"Needs Story"


Gamer Life General Discussion

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

I've noticed that many of the campaign ideas in the Starfinder forum (but also on other forums) of these message boards state some interesting "settings," but IMHO this is the wrong way to build a campaign.

What a great campaign really needs is a good story.

Preferably a story (campaign) that contains multiple sub-stories (adventures) much like a good novel series has complete books but also tells a larger "meta-story."

So, two questions:


  • Do you agree with my observation?
  • How do you come up with the seed of a great meta-story?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

My plan for hatching Starfinder adventures.

1. Take an episode of Star Trek.

2. Ask yourself what would Han Solo, Douglas Addams, or Bender do?

3. Voila! The rest should take care of itself.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

1) To an extent. The setting establishes the thematic foundation for the campaign story (such as the "central conflict").

2) The story itself for a campaign essentially reduces to a hero's journey, using the setting themes and other genre tropes as context; as well as personalizing certain aspects to the interests and goals of the players/their characters.

Dark Archive

No
For my group sandbox is the go to method. Conflicts and events are in motion and don't just revolve around the PCs. Setting up a story for the PCs is just.

Having a plot for the campaign ahead of time and holding to it invalidates the players actions.


I disagree, but more because this sounds like a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" kind of thing.

I dont have a response much to the second point, but i would say that a general idea of what the game could be is a good thing to have, both for players and GMs. I think to plant the seef, you really need a gm to say "this is the style of game we'll be running," and from there you need players who'll be invested in however the plot and setting evolve.


Lord Fyre wrote:


So, two questions:

  • Do you agree with my observation?
  • How do you come up with the seed of a great meta-story?

1. Nope.

What a game needs is players and GMs that are willing to make an effort at having fun. A setting is a backdrop and game/story hooks, not the actual story. An interesting, well-written setting lends itself to games and makes things easy for players and GM to do cool stuff that turn into good stories. A story is about the characters and events, and the GM only has partial control over one of these.
Games are not stories in the same sense as novels, short stories, etc. are, and treating them as such has an unfortunate tendency to run into railroading and PCs that can't do much.
The GM should set the stage and determine the events that will occur when the PCs get involved and what will occur if the PCs do nothing. Everything after that should follow from the PCs actions, which may or may not follow whatever tentative plans the GM had.
The difference between the story of a game and the actual game is very similar to the difference between a history book and the actual events.

2.
Ideas for adventures I steal everywhere. Sometimes I have a concept for a long campaign that will have a definite end e.g. Jedi and soldiers fighting in the Mandalorian Wars. This lack of planning can be a weakness when I don't present any sort of structure to the progression of the game and the players are forced to muddle about from one unconnected adventure to another.

The longest running game I'm in, 13 years and going slow, doesn't have much 'meta-story' any more than reading about a dynasty of rulers has. Things happen and lots of the things that happen are directly caused by previous things that have happened and in turn cause even more things to happen, but other than ideas for individual adventures there isn't anything resembling a pre-planned overarching story or goal. Stuff just happens and the consequences are lived with.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Lord Fyre wrote:

I've noticed that many of the campaign ideas in the Starfinder forum (but also on other forums) of these message boards state some interesting "settings," but IMHO this is the wrong way to build a campaign.

What a great campaign really needs is a good story.

Preferably a story (campaign) that contains multiple sub-stories (adventures) much like a good novel series has complete books but also tells a larger "meta-story."

So, two questions:


  • Do you agree with my observation?
  • How do you come up with the seed of a great meta-story?

I actually think an RPG benefits from not too much story.

I like novels with complex plots, twists and revelations about behind-the-scenes motivations of previously friendly characters suddenly betraying the protagonist.

In an RPG that kind of thing just leaves the PCs confused. Betrayal by an NPC (even as mild a betrayal as just having a secret agenda) is something I just never do now - my experience is that you betray them once and they don't trust another NPC for an entire campaign or two. Psychologically, I think it's that they don't want to be fooled again. I can't count the number of campaigns I've run which have failed due to the PCs not wanting to ask around for help or to share information with all the friendly NPCs who could point them in the right direction for adventure. I used to blame my players for that tendency, but on reflection, I think they met too many NPCs with secrets and didn't want to run the risk of confiding in anyone.

Even leaving aside the issue of hidden agendas and secret behind-the-scenes stuff. If the plot is too complex then I think rather than intriguing the PCs they just end up shrugging and seeing what happens next with very little buy in. The attitude becomes: "I can't make sense of what's going on, so I'll just go along for the ride" and suddenly they're not really the protagonists but the highly skilled sidekicks, not really paying attention to the development of the story but just waiting for the next tactical decision making opportunity.

I much prefer setting up super-simple, black-and-white campaigns with clearcut goodies and baddies (parenthetically, I think this is much more compatible with a system that uses alignment). That way complications are spurred by PC interest rather than by my laying the foundation - the upside being I don't have to catch their interest, I just have to fill in the gaps once they identify an NPC they mistrust or are otherwise intrigued by.

Partly, this approach has evolved as most of my group have little interest in delving too much into setting lore. I regularly run games for people for whom race is a set of stat modifiers and who play clerics that can't remember their deities name or portfolio (let alone the name of any holy text or appropriate aphorisms!)

There's always a risk in extrapolating from one's own perspective to the world at large. Nonetheless, as a player, story is the most important feature to me - the tactical side of the game and the mechanics I can take or leave. My view is that many DMs are in this same boat. However, I think it's important to run the game your players want to play, not the one you do.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Note that a sandbox will not have a campaign story. A sandbox is a collection of stories ("vignettes;" possibly incorporating them in one or more "plot arcs" that serve as "mini-campaigns"), which may or may not be related beyond the presence of the PCs.

A campaign story has a definite goal (for the PCs to resolve) which acts as the unifying element for the challenges, encounters, locations, etc. that the PCs interact with. The resolution of that goal is the climax and conclusion/transition point for the campaign.

That said, you can have a campaign story that isn't a "railroad." One way is to develop a "plot matrix" (possibly using a flow chart) instead of a plot-line: Present the PCs with multiple options at various stages (usually at the completion of each separate plot task) that they can pursue, all of which advance them toward the story goal. Completing an option can open up new options or sequences of options; also, the PCs can pursue uncompleted options from earlier points (unless they are dynamic and/or time-critical; but the results of those can be used as starting points for new options). This requires more work on the GM's part, but provides the PCs with a greater flexibility of (actual) choice; this is a method that has been used for many computer games, where the player is allowed to complete parts in whatever order they want (although some parts may require specific criteria to become accessible; or the challenges may be geared toward a certain "level") and completion of all parts are not necessarily required to successfully complete the game ("campaign story").

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / "Needs Story" All Messageboards

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