How do you put your series together?

[Forest Eyes]

In general I avoid having too much of a pre-determined plot, since I'm deathly afraid of railroading. Instead I normally set up the antagonists and their goals, a generalized setting, and a few adventure ideas, rather than piece together a large group of plot points. This tends to make my games more episodic than sequential, since one adventure might lead into another, but rarely do they specifically culminate towards a specific goal.


The other model is structuring your story more like a novel or TV Drama, where the events are supposed to be leading towards a specific climax. I don't really use this method, but I'm sure it's viable, I just haven't seen it implemented. Any input?

 

[Jack1]

My games all tend to be born from a single idea that appeals to me, and I try to let that idea be the steeple on the horizon in what is otherwise a completely spur of the moment storytelling style. I go into a game with vague ideas of where I want to start and finish, with maybe a few scenes that I like in the middle, and apart from that the games I run tend to be very free range.


Generally an idea has to get me really psyched because to be honest, I plain dont like being an ST. Inspirations can come to me from books, movies, tv shows or random vectors. Most of my imagery is inspired by Bleach and Naruto, and I try to keep the tone of my games on a similar wavelength to that style of alternating melodrama / silliness.


Currently, I'm running one game which started out as spec ops Lookshy rangers infiltrating the realm with the intent of softening her up for an invasion of by lookshy supported by the Sword of Creation manse, usurped by the PCs and their collegue's efforts. It has since morphed into a very high powered dragon blood game which is mainly about the PCs being tempted by power of various sorts.


There are two other campaign kernels currently in my head which I hope to implement some time in september. One is about creation's least secret secret organisation, going about their fairly secret business in an entirely strongarm and blatant manner.


The other is a direct port of Azumi (the live action movie, not the manga) and is all about a team of super-leet enforcer assassins taking out potential shit-stirrers during the empress' reign.

 

[Ker'ion]

I allow each player to pick a topic they want in game and then find a way to incorporate them all into a functional plotline.  That way everyone is sated.

 

[Jakk Bey]

I tend to run with short term story themes--usually based on some song that fits--and build the stories in short episodes.  I tend to think of each session as an episode, and while there are often two and three parters, I prefer to build things in concrete blocks.


I also retcon the crap out of things.  I keep notes. A lot of notes. What the players said. What the characters said.  What they did, and to who.  And what the NPCs did as well. While I've got a central theme in mind, and I like to build up in episodic fashion, I like to keep flexible enough to run with what the players are chasing after.  I like to make each clue mean something, and if the players are chasing down a false lead, by the art of the retcon, it will lead them to something anyhow--not what they were expecting perhaps, but I tend to take what the players give me and run with that.


By keeping to episodes, and building a campaign out of them, it gives me a lot of flexibility in case players suddenly start chasing down a lead I didn't think of, or follow a line of reasoning I didn't expect.  


It helps that I tend to create campaign settings with a LOT of notes. All the players, even if the characters don't meet them get at least a small treatment, and then I figure out what those players will do with the actions from last week's exciting episode.  Some folks wouldn't gig onto the PCs until something major, some may misinterpret things, and I like to have enough factions that PCs can play one or two against another, or visa versa, and sometimes PCs realize that they've gotten played, and that is always a nice moment.

 

[Ledaal Kajiri]

Generally I talk with the players at the start and we discuss where we want the game to be set in Creation, and what character types people are interested in, before anything else goes on, whether a northern barbarian game, or a game about the officers of a Lookshy unit, or a DB game set at a school in Arjuf. From there I detail out the general area, what gerneral events are currently going on in that region, and how they are likely to affect the PCs. Considering that PC types usually have a bit of destiny, I make sure there is some reason that they will get involved in at leastone or two somewhat important local events...how important depending on their power-level and general destiny. After the first few plots get going, the directions the players choose to take make a lot of my decisions for me, but I work to make sure that the game isn't static, where nothing happens if the PCs aren't present. If there is a Realm invasion of the Scavenger Lands and the PCs decide to go artifact hunting instead, then the invasion still happens. When they come back from hunting the war will likely still be going on, battles will have been fought, etc. However, they will have had no effect upon it...things willhave taken a pre-determined course. IF the PCs instead choose to act, then my predetermined course for how the war will go if they do not interfere will likely change...their actions will make some difference...or not, if they all get themselves killed off in their first battle doing something stupid beyond their own capabilities. If a group of heroic mortals comes up with a cunning plan to try to assasinate Mask of Winters, and manages to get close and successfully attack him...they're still going to lose. He's out of their league. I try to avoid either railroading, or PCs always win syndrome. The PCs in my games have to actually earn their major victories...or defeats.

 

[Flyck]

I throw the bug in their ears that I'm looking at running.  And eventually a week later they begin to be interested.  Then of course they begin asking what they can run for characters, and it's then that I realize "My god, I don't know what I'm doing here."  And so I tell them I'll think about it.  Eventually, I respond with 'Whatever, so long as it's not -X- or -Y-"  (where X or Y is usually equal to the primary antagonists, or potential player characters that I simply do not wish to deal with).  Eventually, I throw together some beginning NPCs and potential bad-guys, hash together some overall idea, toss some plot-hook salads, and begin the first headache-session of dragging the miserable lot of would-be heroes from all corners of the world to one location...   :roll:   Because clearly, not all of them can work together on their character creations...  This latest bunch of would-be heroes had to be dragged into Nexus from Rathess, Sijan, the Lover's Citadel, and Gem.

 

[Forn Clakes]

I'm with Jakk on this one: I retcon the shit out of everything, keeping notes on any and every little action that could lead to a potential plot.


I do this by having a piece of paper with each character's name at the top and making short-hand notes of anything significant and those things not so significant that I could possibly use to throw the players off kilter.


~FC.

 

[Sherwood]

I don't try to lock a story into a set line.  I've noticed a tendancy of my players to utterly destroy the well planned story out and come out with a bizarre plan all their own.  In one game in particular, the players had been sent to look into a supposed mutiny plot in a sci-fi game.  I wrote two versions of the game; one where they stop the mutiny and the other where they join in.

 

[Forest Eyes]

Could you clarify what you mean  by retcon? I usually thought it meant altering continuity retroactively, a la the soap opera's "I didn't die, that was my twin brother" plot twist.

 

[Ledaal Kajiri]

I believe in this case its thinkingthings through later and making events that  previously were unconnectedbe so..bringing things together from a somewhat disparate game to something where it really was the plan all along...really. So long as the players don't know, and it all makes sense, it can occasionally be useful...particularly when you have an idea and use it...then later it suddenly occurs to you that it really would make sense that the village being sacrificed to open a shadowland might have been part of the plot of the Deathlord the PCs are currently opposing...but at the time it was just a subplot that occured to you.

 

[Jakk Bey]

The RetCon is a delicate thing. You can't let the players know you've changed things.  Which is why you take notes. A lot of them.


Characters are determined to run down a lead that wasn't that important in your original plan. Heck, they missed the clues you planted.  But then you can expand the lead they are after.  Yes, they missed an important plot point, but you can figure out what happens when they miss something, but run with what they're chasing.


Retcon means you change what is important and stay flexible. You may even have to change a couple of key elements, but if you're a devious screen monkey, you can link things back up again to your original plot, and make it work.


PCs miss the clue about the Abyssals who attacked the village, and instead chase after the obvious bandits.  But the bandits were put into play by the Abyssals and were the intended foils, so the PCs have fallen for the villains' clever ruse.  The Abyssals content to see the PCs chase after their foils, go on to do their thing.  BUT, the bandits may have a clue or two back to their masters--perhaps a few minor items that could be traced back to the Abyssals. In fact, the trace might work out better than discovering the Abyssal contact early.  Makes the players feel that their opponents are clever, and clever is appreciated.


Meanwhile, the Abyssals are choosing their next target--the PCs' base camp.  Now the Abyssals are just nasty, and it gives the PCs a lot more motivation to nail these bastiches.


Retcon gives you chances to exploit plot points and expand some that you didn't, or reduce the importance of others.  At all times though, the PCs don't feel like they're chasing their tails.  They're always important, vital, and on the hop.

 

[DugCoffin]

I always start by thinking to myself, "I want to destroy creation with (insert rediculously enormous object here).  What would I need to get that done?".


This usually gives me some great ideas on villians, locations, history, and people.  I usually end up tossing it and retconning, but always have a lot left to work with.  My players drive my games.


One more helpful thing from Feng Shui:


Think of 3 cool settings for fight scenes.  I've generated tons of adventures just off that.

 

[Sherwood]

Heck, you can have fun with your players by just letting them see that they are not the only game in town.  In a Rifts game I was running, the meta-plot was of a bunch of vampires preparing to open a giant rift to suck the planet to the realm of their masters.  The players were taking their time (too much time IMO) building an army to fight the fang gang.  They finally get down south and figting thru hordes of lesser vampires when suddenly, all the vamps die.  As the heros are looking around, trying to figure it out, a different group of adventurers comes walking out of the cave all tore up.  They looked at the PCs and said someting to the effect of, well, that was a job well done in taking down the baddies and saving the world.  But hey!  Thanks for distracting the troops out here so we could do the real work.


They were soooooo pissed, but they had to admit that it was funny as hell.