Talk:Dramatic Theory Applied to DQ

Narrative and Drama

This is an excellent response I received following my initial waffle. Well worth sharing! I'll ask the author's forgiveness later :-) -- Stephen.

I have the essential 'what the bad guys want to do' part of my story, and I know who the critical npcs are. It is important to know WHY they want to do what they're doing, but it is a bad idea to go into too much detail at this stage. Just a general sketch of the story is as much as you want.

ManyGMs, particularly new ones, suffer from over-preparation. Over-preparation is where you work out more details than you're ever going to use in the game. The reason this is a bad thing is because of the natural desire to see your hard work recognised. The solution is not to do the hard work in the first place, that way you don't force your players to sit through what is quite likely to be a reasonably tedious exercise.

Only prepare the material that you think you're going to need on the particular night of play. Have stock encounters (I usually have three) which you can throw in if the players do something unexpected. You can quite often tweak what you have to fit into anything that players do and it will appear seamless and integrated with the rest of the story.

This observation applies to writing your main story arc, as well. If you commit to it too strongly in the beginning, then it is too easy to force pcs onto a path they didn't choose on their own. It gives them a greater sense of traction if they believe that their choices are their own, and that they have an impact on the world.

If you only have a sketched in conclusion to your story, it's easy to work backwards from there. The hardest part is working out how many games you want it to conclude on. My current story I see taking the better part of six or more seasons. A lot depends on what the pcs do, which is fine. However, with such a long story arc, I can be reasonably relaxed about the execution of each adventure.

In the previous game, the goal that I had set for the players to achieve was not achieved, and I have to say that from about the sixth session onwards, it was clear to me that it wasn't going to happen. However, because the story is sufficiently plastic, I made the goal something that was easier for the pcs to complete.

So, in short, my approach is to know the point that I want to arrive at in the end. I do that with my big story arc (which may span years) and with the smaller story arcs which may only last for weeks or a season. It involves knowing which npc wants what, and why, and who the other players might be. I do not do more than sketch in details at this point.

As pcs interact with the adventure, I take into account what they have done, and consider what impact that might have on the various story arcs. This sometimes spawns other story arcs which I had not predicted. Which is free material.

I do not have complicated plots. They are too hard for pcs to have any hope of following, bearing in mind that they play the game with week-long gaps in between. In any case, I have found that pcs will quite often provide a complicated plot all on their own without the GM doing a skerrick of work. My policy is never disabuse them of this notion, mostly because they suddenly believe you to be brilliant when you reveal it was something much simpler.

Anyway, that's the narrative theory.

The dramatic theory is a bit simpler.

On any given night, you want to confront the pcs with a conflict (not necessarily combat) by 8:30 or so. Each night of play carries emotional freight, and although its amplitude is significantly lower at the denouement than it is at the climax, it will inevitably be of higher value than the preceding week. Or at least it should be. If the tension is lower than the previous week, the pcs are losing interest.

As a GM, you are faced with the daunting task of finding some way to wow the pcs every night of play. This is impractical and taxing. Shakespeare quite often used light relief, for example the Porter's Scene in Macbeth, a more pointless scene (storywise) never having been written. However, once the tension has been reset, it can climb again, meaning Shakespeare didn't have to work nearly as hard to get a powerful response from his audience.

I suppose what this means is that it's a good idea to mix up your game, at the same time you keep an eye on the story you want to tell. Make sure that you have something that will let the players unwind a bit before they have to fight their way into the pit of hell.

I'm not sure I've said much that is new. If I had to boil it down, it's:

• Don't commit yourself (and the pcs) to a prescribed course of action. Instead, have a concluding event which is distant enough so you can adjust for the unexpected.
• Know your npcs. I base mine on people I know. I do NOT use characters from TV, comics or movies. I could go into the reasons but it's involved. I might use a character from a novel. You have to know them well so you can have them behave in a way that the pcs feel is believable.
• Make sure that you have a variety of games prepared, and at least one of them should be some kind of tension breaker, unless you're very brave. Not every session of play needs to be combat. Every session needs to deal with conflict, however, whether it be problem solving or mashing the orcs face in.
• Do not over-prepare. This is such an easy trap to fall into. Prepare stock encounters which you know intimately well. The better you know them, the easier they are to improvise details. If they started out as goblins, they can easily become orcs or jackals or ettins. You have the change the stats, but if you know the critters, you are pretty sure to know how they'll react. Three such encounters is as much as you need.
• Add material that the pcs give you. It makes them feel as if they have some impact on the world, but most importantly it can add colour which you may not have thought of. And it's free.

---