Plot Devices, Plot Opportunities, Published Adventures, and FRG
Posted by daHeadRatMay 7
I admit that I use a lot of published adventures in my campaigns partly because I’m lazy, partly because some of them are pretty good but mostly because my brain is wired that way. I have a strong tendency to see how things can (even if they shouldn’t) fit together. I often use bits and pieces of different published adventures and tie them into a campaign to further an ongoing story or to introduce a potential new direction. One of the major problems of doing this, however, is that most published adventures rely upon plot devices rather than plot opportunities to advance the story and plot.
Aleph Gaming has a short discussion of the difference between plot devices and plot opportunities. Both provide a direction in which the plot can develop; the former pushes, intentionally, in the selected direction while the latter simply offers an opportunity for the plot to develop in that direction. The key difference, I think, is the intention. A plot device is intended to force the plot in a certain direction and is introduced to do just that even if there is no good (story) reason for it. A plot opportunity is only intended to offer a potential direction in which the story can go. Plot devices are intended to be linear (i.e., railroad) while plot opportunities are intended to be more emergent and collaborative.
The distinction can be a pretty fine one and, especially to the players in a campaign, it may be difficult to differentiate between the two. If a plot device is not followed, that plot doesn’t happen. If a plot opportunity is not followed, the plot just goes in a different direction. A plot device not followed could seem like a plot opportunity and a plot opportunity followed could be seen as a plot device (especially if the choice to follow seems the only that can be made). Additionally, the combination of plot opportunities and the actions of the player characters can lead to situations where the players feel forced to make certain decisions and thus plot opportunities may feel as though they are plot devices. I think the difference again goes back to intent (and perhaps GM presentation).
Published adventures typically employ plot devices rather than plot opportunities with good reason…they simply can’t account for which opportunity will be followed and which will not. Instead, a published adventure assumes that the characters will pursue a particular plot as written. The adventure and its plot devices intend for the characters to go in the appropriate direction. For shorter published adventures, this is not that problematic from an emergent perspective. The plot device which begins that particular mini-story can be offered in such a way that it is a plot opportunity (the intent and presentation is not to force but to offer) and can grow out of the ongoing story. The rest of the adventure is often simply a consequence of having pursued that initial plot opportunity. For longer adventures, the use of plot devices that force the characters in a specific direction becomes significantly more important to keep the plot on track and thus get the characters to the latter portions of the adventure. In fact, I’m guessing that the longer the adventure “path,” the more likely it is that plot devices will be used.
The challenge in using published adventures in a campaign that is more oriented towards being emergent and collaborative is to not let the published adventure’s plot devices railroad the campaign (it really is railroading a campaign as both the GM and the players are railroaded by the plot). I suppose one way of doing this beyond just allowing the adventure’s initial hook to be a plot opportunity is to tie the adventure as much as possible to the ongoing story, character goals and backgrounds, and campaign premise. Allow for foreshadowing earlier in the game, provide information that will “naturally” hook the characters, and tie the adventure to the choices or actions the characters have already made. In other words, if the characters are going to follow the plot opportunity, try to present it as a consequence of what has gone on before or at least tie it in such that the characters would be interested rather than just forcing it upon them.
I’m not really sure where I’m going with this anymore (I have a feeling that’ll happen more often than I’ll like). As I discuss the Ptolus campaign from the perspective of being an emergent story, I’ll be using the notions of plot device and plot opportunities to describe how important plot elements were introduced.
3 comments
Comment by Thanuir on May 9, 2008 at 2:03 am
Published adventures, in general, are very fragile: Ignoring a single plot hook can shatter them for reasons you outlined above. The same is true of adventures the GM builds, though they can take into account the capabilities and tendencies of players and their characters.
Impro is more robust, short-term, as it can’t be shattered as anything planned can. There is the risk of hitting a block mid-session, in which case consulting the players is one option, as is taking a break.
On long term impro becomes more fragile as the probability of significant inconsistencies increases.
Comment by gldearman on May 15, 2008 at 9:44 am
I like your differentiation between plot devices and plot opportunities. The key is player choice; players (or their characters) have to have choice, and feel that the choices they make are meaningful.
Plot devices can be used in this context — the key is to present them as plot opportunities (i.e., the party has a choice), and “bait” them well enough that the players will almost certainly take the opportunity. If the players take the bait, the plot goes where the GM was driving it, the players feel as though they made the choice which drove the plot, and everyone is happy. To do this successfully, a GM must know his players and their characters well; and also resign himself to the fact that sometimes they will ignore his “opportunity”.
The dark side of this is that plot opportunities can seem like plot devices if the players don’t realize that they have choices or don’t understand them. A party that isn’t being railroaded can feel like they are if the GM does a poor job of presenting opportunities.
Comment by daHeadRat on May 19, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Good comments both…those are definitely some of the issues/tensions involved.
I do, however, have to disagree (at least semantically) with you Gary about “ignoring” plot opportunities. I think a GM should not expect the players to pursue every plot opportunity. In fact, I think a GM should fully expect that the players will not follow many of them (that’s the nature of the beast). However, in my mind, that is different than simply ignoring them. Assuming it is presented appropriately, the GM should be able to expect that the PCs will consider plot opportunities in light of the game and consciously elect to pursue them or not. I believe that is different than simply ignoring them. A game that is more collaborative probably requires that the players be consciously selecting (or even creating) plot opportunities to pursue…if they simply ignore them, such a game starts to break down.
Here’s an example from my most recent campaign. One of the characters was something of an itinerant archaeologist and had had numerous run-ins with undead in his explorations of various tombs throughout his pre-campaign years. At the start of the campaign, the PCs shared a camp with a traveling merchant and her two guards. During the night, a pack of ghouls attacked the camp and the merchant’s two guards joined in but on the side of the ghouls. The merchant was nowhere to be found but, after the battle, could be heard yelling a threat (from afar) at this particular PC and even used his full name (which had not be given to the merchant previously). That appears to have all the trappings of an early plot opportunity and many of the other players saw it as such. The player of the threatened character, however, just responded with something like, “Yeah, yeah, whatever” and appeared to have dismissed it out-of-hand. That is simply ignoring a plot opportunity and rather different than proactively choosing not to pursue it. The latter is fine but the former is problematic as I expect players to be proactive. After all, the whole point of plot opportunities is so the GM doesn’t railroad the game…if players ignore such opportunities, those tracks start to be more appealing.
You must be logged in to post a comment.