Unanimous Good

[gbaji]

I think "fate/karma/divine justice" are all fine messages, provided that the story communicates it clearly. If the Hero defeats the Villain, but refuses to kill them, and then the Villain's Evil Device explodes and kills the Villain, that's a fine "Do bad things, and bad things will happen to you." message. The "karmic retribution" of the situation must be closely tied to the actions taken.

Sure. But it's ultimately a contrivance that the author is using to impose morality on the story. Not saying that's a bad thing, as long as it's constrained within a story. I think that where this can go wrong is when GMs try to force this sort of moral reality into a RPG.

The whole Gollum thing is fine, people are nice to him, he starts to turn around. Sam is mean to him, he starts to regress. At the end of the day when given a sort of "last chance" to help or hinder Frodo in dealing with the Ring, he fails and goes for the Ring which ultimately leads to his death. The actions people take are directly related to the consequences they suffer. There is a fairly clear "A leads to B" here.

There's some moralizing here, but also that Tolkien was trying really hard to get across the idea that The One Ring was just so powerful and so seductive that pretty much no-one could resist it, much less destroy it. We only actually see one being willingly give up the ring. Galadriel. And it was extremely difficult for her, and a major part of her "test". And it's still unknown what would have happened if she'd tried to take the Ring to Mount Doom and toss it in herself. One could argue that the reason she gives it back to Frodo is precisely because she knows what might happen if she takes it. Same deal with Gandalf. He's unwilling to even touch the thing, and recoils when Frodo tries to get him to take it.

Oh. Technically, there is a second who does. Samwise. And, once again, that was Tolkien putting his own spin on "common people are better than powerful people" bit (and sure, Frodo tries to hand it off earlier as well, for the same reasons). The less power and ambition people had, the less power The Ring had over them. It's why Galadriel's choice is so significant. She actually had the power to take it and defeat Sauron with it, and rule with it. But even lesser beings could not long resist it (Frodo becomes suspicious of Sam when he realizes Sam took the ring). Boromir, for all his strong sense of honor and duty, could not resist it over time. Aragorn, much like Gandalf, intentionally chooses not to travel with Frodo and The Ring because he's afraid of what he might do. Tolkien could not have justified Frodo actually thowing The Ring into the mountain after having held it and been influenced by it for so long, so he had Gollum fall instead.

Well. And there's Tom Bombadil (ok, I'm making yet more exceptions here), but he's specifically an outside element to the entire setting, so he kinda doesn't count.

If people walk away from a story and say "That could never happen IRL!" then that's either:
An indictment of the story failing to present a believable message. (the consequence was unrelated, absurd or implausible)
OR it's an indictment of reality that things IRL do not function as they should. (Ie: bad people doing bad things don't get bad consequences)
To make things more muddled, both could be true.

Hah. Was about to say the same. I've also noticed that there's an odd factor to popular storytelling and it leads me to wonder:

Do people behave the way they do sometimes because that's what they see characters in stories do? Or do characters in stories behave the way they do because that's how real people do?

Cause yeah. I've done the hard eyeroll at behavior written into some TV/film plots. And then I've seen real people actually behave as though they are in a freaking telenova or something (seriously. I have a friend who literally acts this way). So... Art imitates life? Or life imitates art? Or a bit of both?

[MetroAlien]

I don't think it's possible to get rid of "author fiat".

Every story will be influenced either by the storyteller's (not even the original author's) personal moral bias, or their presumptions about what a "story" should be (i.e. their cultural heritage).

James Bond escaping the evil mastermind's trap is author fiat.
It reflects the author's bias that the good spy should defeat the evil criminal.

The sexy hostage falling in love with James Bond is author fiat.
It reflects the cultural bias that stories should include elements of love, even if the plot is otherwise not romantic.

A subversion of the above would, once again, be author fiat, reflecting conscious social criticism aimed at the absurdity of storytelling clichés,
or the desire to tell an "edgy", "original" story.

Unless you're reciting a historic documentary or the output of a randomised story-telling algorithm, every single scene is author fiat.

Why is the monster in the shape of a dog after killing a bunch of humans at the start of John Carpenter's The Thing? Author fiat.
Why did Pippin eat a whole entire lembas bread in Peter Jackson's adaptation of LotR? Author fiat.

Subjectively, I prefer stories that are aware of their own biases. In good hands they may have interesting and innovative things to say that have relevance outside their fictional setting.
In bad hands they come of as preachy.
A good story without moral self-awareness lets me relax while munching doritos.
A bad one is a vapid waste of time and money.

RPGs are special, because they require us to interact with other people's values.
Depending on the group's mood, it may result in tactful compromise (the unanimous good) or competitive one-upmanship (murder hobos)

[Pauly]

Hah. Was about to say the same. I've also noticed that there's an odd factor to popular storytelling and it leads me to wonder:

Do people behave the way they do sometimes because that's what they see characters in stories do? Or do characters in stories behave the way they do because that's how real people do?

Cause yeah. I've done the hard eyeroll at behavior written into some TV/film plots. And then I've seen real people actually behave as though they are in a freaking telenova or something (seriously. I have a friend who literally acts this way). So... Art imitates life? Or life imitates art? Or a bit of both?

I’ve heard that before The Godfather came out the mafia dressed pretty much like you see Tony Sparano’s crew in The Sopranos, but after The Godfather was released out came the Italian suits, fedoras and tailored coats

[NichG]

I don't think it's possible to get rid of "author fiat".

Every story will be influenced either by the storyteller's (not even the original author's) personal moral bias, or their presumptions about what a "story" should be (i.e. their cultural heritage).

James Bond escaping the evil mastermind's trap is author fiat.
It reflects the author's bias that the good spy should defeat the evil criminal.

The sexy hostage falling in love with James Bond is author fiat.
It reflects the cultural bias that stories should include elements of love, even if the plot is otherwise not romantic.

A subversion of the above would, once again, be author fiat, reflecting conscious social criticism aimed at the absurdity of storytelling clichés,
or the desire to tell an "edgy", "original" story.

Unless you're reciting a historic documentary or the output of a randomised story-telling algorithm, every single scene is author fiat.

Why is the monster in the shape of a dog after killing a bunch of humans at the start of John Carpenter's The Thing? Author fiat.
Why did Pippin eat a whole entire lembas bread in Peter Jackson's adaptation of LotR? Author fiat.

Subjectively, I prefer stories that are aware of their own biases. In good hands they may have interesting and innovative things to say that have relevance outside their fictional setting.
In bad hands they come of as preachy.
A good story without moral self-awareness lets me relax while munching doritos.
A bad one is a vapid waste of time and money.

RPGs are special, because they require us to interact with other people's values.
Depending on the group's mood, it may result in tactful compromise (the unanimous good) or competitive one-upmanship (murder hobos)

It's less that one must 'remove author fiat', but more that the author doesn't get a pass from the sort of criticism that one would be expected to deal with in any kind of persuasive argumentation. Of course someone putting forward a persuasive argument has a bias and a motivated reason to argue certain beliefs, but in order to actually be persuasive they have to look at it from the point of view of people who do not yet believe what they're saying is correct, and find common ground to argue that their view has merit.

Overly transparent author fiat basically fails this. It's going to a debate and saying 'because I say so'.

[KorvinStarmast]

I’ve heard that before The Godfather came out the mafia dressed pretty much like you see Tony Sparano’s crew in The Sopranos, but after The Godfather was released out came the Italian suits, fedoras and tailored coats

Life imitates art, you might say.

[gbaji]

Why is the monster in the shape of a dog after killing a bunch of humans at the start of John Carpenter's The Thing? Author fiat.

Spoiler

Show

The implication is that the dog assimilated at the beginning of the prequel was turned into a Thing at the time, and no one ever killed it. All the other Things were people who were assimilated, but the dog was forgotten in all of their running around and turning on each other. It never appears in the fim (after being discovered missing), and is never killed.

RPGs are special, because they require us to interact with other people's values.
Depending on the group's mood, it may result in tactful compromise (the unanimous good) or competitive one-upmanship (murder hobos)

Yup. This is what makes writing a good RPG scenario far more difficult than just writing a story. As the GM, you are (or should be) creating a framework for a story. The actual story, including the details of what the protagonists do (presumably) is cooperatively told by the players. This can cause problems for many GMs, who either want to write too many of the details (and railroad the adventure as a result), or go in the opposite direction and provide little or no story framework at all (which often results in somewhat meaningless series of encounters and "wish fulfillment fantasy" outcomes).

Great GMs can actually "write" epic tales into their RPG games, while not railroading, nor just sitting back and hoping the players come up with "things to do". But yeah. It's incredibly difficult. And it requires a form of writing that is very different from what a novelist or screenwriter does.

[kyoryu]

Yup. This is what makes writing a good RPG scenario far more difficult than just writing a story. As the GM, you are (or should be) creating a framework for a story. The actual story, including the details of what the protagonists do (presumably) is cooperatively told by the players. This can cause problems for many GMs, who either want to write too many of the details (and railroad the adventure as a result), or go in the opposite direction and provide little or no story framework at all (which often results in somewhat meaningless series of encounters and "wish fulfillment fantasy" outcomes).

Great GMs can actually "write" epic tales into their RPG games, while not railroading, nor just sitting back and hoping the players come up with "things to do". But yeah. It's incredibly difficult. And it requires a form of writing that is very different from what a novelist or screenwriter does.

It's not that hard. It just mostly involves knowing what you should and shouldn't write - having active NPCs with agendas is really the key, as well as knowing enough of the NPCs, and having everything react against not only each other but also the PCs.

[NichG]

I tend to think the best way to 'write' for tabletop games is to formulate things as asking questions, and its all about making questions whose answers aren't obvious or universal - ones where answering the question means not just making a 'choice about what my character does', but a choice that has ongoing broader implications about how to see and understand and relate to the world. Here's a world, here's a fulcrum where you can gain the opportunity to determine something about it going forward, but what the fulcrum does is not predetermined: what do you think the world should look like?

The trick is in making problems that are in some sense irreducible (so there is no perfect solution, and decisions are actually meaningful expressions of priorities and values rather than forced choices) but at the same time aren't hopeless (so why bother to try to solve them if all solutions suck) or which seem insurmountable (so there's no feeling of actual progress). Once that exists and makes its presence known, it sort of holds itself up, like a math puzzle or something where you can check the solution - if players come up with their own answers they can tell for themselves if its satisfying or not without necessarily needing the GM.

[gbaji]

It's not that hard. It just mostly involves knowing what you should and shouldn't write - having active NPCs with agendas is really the key, as well as knowing enough of the NPCs, and having everything react against not only each other but also the PCs.

Yeah. You'd think that would be the case. But it's amazing to me just how many GMs have a really really hard time actually doing it. The sheer number of times I read about some GM abruptly teleporting the PCs somewhere to get them into an adventure just leaves me shaking my head. Ditto the other end, where the GM just sits back and asks the players what they want to do, then more or less lays brick in front of them (kinda the opposite of "track", but IMO not a whole lot better).

I was also speaking specifically of writing an "epic adventure". Putting NPCs into an environment, giving them objectives and whatnot, maybe plotting out a few events that the NPCs are going to do on their own, and then dropping the PCs into that, maybe tossing some hooks out there and letting them decide what to do, is kind of the mid level difficulty setting for this. It's a great start though. Tying that basic environment into larger stories and plots without resorting to railroading takes a bit more skill.

As you say: It's just not that hard. Or, at least, it shouldn't be. But I do think that so many GMs are stuck in "I have to write the story!" mode, and so many players are stuck in the "If you write a story, it's railroading!", that many other GMs swing to "I'm not going to write any story at all" mode instead. You can absolutely write stories. You just can't script them. There's a key distinction there.

[Pauly]

Writing for an RPG is like writing jazz music.

You provide the infrastructure to allow improvisation to happen while the song progresses. Too much structure and there’s no room for improvisation and too little structure ends up with the improvisation noodling around aimlessly.

[kyoryu]

As you say: It's just not that hard. Or, at least, it shouldn't be. But I do think that so many GMs are stuck in "I have to write the story!" mode, and so many players are stuck in the "If you write a story, it's railroading!", that many other GMs swing to "I'm not going to write any story at all" mode instead. You can absolutely write stories. You just can't script them. There's a key distinction there.

Yeah. I think a big part of the problem is that there aren't a lot of examples - published adventures tend to not work like that because it's really hard to write a long series of modules in that mode.

So people get used to seeing "adventures look like this!"

[Talakeal]

I don't know if it's necessarily worse, merely that I've never found one that wasn't worse. So my priors are very firmly fixed against it.

I'm fine if messages can be derived from the work, or even if the author's own biases/worldview comes through a bit. That's pretty much inevitable. But trying to preach a clear message in a work of fiction ends up fighting the story. Because real (or real-seeming) worlds just don't have those clear messages. There's always loose ends, things that don't "fit the message", etc. So you either muddy your message or you start imposing artificial constraints on the story. And yes, this applies even where I agree with the message. For example, I think the Narnia books got worse (as worldbuilding/fiction) as the allegorical parts got stronger. That's despite being good allegories and me being a very firm Christian. Similarly, the Sword of Truth novels got less and less interesting the more the author's Objectivism got shoehorned in (I'm much less a fan of that message, however). Etc.

I'm fine with selecting characters and events that you hope will send a message...as long as they're allowed to develop according to narrative constraints, not external ideological constraints.

And to say that all stories need messages inserted into them to be called so...yeah, I disagree fundamentally with that.

Mind. Blown.

I have never been more tempted to have a conversation that will inevitably break forum rules.

[gbaji]

Yeah. I think a big part of the problem is that there aren't a lot of examples - published adventures tend to not work like that because it's really hard to write a long series of modules in that mode.

So people get used to seeing "adventures look like this!"

Agree 100%. I'm not sure it's really possible to write a published adventure that isn't in that sort of format though. I've actually considered publishing (even if just online) a number of the adventures i've written (probably have thousands of pages of stuff). But the problem is that writing these is a dynamic process. Even when I write a relatively short adventure, I start out with an outline, and write in a series of "chapters", with like one paragraph describing each on.

Then I detail just the first part. I've created the framework for the whole adventure at this point, but have no clue how the details are going to work out along the way. I literally write maybe one or two chapters ahead at most specifically because the world is dynamic. The NPCs are going to react to what the PCs are doing. I've written what they started out doing in the main outline. I've written in a handful of chapter headings that are planned to occur along the way (some are events or locations related to the "main plot", while some may just be random stuff on the side that I'll have them run into along the way if they fit). But even those may change (some added, some dropped) based on what the players actually do.

The PCs often do things I didn't expect, or travel a different route, or whatever. So each chapter is written along the way based on the specifics of what the PCs are doing, with an eye towards the starting point I already wrote and whatever actual "plot" is going on by the various NPCs.

I'm not sure how to write that for someone else to do. I clearly can't just publish the stuff I actually wrote, because a lot of it includes stuff that is specific to reactions to what the PCs actually did when I ran it, which is not necessarily what any other group of players would do. I'm not going to create an if/then tree here (and I don't think that's great anyway). For someone to use this sort of adventure, they have to already know how to creatively and dynamically react to changes in the story itself. And thats a skill that has to be learned. And it's kinda hard to just publish the outline and chapter headings and just call it a day. But yeah. That's actually all I start with (well. and a whole lot of existing world building).

And that's just a simple single adventure. I've introduced larger plots that span multiple adventures, dropping hints here, events there, and otherwise just tracking specific "major events/threats" going on in the game setting, and having things realted to those happen while the PCs are doing other things. Sometimes, it's just a vague idea in the back of my mind that "something is going on", and I flesh out exactly what later on. Heck. I drop things in all the time, even if I have no plan for them at all. Not everything leads to an epic adventure. Sometimes, that old vase you found in the bad guys basement is just an old vase.

But sometimes, it's not...

[Easy e]

To write something like that as an adventure, I think you need to focus on structure like:

1. The inciting incident

2. Key setting details/NPCs

3. Key Plot Points or encounters that must be touched on along the way (could be key clues, specific dialogue exchanges, challenges, etc.)

4. Other potential Nodes along the way, improv suggestions, and potential connective tissue ideas to spark creativity.

5. The End (and variant endings)

Of course, this makes the game more of a cinematic story line with key story beats, but I think trying to publish a sandbox is just writing a setting book.

[KorvinStarmast]

Mind. Blown.

Tastes differ. Not that hard of a concept to grasp. I was unable to tolerate Goodkind beyond the second or third chapter of his second book. Wizard's First Rule was about all I could stomach...my son read four of them. He liked them better than I did.

[gbaji]

Tastes differ. Not that hard of a concept to grasp. I was unable to tolerate Goodkind beyond the second or third chapter of his second book. Wizard's First Rule was about all I could stomach...my son read four of them. He liked them better than I did.

I made it to the first chapter or so of Temple of the Wind. Just couldn't handle the internal monologuing/angst anymore. Oh.. woe is me. I'm the ruler of the lands now. I have a wife who loves me. I also have several other beautiful women, trained in domination, who are throwing themselves at me (and literally willing to die for me). I also have a boatload of oathbound male warriors also willing to die for me as well, just to be fair. I have a magic sword that holds the skill/knowledge of every master who ever held it making me supremely powerful in combat. I have a cloak that makes me invisible and fast and (can't remember what else). I also have other unspecified magic abilities that basically allow me to regularly do <whatever the plot requires>. But my life is just so complicated! Waaaah! Let me spend page after page thinking about how difficult this all is for me.

Or... Not. The only thing that kept me reading that series was that I was interested in seeing what they would do/reveal about Zedd. He always referred to himself as "first wizard", taken to mean "a wizard of the first order", but some of the hints, and the fact that he seemed to know things, and have powers to do things no one else could do (but pretended he couldn't), always made me think he was much much older, and actually "the first wizard" (as in actually founded the order of wizards or something, was the one who created the veils, cast out Darken Rhal, etc). Dunno. Just a pet theory of mine. Just couldn't get through the books enough to make it worth finding out what the real deal was.

On the flip side. I actually enjoyed the Sword of Truth TV series. Very very different. But enjoyable in its own way.

[Quertus]

There are definitely schools of writing that insist you have to start with the Message as the core of any Story. Most of these schools of thought seem to be founded in the belief that the value of Story is that it provides the reader (/viewer/whatever) a template for dealing with problems/scenarios, that that’s why our brains are primed to respond to Story. And, I’ve gotta admit, I regret encountering a member of stories / ideas decades after those ideas would have been useful. So I can see why the connection between Story and Message is so hard to break for those who believe in it.

That said… by those standards, I can only assume my stories usually end up with a message something like, “planning is good, but it’s not God - it’ll help, and may even be necessary, but it’s not omnipotent. Sometimes, bad things happen to good people, even when they have good plans. (And sometimes/often, they don’t.)”

In an RPG setting? I imagine, as GM, my players would tell you I liberally sprinkle in, “be careful what you wish for” (and especially “be careful what you Wish for”). But, either way, the focus is much more on “that time we…”, and playing to find out, than trying to enforce any particular Message.

[kyoryu]

To write something like that as an adventure, I think you need to focus on structure like:

1. The inciting incident

2. Key setting details/NPCs

3. Key Plot Points or encounters that must be touched on along the way (could be key clues, specific dialogue exchanges, challenges, etc.)

4. Other potential Nodes along the way, improv suggestions, and potential connective tissue ideas to spark creativity.

5. The End (and variant endings)

Of course, this makes the game more of a cinematic story line with key story beats, but I think trying to publish a sandbox is just writing a setting book.

I'd go with:

1. Inciting incident

2. Setting details as appropriate (you can go nuts here)

3. Key NPCs (preferably more than six), including:
* their relationships to other NPCs
* what they want, preferably multiple goals
* their agenda - what they plan on doing to get what they want. SuperProTip is to have the agendas conflict with other NPCs

4. Other ideas of how things might change based on what happens.

5. An idea of how the world might change as various agendas occur (usually visible, noticeable changes rather than subtle stuff)

6. Possible endings

[gbaji]

I'd go with:

1. Inciting incident

2. Setting details as appropriate (you can go nuts here)

3. Key NPCs (preferably more than six), including:
* their relationships to other NPCs
* what they want, preferably multiple goals
* their agenda - what they plan on doing to get what they want. SuperProTip is to have the agendas conflict with other NPCs

4. Other ideas of how things might change based on what happens.

5. An idea of how the world might change as various agendas occur (usually visible, noticeable changes rather than subtle stuff)

6. Possible endings

My writing usually actually starts with "what's going on?" first. I write what the NPCs are doing, why they are doing it, and how this may interact with other things also going on.

Example: Evil King has discovered that his good brother is forming a rebellion against him, with the aid of some adventurers from the nearby kingdom (the PCs). He's begun forming special combat squads, better trained in combat, and provided with some magic items and shamanic spirit/magic support, to hunt down members of this resistance. Additionally, he has formed an aliance with the Black Fang assassin cult, allowing them temples in his lands in return for service to eliminate "problems" (like his rebellious younger brother). His first set of squads have completed training and begun operations. The first Black Fang temple has been established secretly in one of the outer watchtowers about 5 milies to the East of his capital city. Meanwhile, there is a group of wealthy merchant class people who have formed a secret society of their own. They also desire regime change, but want to stay in the shadows. They will desire reaching out to the PCs if possible, and ultimately may form an alliance with the younger brother as well. They have other objectives as well (which I'm not going to post here, for reasons).

Then I write "the hook" (Inciting event I suppose). Which is what will inform the PCs that something is going on, which they may wish to investigate. In this particular adventure, IIRC, it was a request from the large farm owners in the north of that kingdom requesting help to deal with a cursed mine they (a previous PC party) had discovered on their lands, and which had caused them some troubles. They already tried hiring a local shaman, and that ended somewhat disastrously (which was also a previous adventure dealing with the aftermath), so they're going outside their lands, to some people who have helped them previously, and hoping that their divine and sorcerous resources may prevail where the local shamans did not. Of course, along the way, they will run across one of these squads, hunting their also-ally the rebel Prince, and perhaps realize something more is going on here (I allow for one "random chance hook" in an adventure like this, since that's the happenstance thing that gets them clued in to something going on, and this is it).

Then I write chapter headings. So in this case, a paragraph describing the hook (party is approached for assistance with the cursed mine). Then that they will encounter a squad while traveling there, and (assuming they defeat said squad, which they should given these things are not realy scaled against powerful PCs), learn about the evil Kings current operations. Something they may want to warn the Prince about. This first chapter I also fully detail in its own doc (the request for help, and the squad encounter along the way).

Next chapters are just headings in the initial adventure outline doc. A paragraph about dealing with the mine (they go there, farmers ask for help, brief description of what is there -which I already know, since I've run the efects of the cursed mine twice already-. Details to be filled later). Another one about talking to the Prince and he will ask them to investigate the squads. He has some information on where their training facility may be. Next paragraph about said training facility, where it is, who's there, etc. And that they'll be approached by some sneaky type inviting them to where the secret society folks are to come talk. Next paragraph about secret society folks, and what they'll ask. And hey. They know about the assassin cult and where their new temple is. Gee. If they could squash that, it would put a damper on them even being wiling to expend resources expaning their operations here, so there's a paragraph on that too. I may also drop in a couple other paragraphs about other side things going on, which may or may not impact them, but aren't necesary for the "main plot", and which could be dropped in anywhere. Maybe a troup of puppetters in a random town, that are more than they seem. Or a local slaver who they come across (and could choose to do something about, since slavery is legal in this kingdom, but they don't like it, but they're also trying to keep a low profile here).

Then, as the adventure unfolds, and the PCs make various choices, I fill in the details on the actual chapters, writing a complete doc for each one, including names, places, stats on opponents to deal with, etc. And I also try to throw in other random creative stuff along the way, if I feel that the adventure is getting a bit to stock or direct.

And yeah. Possible endings are there as well. They may or may not deal significant damage to the squad training program (probably not too much though, since this is a large(ish) scale thing, so the one location they go may just be part of it). They will presumably really want to take out the assassins, and squash their temple and try to send them packing. Divine worship isn't a popular cultural thing in this particular kingdom (pretty much only the PCs kingdom allows it widescale for historical reasons), so this is "super secret" (er. also "assassins", right?), and also an extension of resources on both sides, so stomping it before it get's fully operational will set that back a lot. Of course, this ending requires that they encounter the secret society folks, which is most directly done if they track down where the squad came from, but since they are trying to make contact, they will likely reach out to them at some point, even if that hook doesn't work.

The point here is less about "how" they reach any potential ending (since there may be multiple ways they get there), but "what" may happen depending on what they accomplish. And the outcome of various choice they make will potentially lead to additional adventures written later. Or I'll just toss something else in entirely. I find having breaks in between commonly themed adventure paths works well at maintaining a continuity and a sense that they PCs exist in a real world instead of just a single big story. Of course, the players are absolutely free to come to me and say "We want to go investigate this, or deal with that", and I'll write something for that.

And to be fair, I run this game in an incredibly detailed and already filled in game setting. So a heck of a lot of this is very easily just slotted in. If I were writing an adventure from scratch in a new setting, I'd have to also fill in the details of which kingdoms are where, some maps, some historical details, etc. But for relatively small scope adventures, that's not too terribly difficult. But that fits more into a "how to build a game setting" thread. In my setting I tend to keep 4-6 irons in the fire at any given time. Things that are going on, some of them pretty simple, some of them quite complex. The players can choose to take direct action regarding any of these at any time if they want, and in some cases, that's quite doable. In some others, there may not be a lot they can do, until some new incident occurs which provides new information/opportunity. And some of them, they really don't even know much at all about them. But they are there anyway...

[Easy e]

I'd go with:

1. Inciting incident

2. Setting details as appropriate (you can go nuts here)

3. Key NPCs (preferably more than six), including:
* their relationships to other NPCs
* what they want, preferably multiple goals
* their agenda - what they plan on doing to get what they want. SuperProTip is to have the agendas conflict with other NPCs

4. Other ideas of how things might change based on what happens.

5. An idea of how the world might change as various agendas occur (usually visible, noticeable changes rather than subtle stuff)

6. Possible endings

Which to me seems more like a setting book, than an adventure. However, that structure works great too!

Both setting books and adventure modules are cool, but they are trying to cater to different gamer needs and wants. At least, that is my opinion and is just as wrong as anyone else's opinion on the matter. :)

[gbaji]

Which to me seems more like a setting book, than an adventure. However, that structure works great too!

Both setting books and adventure modules are cool, but they are trying to cater to different gamer needs and wants. At least, that is my opinion and is just as wrong as anyone else's opinion on the matter. :)

Yup. Hence my statement about the difficulty of actually "publishing a scenario" that isn't just a thinly veiled railroad. You either have to just establish the setting and then toss in some hooks, clues, etc, and put the heavy lifting on the person running it *or* you're stuck detailing a specific adventure in the traditional manner (which will ultimately end up being at least a bit railroady, due to space constraints if nothing else).

My actual scenarios are all of the former style. But that's because I'm starting with "well defined setting", and just dropping in specific NPC "plots/plans", and letting it rip from there. But that's nearly impossible to actually write for someone else to run independently. I can't write my own thought process as I respond to the PCs choices and actions and make decisions about what the NPCs will do. Er. I could, but it would result in an absolutely massive web of if/then options that would not really work as a viable adventure to run (and might just drive someone mad. Mad i say!).

Having said that, I actually like setting books a lot. Most of them will have some basic adventure ideas, and often have different groups/organizations/religions/whatever as well that may be interesting. I usually use them as ideas for places/people/things to drop into another game setting. But yeah. I usually then drop my own scenario ideas into that setting rather than just follow along with what was written.

Not a huge fan of canned adventure books though. I mean, I can (and have) run them. But I typically just view them as one shot sorts of things to run through. Not something I take very seriously, or spend a lot of time on. And honestly, while some are written well, I'm just not a fan of trying to run through something someone else wrote. I often spot gaps in them, or things that just don't make sense. Or sometimes, arrive at some point in the book and am like "Wait. There's nothing explaining what happens in this situation", and have to wing it anyway. To run some of these things "well", often requires as much or more more effort and time on my part as I would have spent just writing my own adventure in the first place. And if I do that, I'd know exactly the who/what/when/where/why, and not find myself confusedly flipping through pages trying to figure out which monster goes where, or what the motivation of NPC X is, or any of a number of things that I can wing just fine if I wrote the material, but have no clue what the author of the adventure was thinking when they wrote (the often complete garbage) I'm trying to follow.