Been reading a bunch of books on structure for movies, writing, Campbell's heroes journey and so on. It's not a divine commandment to follow but it's good to have references to reflect on what one's got.
Designing a one-shot, a campaign, something in between, any of you have some guidelines for that?
Adventure design
Moderator: Moderators
Usually I start by designing the main antagonist/evil master plan, then I work backward from there asking myself how the players will stumble across the information that leads them to this plot.
Once you have the end stage you can usually figure out a couple steps that are not essential but that would be helpful and then design a complementary boss to handle that.
Once you have the end stage you can usually figure out a couple steps that are not essential but that would be helpful and then design a complementary boss to handle that.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
I usually go with
1) What is happening? Usually inspired by the news or a movie. May just be a location or group I want to use.
2) Why is it happening. I like to have a reason why things are happening. The players probably won't find out 100%, but when we get to things I haven't planned for, I can figure out what makes sense pretty quickly. (An insane computer program captures and brainwashes people to make them improve the place it "lives." The players steal or break something I didn't expect that was in the program's way. The result would be no real response to their overt crime, because it was beneficial to the program.)
3) I build up the opposition that would make sense in the location, as well as any weaknesses in the defenses based on what is really going on (strong outer defenses, but not much inside because people work there, or people are willing to ignore problems if they won't get personally blamed because the boss is a controlling jerk). I need to know entrances, exits, and how people who are there get in and out, and what those people do.
4) I make sure all of the players have something to do, and that no one player should easily be able to just bypass large portions of the adventure with their skills. If the players can manage to out-plan me, that's great. I'm just going to make sure it's not easy. This is also when I try to guess what the players might do, and have those areas fleshed out.
5) Go back and make sure everything still works together and makes sense.
1) What is happening? Usually inspired by the news or a movie. May just be a location or group I want to use.
2) Why is it happening. I like to have a reason why things are happening. The players probably won't find out 100%, but when we get to things I haven't planned for, I can figure out what makes sense pretty quickly. (An insane computer program captures and brainwashes people to make them improve the place it "lives." The players steal or break something I didn't expect that was in the program's way. The result would be no real response to their overt crime, because it was beneficial to the program.)
3) I build up the opposition that would make sense in the location, as well as any weaknesses in the defenses based on what is really going on (strong outer defenses, but not much inside because people work there, or people are willing to ignore problems if they won't get personally blamed because the boss is a controlling jerk). I need to know entrances, exits, and how people who are there get in and out, and what those people do.
4) I make sure all of the players have something to do, and that no one player should easily be able to just bypass large portions of the adventure with their skills. If the players can manage to out-plan me, that's great. I'm just going to make sure it's not easy. This is also when I try to guess what the players might do, and have those areas fleshed out.
5) Go back and make sure everything still works together and makes sense.
The Lazy DM framework is pretty good for building adventures in general.
But if we're just talking about narrative structure for an adventure:
For TTRPGs, the framework I've found that most translates from screenwriting is the four-corner opposition structure from John Truby's The Anatomy of Story. This video gives a rundown: What Writers Should Learn from Batman Begins
Basically, you setup four factions that each approach the same difficult, morally-charged question in a way different from the others. That question should be tied to a location, object, or person they're all competing for. Each faction's answer to the question should reflect their values, and their value conflicts lead to actual conflict. Adapting this structure to TTRPGs is simple: You make the PCs one of the four factions and let them figure out their answer to the tough question themselves.
If you want to prevent some or all of the PCs from joining other factions:
But if we're just talking about narrative structure for an adventure:
For TTRPGs, the framework I've found that most translates from screenwriting is the four-corner opposition structure from John Truby's The Anatomy of Story. This video gives a rundown: What Writers Should Learn from Batman Begins
Basically, you setup four factions that each approach the same difficult, morally-charged question in a way different from the others. That question should be tied to a location, object, or person they're all competing for. Each faction's answer to the question should reflect their values, and their value conflicts lead to actual conflict. Adapting this structure to TTRPGs is simple: You make the PCs one of the four factions and let them figure out their answer to the tough question themselves.
If you want to prevent some or all of the PCs from joining other factions:
- Ensure each faction is obviously unreasonable in some aspect of their answer to the tough question.
Ensure each faction conflicts with individual PC goals/values.
Make the faction leader an asshole.
Make the faction's goals harmful to NPCs important to the PCs.
Last edited by brized on Mon Jun 10, 2019 4:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tumbling Down wrote:An admirable sentiment but someone beat you to it.deaddmwalking wrote:I'm really tempted to stat up a 'Shadzar' for my game, now.
Honestly, brized's method works to keep players engaged with the adventure, and kaelik's method works for verisimilitude regarding each faction's capabilities within the scope of the game and gives them a mechanical framework to engage with the central conflict question that needs the PC's answer. I figure best practices would be to incorporate both in the adventure design.
-Kid Radd
shadzar wrote:those training harder get more, and training less, don't get the more.
Stuff I've MadeLokathor wrote:Anything worth sniffing can't be sniffed
Re: Adventure design
It depends on game and group preferred playstyle. Dungeon crawl, sandbox, investigation, heists, drama, etc. will ask for different structures each, IMO.OgreBattle wrote:Been reading a bunch of books on structure for movies, writing, Campbell's heroes journey and so on. It's not a divine commandment to follow but it's good to have references to reflect on what one's got.
Designing a one-shot, a campaign, something in between, any of you have some guidelines for that?
For a one-shot, I usually start with a concept. It can be a scene I have in my head, an interesting twist, a plot hook I've read somewhere, a feeling I want to push to the players. Then I extrapolate from that and try to get an interesting adventure around this.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it turns out the concept isn't enough to make an interesting game.
For a campaign or something more fleshed-out I prefer to start with an interesting situation, then I think about the different factions that will be involved, the resources and goals they have, run a few simulations in my head to see if that can make for interesting plot-hooks. If the players like it, I ask them for what they want to play and I try to push the setting in these directions.
But generally speaking, I've found that the big difference between a good game and an exceptional one is the use of themes. A game where players uncover a conspiracy led by a weird cult can be fun. But a game where the players get to think and act around the concept of individuality vs community (for example the cult pushes for a solution that is beneficial for the community but will reduce individual freedom and some PC can find this outcome preferable to the status quo), will probably resonate more and lead to a more interesting time.
Moral themes are one of the easiest to trigger, by having the players face tough moral choices where the choice is not between good and evil but between one moral stance and another, forcing them to take a stand rather than just "do the right thing". But you can also go for philosophical or political concepts.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it turns out the concept isn't enough to make an interesting game.
For a campaign or something more fleshed-out I prefer to start with an interesting situation, then I think about the different factions that will be involved, the resources and goals they have, run a few simulations in my head to see if that can make for interesting plot-hooks. If the players like it, I ask them for what they want to play and I try to push the setting in these directions.
But generally speaking, I've found that the big difference between a good game and an exceptional one is the use of themes. A game where players uncover a conspiracy led by a weird cult can be fun. But a game where the players get to think and act around the concept of individuality vs community (for example the cult pushes for a solution that is beneficial for the community but will reduce individual freedom and some PC can find this outcome preferable to the status quo), will probably resonate more and lead to a more interesting time.
Moral themes are one of the easiest to trigger, by having the players face tough moral choices where the choice is not between good and evil but between one moral stance and another, forcing them to take a stand rather than just "do the right thing". But you can also go for philosophical or political concepts.
Writing up the plot of the adventure runs counter to the idea that PCs are making meaningful choices. You are not writing a story or a video game.
I've found that writing up really interesting places and characters and a general timeline of events is all you need to let the players generate their own story. Let them interact with all the pieces and react to their decisions and all it takes is some minimal improvisation to keep the fun going.
Sometimes they are going to want to take over an old dungeon and turn it into a fortress, and that needs to be a thing that can happen. Sometimes they are going to decide that they need to take over the leadership of the local temple to protect the people. In one campaign, my players decided to take control of a tribe of orcs by offering them transformation into were-crows, and it was great and not at all in my overall plans.
Sometime this means that they'll get to places too late or fail to find important clues, but its not too hard to say to yourself "what's the most fun option for failure here?"
The last campaign I ran involved the players being librarians of Oghma who recovered lost and overdue books in wild and exotic locales, gradually uncovering clues to a greater meta-plot about an alien god of knowledge who was trying to usurp both Oghma and Shar, and a lot of the material came from letting them suggest plans and me writing up locations on the fly.
I've found that writing up really interesting places and characters and a general timeline of events is all you need to let the players generate their own story. Let them interact with all the pieces and react to their decisions and all it takes is some minimal improvisation to keep the fun going.
Sometimes they are going to want to take over an old dungeon and turn it into a fortress, and that needs to be a thing that can happen. Sometimes they are going to decide that they need to take over the leadership of the local temple to protect the people. In one campaign, my players decided to take control of a tribe of orcs by offering them transformation into were-crows, and it was great and not at all in my overall plans.
Sometime this means that they'll get to places too late or fail to find important clues, but its not too hard to say to yourself "what's the most fun option for failure here?"
The last campaign I ran involved the players being librarians of Oghma who recovered lost and overdue books in wild and exotic locales, gradually uncovering clues to a greater meta-plot about an alien god of knowledge who was trying to usurp both Oghma and Shar, and a lot of the material came from letting them suggest plans and me writing up locations on the fly.
-
Avoraciopoctules
- Overlord
- Posts: 8624
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:48 pm
- Location: Oakland, CA
That does sound like a really cool game.K wrote:The last campaign I ran involved the players being librarians of Oghma who recovered lost and overdue books in wild and exotic locales, gradually uncovering clues to a greater meta-plot about an alien god of knowledge who was trying to usurp both Oghma and Shar, and a lot of the material came from letting them suggest plans and me writing up locations on the fly.
The concept I am drafting right now basically starts with the premise that the PCs just successfully robbed a dragon horde full of crazy magic artifacts. Their wanted stars have shot to max, and there's like 8 named supervillains who want to beat them up and take their stuff to boost their various evil plans.
PCs are free to do whatever they want, engage with the baddies or not. Even if all they want to do is totally disengage from the setting, there should be some fun sessions dealing with the various ninja squads pursuing them.