Skip to main content
replaced http://rpg.stackexchange.com/ with https://rpg.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

As I've said before in at least a couplecouple of placesplaces, you can't really plot an RPG. Because the plot is the sequence of events that make up the story, and the players are going to make many of the most important decisions - namely, they will determine the actions of the main characters. Therefore, the plot is jointly in the hands of the PCs and the GM. What a GM can do is provide a situation.

And that's why in most games (excepting GM-less games such as Fiasco where the situation is determined collaboratively and games where the situation is dictated by the game itself like Lady Blackbird) the GM is a driving force.

Because the GM traditionally is responsible for two things:

  • The initial situation - the set of conditions that drives the PCs to action.
  • Feeding the results of those actions back into the situation to create another situation that demands action

These responsibilities apply across the vast majority of games, whether the game rules couch them in those terms or not.

In traditional dungeon-crawling games, the initial situation is largely set up in advance - there is a subterranean complex (possibly inhabited by a fire-breathing reptilian) and the confines of that complex are stocked with obstacles (monsters, traps, puzzles) and rewards (treasure, XP).

The GM in that instance is also responsible for providing a "hook" - a situation that would prompt a party of adventurers to test themselves against the dungeon. This is why old men die so often in taverns clutching scraps of parchment or whispering cryptic last words. The GM is then responsible for applying the results of the PC actions to the dungeon environment and modifying the situation to match what has happened in the story so far. For example - there was a room with a sleeping troll, and the GM expected his players to try to sneak past this overwhelming opponent because they had learned that there was an important key in the niche beyond him. But the players fled from a goblin ambush and made their stand outside the sleeping troll's door. Now the GM has to decide (or allow the fortune mechanic of the game to decide, but either way, the GM has made the decision) whether the troll is still asleep or not. And if not, the GM has to decide what the troll's next actions might be - does he go to his door to see who made such a racket? What will the PCs do when the troll emerges?

In some games, this cycle is implied, in some it is explicit, in some it is enshrined in the mechanics.

Take the games using the Apocalypse World engine, for example. This family of highly narrative games builds the feedback directly into the mechanics. When a player rolls dice, the action will either succeed, suceed at a cost, or cause trouble (which doesn't keep the character from succeeding, it just means trouble) depending on the result of the roll.

But the GM can't be the driving force, because the players are in control of the actions of the main characters. So unless the GM overrides the spirit of (most) games and dictates player actions, the GM cannot possibly plot the game alone. But by creating the initial situation and evolving that situation in response to player actions, the GM has an extraordinary amount of power to shape and influence the plot - to be a driving force in the game.

As I've said before in at least a couple of places, you can't really plot an RPG. Because the plot is the sequence of events that make up the story, and the players are going to make many of the most important decisions - namely, they will determine the actions of the main characters. Therefore, the plot is jointly in the hands of the PCs and the GM. What a GM can do is provide a situation.

And that's why in most games (excepting GM-less games such as Fiasco where the situation is determined collaboratively and games where the situation is dictated by the game itself like Lady Blackbird) the GM is a driving force.

Because the GM traditionally is responsible for two things:

  • The initial situation - the set of conditions that drives the PCs to action.
  • Feeding the results of those actions back into the situation to create another situation that demands action

These responsibilities apply across the vast majority of games, whether the game rules couch them in those terms or not.

In traditional dungeon-crawling games, the initial situation is largely set up in advance - there is a subterranean complex (possibly inhabited by a fire-breathing reptilian) and the confines of that complex are stocked with obstacles (monsters, traps, puzzles) and rewards (treasure, XP).

The GM in that instance is also responsible for providing a "hook" - a situation that would prompt a party of adventurers to test themselves against the dungeon. This is why old men die so often in taverns clutching scraps of parchment or whispering cryptic last words. The GM is then responsible for applying the results of the PC actions to the dungeon environment and modifying the situation to match what has happened in the story so far. For example - there was a room with a sleeping troll, and the GM expected his players to try to sneak past this overwhelming opponent because they had learned that there was an important key in the niche beyond him. But the players fled from a goblin ambush and made their stand outside the sleeping troll's door. Now the GM has to decide (or allow the fortune mechanic of the game to decide, but either way, the GM has made the decision) whether the troll is still asleep or not. And if not, the GM has to decide what the troll's next actions might be - does he go to his door to see who made such a racket? What will the PCs do when the troll emerges?

In some games, this cycle is implied, in some it is explicit, in some it is enshrined in the mechanics.

Take the games using the Apocalypse World engine, for example. This family of highly narrative games builds the feedback directly into the mechanics. When a player rolls dice, the action will either succeed, suceed at a cost, or cause trouble (which doesn't keep the character from succeeding, it just means trouble) depending on the result of the roll.

But the GM can't be the driving force, because the players are in control of the actions of the main characters. So unless the GM overrides the spirit of (most) games and dictates player actions, the GM cannot possibly plot the game alone. But by creating the initial situation and evolving that situation in response to player actions, the GM has an extraordinary amount of power to shape and influence the plot - to be a driving force in the game.

As I've said before in at least a couple of places, you can't really plot an RPG. Because the plot is the sequence of events that make up the story, and the players are going to make many of the most important decisions - namely, they will determine the actions of the main characters. Therefore, the plot is jointly in the hands of the PCs and the GM. What a GM can do is provide a situation.

And that's why in most games (excepting GM-less games such as Fiasco where the situation is determined collaboratively and games where the situation is dictated by the game itself like Lady Blackbird) the GM is a driving force.

Because the GM traditionally is responsible for two things:

  • The initial situation - the set of conditions that drives the PCs to action.
  • Feeding the results of those actions back into the situation to create another situation that demands action

These responsibilities apply across the vast majority of games, whether the game rules couch them in those terms or not.

In traditional dungeon-crawling games, the initial situation is largely set up in advance - there is a subterranean complex (possibly inhabited by a fire-breathing reptilian) and the confines of that complex are stocked with obstacles (monsters, traps, puzzles) and rewards (treasure, XP).

The GM in that instance is also responsible for providing a "hook" - a situation that would prompt a party of adventurers to test themselves against the dungeon. This is why old men die so often in taverns clutching scraps of parchment or whispering cryptic last words. The GM is then responsible for applying the results of the PC actions to the dungeon environment and modifying the situation to match what has happened in the story so far. For example - there was a room with a sleeping troll, and the GM expected his players to try to sneak past this overwhelming opponent because they had learned that there was an important key in the niche beyond him. But the players fled from a goblin ambush and made their stand outside the sleeping troll's door. Now the GM has to decide (or allow the fortune mechanic of the game to decide, but either way, the GM has made the decision) whether the troll is still asleep or not. And if not, the GM has to decide what the troll's next actions might be - does he go to his door to see who made such a racket? What will the PCs do when the troll emerges?

In some games, this cycle is implied, in some it is explicit, in some it is enshrined in the mechanics.

Take the games using the Apocalypse World engine, for example. This family of highly narrative games builds the feedback directly into the mechanics. When a player rolls dice, the action will either succeed, suceed at a cost, or cause trouble (which doesn't keep the character from succeeding, it just means trouble) depending on the result of the roll.

But the GM can't be the driving force, because the players are in control of the actions of the main characters. So unless the GM overrides the spirit of (most) games and dictates player actions, the GM cannot possibly plot the game alone. But by creating the initial situation and evolving that situation in response to player actions, the GM has an extraordinary amount of power to shape and influence the plot - to be a driving force in the game.

Source Link
gomad
  • 33.8k
  • 6
  • 104
  • 180

As I've said before in at least a couple of places, you can't really plot an RPG. Because the plot is the sequence of events that make up the story, and the players are going to make many of the most important decisions - namely, they will determine the actions of the main characters. Therefore, the plot is jointly in the hands of the PCs and the GM. What a GM can do is provide a situation.

And that's why in most games (excepting GM-less games such as Fiasco where the situation is determined collaboratively and games where the situation is dictated by the game itself like Lady Blackbird) the GM is a driving force.

Because the GM traditionally is responsible for two things:

  • The initial situation - the set of conditions that drives the PCs to action.
  • Feeding the results of those actions back into the situation to create another situation that demands action

These responsibilities apply across the vast majority of games, whether the game rules couch them in those terms or not.

In traditional dungeon-crawling games, the initial situation is largely set up in advance - there is a subterranean complex (possibly inhabited by a fire-breathing reptilian) and the confines of that complex are stocked with obstacles (monsters, traps, puzzles) and rewards (treasure, XP).

The GM in that instance is also responsible for providing a "hook" - a situation that would prompt a party of adventurers to test themselves against the dungeon. This is why old men die so often in taverns clutching scraps of parchment or whispering cryptic last words. The GM is then responsible for applying the results of the PC actions to the dungeon environment and modifying the situation to match what has happened in the story so far. For example - there was a room with a sleeping troll, and the GM expected his players to try to sneak past this overwhelming opponent because they had learned that there was an important key in the niche beyond him. But the players fled from a goblin ambush and made their stand outside the sleeping troll's door. Now the GM has to decide (or allow the fortune mechanic of the game to decide, but either way, the GM has made the decision) whether the troll is still asleep or not. And if not, the GM has to decide what the troll's next actions might be - does he go to his door to see who made such a racket? What will the PCs do when the troll emerges?

In some games, this cycle is implied, in some it is explicit, in some it is enshrined in the mechanics.

Take the games using the Apocalypse World engine, for example. This family of highly narrative games builds the feedback directly into the mechanics. When a player rolls dice, the action will either succeed, suceed at a cost, or cause trouble (which doesn't keep the character from succeeding, it just means trouble) depending on the result of the roll.

But the GM can't be the driving force, because the players are in control of the actions of the main characters. So unless the GM overrides the spirit of (most) games and dictates player actions, the GM cannot possibly plot the game alone. But by creating the initial situation and evolving that situation in response to player actions, the GM has an extraordinary amount of power to shape and influence the plot - to be a driving force in the game.