The Phoenyx - gamers

cra2

Wed

Jul 18
2001

18:21Z

gm styles

This is long, so if you're not interested in the discussion of gm styles/plot advancement, please ignore...

Has anyone ever seen an index or commentary on different gm styles as they pertain to moving the plot along? This is hard to explain.

I've seen gms run the game where the plot follows the characters. In other words, if the characters decide to go to town and spend the night drinking at the bar - the story follows them there. The gm modifies what he/she might have been planning and just creates encounters for them at the bar. He/she may throw out some plot hooks at the bar, but if the PCs ignore them and head down the street in a different direction, that's the way the story goes. Random encounter charts for the street are brought out and the story follows the characters' decisions. It "reacts" to the players.

I've seen other gms run adventures where the major plot is the center of the story and one way or another, the PCs will follow it along. More like a choose-your-own-path storybook, the players are given descriptions of scenes and then allowed to interact with NPCs in that scene. Then, the scene ends with them choosing from several courses of action or plothooks to follow. The gm has already prepared these next scenes and just has to modify them slightly based on the outcomes from the previous scenes. The "doing research" scenes, and the "shopping for gear" scenes, and the "journey to get there" scenes are glossed over as the PCs are quickly brought up to the next prepared scene.

I've seen Modules written using these two different styles (and a million variations). Remember old d&d modules that were essentially just a map of a cavern with static creature/treasure encounters?

Anyways, I was wondering what others thought about the various styles. This comes up after a particularly long (8+hour) gaming session we had the other night where the pcs spent almost the entire time trying to analyze the clues they had found and researching new leads. This is usually just a musical montage in most movies where you see the protagonists doing library research and calling up their contacts for info. Well, we roleplayed this for 8+ hours. How? Every lead someone went after was turned into a scene played out by him/her and the gm. Every internet role was a (slow) adventure in cyberspace, and every reconnaisance mission was gone through like a mini-adventure (with no tension or danger).

Needless to say, this was rather unproductive (because 99% of the leads turned up nothing) and it bored the tears out of most of the players. And I don't know HOW it moved the plot along at all, after 8 hours of playing. This got me thinking about the various styles of running the game and moving the plot along.

Apparently this gm comes from the school of letting the characters create the story. If we, as players, were indecisive or too obtuse to follow the plothooks, then he was going to let us sit there and roleplay every conversation or action we'd take. The plot would not come to us. We would have to go and find the plot.

This reminded me of other gm styles. I've seen gms who would have said, "gimme a list of all the shopping items you want and gimme a list of all the contacts you go to and what skill you're using to get info out of them". Then they would have given us the info/gear we were after and only roleplayed any critical or dangerous scenes. After this, it would be time for us to put our heads together and make a decision as to our next step. If we took too long, the action would come to us - either in the form of a random encounter, a completely new plot hook, or a side adventure. Either way, the gm was less concerned with following the characters around and more concerned with getting the players to feel the various elements of a traditional story plot - intro, rising action, climax, denouement, etc.

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page: http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

Brett Ritter

Wed

Jul 18
2001

18:46Z

gm styles

> Has anyone ever seen an index or commentary on different gm styles as
> they pertain to moving the plot along?  This is hard to explain.

I've seen a good one recently, but I don't recall where...sorry.  It was
more centered around designing adventures rather than "moving the plot
along".

> characters' decisions.  It "reacts" to the players.

So the adventure is about the characters, and whatever they happen to
follow.  Got it.

> I've seen other gms run adventures where the major plot is the center
> glossed over as the PCs are quickly brought up to the next prepared
> scene.

This summary mixes a number of elements.  Foremost is the adventure is
about what's happening, not the players?

There are different ways of running this.  Some create prepared scenes as
you describe, and those happen when the players arrive.  If something
delays the players for a while, the event will still happen when the
players arrive.  (I.E. The adventure is set, but the players are still key
elements).  Sometimes these scenes are all available (the old
map-with-encounters), sometimes they branch ("Save the princess, or stop
the villain").

Others have a timeline, and at noon Event A will happen, at 1
pm, Event B happens, regardless of whether the players are there.  The
players can derail or modify these events if they do something before that
point in the timeline. (The adventure is happening, and the
players control how they interact with it)

> This comes up after a particularly long (8+hour) gaming session we had
> the other night where the pcs spent almost the entire time trying to
> analyze the clues they had found and researching new leads.  This is

If this was really boring for you, then the GM should have skimmed it.
Personally, we often have a few hours of this in our games, because NPC
interaction is a major element of our roleplaying.

> Apparently this gm comes from the school of letting the characters
> create the story.  If we, as players, were indecisive or too obtuse to

I often set up situations without knowing how the players will resolve it.
On rare occasions, this has caused problems that I've had to fake a
solution to, but usually the players come up with better ideas than I
would have.

> This reminded me of other gm styles.  I've seen gms who would have
> said, "gimme a list of all the shopping items you want and gimme a
> list of all the contacts you go to and what skill you're using to get
> info out of them".  Then they would have given us the info/gear we

Ick.  So where's the roleplaying?  I have no interest in roleplaying every
shopping trip, but getting info from contacts sounds like a major element.
At least the contacts that HAVE info.

> a decision as to our next step.  If we took too long, the action would
> come to us - either in the form of a random encounter, a completely

"There are rumors of a red dragon to the north.  'A red dragon eh?  Sounds
 a little rough.  We head south.'  The southern path is blocked by an
impassable wood.  'Okay, west then.'  Travelling west, you meet peasants
fleeing a dragon attack further down the path.  'East'.  You head east,
and a dark shadow falls over you...."

That's exageration, but I personally prefer having control over plot
elements.  As a GM, I've had players track down villains that I intended
to become recurring.  Oh well, they were clever.  They've also missed low
level villains by missing some clues.  Hey, that just means when they
reappear a few months later seeking vengence, the satisfaction will be
enhanced.

> new plot hook, or a side adventure.  Either way, the gm was less
> concerned with following the characters around and more concerned with
> getting the players to feel the various elements of a traditional
> story plot - intro, rising action, climax, denouement, etc.

I think you're mixing some elements.  It is entirely possible to have an
game that revolves around the player actions without boring anyone to
tears.  Likewise you can have action-filled adventures that are boring.
It's more a matter of GM skill, and GM-player interaction rather than GM
style.

All IMNSHO, of course.



----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

Rohan Light

Thu

Jul 19
2001

00:02Z

gm styles

	[Rohan Light]  Hi.  I'm new to this list...
>  
> I've seen gms run the game where the plot follows the characters.  In
> other words, if the characters decide to go to town and spend the night
> drinking at the bar - the story follows them there.  The gm modifies what
> he/she might have been planning and just creates encounters for them at
> the bar.  He/she may throw out some plot hooks at the bar, but if the PCs
> ignore them and head down the street in a different direction, that's the
> way the story goes.  Random encounter charts for the street are brought
> out and the story follows the characters' decisions.  It "reacts" to the
> players.
	[Rohan Light]  I use a loose variant of this style.  I find out what
sort of story/theme the players want before character creation; trying to
get some sort of general consensus.  "Hey, why don't we play the first set
of grave robbers that plundered the pyramids".  The characters are created,
I go off and write plot specific to the type of characters (thieves need
things to steal, heroes need things to save or prevent, scholars need
theories to prove/disprove etc).  I determine the setting and then stick the
two together.  From the outset the plot reacts to the players as they're
designed to be in the middle of it.

	What comes out does follow the players around.  This is their own
movie, scripted largely to their needs/wants, and all I do is apply plot
devices and twists.  Everything goes along hunky dory until I throw the
first curve ball. Then things start to fall apart for them and, even though
the story still follows them, I'm back in the driving seat in terms of
keeping the drama going.

> Apparently this gm comes from the school of letting the characters create
> the story.  If we, as players, were indecisive or too obtuse to follow the
> plothooks, then he was going to let us sit there and roleplay every
> conversation or action we'd take.  The plot would not come to us.  We
> would have to go and find the plot.
	[Rohan Light]  Well, that's a waste of time then isn't it.
Everything is dependant on varying degrees of momentum.  Even in the still,
quiet scenes, there needs to be a sense of momentum.  I've heard of GM's
leaving the room and saying "Let me know when you've sussed it out".  That's
just stupid.  This is meant to be fun.  It sounds like story purism gone too
far.  The conventions of the medium must always be kept in mind: a bunch of
people choose to sit down, game something out for a few hours a week with
the expectation that such activity is a better choice than getting the
Matrix out again.  If all we do is sit around feeling stupid, then the video
store will be busy next week.  If things start flagging, introduce the next
plot device.  Even if your uber plot doesn't call for it.  If you have to,
throw in something that you have no idea about yourself. I had a scene going
nowhere once where the characters were in an Etruscan banquet.  I don't know
how I did it, but I got them convinced that all of the mirrors in the room
seemed to be like eyes following them around.  I had no idea what it was all
about, but between everyones efforts, the players got freaked out and
interested in a flagging scene.



> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The email message together with the accompanying attachments may be
CONFIDENTIAL. If you have received this message in error, please notify
mail@tepapa.govt.nz immediately and delete the original message. The
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be views of Te Papa.  
Te Papa employs strict virus checking measures and accepts no liability
for any loss caused either directly or indirectly by a virus arising
from the use of this message or any attached file.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

cra2

Mon

Jul 23
2001

13:59Z

gm styles

gmast@phoenyx.net wrote:
> > Has anyone ever seen an index or commentary on different gm 
> >styles as they pertain to moving the plot along?  This is hard to > >explain.

>I've seen a good one recently, but I don't recall where...sorry.  

Ugh.  Curse you!  Sooooooo close.  Was it in a magazine or online?

>So the adventure is about the characters, and whatever they happen to
>follow.  Got it.

Yep, that's one kind.

>This summary mixes a number of elements.  Foremost is the adventure >is about what's happening, not the players?

Yes, the story is unfolding.  The game just follows the characters as they react to the unfolding story around them.

>a) Sometimes these scenes are all available (the old map-with->encounters), 

>b) sometimes they branch ("Save the princess, or stop
>the villain").

>c) Others have a timeline, and at noon Event A will happen, at 1
>pm, Event B happens, regardless of whether the players are there.  

There!  That's 3 different methods of laying out the game.  What would you call them as a category? - The game style?  The storyline structure?  The plot advancement style?

And then, what name would you give to the 3 styles that you described (above)?  And are there others?

>If this was really boring for you, then the GM should have skimmed >it.  Personally, we often have a few hours of this in our games, >because NPC interaction is a major element of our roleplaying.

A few hours is different than 8+ hours of it.  Yes, interacting with the NPCs is the major opportunity for playing out your character in social situations.  I agree.  However, in this case, we were off roleplaying scenes with NPCs who turned out to be irrelevant and who bore no information.  It is that stuff that eventually felt like a waste of time.

>Ick.  So where's the roleplaying?  I have no interest in roleplaying >every shopping trip, but getting info from contacts sounds like a >major element.  At least the contacts that HAVE info.

EXACTLY!  -When- the contacts have info or pose a threat of some sort, the interaction can be interesting or fruitful.

>I think you're mixing some elements.  It is entirely possible to >have an game that revolves around the player actions without boring >anyone to tears.  Likewise you can have action-filled adventures >that are boring.  

Yes, you can have either.  I think that the elements that make either of these storylines entertaining are the traditional elements of plot structure (into, rising action, climax, etc.).  You can have total action, or no action, but it's not entertaining if you don't have a building storyline.  Right?

>It's more a matter of GM skill, and GM-player interaction rather >than GM style.

True dat.  True dat.  You're right.  Even a story/game style that just follows the characters around wherever they may roam can be infused with tension and danger and a gripping storyline.  (Although this style is probably more difficult to add those elements to because you have to come up with these on the fly.  You can't prep too far in advance because the characters may just ignore all the plothooks you throw out.)

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

Joseph R. Dietrich

Tue

Jul 24
2001

14:18Z

gm styles

> A few hours is different than 8+ hours of it.

So, were you running this game?

> You can't prep too far in advance because the characters may just ignore
all the plothooks you throw out.

Well, if they seem dead set on ignoring plot hooks, then the game is going
to stall. At that point you will probably have to take editorial control and
gently remind them "Hey you guys, this is a plot hook (tm)."

Seriously. Just do what you need to get them on track. In my experience most
players just want to have a good time and are willing to put up with a
certain amount of guidance like that.

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich, yikes@evansville.net

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

cra2

Tue

Jul 24
2001

15:23Z

gm styles

Joseph R. Dietrich, yikes@evansville.net wrote:
> > A few hours is different than 8+ hours of it.

>So, were you running this game?

NooooOOOOooo.  I was one of the poor sods suffering through it.  So, I was thinking about the ways I would have handled that.  And, being a gm myself, it made me stop to ponder the different ways that gms prepare and run adventures.  I've never seen any literature on the subject, classifying gm styles into categories like...

a) You create an environment (dungeon, town, or world) and just let your Players explore it, reacting to whatever choices they make.

b) You create a compelling story and turn it into the various SCENES that would move the plot along and then you introduce the scenes to the players, only allowing them to choose which scene to go to next.

So, I wondered (on this list) what styles (or variations) people use and how it works for them and what you'd "name" them for ease of reference and what articles they've seen on the subject.

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

genericjoe

Tue

Jul 24
2001

16:25Z

gm styles

> Joseph R. Dietrich, yikes@evansville.net wrote:
>> > A few hours is different than 8+ hours of it.
> 
>>So, were you running this game?
> 
> NooooOOOOooo.  I was one of the poor sods suffering through it.  So, I
> was thinking about the ways I would have handled that.  And, being a gm
> myself, it made me stop to ponder the different ways that gms prepare
> and run adventures.  I've never seen any literature on the subject,
> classifying gm styles into categories like...
> 
> a) You create an environment (dungeon, town, or world) and just let
> your Players explore it, reacting to whatever choices they make.
> 
> b) You create a compelling story and turn it into the various SCENES
> that would move the plot along and then you introduce the scenes to the
> players, only allowing them to choose which scene to go to next.
> 

I think the problem I have with this analysis is that it seems to imply 
somehow that the characters and the environment or the story are completely 
seperate.  The two must work together in order to create a story that 
everyone enjoys.  By having the story/environment react to the players (or 
characters) actions and desires, the players are invested in it, and it 
becomes more exciting.

Thus, when I'm a *creating* a character to run, I always include several 
small things "grommets" for the hooks the GM will give me.  Places where a 
good GM can more tightly enmesh my character with the world around hir.  
This is one of the reasons I prefer character creation which includes 
a "Mertis/Flaws" or "Advantages/Disadvantages" section.  Both of these can 
provide grommets to me as a GM and (I've found) give the charcter some 
depth making it more intelligible by the players. 

{My GF has difficulty creating characters in D&D b/c there's no motivation 
implicit to the character generation.  Whereas, she's very fond of her 
Werewolf character b/c she went through a list of Flaws, and picked ones 
that were interesting together, and gave her character shape.  I know she 
could have done this with D&D just as well -- but she's still learning how 
to do this.}

My thought about the "boring campaign" was that the GM wasn't paying 
attention to what the characters/players wanted.  It's all well and good to 
do this whole "simulationist" thing... but you run the risk of the world 
being boring, unless you pay attention to the grommets the characters 
offer -- and place things so that they will run into them, triggering the 
hooks.

I find I'm not much of a simulationist anymore -- instead trying to create 
interesting characters and situations, stories and interactions. 

Thinking about it, I wonder how close the three-fold model is to your 
original question about preparation for adventures.

GenericJoe

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

cra2

Tue

Jul 24
2001

21:29Z

gm styles

> > Joseph R. Dietrich, yikes@evansville.net wrote:

>I think the problem I have with this analysis is that it seems to >imply somehow that the characters and the environment or the story >are completely seperate.

Well, you're right.  Those two styles don't mention the characters' individuality much.  They refer to two extremes; either a) make an environment and let the PCs explore it, or b) make a story and lead the PCs through it.  I've seen both of these run successfully at one time or another.  I recall playing in a game where the (a) style above was used and our small group of PCs had a blast deciding their own goals and creating their own missions.  We got WAY into the minute details of who our characters knew in town and what we did on a daily basis and wound up dabbling in local politics, etc.

I've run both of these myself, when I couldn't be sure who was going to show up and play what characters.  So, I had a story-line or an environment waiting for whatever characters would eventually wind up going through it.  You know...a "module".

I guess we could add a third extreme to the list of styles and call it (c) When you make the PCs first and then create a storyline that revolves around them (their hopes, goals, flaws, backgrounds, etc).

But I think I keep mixing apples & oranges.  It's very grey for me as I try to do six other things and formulate my thoughts on this at the same time.  So, I apologize for trying to explain this over and over.  

Ummm,... in this third example (c), we're really talking about how the campaign was prepared.  And while the other two (above) could be seen that way also, I think that I was trying to explain how the campaign was RUN as well.

For example, in the first one, (a), the gm tends to let the players do whatever they want and go wherever they want.  The game is centered upon letting them roleplay whatever it is their characters do on a daily basis.  So, if they enjoy spending a few hours chatting with an NPC, so be it.  If they put their minds together and decide to take over the town, so be it.  Let them try.  And if things get boring because they don't have the ambitions or motivations to do anything, then throw some drama at them - a bar-fight or a plothook to some small adventure.

In the 2nd one, (b), the gm runs the game like I've seen some modules set up where there is a series of "events" or scenes that will happen when the characters follow the clues around.  So, as the gm, your job there is to describe the scene, let the PCs interact with that scene, and then let them choose which lead or clue to follow up, bringing them to the next "scene".  Eventually, this leads through all of the elements of a traditional story, culminating in an exciting climax.

>The two must work together in order to create a story that everyone >enjoys.  By having the story/environment react to the players (or 
>characters) actions and desires, the players are invested in it, and >it becomes more exciting.

Well, both styles above can "react" to the players.  In the latter for example, the players' actions will determine direction in the unfolding plot an will affect small changes in the upcoming scenes.

>My thought about the "boring campaign" 

in his defense, it was only a boring night or two during a relatively interesting campaign that brought this line of thinking about.

>was that the GM wasn't paying attention to what the >characters/players wanted.

agreed.  I think that he was so busy fielding requests from players to explore leads and follow individual goals that he wound up roleplaying out each of those scenes instead of first figuring out which ones would actually contribute to the plot or add to the drama.

>Thinking about it, I wonder how close the three-fold model is to >your original question about preparation for adventures.

what is the "3-fold" model?

----------------------------------------------------------------
GAMERS Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gamers/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

Mike Jones

Tue

Jul 24
2001

21:41Z

gm styles

>From: 
>what is the "3-fold" model?

If I remember correctly, it is a way of summarizing three of the more 
popular styles of play:

1) Simulationist--emphasis on emulation or simulation of reality no matter 
where that may lead the story.

2) Dramatist--emphasis of dramatic story, possibly at the expense of the 
simulation aspect

3) Gamist--more focused on the game itself. Simulation and drama are both 
secondary to "game balance" and similar gamist concepts.

Something like that, I think, although I am way oversimplifying all three 
positions. And in every argument about them, it is usually noted that most 
gamers are some mix of the three.

----------------------------
Mike Jones
Pariah--Coming soon
from www.roguepublishing.com

----------------------------------------------------------------
GAMERS Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gamers/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

cra2

Mon

Jul 23
2001

13:59Z

gm styles

>[Rohan Light]  I use a loose variant of this style.  I find out what
>sort of story/theme the players want before character creation; >trying to get some sort of general consensus.  The characters are >created, I go off and write plot specific to the type of characters. 
>I determine the setting and then stick the two together.  From the >outset the plot reacts to the players as they're designed to be in >the middle of it.  What comes out does follow the players around.  

So you create plothooks that provide opportunities for the type of characters the Players created.  If the PCs ignore or miss these hooks and take off after their own desires, you just follow their lead, right?  In summary, this is the style where you just create the world (environment) for the PCs and let them explore.  Right?

But then...

>Everything goes along hunky dory until I throw the first curve ball. >Then things start to fall apart for them and, even though the story >still follows them, I'm back in the driving seat in terms of keeping >the drama going.

...eventually, you throw out an unavoidable plothook where they are forced into action (or reaction)?

>[Rohan Light]  Well, that's a waste of time then isn't it.
>Everything is dependant on varying degrees of momentum.  Even in the >still, quiet scenes, there needs to be a sense of momentum.

Ahhh.  Yes, that's a better way to put it.  He should have made sure that the NPCs he bothered to let us interact with had something to contribute to the story. 

>If all we do is sit around feeling stupid, then the video
>store will be busy next week.  If things start flagging, introduce >the next plot device.

Yeppers, that's what I was thinking - we were completely missing some detail that was supposed to lead us to the next "event".  If we were missing it, then the GM should have reacted by either making it a bit more obvious or by bringing some drama to us (whether related to the major plot or not).  Instead, he let us squander a good 8 hour gaming session shopping for items, interacting with inconsequential NPCs, and arguing about the clues we had been given so far.




----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

Rohan Light

Mon

Jul 23
2001

20:29Z

gm styles

> >[Rohan Light]  I use a loose variant of this style.  I find out what
> >sort of story/theme the players want before character creation; >trying
> to get some sort of general consensus.  The characters are >created, I go
> off and write plot specific to the type of characters. 
> >I determine the setting and then stick the two together.  From the
> >outset the plot reacts to the players as they're designed to be in >the
> middle of it.  What comes out does follow the players around.  
> 
> So you create plothooks that provide opportunities for the type of
> characters the Players created.  If the PCs ignore or miss these hooks and
> take off after their own desires, you just follow their lead, right?  In
> summary, this is the style where you just create the world (environment)
> for the PCs and let them explore.  Right?
	[Rohan Light]  Yeah, more or less.  Because the pc's are created
with an end result in mind (grave robbers, corsairs, petty functionaries)
they pretty much set their own course.  If they stray off it, then it's
either awesome roleplaying or non-roleplaying.  I insert pre-set story
threads in regardless of where they're at.  EG crucial encounter #3 was
meant to be at the market, and they went to the palace.  Well, that's where
I stick it.


> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The email message together with the accompanying attachments may be
CONFIDENTIAL. If you have received this message in error, please notify
mail@tepapa.govt.nz immediately and delete the original message. The
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be views of Te Papa.  
Te Papa employs strict virus checking measures and accepts no liability
for any loss caused either directly or indirectly by a virus arising
from the use of this message or any attached file.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

cra2

Mon

Jul 23
2001

21:47Z

gm styles

gamers@phoenyx.net wrote:
>[Rohan Light]  Yeah, more or less.  Because the pc's are created
>with an end result in mind (grave robbers, corsairs, petty >functionaries) they pretty much set their own course.  If they stray >off it, then it's either awesome roleplaying or non-roleplaying.  I >insert pre-set story threads in regardless of where they're at.

I can remember a long time ago when I was still running AD&D and I had piles of modules.  I took a random world map from some other fantasy setting and used their religion, money, calendar, etc.  

Then, I took each AD&D module and determined where it would fit into that world map, based on the location(s) described in the module.  
Then, I let the players create whatever PCs they wanted to.  The only restrictions were that they needed to have a strong reason to be (and stay) together.  And that they needed to form a loosely heroic group (since that lends itself well to most modules).

After that, we were ready to roll.  As you can see, there was not alot of effort involved in that one.  Yet, it made the Players think I had done a tremendous amount of detailed work.  In most cases, they thought the entire thing was a custom-built campaign.

I let them wander whichever way they wanted and form whatever goals they desired.  Whenever they wandered near one of the "modules", I simply used whatever plothooks the module suggested that I employ ("the mayor comes to you and asks you to save his town...").  And whenever a module "ended", I had the next closest module's plothooks ready and waiting.  If they ever strayed away from the ready-made adventures, or spent a significant amount of time in transit, I'd do a little ad-libbing, but mostly just referred to the "random encounter" charts for that terrain.

Boy that was an easy campaign to run....  sigh, the good ol' days.
But, that was back before they had every damn module invented memorized.  And back when they were thrilled just to fight some random orcs in the woods.  No need for a significantly enthralling epic storyline that tied all of the events of their characters' lives together.

----------------------------------------------------------------
GMAST Home Page:  http://www.phoenyx.net/gmast/

Permalink | Thread | | | Add reply

Refresh

discussion > gamers > main

Wed

gm styles

Wed

gm styles

Thu

gm styles

Mon

gm styles

Tue

gm styles

Tue

gm styles

Tue

gm styles

Tue

gm styles

Tue

gm styles

Mon

gm styles

Mon

gm styles

Mon

gm styles

discussion

games

news