Since I ranted about character development yesterday, I'll start on about story development today:

Let no one fool you. Stories, even good ones, are pretty formulaic. Introduce characters. Introduce crisis. Escalate. Resolve. Three acts: Shakespear to Simpsons, three acts. There is still a ton of room for improvisation and countless variations for this pattern.

1) Introduce characters does not have to be "Meet Mr. Johnson." In fact, from an RPG perspective, it is far more important (at the beginning of a campaign at least) for the PC's to see each other. Consider nearly every James Bond movie: before the opening credits you will have a completely solid idea of who James Bond is before they even start to tell you about his mission. I always thought "Food Fight" was brilliant for this.

2) Before you begin to create any sort of plot, write down a list of things and mood words that you want to use. At this point, I would avoid referring to specifically Shadowrunnish things. All you are doing is creating mood. Use these words in your "establishments", "Tell it to them straight" (or at least the first paragraph or two.) is the RPG equivalent of the establishing shot in film. Don't get establishment mixed up with exposition. Establishment: Two big spaceships are in a laser battle. Exposition: "It is a dark time for the rebellion..." While you're at it, use exposition sparingly, but don't ignore it. Make it come out through your characters when you can, but as a GM you can present exposition all you want. "You've all heard of Black Roger, he's a pimp who has connections to the orc underground...."

3) "Decision Tree Format" Is a term we've probably all heard. I suggest that when you write this way, you must do it from the player's perspective. Start with your establishing scene. Then try to anticipate what the players could conceive to do. I say this because as a player, a common GM trap when using DTF is to wrap up a scene, then say "Okay, now you can go do this, or you can go do this. Which do you choose?" Like I said, you are only anticipating the choices they might make. The world you are creating is a forest, not a highway. The paths they choose might not be the obvious ones.

4) In every decent story, it is vital... no, necessary, for a central character to go through an internal change. You will find that the bulk of the story is about that character trying to resolve his crisis without changing. This usually makes life more difficult for him each time he tries, until he realizes that he must change. "You are the one, Neo!" "No I'm not." "Are too!" "Am not!" "ARE TOO!" "....okay, maybe I am." It is the internal change that usually marks the turning point of the story. After that we just sit back and watch things get blown up.
Of course, we're talking about what is essentially a serial (more on that in a minute) so likely the changes should usually be small ones for PC's. "The fixer says he's trying to save you. Maybe you could trust him just once." "No way, I don't trust anybody!" "But now you're alone after Mr. Johnson screwed you. If you don't trust him, you'll be caught and killed." "Okay, Mr. Fixer, I'll hide here, but just 'til tomorrow..."

5) Surround your PC's with allies as well as enemies. These allies do not have to be assets, just people with whom the PC's can interact with and can supply motivation. What are these people like? See my thread on character development.

6) The format of an RPG is that of a serial, it seems to me. Lots of people tend to model their games on their favourite movies, which limits them. I mean, how many good sequels are there? At the end of Robocop, Murphy had finally gotten back in touch with his humanity. What was Robocop II even about?
I believe it is far better to model your campaign after any long running television show with a lot of lead characters that follows a chronology. Examples: ER, CSI, Cheers (Sometimes Norm found a good job, sometimes he lost it but stuck to his principles...), 90210, et al.
(I have no intentions of discussing the merits of those programs, and I'll be torqued if someone hijacks my thread to do so. I don't care if they're good or not, just that they have an appropriate format.)

7) Keep a timeline. I just write down days of the week on lined paper as the characters go through them. Then when I have a minute, I'll jot down what NPC's have been doing on those days. Just the highlights. Always in pencil, because you want to change it sometimes to accomodate your characters.


There you go, run with it.....

I like. Thanks for sharing.

Some new and interesting thoughts, some stuff I already used, this is one of the reasons for why RPG-related forums are a good thing. thanks

*laugh* -- can I submit Dragon's story, or (for a more in-game meet) Tony's story -- or for that matter just about any of our local Living in the Shadows storylines -- for active examples of most of what you just wrote, Dog?

Where I'd disagree with you is the idea of having an absolutely solid idea of who the other PCs are. In some games, this is the norm, even to the point of taking matter-of-factly which role in the team a given PC is going to fill. In other games, it isn't: which can be either group-divisive, or give a sense of constant discovery about other PCs. Not that I'd disagree with you about the James Bond example you gave ... at least partly because I happen to think that one doesn't get an absolutely solid idea from those about who James Bond is, only about what James Bond does. But that's a subject for another thread

touche

Oops -- I didn't mean to drown this, only to give examples. Linked in your other thread actively (in the previous post), and raising this to get more perspectives and discussion.

Interesting thoughts, Dog, and they're much appreciated.

Regarding the decision tree, I've never used one. I've never run Shadowrun in a solid way, I've never written a whole lot down. I always think up a concept for the story, make a rough plan of what's going to happen when, and then I generate the big baddies so they've got solid stats and generate the maps where I know combat is going to happen. After that I leave it entirely up to the players to generate how they're going to go about dealing with the storyline. I'm very improv oriented as a GM and it has worked well for me. Everyone I've ever run for seems to enjoy the games. I remember when I first started running D&D I would write everything down, but the more I ran games the looser I got with the particulars. That's just something that works for me. I let the players do the work to write their own story through their roleplay, and they seem to enjoy it, and they always, always, go in a direction I never would have thought of or could have predicted. However, the idea for writing down the moods you want to use is a good one. I'm definitely going to try that.

As for the internal changes, I hate to railroad players into stuff. I think if you make every run contain an internal change that has to take place with a character you run the risk of losing the power that those changes create. Like any powerful spice, use it sparingly. Now, I don't exactly think you mean to make the players change in every run, but I just wanted to caution some other GMs against making it a common theme.

Speaking of using things sparingly, from what I've read from other GMs on here it seems that the Johnson screwing the characters is a common theme. Like it is expected that the Johnson is gonna screw 'em, and I don't agree with this at all. If that becomes a scheduled thing how will the characters react to that? In my mind, they would stop running. Why work for someone you can't trust at all? I realize you don't want the players running around taking what their Johnson says as gospel, but you can't make the Johson's betrayal gospel either. Like the above mentioned spice, use it sparingly, and it makes the meal that much more delicious.

I've never been a fan of the "decision tree" view of running a game, even if it's based from the PC's point of view. I use a "timeline" method--that is, there are things going on in the gaming world (people coming and going, delivery guys dropping off lunch, evil organizations plotting world overthrow, paperboys beaming pirated screamsheet to home recievers, etc. etc. etc.). Some of these events directly impact runs (e.g., what's this? The target you're extracting has a mistress who he is going to visit on Tuesday at 10 am?) and some of them don't (e.g., a car pulls up in front of the address you're staking out. The window rolls down slowly, revealing an ork with a hideous grin on his face. "Excuse me," he asks, "how to I get to Grove Street from here?").

The PCs actions intersect with all these activities which are going on concurrently. Sometimes it means the PCs strike at an opportune moment. Sometimes it means they're too late to secure a target. Sometimes it lands them an unexpected windfall, and sometimes it makes them pay. I think it's a good system. It's not even that GM intensive (sometimes you can just make things up as you go along, giving the illusion of a vivid and well-constructed time line to your players). I think it makes the game feel a lot more "real." It's also a less player-centric view of the world. Nothing waits on the PCs. It forces them into character and ups the stakes, while giving them a more rich world in which to play their roles.

I know that's the method I use. Timeline methods give the players a chance to do random things and it can or can't affect the timeline. Sometimes they are helpless to watch something happening, sometimes they can save the day (or wreck someone else's day, depending on their actions). It also makes them aware of the world around them, and how fickle Murphy really is.

To elaborate on Shadow Scholar's second point, I should point to those who haven't noticed yet that a "story" doesn't usually equate to one game session. Life-altering changes don't occur every weekend. Ask anyone who has quit smoking.

I guess I had in my head the notes on my "Character Development" thread. Perhaps the "internal change" comment was more for players and belonged in the other thread. What I should've said was that a GM's job is to provide opportunities for players who want to pursue a personal development goal, along with all the traps and challenges that make it fun.

Thanks for the notes, guys.

Oh, forgot this one: "Write what you know." Like to play and watch basketball? Making a storyline involving that will create a new level of detail and realism as your innate knowledge makes its way into your work. Make NPC's that share traits with people you know..... oops, gotta run.