This last decade, the big trend in game design has been the success with consequences that you’ll find in system like FU RPG, * PTBA*, FITD and other I forget. A cool feature of the consequences it that it switch from the GM deciding every story point during preparation, in prepping an outline and fill it using the positive and negative “consequences” (e.g. in more classical game you decide that the dagger who killed the king is hidden in the bishop desk, on a fiction first game a partial success may-mean that while you’re finding the dagger under the bishop bed, the bishop entre his room an asks you what you’re doing.

Now the drawback, is that the whole game-flow can be more chaotic with consequences adding extra steps in the story. I see two difficulties with that kind of approach, one is very practical, making sure that the game session finishes before the last train so everyone can come home the other is finding the balance between staying in your campaign outline, and keeping your plot twist for the right moment, and drowning the PC over tons of consequences. I remember that after a Kult campaign, our GM told us about all the holds (consequences letting the setting do action against the PC) he didn’t use to try to stay in the “plot” and not add extra complication to an already complicated story, but the same happen in many "consequences based games).

So out of curiosity, how do you deal with this layer of chaos. Do you go full chaotic, not prep anything and let the consequences driving the history, you limit the dice-roll to not stack up too much consequences for/against the PC ? Or do you adapt on a case by case basis ?

  • tissek
    12·
    10 months ago

    Apocalypse World, the system that spawned the PbtAs, have a pronciple for the GM

    Play to find out

    For me that is the guiding light. I play to find out. There is no plot, no story. Only the situation the game finds itself in. I dont know where it will go. But I do know where it starts and who is involved.

    As for managing the chaos I use two tools. First is only call for a roll when it really, really matters. When there are consequences. Second is something that can have fallen out of favor in more recent PbtAs and that 8s clearly defined Threats along with the moves they take and a few clocks/fronts. That way when I need to Play to find out I have tools to keep it contained. Which also ties into only testing when it matters because there are a threat or two involved.

    Or put in another way: Read and absorb Apocalypse World.

  • keis@talk.halvbrax.se
    6·
    10 months ago

    @Ziggurat @rpg In my experience it’s not a matter of preparing more or less but how you prepare. When I started out in the hobby I used to do very detailed scripts in preparation almost like a choose your own adventure game but work with much broader strokes these days and playing PBTA games very likely helped in that.

    I like to prepare situations and characters. A situation describes some event that is happening or could happen, a conflict of some kind. “Bandits attach the bishop’s carriage”. Characters are usually a short description “Guard” and a motivation “Impress the captain”.

    The rest flows from this and lets me easily pull from prepared stuff when improvising.

    I keep these noted down for each session and prepare along what I think the next story beats will be. I rarely end up using all but then simply move them along into the next session or into the archive of ideas that could be used later.

  • sirblastalot@ttrpg.networkM
    3·
    10 months ago

    I have a list of setpieces I want to put in front of the players (an island that’s actually a giant turtle, a treasure hunt, being lost in the ocean in a rowboat, etc) and around the halfway point of the campaign I try to figure out a climactic finale to build to. But beyond that, I don’t plan beyond the next session. I just plan my sessions by recapping what happened last session, putting forward any consequences of that, and a little light prep for a couple of the most likely courses of action my players might take next. Maybe dropping in one of those setpieces if it seems to fit.

  • INeedMana@lemmy.world
    2·
    10 months ago

    I only played Karma in the Dark, I’m not sure how vanilla it is

    In the end it’s just a game. If skipping some consequences makes everyone happy with the game, then everyone is happy ;)
    But my 2¢ would be:

    GM told us about all the holds he didn’t use to try to stay in the “plot” and not add extra complication to an already complicated story

    1. I think the plot might have been over-defined
      1. Take a look at Onion Plots and Lazy GM, these work very well with loosely defined plots. Instead of having a plan point by point, have a “bag” of points to choose from when complication happens
      2. I don’t want to say railroaded because that’s a loaded word, but I’d guess that they focused too much on how the job will progress, instead of the moving parts of the situation. Also, if the planned story was complicated in itself, maybe they moved too few of the planned complications to the “complications to reveal when a complication comes out from the dice” bag. You can have a few “really have to reveal those” in such a bag. It just takes a little practice to know how many
      3. When a complication happens, it does not have to be a plot-changing heavy hitter. I’m not familiar with Kult but a consequence could also be a Clock that means “someone in the setting will figure out something (connections, location, identity) when it fills”. And it’s ok if it lays dormant for a few other jobs. When you have many plot Clocks open it can lead to culmination when a few of these suddenly fill up a few jobs later. “play to find out” also means that there will be some loose ends in the plot, you never know if a random 4-out-of-6 Clock won’t come in handy just before a plot-important job to raise the tension
      4. When a consequence occurs, the GM has the control over how hard it is in fiction - whether it should be a twist or just business as usual
    2. A consequence does not have to be a complication. It can be
      • a lower effect - you are progressing towards the goal but the obstacle is well guarded and so far only managed to get half-way
      • harm - if the fiction is in a state you want to keep, you can always deal harm as a cop-out. A sprained ankle can happen to everyone
      • lost opportunity - you hear footsteps down the hall
    3. Complication does not have to be something right here and right now. “When hacking the node an ICE managed to identify part of your signature. This is not a Trace Clock, but if you don’t Resist or address it somehow later on, your Contact/Hideout will be in trouble because the Police (not the Corp yet - here’s my choice on gravity) will come looking for you and they won’t be asking nicely”
    • Ziggurat@sh.itjust.worksOPEnglish
      3·
      10 months ago

      Sure, looks like I didn’t checked the language before posting,

      EDIT, I’ve done the change myself