Player Versus Story

As mentioned in a previous post, I am working on a game I can run at conventions this year. It got me thinking about story/game content versus what players want. I have been putting together my own stories almost since I started playing this game. I guess, as a writer, I enjoy creating worlds and watching people play in them.

Don't get me wrong. I do like published games. They are nice jump off spots or fillers. I am just not a fan of full campaigns that are pre-published. I feel they are too restrictive. Maybe that is just because I tend to run for players that like to think outside of the box. I remember running my first published game. I was completely unprepared for where my players took the story.

However, I have played in GM crafted games where the ability to get outside of the box is not possible. They thwart any attempt to go outside of the parameters of their story. This is such a boring approach to gaming for me.

GM: "You are in a square room. Each wall contains a door. What do you do?"

Players: "Try a door."

GM: "Which one?"

Players: pointing at the map "Umm, this one."

GM: "It is locked"

Players: "Split up, Fighter, try the doors. Rogue check for traps and lock mechanisms. The rest of us canvas and look for keys"

GM: "The fighter finds that all of them are locked except this one." points at the map. "Your search reveals no keys or other contraptions for unlocking the other doors."

Rogue Player: "I attempt to pick the lock of this one" points at map

GM: "After several attempts, you are unable to properly pick the lock"

Players: "Clearly there is something cool behind these other doors, but apparently he," points at the GM, "wants us to go here."

I suppose for some people, this type of game is appealing. I don't think I have ever met these people. But my guess is that they do exist somewhere in the known universe.

There will be times when the GM does have to rope the players back into the "reality" of the story so that they don't go off of the deep end. However, the way that your players react to a situation can give you insight into the kind of story they want to play in. In fact, this is how I tend to use published material. Use it as a starting point and see how the characters react. What story elements do they gravitate towards? What NPCs seems most interesting to them? What story are they telling amongst themselves about who they are and where they want to go? From there, I can use these ideas to plot further down the line.

I try not to plan too far out. A couple of chapters fully scene-ed with notes for where I think it is going or what elements I would like to bring to the table. Players are fickle. And the last thing I want to do is spend all my free time between games crafting story elements that will never see play. Or writing the whole story based solely on how they react/play during the first couple of "chapters."

This is again where I vary from some folks I have played with. I have been in the game where the GM has spent a great deal of time crafting what they feel is an amazing story. And when you first start playing, you groove with the style. As your character grows and develops, the story has less and less to do with where you are going in life. But you are trapped in it. I have even suggested downtime things that my player would be interested in and been ignored as it is not part of the story they want to tell. I probably should have left the game at that point. But I liked the people so I tolerated it.

What all of this comes down to is really just some advice. If you are a GM, do not buy into the idea that you are god. You may have spent quite a bit of you time refining your story. But remember, that the characters are driven by intelligent people. They will grow and develop just like real people and what was fun for them at the start may not be where they are now. Don't force your story on your players. Let it grow and develop with them. It will be more enjoyable for both of you in the end.