Player Driven Plots (instead of Plot Driven Players)


Gamer Life General Discussion

51 to 84 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I enjoy mixing it up. Sandbox style has always been my favorite, ever since my dad ran a hexcrawl in second edition (using older rules) and I played with Batman the Half-Orc Barbarian (I was six). So these days, I incorporate a lot of that design concepts into my campaign. I like to run campaigns that are open, with several hooks across the world to hook players in. It's not too hard and fair fun. I also bring back random encounters because I enjoy them. They can add some much needed fun and players can surprise you with them. Like last night, when I rolled an imp and two lemures as a fight, the players ended up capturing the imp for the cleric to redeem.

The Exchange

I think that's an awesome barbarian name.


Odraude wrote:
...I played with Batman the Half-Orc Barbarian (I was six). So these days, I incorporate a lot of that design concepts into my campaign.

Please tell me Batman is still there. :)


Haha, I still have the old character sheet, long yellowed and such. It's survived two decades, four moves, and three presidents. I may have to remake Batman next time I run again, since my current game seems to have crashed and burned magnificently.


When I prep for a session I usually know what plot points I want to hit through the session and where things can go. I prepare a toolbox of NPC, encounters, rules systems and things like that. I define locations for battlemap purposes and events happening. I go from there, following the paths the players take. I think of it as an hybrid between full improv and GM-driven plots.

For the major plots I use a comic book system. I have the main plot (plot A) they are following and foreshadow a few other plotlines. Usually they'll pickup one of those (now plot B). I keep the old threads progressing so at some point when plot B is resolved I have plot C ready and it appears to the players like I've been preparing that plotline for a while (back when they were after plot A).

Also Session 0 is important to define where they want to take their characters, make sure everyone is on the same page and defining what the campaign is about.


Not planning to let current posts fall so far behind, so I'll address current ones first before going back to where I left off in the pile.

@ GreyWolflord One big thing is going to be how much prep you put in. Myself? I generally make it my goal to spend absolute(ly) zero time doing traditional prepping. I do commit a great deal of mental energy to assimilating my Players Characters backstories/goals/dreams/purposes/personalities/identities, and I also try to put in at least one session per week of imagination meditation (closing myself off somewhere with few distractions, ideally outdoors, closing my eyes and envisioning as many different random scenarios and environments as possible, in the greatest level of detail I can craft in my head.)

@ SirMattDusty indeed, there are all kinds of different players, just like there are all kinds of GMs. Nothing wrong with any approach, just different people with different preferences. I will note, of course, that in my campaigns the world doesn’t revolve around the players, the limited story the players are participating in revolves in concert with the players. The world acts, they act, it’s a sort of dance so to speak.

Going back to the older posts......

@ TheJeff Indeed there is nothing wrong with that playstyle. In fact, once one of my players created such a ‘big bad’ for me in his backstory, being the Red Dragon Bloodline sorcerer spawned from the descendents of a tyrant Ancient Red Wyrm who had taken it upon himself to rule over the ‘lesser species’ in his domain. He didn’t have anything ‘planned’ so to speak (at least not yet in my head, who knows what would have developed during play) but it was an excellent setup for a sort of freedom fighters campaign.

@ MrSin I will confess I have an obsessive thing for mastering rules systems. If I’m going to play a game, I will do my level best to commit as much as possible to memory. In recent years I’ve also become far more flexible in terms of homeruling and providing basic rulings on things based on my own sense of logic/fairness and familiarity with the rules rather than citing specific rules themselves. (If this is ever going to screw over a player based on a rule he was working with based on its RAW state, he always has the right to show me the rule and we can adjust to keep things going.)

It also helps that I’m not big on controlling treasure and like to give players things they like/replace necessary magic items with inherent EX aspects of the character.

@Simon You’re assuming that I’m running a Heroic campaign, which I do not. I’m not a fan of fate dragging so-called-heroes to their destinies. Heroes are forged by their choices. If the players wish to be heroes, then they are made so by their heroics, not by ‘PLOT.’ Likewise, if my players wish to be casual human beings looking to make a quick buck, or generally good people with generally good goals but not as much courage and daring as a hero, or if the party wants to subjugate the people and take over the world, or even if they’re just merchants travelling from town to town trying to make a profit and survive the dangers of the wilderness and their scheming merchant rivals? All of that and more are options my players have, because I don’t create overarching plots, the players do.

There are forces in the world doing their things yes, but the world has existed for thousands of years, I’m not going to force the players to rise up and be the heroes who save it. Somebody will, if my players choose to pursue that, then that somebody is them. If they’d rather do something else, then someone else will answer the call. Not my problem.

@ Lincoln Hills That’s some impressive prep work you’ve done, lining up 200+NPCs. It’s the total opposite of my style, which is to create new people as they appear, but if it works for you then that’s great.

@ Simon Just because I don’t prep quests doesn’t mean they don’t happen. There are tons of quests, and character arcs, and usually larger overarching themes and stories which evolve out of spontaneous play in my campaigns. Not everything is linked, but many pieces do link together to form something greater.

@ Arachnofiend it’s true that Improv acting has a starting point. In the case of my campaigns, its my goal to make that starting point a combination of detailed character backgrounds/goals/identities/personalities. If the player needs some sort of impetus to motivate their character I try to work with them to come up with one.

As far as option paralysis, I’ve always made it a personal goal to try to help walk a player through their choices where needed to help them create the character they want, without too much concern over the other players. A little party balance is advised, but I’ve never seen adventurers as a hivemind so much as distinct individuals who form a group when needed.

The Exchange

I was running a city-based campaign. Those NPCs were going to be popping up over and over again. I couldn't fake it.

On the plus side, now that I have the archive, I can tap into it for virtually any campaign/location, change the name of a character of appropriate class/level, and 'instantly' have an NPC without having to sit down and build it from scratch. ;) As long as I swap the gear a little...

"That's odd, this is the third barbarian we've killed who was wearing a cloak of arachnida. What are the odds?"


Hahaha, yes, once an NPC pops up I always note his name and any details that come up in play (and any other details that pop into my head which do not make it into play at that time.) Recurring NPCs are a valuable tool in my toolbelt, and one I believe many GMs put to good use.


I actually have this massive list of names that fit my setting. So if there is an impromptu NPC that is needed, I can mentally grasp it from my metaphorical hat of names and use it.


On the subject of names 'fitting the setting,' I've developed a habit of not freely offering a character's name until asked for it, and many characters prefer to offer simple nicknames or surnames (or by title, including things like 'call me Barkeep' or something to that effect) so I don't actually have to craft full names in the moment very often.

Coming up with interesting unique names is the one area of spontaneous GMing that still gives me a little trouble when I have a good group for that kind of campaign and have build some rapport with them. (Up until the point that rapport is there, a new campaign with new players can have a slow start.)


kyrt-ryder wrote:

On the subject of names 'fitting the setting,' I've developed a habit of not freely offering a character's name until asked for it, and many characters prefer to offer simple nicknames or surnames (or by title, including things like 'call me Barkeep' or something to that effect) so I don't actually have to craft full names in the moment very often.

Coming up with interesting unique names is the one area of spontaneous GMing that still gives me a little trouble when I have a good group for that kind of campaign and have build some rapport with them. (Up until the point that rapport is there, a new campaign with new players can have a slow start.)

That's fair. My setting is simple, as it's based on the Caribbean of the 1500's. Specifically, my players are in the equivalent of fantasy Puerto Rico. So I can luckily throw out a common Spanish name easily (Hector, Juanita, Rodrigo). When it comes to native names, however, that requires a list.

It also helps that I'm Puerto Rican, so I can just name NPCs after my extended cousins :)


My current homebrew is a megadungeon; that is there's one big ruined castle and town with nearly a dozen zones further divided into levels and sub-levels per zone. I told my players this up front but I couldn't deal with just murdering them outright at first level delving the megadungeon so I spent this first level (4 sessions) hitting smaller one-shots around their home city.

Tomorrow their plot becomes this: find Blackhorn's Vault hidden somewhere in the depths below the Lower Warrens.

This is as much plot as I'm going to give them right away. Blackhorn's Vault is a ways away from the surface entrance with several ways to get to the sub level so this will involve lots of exploration. In short: I don't expect them to get there in one session.

As such I've got a handful of old maps I've drawn on graph paper, some random encounter tables and some ideas for set pieces here and there. I've also got lists of names for people, places and things. I honestly have no idea what sub-plots they'll run into along the way, if any.

I will remind them, before we get into tomorrow's session, that this is a megadungeon campaign and some delves will be long hacks. One of the players during downtime took the opportunity to buy food, water, and other long-term necessities. My hope is that the players aren't blindsided by not instantly reaching their goal.

On a larger scale I hope my players are ok with exploring. All 3 of them are the types who like to have firm objectives and acheive them. One of my players has also requested rich, involved plots. I hope I can ad-lib well enough to deliver.

If anyone has any last minute advice or commentary for my immediate situation, throw it in. In the meantime I'll continue combing this thread for general points.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've run several campaigns that were player-driven. The players feel empowered that they're actually building their own world and their places in it.


Obviously, with published products there is less opportunity for player driven play unless it is something like Kingmaker.

I love player driven play but as a GM I don't go total sandbox. I prefer for players to drive a plot based on their own ambitions but I will usually have some sort of event ready to go if things slow down.

For instance the players want to build a temple or bar and are working busily around town getting supplies and interacting with local officials but I have in my pocket an "adventure" involving a corrupt official, renegade priest or monster attack that relates to what they are doing.

You need lumber to build your bar...suddenly prices go up or the supply is cut off and the party must investigate only to find evil druids cutting off the supply of timber. That sort of thing.

I am pretty good at doing things on the fly however.


Sorry Mark, I can’t really offer you much advice, dungeons aren’t my thing. The closest I’ll get to a dungeon is a lair of Kobolds dug into a cliffside or a small cave system. Whatever the case, these minidungeons I actually use never last more than one session.

@ MattR1986 you assume I have ‘clues and events nestled in certain places’ which I do not. Clues and events happen spontaneously, sometimes as a result of the characters actions, sometimes because a player inspired something to me OOC (either on purpose or on accident) and sometimes they happen just because those things are happening in that place in that time.

Nothing is set in stone, everything evolves in the moment. The ‘stream of meaningless jobs like you're a temp murder hobo employee’ you speak of only occurs in campaigns where the players want that kind of game. In other games, the characters have some kind of goal they’re progressing towards, or some coherent theme evolves out of the events in play.

@ Kimera757] Everyone’s entitled to their own preferences. I prefer to have the PCs be independent and driven by their own goals and dreams. Splitting the party sucks (and I do my best to motivate the party to work together whenever possible) but I would prefer to have players who go after a goal- even if that goal excludes the other PCs- than to have players who ask me what to do next.

(Heck, some of my fondest memories are of a PC who joined up with the force against whom the rest of the PCs had rallied against. Made for one hell of a campaign.)

@ Bacon666 a bare minimum of 3 goals seems like a pretty reasonable place to start. Sometimes a character has a really really deep dream which naturally has a great many steps along the way that would suffice, but 3 goals of different timeframes sounds like a nice minimum value to me.

@ Mathew Downie Mark’s already answered one option here, and that’s to prepare, prepare, and prepare some more. Put together a massive binder of scenarios to draw from and go with whatever suits the mood and location in the moment.

My own method is pretty much the opposite, however. What ‘prep time’ I spend isn’t preparing specific adventures or NPCs or Encounters, it’s assimilating rules/creatures/themes and honing my imagination and ability to respond to the unexpected/produce the unexpected without previous work regarding any particulars.

In fact, the last few weeks I’ve been working my way through the bestiary, taking a few monsters per day and running them through all sorts of variable scenarios in my head when I have a low-mind moment (such as weeding the garden, for example), trying to ‘master’ them to better Game Master with them.


For help with making NPC names, I like using Behind the Name random generator. You can get some cool names from it. My favorite is Salvador Seville. Hope this helps.


Behind the Name is great. I have named at least half a dozen characters by choosing a linguistic theme and digging through their alphabetical archive. It works particularly well when you know there's a strong link between a certain culture and an RPG class, like Welsh and Druids for example.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

i wanted to play in a Sandbox game, but i don't really have the confidence for one, due to dealing with countless powermad DMs whom forcefeed their plots to the players and at the same time, the paralysis that comes from being put on the spot derived from never having a chance to learn improv due to a guy whom hogs the spotlight with his speeches and a controlling current DM whom while he may use character backstories as adventure fodder, still includes a main foe and main plotline and railroads, even with the side adventures.


Auren "Rin" Cloudstrider wrote:
i wanted to play in a Sandbox game, but i don't really have the confidence for one, due to dealing with countless powermad DMs whom forcefeed their plots to the players and at the same time, the paralysis that comes from being put on the spot derived from never having a chance to learn improv due to a guy whom hogs the spotlight with his speeches and a controlling current DM whom while he may use character backstories as adventure fodder, still includes a main foe and main plotline and railroads, even with the side adventures.

Ummm. Mr. Fishy is sorry for you. Have you tried poison? Or playing a wierd character, like a goblin cavalier, or a A tengu monk kensai name Bwk Bwk?

Some DMs are power hungry tyrannts and Mr. Fishy can help you...um...turn the tables. Learn their tells and plays. Most people have a routine pattern that they follow. Learn the pattern and out manuever them. You might get an ECL on every character, but at least you get to watch the power trip fail. Horde items and bring them out at unexpected times. Keep an extra dagger in your boot. Or a smoke stick in your quiver.

Just make sure your actions are justified. High ranks in diplomacy and bluff help to, it gives you a mechanical defense against rules lawyers.


Mr. Fishy, you are one devious gill-breathing individual. That's not a bad thing - so are some GMs. One of my favorite Rogue character concepts keeps at least 6 concealed daggers at all times (including adamantine and cold steel) in addition to his primary weapons and has sky-high sleight of hand.

It often seems better to co-operatively tell a story with your GM than outwit them though. Idealistic? Maybe. But this way they don't TPK you for giggles.


Auren "Rin" Cloudstrider wrote:
i wanted to play in a Sandbox game, but i don't really have the confidence for one, due to dealing with countless powermad DMs whom forcefeed their plots to the players and at the same time, the paralysis that comes from being put on the spot derived from never having a chance to learn improv due to a guy whom hogs the spotlight with his speeches and a controlling current DM whom while he may use character backstories as adventure fodder, still includes a main foe and main plotline and railroads, even with the side adventures.

Eesh, come to think of it my next game is with a DM who told me he's specifically running an AP to keep us all on the rails and from doing much sandboxy. Sets off a big red light somewhere in my head.


The DM has unlimited resourses. Mr. Fishy has a character sheet that the DM is allowed to review at anytime. ROUND ONE, FIGHT! If the DM is on the level then Mr. Fishy plays...nice. If the DM is a power tripping jerk, well. Mr. Fishy as and will go rogue. It is not pretty.


Back when I had a regular group to run with, I used to have a world that kept on running in the background. The party had a lot of freedom of where to go, although the farther into the wilderness they went, the more deadly the encounters became. Initially there would be a bit of railroading to get things started, i.e., the party is hired to do "X", but thereafter things would become more of a sandbox. Every month or so of game time I would provide a sheet of rumors. Some of these rumors gave information on the overall world, some were optional plot hooks, and some were information that party members had been seeking (e.g., paying off a traveling bard to send information if he hears about "X") that related to player back stories or goals. When the party got back to town, I would ask the players what their characters were interested in investigating, giving me some guidance regarding what to prepare next.


kyrt-rider wrote:

@Simon You’re assuming that I’m running a Heroic campaign, which I do not. I’m not a fan of fate dragging so-called-heroes to their destinies. Heroes are forged by their choices. If the players wish to be heroes, then they are made so by their heroics, not by ‘PLOT.’ Likewise, if my players wish to be casual human beings looking to make a quick buck, or generally good people with generally good goals but not as much courage and daring as a hero, or if the party wants to subjugate the people and take over the world, or even if they’re just merchants travelling from town to town trying to make a profit and survive the dangers of the wilderness and their scheming merchant rivals? All of that and more are options my players have, because I don’t create overarching plots, the players do.

There are forces in the world doing their things yes, but the world has existed for thousands of years, I’m not going to force the players to rise up and be the heroes who save it. Somebody will, if my players choose to pursue that, then that somebody is them. If they’d rather do something else, then someone else will answer the call. Not my problem.

@ Simon Just because I don’t prep quests doesn’t mean they don’t happen. There are tons of quests, and character arcs, and usually larger overarching themes and stories which evolve out of spontaneous play in my campaigns. Not everything is linked, but many pieces do link together to form something greater.

If that works for the groups you run for, I can't see any reason for you to do it differently. I tend to make large worlds for the players to interact with ahead of time and then adjust things on the fly as needed. That being said, I create an overarching plot that has a heroic goal.

I've said before in other threads, not wanting to be heroes in a fantasy RPG is a bit weird to me. IMO, that's the whole point of the game. But that's just my opinion. Having random quests spring into being because the players want to do something just seems too much to me like achievement hunting in video games. It's something that can be done to kill time but doesn't have an overall effect on the game.

I'm hoping anything here doesn't seem antagonistic, that certainly isn't my intent. We obviously view the game differently, and there's nothing wrong with that. That's one of the nice things about a relatively customizable system.


Good thread here. Whenever I've run a campaign I always want to demonstrate motion in the campaign. For an example, if the players pass through a town I won't read them flavor text - I may tell them there's a dilapidated tavern but across the street from it there's a new tavern in the midst of being built. Flavor text is NOT needed unless you want to explain an action as a backdrop, but that's no

Later on after a few sessions and some time passes they come back into town and lo and behold that tavern is all built and the one across the street is destroyed. It's the player's decision to get involved and I will have a small story planned but I'm a good enough GM to expand on that if the players react to it.

Motion is always a constant and interesting NPCs that are influenced by the character's decisions. Consequence-heavy plotlines that define morality aren't required but I personally prefer them because if I know which way the characters lean it will greatly influence the tone of the campaign I run, and it makes things more organic.

But I come from a background pre PFS & LG - for years all I ran was home-brew, shotgun-based sandbox campaigns with episodic content and usually one meta-arc with plenty of flexibility on my end for other player-driven arcs. I had a good idea where I wanted to end my "season" but how we arrived was in the hands of the players and more than once I had to change my season-enders because my players had "one-upped" me and made it even better. It made for some incredible situations and truly dramatic moments.

But in my six months in PFS I have to say I enjoy it as well. It's single-serving goodness and I find as a GM I have to be more on my game and more on-point to deliver the material with as much energy and enthusiasm as I can. I don't look for ways to change the information provided in the scenario, I look for ways to deliver the material in an interesting and innovative way. It can make all the difference.


kyrt-ryder wrote:

I see this all the time on the boards, GMs who have this expectation that players should 'step in line' and 'play by the script' and find myself wondering...

Where are the other GMs who do away with the concept of a script entirely, and play improv-style along with their players?

I can't be the only one on these boards.

Gotta love the improv. Player failure drives the plot. All I did to prepare was have a few good characters, a few boss monsters, and a few puzzles ready to go. Drop them in when necessary and make the altaholic the chieftain of a kobold tribe. Naturally, his first instinct is to write up a sheet for each and every tribesman. Good for splitting the party for extended periods. Pick a kobold :)


I played with a GM last night who made the comment "I have plenty of hooks; it's playing them out that will be the problem." I think that's fairly common among sandbox GMs. Think about it: watched an action movie or read a book lately? You probably have a hook from there. Roll on some random generators; there's a couple more. Then look at your PCs' backgrounds; there's even more.

But then you get to the table. You put down your sandbox map, you lay out the opening scene, then you ask the players what they're going to do next. The minute they say something, anything, you blank and realize you didn't think about where the hook was going.

Maybe its not a common problem, but I know it happens to me all the time.

One thing I've started doing is putting the hooks on index cards. I name them on the non-lined side and maybe do a brief description like

plot hook card:

Graveyard Shift
PCs hired by church to guard a corpse in the cemetery. Undead hijinx ensue.

Then on the lined side I try to shoot for at least 3 bullet points that have to get worked in and dealt with to consider the hook resolved. In the case of the spoiler above

plot hook card/lined side:

* Corpse turns out to be a void zombie
* Innocent bystanders in jeopardy
* Final fight: 1 akata - bursting out of void zombie?

Then as my players talk to folks in town and decide to act on the Graveyard Shift hook, I just grab the card and try to work in the elements as best I can. Its part prep, part ad libbing, and doesn't fix players to rails they didn't already choose to get onto themselves.

In my own games I have a month between sessions. This is a blessing and a curse. On the one hand it gives me PLENTY of time to spawn new hooks and prep between games. The downside though is that I have weeks of obsessing on how to connect the hooks the players have already resolved into a cohesive plot in order to make future hooks make sense for my players who LIKE plot.

In a perfect world I'd love a bi-monthly game. 2 weeks is just enough time to pull together a few hours of prep work without obsessing. It also feels like just enough time where, with a small recap, my players wouldn't completely forget what's going on. Anyone else have any of these issues?


I learned a long, long time ago that if characters are presented with options A, B, or C they'll always choose Q. I prep for games with a few notes, some monsters or NPC encounters or other such things and what should be the successful end of the session. I don't herd them around the sandbox, I let them do what they want and let them think it's what I had planned. If they don't go down the Dark Corridor of 1000 Deaths where the boss monster waits, I'll sometimes move him to the corridor they did go down, rather than have them waste time (I put treasure in the non boss corridor, so it's not a total waste of time) but with limited session time it's what works for us.


Often have some random cards with a picture, word, phrase etc to add in something if a scene goes 'quiet'.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
I've run several campaigns that were player-driven. The players feel empowered that they're actually building their own world and their places in it.

Congrats. This is awesome... when it happens. Although - as I said - I like to have two or three paths for the PCs to follow, it's such a relief to see characters emerge from "Race Class Level" into the "Character with genuine motivations*" state that I don't begrudge the extra work involved when they ignore my cunningly-crafted plot bait and head out to do something totally self-motivated.

(And my villains love the extra time this gives them, evil-plan-wise.)


I like following a scripted AP from time to time and I like letting my creative GM skills go letting the players drive the story. Both take about the same time between reading or additional prepping.

When I do a player driven game I create sand box environment. I have plots going on that the players can get involved in or they can just watch them follow through. Usually one plot peaks a players interest and the ball get rolling. Next thing you know you player plots interacting with the setting. I create plots in response and the game take shape. The work doing this is heavy at the start but get easier as you go on, it organically grows. I start stating up NPC the player come in contact with, I have a sheet level appropriate stat blocks using the NPC rules that I can just use. Sometimes after the game I tweak it for flavor.

This isn't improv though. It's well planned but the player can lead you to areas where you have to wing it. I find typically that doesn't happen as the action that is occurring is keeping the players interest and the player too involved with the setting to just charge off.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

I do set up player driven campaigns.... and when I do, my players will instantaneously turn into vegetables who wait for me to pick them up and toss them down the plot-rails, failing to notice even if I toss the slightest of hints of adventure right in their faces (and doing so only after they decide to not do much of anything).

So then I devise a very specific plotline with lots of guidance (or grab one from a module) for the players to follow, in which case suddenly they have a brilliant idea, pick the entirely unanticipated "plan Z" to solve all their problems, and the PCs then walk entirely in another direction where I have absolutely nothing prepared whatsoever.

Sometimes I wonder why I GM at all save that I am a masochist, I suppose.

So generally I have a broad plot in mind, and know what my main NPCs are doing in the background, but I also try to have enough of the setting generated so that if they do decide to go for plan Z, I can have a better chance of coming up with something interesting on the fly.

My only issue is that if I realize they hit a point that would be a good spot for an encounter and I don't have monster/NPC stats ready, I myself slow the game down as I look up something of the appropriate CR/Terrain/etc (likewise for hazards, traps, etc.).

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you want to experience an example of what a largely improvised, open-world, sandbox style game is, go here:

Paths of Gaeda Play Podcasts

Paths of Gaeda Adventure Log

Paths of Gaeda Wiki

I ran this game for three years (60-odd sessions, ultimately. Party went from level 1 to level 13. We may go back to it again.) You can listen to the podcast, you can read the adventure log, and you can look at the wiki which was built up slowly over those three years (Thank you, Obsidian Portal!)

Here are what I think were the salient lessons of that campaign:

1) My first question to the players when a new character was coming in was always "What are your goals?" I also asked this to the players as a group at the beginning, and from time to time afterwards. I made it clear that if there was a particular kind of plot or adventure they were interested in, all they had to do was let me know and I would throw options at them. This approach had mixed results, but overall it was positive.

2) Not every player will care about the plot, no matter WHAT the plot is. Some players made interesting backstories, gave their characters concrete goals, and pursued those goals independent of whatever adventure hooks I threw their way. Other players left their character's motivations and backstories vague or nonexistent. I had one player create a beleaguered wizard who had a year and a day to pay back a massive debt. I had one player literally tell me "I just want to roll d20s." Guess which character got more plot development? And that was just fine. So a couple of player characters ended up driving most of the story and the others were mostly just along for the ride. Everyone seemed happy with that arrangement.

3) Even when the characters had poorly defined goals, I threw bits of plot at them and gave them the option to either take it or reject it. Old relatives showed up. One character accidentally got involved in a prophecy that went in a very strange direction. One character actually met his patron deity and got officially doomed. Some of the complications went nowhere, but some of them inspired character development and created new plots.

4) Steal steal steal. I adapted lots of material from elsewhere. The geography was all based on the eastern US. The various political conflicts adapted from history. NPCs based on my poor impressions of actors in films I had seen. Entire plots lifted from TV shows and books I had read. I adapted a first edition D&D dungeon crawl as a sort of capstone event for the campaign.

5) Every so often I would end a session at a decision point and I would put it to the players: "Are you going to go north following the trasure map? Or are you going South to fight in the war? Or is there something else you'd rather do? your answer will determine what I prepare for next week." It helped a lot. As long as I made sure that the party had chosen themselves to go down a particular path, I could be pretty certain they would follow that path to the "end" of that particular plot thread, and I could prepare some things ahead of time.

6) For an improvised campaign, I still had to do a lot of prep. It was mostly statting out opponents and designing set-piece encounters. Occasionally the party would zig when I thought they were going to zag, but if that happened I would put away my prep work to recycle in some other area later on.

7) Every once in a while I would throw something random in and see what the players made of it. Sometimes, in trying to figure it out, they gave me ideas that were better than my original notions and they unknowingly helped me develop new plot threads.

8) Finally, I frequently designed encounters without bothering to design a "way out" or a "path to victory". They had more collective brainpower than me. I trusted the fact that if I got them in trouble, they could get themselves out by thinking of something creative.

That's probably more of an answer than was wanted, so I'll stop there. I hope it helps!


Point seven is very good. If you throw a random hook out there, and the players start openly speculating about it ... sit there and take notes. If you incorporate at least some of their paranoid theories, or at least a twisted version of them, the chances that they will keep following the plot thread just skyrocketed.

51 to 84 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / Player Driven Plots (instead of Plot Driven Players) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion