The Three Laws of Emergent Story MotionPosted by daHeadRat on May 5th, 2008
As part of character creation for a FRG campaign, I asked one of the players some clarifying questions about his character’s background because I had story ideas starting in my head and didn’t want to go off in a direction he hadn’t intended. His response was interesting, “Do what you do and I will react accordingly,” and it really struck me as being both blatantly obvious and surprising elusive. What it really says is, “Act and I’ll react,” which seems to me to be exactly what it means to play in a roleplaying game, especially one that is story oriented. It is, in fact, the key to an emergent story and got me thinking of how to discuss this idea. With apologies to Newton and my tongue firmly planted in my cheek, here are da Head Rat’s Three Laws of Emergent Story Motion.
Law #1: Law of Inertia
A story at rest will remain at rest, or come to rest, unless an outside force acts upon it. A story or plotline will only emerge IF the players interact with it. Roleplaying campaigns with a story orientation, especially an emergent story orientation, have an inherent inertia, a “braking” force, and will come to a stop unless the players (and the GM) are active forces propelling the story onwards. Unless the characters are actively engaged within the bounds of the campaign’s premise, setting, and their own backgrounds, the story will not go anywhere and, unless the GM is willing to forego this approach, the campaign will likely grind to a halt. The GM can, of course, propel a story forward single-handedly but, if such is the case, the story is no longer emergent. It does not develop from the actions and choices and reactions of the PCs and NPCs. Instead, it is a story that is followed by the players and GM rather than collaboratively created (a fine line indeed).
Law #2: Law of Resultant Force
The momentum and direction that the story takes is directly proportional to the force of the actions, choices, and reactions of the PCs and NPCs. In other words, the greater the force of a choice or action, the greater it will propel the emerging story in a certain direction. Actions and choices always have consequences on the emerging story. This law is non-judgmental…there is not necessarily a wrong or right action or choice in any given situation…simply consequences that lead to more choices that lead to more consequences that lead to more choices that lead to more consequences ad nauseam. The consequences may not always be the ones a player/character/GM most desires but that is how emergent stories go…sometimes things go exactly how a character/player wants and sometimes they don’t.
Oh, I take it back, there is a wrong way of doing things. Just doing something to be disruptive, selfish, or to compete with or “one-up” the other players is a wrong choice; those kinds of actions/choices put the brakes on an emergent story.
Law #3: Law of (Appropriately) Reciprocal Actions
Actions and choices taken by characters have appropriate consequences of reciprocal force. As characters interact with the campaign’s premise, plot hook(s), setting, NPCs, and their own backgrounds, there are not always equal and not always opposite reactions but there are reactions that are appropriately reciprocal. Other characters respond in an appropriate manner to the choices and actions that your character makes and takes. These reciprocal actions are determined by the emerging story, the setting, the premise, and the involved characters…the typically reactions are not random, they are grounded in the story and setting. Although a reaction may not always appear appropriate to the players, it is usually because the players do not have all of the information necessary to understand why the reaction is appropriate. Regardless of the exact action/reaction, anytime a PC or NPC does something, it has some impact on the direction the emerging story takes.
Those are the three laws…one thing becomes clear looking at them. An emergent story approach can cater to a wide variety of players and not just story-oriented players. Both challenge oriented and character oriented players can easily enjoy and actively participate in the emerging story. All they need to be is proactive, involved, and engaged in what has already happened previously in the campaign and the bearing it may have on what will come (e.g., on upcoming challenges or “in-character” roleplaying). Nothing actually has to be overly couched in story terms…simply doing those things will create the emergent story. If, on the other hand, players (even story-oriented players) are not proactive, involved, and engaged with the campaign’s events, settings, premise, and NPCs, then the campaign will likely not result in an emergent story (and there is nothing wrong with that if that is what the players and GM prefer). Of course, if a player isn’t really engaged with the game, why are the playing, right? Hopefully, everyone has at least some level of engagement with the campaign.
To be honest, most rpg campaigns have at least some element of an emergent story, even the oft-maligned “railroad” (the plot is on a set of tracks and will never deviate) and hack n’ slash/monty haul campaigns. Even these types of campaigns are impacted by the actions and reactions of the players and characters (e.g., an “adventure path” campaign such as Age of Worms or the Pathfinder series of adventures where the campaign is significantly pre-plotted will have variations from one campaign to another based on the actions and decisions made by those involved). The difference, I suppose, lies in the focus, intent, and design of the campaign…an emergent story orientation emphasizes the three laws above and the campaign tends to be much more flexible and customized based on the actions of the players than a campaign without such a focus (as well as often being a lot more work for the GM).
To help illustrate how I’ve utilized an emergent story approach, even if the players may not have fully realized it, I’m going to try and describe how the Ptolus Campaign developed as an emergent story. I won’t do this all at once, it’ll be as a series of responses here. I can’t promise that I’ll have remembered everything correctly but I’ll do my best. I think this might help folks understand how I approach a campaign and some of the pitfalls or problems I’ve faced with such an approach.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:15 am
The start of a campaign strikes me as having a lot of pitfalls from the perspective on an emergent story. Unless the GM has provided a clear indication of the basic premise of the game and the setting and the players have created characters who goals, motivations, and back stories that tie in well with the premise and setting, the start will feel fairly contrived and forced. Although the GM and players can sit down and establish the setting and premise as a collaborative activity, it typically doesn’t work that way. Instead, the GM typically establishes the setting and has the initial adventure in mind (if not an entire “adventure path”) before the players create their characters. When this is the case, it is important that the players know what is in store and “buy” in on the premise and setting and create appropriate characters.
At the start of the Ptolus campaign, I didn’t provide this clear indication. Instead, the players each had been provided the Ptolus Player’s Guide (a good intro to the setting) and allowed to create whatever characters they wanted with a single premise in mind: they needed to have some “hook” to have brought their character to the city of Ptolus. I had planned on using the standard Ptolus adventures starting with the attack on Phon and going on through the Banewarrens. I probably could have provided some sort of information on this to help the players build characters that would naturally “hook” into this meta-plot but I didn’t.
As a result, I got a pretty mixed bag of “hooks” (or lack thereof) for why the characters had arrived in Ptolus (see the character descriptions in the Ptolus Journal post). Amaryllis had the most concrete hook—she had come to Ptolus tracking down slavers who had taken, and later killed, her brother in the hopes of stopping their vile trade. Ellywick and James had each come to Ptolus to learn something more about their characters but left it pretty vague (she about her sorcerous powers and he about why he was spared from death and ended up with a scar in the shape of the holy symbol of Lothian). Rodlat really didn’t have any hook…he had been traveling with his mentor to the city but wound up the only survivor of a shipwreck.
So, instead of already having “bought” in on the initial premise, the characters (and players) came in cold and I fell back on the old technique of introducing a colorful and memorable NPC and then later appealing to the characters’ (and players’) inherent sense of adventure and goodness via the bard Al Kaline the Third and then later a cry for help from a dark alleyway.