Group Divided

Do you ever get frustrated by a seeming schism in your group? Do some of your players always give you a sideways glance when they declare actions? Do others bottle up during social encounters? Do some get bored after half a round of combat?

If more than one of these applies to your group, it sounds like you have a group of mixed play styles. A mixed group can be a good thing, but more often is just a source of friction and a headache for the GM.

This topic actually cropped up during a twitter conversation on the #rpg hash tag. R.A. Whipple was commenting that his group was playing highly adversarial even though everyone agreed to a politically based campaign. This is a terrible thing to happen, but during the conversation he revealed that he was only having problems with three players, one was helping him, and the other three were newbies without direction.

I suggested something radical: split the group. Find a GM willing to play the adversarial game with the more experienced players; take the newbies and the helpful member of the group and keep running the campaign.

We need to check our groups out regularly to know if they’re healthy as a group. The more in-fighting and bickering that comes of diverse play styles the less fun the group will have. By extension, the less time the group will last.

Some great place to look for the different player styles, and some excellent ways to deal with each, see Robin Laws’ Guide to Good Mastering (If you can find it) or the 4th Edition D&D Dungeon Master’s Guide 1 and 2.

Video Inspirations

So, getting back into the swing of things at school, it’s affecting my schedule a bit. Of course, to top that off, Champions Online went Free-To-Play recently, and sucked me back in. The truth is, while a lot of the Champions formula is straight out of the standard MMO formula, it did some things I’d not seen before that I really enjoyed, and keeps me wanting to play the game.

One of the major things they did that I loved is the break down of enemies into Henchmen, Villains, Master Villains, Super Villains, and Legendary Villains. This breakdown lets players know about how many they can take on their own. For example, a group of 5 on level henchmen is a pretty fair fight in Champions. A Villain and a Henchman or two is also a fair fight. Once you get up into the super villain levels you want groups of people for a fair fight.

That is, of course, the theory and the math breaks down occasionally. The idea, though, is spectacular and was one of the changes made to 4th Edition D&D I absolutely loved with the addition of the Minion, Elite, and Solo entries in the Monster Manual. This makes it very easy to throw together mixed groups of various power levels against a group of heroes without guessing if you’re going to just obliterate them or have the group steamrolled.

The other thing I liked about Champions is the way energy works. Your energy has a point of equilibrium where you recharge to almost the moment you leave combat. You also have a base power that is your energy builder; attacking with it builds up your energy bar, which drains when you use your more powerful (and interesting) powers.

I like this system, and have seen various systems in games do something similar. Building up a resource to turn it into ‘cool shit’ is a pretty well tread territory for a reason, my only complaint about it in Champions is that the power builders are really boring. Some people have leveled the same exact complaint at At-Wills in 4th Edition, and not unfairly.

The last part of the Champions formula that I love is that (for Gold members) you can modify the color and point of origin for a number of powers which allows a creative player to make dozens of archetypes using only their basic chains of powers. My example is Necromancer, my first Champions character.

Necromancer uses the Telepathic power set, which is a series of powers using telepathy for various effects, shielding, stuns, basic crowd control effects. By modifying the colors and origins, telepathy looks a lot like dark sorcery. Basically, it openly encourages reskinning which is at the heart of great role playing in most systems.

What about you guys, what video games inspire your mechanical design?

Punishments

Today I want to talk about something that came up in a game a friend of mine was running. The summary is a player went up against a foe that was a magnitude or two of power above his character. In an attempt to keep failure interesting my friend had the foe beat the character back, but not deal any long term harm. The player turned around returned to the fight immediately. When he inevitably lost this time the character lost a hand.

Now, I don’t think that permanent harm is untoward in the right system, and in this case, they were playing a World of Darkness game with mortals, so permanent afflictions are a core idea of the system. The problem is, the character in question was built as a two weapon fighter. A large amount of this character’s experience was sunk into two weapon fighting merits and specialties.

This kind of thing is when I start wondering about the intent of the consequence. Yes, the player knowingly fought an enemy out of his league. He went back in after being soundly beaten. And lost. An in game consequence is entirely justified in my opinion. But the consequence chosen in this case is a bit extreme. Instead of hampering the character it has literally removed the intent of the character.

This player, without meeting him, obviously wanted to play a two-weapon fighter, and spent many of his finite resources on that goal. To take that goal from the player in a way that forces the player to continue playing the character without the abilities that obviously drew the player to the character is actually worse than just killing the character in this case.

This is the kind of event that sparks my often referenced opinion that you should be talking to your players. These kinds of consequences are the top level of drastic and can really create some bad blood between GMs and players. If the players know that a whim is all it takes for them to lose their favorite abilities, they’ll play differently than if they can feel safe in their favorite abilities, but know they can lose other things.

How about you, readers, do you think this kind of consequence is suitable, too much, too little?

Yes

It’s a commonly offered piece of advice to GMs: Say ‘yes.’ Say yes to every crazy idea, say yes to every character concept, say yes to every behavior and desire. And if you don’t say yes, throw the dice.

Other people tell you to NEVER say yes. Leave it up to the dice, or tell the players it’s impossible.

Really, neither way is right.

As I’ve mentioned before, talking to your players is the first thing you need to do. Expectations, both theirs and yours, need to be addressed so that the game can operate on some accepted terms. If you’re expecting a gritty ‘realistic’ game with long lasting wounds and heavy consequences, your players need to know this before you drop that first broken limb on a character.

Talking with your players also lets you know what kinds of crazy things they’re going to want to do. If they want to take down the local/world government, you know ahead of time and can find a way to make it happen and be interesting for both parties.

At this scale, the campaign design, it is generally a good idea to compromise. Sometimes, the appropriate answer is yes.  Sometimes, it’s no. If you’re running a high fantasy romp featuring a band of royalty taking a McGuffin to be destroyed, and they suggest a fairly boring creature with almost no personality and no skills, you might need to reconsider how that story takes place. Of course, if all of your players suggest such characters, maybe your entire campaign needs to be refocused?

Lower down the scale, at adventure design, you will usually be saying no to new adventures while they’re in one, but after the climax, you want to say yes. If they think it’s not pertinent to continue the current story line, and move on to an interesting tidbit that was mostly a side concept, let them follow it. You as a GM should be flexible enough to play anywhere.

On the encounter scale, absolutely say ‘yes.’ ‘Yes and . . .,’ ‘Yes, but. . .,’ ‘Yes, if. . .’ Any one of these allows the player to do what they asked for, and continues to keep the game interesting. The players decide to complete a ritual sacrifice because it was an enemy on the altar? Yes, and a dark god now has its eye on these apparently fallible heroes. They want to pull of a crazy stunt to get the drop on an enemy? Yes, but if they fail the roll, the enemies see them and get the surprise instead. They want to create a large explosive with a stick of gum, a computer and a paperclip? Yes, if they can make the necessary rolls.

Now, I used to use ‘No’ to stop my players from wasting time on things that weren’t going to help them. I wish, now, that I’d caught the hint, and used those preventative measures to make the story more interesting. A personal failing, but one you can learn from: if the players focus on some shiny thing, make something up for them, it’ll be better than you think.

So, GMs, any time you can think of in which saying yes, or no, made your game more interesting?

3 Lessons For Great Stakes

You’ve got an established game, but it’s starting to get dull. The only thing the characters ever fight for is their life, and it’s hard to take that willfully. So how do you spice up your game and threaten the players with something they can actually lose?

Setting stakes is a skill most GMs need to learn, and learn to use well. The concept is simple: give the characters, and players, something to care about. In general, major tropes include fighting for your life against a given enemy, or fighting some world threatening entity. These are good tropes in the right genres, but aren’t always going to keep their ability to fire your players up.

So what are the key ingredients of a good stake in an encounter, adventure, or campaign?

1. Defined

A stake has to be clearly defined to be effective. Make it clear what it is the characters will lose if they fail, and the fate of the thing as well. Destroying a loved item or person has more immediacy than straight theft, but theft opens up many avenues of continued adventure.

The definition also makes it clear that choosing not to take an adventure means losing the stake in a specific way. This allows them to plan in a way that they can’t if you just tell them they’ve lost something.

2. Personal

Personal stakes are always more useful for drawing your players in. If they care about whatever it is they might lose, they’ll fight harder, and smarter, to save it. Try to steal their trademark weapon, their character’s lover/best friend, even threatening their hometown (If you sufficiently developed it.) can all have useful effects.

Making it personal will also cause the player who has the most stake in the situation to push his fellows into doing things they might decide against otherwise. Don’t underestimate social pressure as a tool for guiding your players.

3. Worthwhile

A stake needs to have some value. Allies who hearth wounded heroes, contacts, friends, money, lands, even power are all acceptable in terms of worth. All of these things have a perceived value, and your players will fight for any one of them.

This worth also helps keep the players from experiencing a ‘shock’ in regards to whatever thing they may lose. If you kill an NPC, your players will start to treat the NPCs like cardboard cutouts. By killing NPCs that produce value, they’ll be forced to continue to go to new allies for help. This keeps them from becoming insular in the game world.

So go out there and change the stakes. Let your players know their fortune they keep tied up in local businesses is going to be lost if the Orc warbands go to war, the wizard’s master is dying of an unknown disease, and the king has kidnapped the woman the fighter has been eyeing lately, and the rumor is the king is looking to marry. Oh, and to top it all off, the sky is falling.

What about you, GMs, what have you used as stakes lately?

Coaxing Your Players to Awesome

Do you ever get tired of coming up with all the cool ideas? Does it cause you undue pressure? Ever wish your players would come up with something neat for you to respond to once in a while? Let them know they have some dramatic license and they might start helping!

Dramatic license is about imposing your own ideas on the game world. Most of the time, the DM has all the dramatic license, controlling the world, the NPCs, planning the dungeons, moving the mountains. The old joke that a DM represents the ultimate god of the game world didn’t come into being for nothing. This truth, though, is on shaky foundations as more systems implement ways to empower players to affect the game universe through more than simple mechanics.

If you want your players to take control a bit and make the game more interesting, you need to give them incentives to do so and not create disincentives for doing so. Eventually, the combination of these things will draw out more creative play from your players, regardless of the system.

Incentive: XP
If you have a system that has XP as a reward, it’s a wonderful mechanic to offer for people who come up with great ideas. XP makes you more powerful over time, so even small awards add up. Any time they come up with a cool combat action or anything that you feel improves the game, give them a nominal XP award.

Incentive: Action Point/Drama Point/Bennie/Will Power
If your chosen system has a ‘sometimes’ resource used in combat, it’s a great place to award for cool ideas. If they spend a major action to do something cool, but not very effective, give an action point to make up for it.

Incentive: Bonuses
Mechanical bonuses, any thing that makes characters more likely to succeed, are a great way to encourage ‘cool’ actions. If the cool actions are more likely to succeed than normal, your players are more likely to attempt them.

Disincentive: Multiple checks
If it takes more than one roll to determine if the action succeeds, and they need to make all of them, your players are less likely to attempt it. The simple fact that they will fail more often is enough disincentive to keep the imaginative attacks from happening very often.

Disincentive: Penalties
This is similar to multiple checks, in the fact that penalized actions are more likely to fail, so why attempt? The harsher the penalty, the more likely they’ll ask to take a different action altogether. As a counter point, this is a spectacular way to discourage actions you deem disruptive.

So, more incentives, less disincentives, and encourage it verbally every chance you get. Very simple steps to a more imaginative game from your players.

What about you, DMs, what ways do you incentivize cool actions in your game? Can you think of any ways you unintentionally disincentivize those actions?

Free-For-All Friday: Player Motivations

So, I was good, I wrote my post for today back on Wednesday. Felt it was current enough to be interesting, and was a good topic to muse about. Then, while reading my RSS this morning, I stumble upon an article by The Chatty DM.

He’s covering the idea of player motivations, which is quite different from character motivations that I covered in Hook, Line, and Sinker. I’m going to leave most of his article over there for you to read, but to summarize for this discussion:

The 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons Dungeon Master’s Guide lists a number of core player motivations:

• Acting
• Exploring
• Instigating
• Power Gaming
• Slaying
• Storytelling
• Thinking
• Watching

He goes on to make the claim that, regardless of what’s written on the tin, that 4th Edition caters to Power Gaming, Slaying, and Thinking to the expense of the rest.

Now, while I agree that it does cater to these three things in a number of ways (See the character optimization boards scrambling for even +1 damage in the system.), most of these motivations are in fact covered by the design and/or marketing of the product.

Acting: If any of the motivations aren’t given a solid set of rewards or encouragement in the system itself, it’s acting. There is no mechanical reward for it, and very little in the way of support for players who want this sort of thing in the way of advice.

Exploring: Exploring is given a mechanical kick in the rear through action points. The concept of ‘one more encounter, and you’ll earn an action point’ can be enough to keep some groups going. The fact that once it’s earned, you’ll lose it if you sleep makes the odd number encounters something worth running through.

Instigating: This one there isn’t a real mechanical reward, except as it relates to Power Gaming. Instigating players are as likely to cause trouble as they are to advance the in game narrative, and to them, that shaking up of the status quo IS the reward. In other words, this one doesn’t NEED a mechanical award.

Power Gaming: Optimization is rewarded.

Slaying: Like most versions of Dungeons and Dragons, most of the rules are how to kill things better and what happens when you kill those things.

Storytelling: This one is one of the better supported motivations below the key three Chatty DM called attention to. Via Skill Challenges, which admittedly needed work to become as good as they could be, and Quest rewards, the system actively encourages advancing the narrative in ways other versions of Dungeons and Dragons didn’t. It even produced support, not in mechanical aspects, but help for GMs in the Dungeon Master’s Guide 2.

Thinking: I actually feel this one could have been done better out of the box (Back in 2008), but think they’ve made some definite improvements with the new monster design and more cohesive classes that work even better as a team.

Watching: This is another one I think Wizards of the Coast did a wonderful job with. Watchers often just want to spend time with friends, and possibly make new ones, and between the character builder, Encounters, and an active push to make Dungeons and Dragons ‘mainstream’ to some degree has definitely made this a good time for casual players to get into the game.

To summarize, I think most player motivations that can be planned for were planned for well. Some in the core rules themselves, and some via the marketing efforts of the company. Does this mean some of them couldn’t be improved? Absolutely not, and I wish the Chatty DM the best of luck in his efforts. I’ve literally just discovered him, but even cursory examination of his blog is interesting, and if you like my thoughts on design, his aren’t far off. Definitely check it out.

FRE is going to be getting a one page Primer written soon to take advantage of KORPG’s One Page RPG challenge. And while the Primer is only going to be a page, expect a bit meatier version coming eventually after I’ve worked out how ‘fiddly’ I’d like it.

ExoSquad is on a back burner right now, the holidays sucking up most of my time.

Velocity is of course still awaiting its edit.


Last thing: Obviously, I've picked a new theme, what does everyone think? Better than white on black? Should I dig around for another good template? Or can anyone suggest a good (Cheap.) designer?

Don't Fear the DM's Seat

GMs, have you ever experienced burnout? You run your games for months or years at a time, doing everything you can to make the campaign as fun as you can. You’re good at it: extremely skilled with plenty of experience. But some days, you just want to play a game without worrying about the minutiae of running. What’s the usual barrier to you getting a game in? If it’s like my past experience: no one else knows how to GM!

If this is accurate, this post is for your players, and you probably want to share it with them post haste.

So, Players, as I’m sure you’ve now gathered, this post is for you. I’m going to spill the beans on some secrets of being the GM. Some secrets that I’ve seen guarded by some, but that only creates the burnout I’ve mentioned.

The first secret: GMing isn’t hard! It’s work, usually, but it isn’t difficult work. There are plenty of tools across the web and tucked in the quality GM guides that anyone willing to give it the time can actually GM. You know the rules, your GM has been adjudicating them and you’ve read the books. Don’t let what you don’t know be a barrier to entry.

The second secret: You’re allowed to get it wrong. Whether you know it or not, very little of the experiences you have at the table unfold exactly as your GM expected them to. Even after my series on designing games, I can’t stress enough how likely the plan is going to change. It’s also why I suggest talking to your players, before they make the decision to pack up and head to the Frozen North when the mission you had planned is in the great jungles of the west. If they let you know they think the Frozen North is a cool place they’d like to explore a week or more before you need to have the adventure ready, you can spend that time planning some cool conflicts and seeding some new adventures.

The third secret: GMing can be fun and rewarding in the right systems. Some games make GMing more of a chore than others, but like most creative endeavors, the payoff can be great. When a game you ran becomes the source of a slew of inside jokes, half of which were unintentionally funny moments you designed, you can’t help but feel a little pride. You did something people remember, that’s a tough thing in this age, as the Internet consistently makes the fifteen minutes of fame easier to obtain, and easier to lose.

That’s it, Players. You can GM. You probably have some crazy idea for a maniacal super boss trying to take over the world right now. And you probably know a bunch of heroes who would love to bring him down. Get to it! If you need help, ask your current GM, and make sure to invite him to the table!

Hook, Line, and Sinker Part 4: The Climax

You set the hook by appealing to what drives the characters. You kept them on the line by putting that hook at the end of a series of smaller, more focused challenges. You designed those challenges with a series of smaller hooks and choices. Now, at the end of the game, you need the climactic final confrontation, you need to sink it and bring them back for your next adventure or campaign.

The climax is one of the most important parts of a story, and when it’s missing, people can tell.  In games, players often make their own climaxes, remembering the most iconic moments that present themselves during the game. The problem is that’s the relying on luck method, and this series is all about planning out awesome games.

When it comes to design, every adventure and campaign needs its own climactic encounter. That encounter, in order to give it prime memory real estate, needs to be the last challenge of the night. Beyond that, it needs a handful of things to improve its chances of success.

Stakes

The climactic encounter should have the highest stakes of the entire adventure or campaign. One set of stakes that’s perfect for the climax is of course the life, or at least story importance, of the player characters. Lethality of some sort should always be in the game, but during the climax, life and death become a genuinely interesting set of stakes due to the fact that failure by being removed from the campaign can have far reaching effects on the shared narrative. Another perfect stake in the climax is the hook itself: the ownership of the McGuffin, the secret, the revenge, or the glory. Finally, bring in the fates of non-player characters, allies and enemies known and unknown.

Tension

Tension is a difficult thing to generate, but by raising the stakes, you’re halfway there. The next step is to make losing a real possibility, or even a probable outcome. Some of this is making it challenging via the statistics built into the game, the enemies in the climax should be the most powerful of the adventure, but other ways are from your style as a DM. Don’t pull blows, fight dirty. Make the players feel like they have to work for it. That said, don’t make it impossible. If the heroes can’t win, it kills tension just as much as if they’re sure to win.

Setting

If the climax is a combat encounter, it should have the most interesting terrain features. If it’s a social encounter, public locations are best, especially if they have a lot of people involved. These types of locations make it interesting on a fundamental level. A combat with a dragon is interesting; a combat with a dragon on a stone bridge over a lake of lava with minions flowing from both sides with the McGuffin resting on a pedestal on the far side is climactic. An argument with a Vampire Prince is interesting; an argument with the Prince at Elysium is climactic.

The Unexpected

The last thing a climax need is a shift. The climax is where hidden allies throw their hand in with the heroes, where traitors turn on their ‘friends,’ where hidden plots come out, and nothing ever seems to go right. Besides the story implications that are usable in any type of conflict, combat encounters should have some major turning points, more so than a standard encounter. Take a page out of a video game’s book, make the ‘boss’ monster go through changes in tactics, or changes in forms. Have minions appear halfway through. Change the battlefield mid combat.

When it comes to ideas for a climactic conflict, the best place to look is your favorite movies. There’s only a handful of ways to successfully climax a story, and they’re all closely related.

So, readers, what do you think, did I miss any critical elements of a good game climax?

So I’ve reached the end of Hook, Line, and Sinker. I hope everyone has enjoyed it, I know I did! From the things I spoke on, I have a few more ideas for GM based articles coming, so expect this to become a regular fixture for the blog. I also have a few things I’ll be discussing next week regarding the blog itself and since the school semester is finally over, I’m going to buckle down and do some serious design work on ExoSquad, and a new project I’ll be announcing soon.

Hook, Line and Sinker Part 3: Adventure Design

So we've developed an overarching goal for our players, with an antagonist who's going to continue on his path regardless of the players actions. But that's just ideas, something you'll definitely need to revise before the end, and your game is starting in less than a week, you need something more concrete!

First step is of course picking a hook.  If this is a first adventure, you're going to need to pull something out of your initial questioning, something concrete and short term that you can fit into your ideas for a long term campaign. If this is anything BUT the first session, you should have ended the last session with some idea of where the player characters were going.

Once you have a hook you have a 'victory condition'.  The players get what they want, they win, if they are stopped, they lose. This is an important concept for RPGs as every single fight including 'Survive' as the primary victory condition gets boring after a while.

Going back to last week, let's take some of our 'outline' and make a quick and dirty adventure plan.  We'll assume the adventurers stopped the thief, so now know their trinket isn't a mere trinket. Hopefully, you find out last week they want to know more about their gem.

Our players want to know about their gem, so we obviously need to give them an opprotunity to learn.  A wise sage character, a fairly well stocked library, or even a local legend can all be useful in this situation.  Let your players guide you through this very roleplaying centric portion of your adventure, they'll let you know what kind of story they are expecting.

Now that your players know that the necklace is from the old Empire, and, if there research didn't turn up the fact, now's the time to let them know there are ruins nearby.  Hopefully, off they go.

Depending on your system, your next step is combats or traps, or something with a bit of an edge, it's time to make them to question their bravery. If they survive the trials, and they should, they should meet up with our bumbling archivist trying to find clues as to the whereabouts of the keys to the end game tower.  This is more roleplaying, and again, let your players lead you through this.  You know the character's motivation, let that guide your responses.

Once they know a little more, or have determined the archivist is unhelpful, you need to set up the keynote encounter.  This almost certainly should be a combat, something explosive, and you should find a way to bring the archivist back into the game, trying to steal the amulet.  Of course, beating him, and the rest of the encounter, means another piece of the amulet, and a hint that the item is for something very powerful.  What will our heroes do? Find out, because that's your hook for your next game!

Tying encounters together (Even as simply as this) helps fortify them in memory, as they can be grouped easily.  You want your players remembering this game, right?  So do what you can to help them do so.

To recap: Have a goal, tie the encounters together, and make sure to capstone with a great encounter.  Next time, I'll discuss making those excellent encounters.

What do you think, readers, are plot based victory conditions effective?  Try them out, see what your players think.

Read part 4!

Hook, Line and Sinker (Part 2)

You've set the hook, the players are on the line and aimed for the end, now how do you reel them in?

Start with the high level plan you made: What is it the players are after that should be the focus point of the end game? 

If it's a Greed hook, is it a legendary item?  Maybe they want to rule the world?  Perhaps, they just want a country?  If it's Revenge, is the enemy truly a challenge for the end game? Glory had better be something to go down in the history of the game world.  If it's Knowledge, it should be something that only the party will know when the end game is over. Whatever it is, it has to be something characters of the suspected end can achieve.  In Dungeons & Dragons, it better be multiverse changing, in World of Darkness it should at least affect the city, if not the country or world.  The important thing is to know your system and its end game well enough to make the call.

Now consider what the players need to obtain the goal.  Let's look at a few examples:

The players want to control a mythical artifact that was shattered long ago.  Obviously, they need to obtain all the pieces with the final piece being obtained JUST BEFORE the final climatic battle/encounter.  Why just before?  Because what's the point of an awesome artifact if you don't get the chance to use it?  If it's a weapon, someone should be attacking with it.  If it's something more abstract, perhaps an item that can redefine reality, the final fight should be with an enemy who wants it for themselves, and is willing to plaster the party to get it. So, depending on how many pieces you want to have, you have a rough road map for the campaign: Piece 1, Piece 2, Piece 3, Piece 4. . . End Game.

If they're after revenge, it's a bit more abstract, but the same idea: They need to find out where the enemy is, they need to know his true capabilities, they might need something to counteract a specific strength, and then, they need to get to him.

If they want to control something or do something mythic themselves, they need to prepare.  They need to have the goal, they need to get help, they need to make themselves better, and they have to DO the thing.  Using the Hero's Journey as an outline for this is probably a good idea.

If they're after knowledge, the steps are also similar: They need to know the knowledge exists, they need to find out who or what has it, they need to find out where this thing is, and they need to go get it.

So now you have a basic road map, each major 'step' should take about equal portions of the experience ramp.  I'm going to combine a few of the above ideas into one as I walk through a campaign plan that should keep players on the line.

End Game Hook: The players are trying to assemble an artifact that will let them revive an ancient empire to bring light back to the world. They will be opposed by a man who will stop at nothing to use that same artifact to gain unlimited demonic power and create an empire of his own.

Note that this hook combines three elements, and can include the fourth: An artifact of great power for Greed, a Glory in saving the world, Revenge in a long term antagonist, and Knowledge can be drawn on by making the ancient empire or artifact not something easily found out about.  By using all four hooks, I hope to draw any potential players toward the same goal.  Also, by including all four hooks, I can drop elements the players don't like without greatly affecting my ability to plan for their choices.

Now, steps for each goal:

Artifact

I'll use the artifact as the initial hook for the game and break it into four pieces: The first will be a large gemstone on a necklace that acts as a scaling magical item over the course of the campaign. The second piece will be a rod, wand, or staff (Whichever one is most useful to the players) that the crystal can sit in.  The third piece will look like a piece of accent on another scaling magic item.  And the last 'piece' is a tower from the old Empire where the final battle can take place.

Antagonist

This is a hard one to work with, but likely, he'll be a 'behind the scenes' man, sending loyal henchmen who drop clues leading to him at the end, where he will personally try to dispose of our band of heroes.  The first clue will be when someone tries to steal the necklace from the party, the next will be a man who was trying to get the rod, and the final clue can be a man who has the last piece of the artifact. Then, of course, we have our climax.

Knowledge

I'll say that the use of the artifact is going to be a hidden thing, with clues hidden in the pieces, the antagonist’s friends, and a few wise sages littered amongst the overarching story.  I don't want to make this too specific, but the information should be paced so as to not give out so much as to have 'cut scenes' that slow the game down. We also want to make as much as possible relevant to the current story as possible.  For our case, the first clue that the gem is more than it appears comes when they stop the 'thief,' who lets it slip that the group doesn't know what they're dealing with. From there, investigation should reveal its connection with the old empire, and lead to them seeking out ruins where the rod is kept. At the ruins, they encounter the second thug, whose murmurs reveal that there is an artifact that helped shape the old empire.  If they investigate further, they should learn of the existence of the tower, and at least some of its function.  Another piece of the puzzle is of course the 'key' hidden on another item, which should come into play when the last henchman tries to obtain the other two pieces, revealing that his master knows where the tower is and knows how to activate it. The players should be able to trace the antagonist enough to learn who he talked to, and where he went.  Then we go on to our final encounter.

Glory takes effect pretty much anywhere along this path.  Perhaps they're doing things for a specific king, or spreading their own names so as to more smoothly take control.  It doesn't matter as long as people start talking about them.

So there we have a basic outline:

Adventurers do a dungeon crawl, find a special necklace.

Thief attempts to steal necklace, revealing that its worth is more than it seems.

Group seeks a sage to learn more (Or does research on their own!).

They go to ruins from the old empire.

A man they find wandering through the place reveals that there is an artifact of great power left from the old empire.

Upon defeating him, the players learn he worked for a man who wants all the parts of the artifact.

They find the rod.

They find information on the tower.

They seek out the last key, tracking the man who wants the artifact for himself.

A thug tries to stop them; they take the last piece from him.

They follow the trail left by the thug.

At the tower, they face off with their antagonist.

Win or lose, someone uses the tower.

With this in hand, you have a basic idea of where to go, and what small scale plot hooks to lie down in the players’ path. Combine some of these elements with the players’ short term goals and fill in any dull moments with the players tangents, and they’ll be enjoying themselves to the end.

As this article has proven much longer than I intended, I’m going to break the series into a few more parts.  We’ll get into Adventure and Encounter planning in the next few segments, and end it with the Sinker: clinching Campaigns, Adventures, and Encounters in a way that satisfies.

Next week, I’ll look into discussing more mechanics ideas for ExoSquad, find out more about the load-outs I mentioned in my post on system mastery.

So what do you think, GMs, is this type of planning likely to help you out in the long run?  What about players, you guys think this is too much of a railroad?  Sound off in the comments!

Find Part 3 Here

Hook, Line, and Sinker (Part 1)

Today, I talk about running the game, specifically, making memorable encounters, adventures, and campaigns in any system. My trick? Use narrative tools to plan your game: hook them with a believable goal, taunt them with them, drawing them deeper into trouble and excitement, then when the moment is right, explode with the final confrontation, and let them have what it is they want.

As has been oft quoted by GM resources again and again, you always need a hook.  I've seen plenty of hooks in my experiences playing and GMing, and they don't all appeal to different people.

Hook 1: Greed

This is probably the most common in combat games. Greed is present any time the players do something for gear, cash, or experience. That drive for more can be a useful tool, and for players who have this motivation, abuse it mercilessly. Offer extra rewards, cooler gear, or bigger experience rewards. (I'll talk about my thoughts on experience points and character advancement in a later blog.)

Hook 2: Revenge

This one is another very common motivation I've seen in players. They love tracking people who get the better of them, be it in combat, a deal, or other challenge. This is a tricky one to use on purpose, but if the players ever get the short end of the stick, expect them to go back for the rest of it.

Hook 3: Glory

This one is less common, but I've seen it enough to include it here. This is absolutely a pure story reward: getting 'in' with the king, being given a medal, anything of the sort. Giving the players a chance to do something foolhardy, risky, and above all important to the setting will set this hook.

Hook 4: Knowledge

This is probably the least common hook in some games. Players want to know more: who stole the ruby? Who left that note? What's beyond those mountains? Driven by a desire to find out what twist lay hidden beyond that next turn drives them to getting into places no one else has gone, and getting into trouble no one new existed.

Just about every hook you can think of will be one of these four, and, if you hadn't noticed yet, they all tie back to a desire for more. Greed drives everything. The biggest probably is getting your players involved. Most hooks beyond greed require some player-GM interaction: ask your players what their CHARACTER wants.

Each player has, in their head, an idea of who their character is; take advantage of it. Be formal if you have to, but really, just talk. Listen to your players, pay attention to why they do things. Unlike book characters, players are often talking out loud about why they want something.

Once you have these goals, whatever they are, short, medium, or long, you can put it in your plans somehow. Each encounter or conflict you present your players should lead them to one of these goals, and the more intricately you can combine them, the better.  If your group has a goal to save a kingdom, but there's an opportunity for one of the players to reach one of their goals in another direction, you have some drama built into the situation. Decisions are the thing that makes a game interesting, opportunity costs have a much more powerful effect on the players than a failed die roll. This is how you use hooks to drive a campaign.

For adventures, it’s much simpler, as your players have already told you their goal. The hook is going to be one of the above, but it’s going to be very short term, something they can get to at the end of the story arc. Maybe it’s the current McGuffin, drawing them to the end with Greed. Make the final encounter with a foe who had once bested them, focusing them with Revenge. Maybe Glory drives them after an enemy that has been tormenting the local lands. Sometimes, even important bits of Knowledge can drive an adventure.

For encounter level design it’s even easier, though you’ll gain points with your players if the goal changes a bit. If the only thing they want is to kill the goblins to get to the door it will get old fast. Give them another goal occasionally. Ambush them to draw them in with Revenge. Throw in a renowned foe to get them to act for Glory. Or maybe let it slip that one of their foes knows something they need to know and see how Knowledge drives them.

Hooks are awesome things, and without them, you won’t have players interested enough to have memorable games. How about you, readers, did I miss any hooks? Do you have any examples of the above hooks in play? Comment below! (Sign in with a Gmail account and you can avoid that nasty anonymous tag!)


Find Part 2 Here