Linear Narrative vs. Open Sandbox
Of the limitless ways you can structure and run an RPG, there are two major types I've used for long running campaigns. By no means do I suggest that there are only two, but these are my go-to ways to build a new game.
The type I've used the most is the linear narrative. In this type of campaign, I would typically cook the overarching story thread completely separate from the characters and then make adjustments to the story thread to integrate the characters they want to play. This works best with newer players, or players who have limited knowledge of the campaign's larger back story. With more experienced players, or those who are deeply familiar with the setting or world, I use an approach where each player can write their own back story and I'll take bits from those histories to create the overarching story.
Sometimes I mix these techniques. My Anthemios Iron Heroes (+homebrew) long running game was actually both - the players created character backgrounds, which didn't factor into the larger campaign story until AFTER the first 'book' was complete. That campaign is currently in its fifth (and probably last) 'book' if we ever get to finishing it using Roll20.net.
The second type I use is an open sandbox approach. This is familiar to anyone who's played the numerous video games available in the same vein. I like the way this style just puts everything on the table and lets the game have a life of its own. Sometimes monsters become villains, if they survive initial contact with the players.
My most recent 1st Edition AD&D game was structured like this: the players created whatever character they wanted, and I separately created an area for them to adventure. The party is free to followup on whichever leads are the most interesting or strike out in a new direction of their own choosing. Where possible, I'd add little details of their background to the random elements available in the valley to create a deeper integration.
For our game we used a little explored region of Faerûn called Delimbyir Vale. I littered the valley with lots of small hooks, features, dangerous antagonists and bits of lost treasure for them to find and built up a feature map using Photoshop. Inside the .psd I separated the features and points of interest into two layer groups: those they knew about and those they had yet to discover. At the beginning of every session, I gave them an updated .png of the area with everything they had uncovered.
Here is an example of a player map from mid-game:
One of the really neat aspects of the true sandbox is the highly variable nature of the way the game can develop. I intentionally seeded the game with elements far too powerful for them to overcome and when they would bump into the edges of one of these things, they would be forced to retreat and rethink the approach until they reached a higher level of experience. I had also put a bunch of things into the 'rumours' table that were patently false, so that not every lead would produce a predictable outcome alluded to.
Which game to run really depends on the group of players. Do they know each other pretty well? Are they deeply familiar with the milieu? Are they looking for an experience where not everything they learn is true (or will that just annoy the crap out of them)?
The type I've used the most is the linear narrative. In this type of campaign, I would typically cook the overarching story thread completely separate from the characters and then make adjustments to the story thread to integrate the characters they want to play. This works best with newer players, or players who have limited knowledge of the campaign's larger back story. With more experienced players, or those who are deeply familiar with the setting or world, I use an approach where each player can write their own back story and I'll take bits from those histories to create the overarching story.
Sometimes I mix these techniques. My Anthemios Iron Heroes (+homebrew) long running game was actually both - the players created character backgrounds, which didn't factor into the larger campaign story until AFTER the first 'book' was complete. That campaign is currently in its fifth (and probably last) 'book' if we ever get to finishing it using Roll20.net.
The second type I use is an open sandbox approach. This is familiar to anyone who's played the numerous video games available in the same vein. I like the way this style just puts everything on the table and lets the game have a life of its own. Sometimes monsters become villains, if they survive initial contact with the players.
My most recent 1st Edition AD&D game was structured like this: the players created whatever character they wanted, and I separately created an area for them to adventure. The party is free to followup on whichever leads are the most interesting or strike out in a new direction of their own choosing. Where possible, I'd add little details of their background to the random elements available in the valley to create a deeper integration.
For our game we used a little explored region of Faerûn called Delimbyir Vale. I littered the valley with lots of small hooks, features, dangerous antagonists and bits of lost treasure for them to find and built up a feature map using Photoshop. Inside the .psd I separated the features and points of interest into two layer groups: those they knew about and those they had yet to discover. At the beginning of every session, I gave them an updated .png of the area with everything they had uncovered.
Here is an example of a player map from mid-game:
One of the really neat aspects of the true sandbox is the highly variable nature of the way the game can develop. I intentionally seeded the game with elements far too powerful for them to overcome and when they would bump into the edges of one of these things, they would be forced to retreat and rethink the approach until they reached a higher level of experience. I had also put a bunch of things into the 'rumours' table that were patently false, so that not every lead would produce a predictable outcome alluded to.
Which game to run really depends on the group of players. Do they know each other pretty well? Are they deeply familiar with the milieu? Are they looking for an experience where not everything they learn is true (or will that just annoy the crap out of them)?
sometimes I remember to bring my character sheet ;)
ReplyDeleteHere is a later iteration of the player map to give you an idea how it evolved through play.
ReplyDelete