Robin Laws’s latest See Page XX column, Fear of Structure: The Diagnosis, argues that:
…to emulate certain fictional genres in a satisfying way, the GM needs to be able to create a sense of structure, with an opening that leads to a series of interconnected scenes, and finally to a climax that wraps up the various plot threads dangled in the previous action.
And as Robin points out, that can sound like a bad thing, especially to players who’ve “been burned by dictatorial so-called storytelling GMs whose heavy-handed, anti-collaborative techniques discredit all narrative-based play.” (That’d be this guy.)
His focus is on mystery adventures, but his advice — to consider linear scenarios a viable (and fun) option — can be applied to many types of scenario, whether you’re writing them for WoAdWriMo or for your home game. He makes too many good points to summarize here, and the column is well worth a read.
Synchronicity!
I started writing a mystery adventure yesterday and was kind of stumped. This article got the wheels turning again!
I also think Mr. Laws made some excellent points. I see many veteran roleplayers (these are good Players, too!) who have a knee-jerk reaction when they find a clue that is blatantly supposed to be a clue. At this point, several of them start making train noises and getting “rowdy”.
They know that they need to act on this clue to move forward but resent the “lack of freedom”. It’s interesting that Robin Laws points out that such a structure can be integral to a certain type of game and even fun!
Good stuff!
-Tom
Excellent article! Too many players claim to be railroaded when the GM is actually just doing his or her job. I’ve seen this both as a player and unfortunately as a GM too. I run a lot of modern horror/thriller games and sometimes you have to have a clue to move the action forward.
Once the players were investigating a series of wierd thefts. At one crime scene they discovered a menu for a Chinese resaurant. At the next scene they foudn the same menu. The restaurant was a front for a criminal operation.
They went to the home of a mafia soldier who had been killed. In the fridge they found Chinese take out from the same restaurant. They decided to contact their “friends” at the FBI. They asked for a list of known associates of the soldier, and one of them was a Chinese convict, now free and the owner of the same restaraunt.
Now I would have been cool if the players didn’t want to go to the restaurant. They could have gone to the owner’s home, or come up with a plot to grab him on his way to work, or any of a hnundred different scenarios.
Instead one player said “I don’t feel like an oriental type adventure. Why are you forcing that on us?” and I just sort of sat there stunned.
There was no Kung Fu, or Chinese magic, or deep rooted political and espionage components with an oriental twist. It was just that the owner of the restaurant was Chinese, and had opened a Chinese restaurant as a cover for his part in a crime ring.
There were other ways to get the info that was kept in the Chinese restaurant. But in the end, the restaurant was how the theives were casing out their targets. A delivery person would arrive and act like a recent immigrant who didn’t know much English and could barely handle the delivery job. Using this act, the delviery person would case out potential targets for theft.
We never finished that adventure. At the time I didn’t know what to do, so I just suggested that we play another time and never ran the scenario again.
I thought it was me, but then another memebr of the group GMed and the same player who had taken the wind out of my sails did it again with another GM. We were playing Vampire: The Masqerade, 1st Edition. No matter what leads we had, this player didn’t want to pursue them.
I now realize that some players expect the adventure to come to their characters. If they say that their character is staying at home watching TV all day they expect the GM to describe a commercial with a vital clue, or to have the bad guy visit the character for some stupid reason. If the adventure has a theme the player doesn’t like, the player expects the GM to morph it into a theme that the player does like. When taken to the extremes like I described, you are better off not having that player in your group.
The funny thing is that I have never seen this occur with a player/GM. The players who cry foul the most for these situations are the ones who don’t GM that much if at all.
I had/have a player with some problems like the one VV_GM describes. He got so fed up with multiple GM’s not doing it his way he decided to run a game himself. He still has his problems in play, but he has a better appreciation for the other side of the screen. I think players don’t often realize what it is to be a GM, and what kind of work or mental maneuvering it takes to make a good game. Much like students don’t see the infinite amount of work teachers put into classes, so they don’t respect what is going on. Conversely, I think it is still important as a GM, to keep in a player kind of mindset. Students don’t always have a problem with the material, just getting the hook into it and getting interested.
I’m running a game tonight that I am prefacing in the “social contract” start of the game as a straight dungeon crawl. I want them to know I’m running it just as a combat beat em up with some traps. The players I have who are all about social intrigue should know that won’t factor in majorly.
“We gamers are a cerebral lot and tend to construct theoretical frameworks, which we lean on heavily when articulating our tastes.
Bingo! Anything that starts like this has my undivided attention.
I think some gamers need the equivalent of an adolescent’s mother to tell them, “Just try it, you might actually like it.”
Re: Instead one player said “I don’t feel like an oriental type adventure. Why are you forcing that on us?†and I just sort of sat there stunned. The proper response is, (begin calmly, like Samuel Jackson) “Because I’m the GM, and this is what I’ve written, and this is what I’m running.” (voice rising) “If you wanted something else, perhaps you could have mentioned that before we sat down at the m-f’ing table.” 😎
Re: Re: Instead one player said “I don’t feel like an oriental type adventure. Why are you forcing that on us?†and I just sort of sat there stunned. The proper response is, (begin calmly, like Samuel Jackson) “Because I’m the GM, and this is what I’ve written, and this is what I’m running.†(voice rising) “If you wanted something else, perhaps you could have mentioned that before we sat down at the m-f’ing table.â€
This was a while back before I learned how to use the GM’s angry voice. If it were to happen today I would probably say something like “I’m so sorry. Perhaps I should verify all scenarios with you to make sure we are playing within your comfort zone? I’d hate to do anything original for our gaming sessions. How about we have some orcs attack? Would that be better? Yes, let’s do that instead. By the way, they attack you in a Chinese restaurant. Try the Sweet & Sour Chicken. Its delicious!” 🙂