hour of play for a weekly DnD 3e game. Way more than I'd be comfortable doing, but he seemed fine with it.

And I agree with Ron. Starting another thread would be a good idea.

Best,

Blake