D&D General The Alexandrian’s Insights In a Nutshell [+]

Campbell said:

Sure, but in no way does that address criticism of the technique from the perspective of don't prep plots - prep situations.

Click to expand...

Yes it does. Because it framed as advice, not as law. Advice is always conditional. "don't prep plots - prep situations. (unless you have a reason to do it differently)" - is implied by the context.

Paul Farquhar said:

Justin is giving advice, not dictating how it must be done. Advice is there to be listened to, considered, and as appropriate, ignored. Even though the guy has a bit of a messiah complex, it is not his intent to suggest that you must follow his rules at all times.

There are undoubtedly a great many ways to play D&D, and no advice is going to be appropriate for all of them.

Click to expand...

To be clear, I don't think what @kenada (or @pemerton or @AbdulAlhazred ) are concerned with is (a) whether JA has "a bit of a messiah complex" or (b) whether "his intent is to suggest that you must follow his rules at all times" or (c) whether there is advice that is going to be appropriate for all the ways to play D&D.

The interest is a very narrow one regarding what this thing (Three Clue Rule) does when actually used and what kind of play does it entail (when actually used):

Does the chokepoint-averting impact on play that The Three Clue Rule provides implicate pre-authored plot being funneled to?

My answer to that is "yes." And I don't think the breaking part of events in that kind of game into plot point > diversion of freeplay and/or benign color and/or book-keeping (like "taverning" or pastry-baking or selecting spells during rest or spending coin at the market to reprovision or whatever) > plot point > plot point > diversion of side quest > plot point > diversion of freeplay and/or benign color and/or book-keeping > plot point is relevant to the question. That is because the trajectory of consequential play is pre-authored (the mystery) and is funneled to via the chokepoint-averting Three Clues (or whatever value).

Manbearcat said:

To be clear, I don't think what @kenada (or @pemerton or @AbdulAlhazred ) are concerned with is (a) whether JA has "a bit of a messiah complex" or (b) whether "his intent is to suggest that you must follow his rules at all times" or (c) whether there is advice that is going to be appropriate for all the ways to play D&D.

The interest is a very narrow one:

Does the chokepoint-averting impact on play that The Three Clue provides implicate pre-authored plot being funneled to?

My answer to that is "yes." And I don't think the breaking part of events in that kind of game into plot point > diversion of freeplay and/or benign color and/or book-keeping (like "taverning" or pastry-baking or selecting spells during rest or spending coin at the market to reprovision or whatever) > plot point > plot point > diversion of side quest > plot point > diversion of freeplay and/or benign color and/or book-keeping > plot point is relevant to the question. That is because the trajectory of consequential play is pre-authored (the mystery) and is funneled to via the chokepoint-averting Three Clues (or whatever value).

Click to expand...

And this really boils down to what you mean by a "pre-authored plot".

Is "The Iron Throne is employing bandits to disrupt the supply of iron" a "pre-authored plot" or part of world building?

(credit BG1)

Also, does it matter?

hawkeyefan said:

I think it’s clear that the advice “don’t prep plots” and how it talks about not caring what the PCs do is certainly contradictory with the way he presents the “three clue rule” as being “for any conclusion you want the players to make, include three clues”.

Bolded emphasis mine. If there are conclusions you want the players to make, then you care what they do. You want them to proceed in a certain way… along some predetermined path.

Click to expand...

This may be a product of poor word choice. It would probably be more accurate to say something like, “if you give players information about something fewer than three times, they probably won’t remember it.”

Paul Farquhar said:

And this really boils down to what you mean by a "pre-authored plot".

Is "The Iron Throne is employing bandits to disrupt the supply of iron" a "pre-authored plot" or part of world building?

(credit BG1)

Click to expand...

That depends entirely on the particulars of how a game system enacts the process of principally generating and resolving content. There are a host of micro-questions to ask and answer before getting to the big ticket item of "is this constitutive of pre-authored plot in the experience of playing a TTRPG?"

I can say, however, that if the above idea you're presenting is (a) pre-authored and (b) meted out in play via The Three Clue Rule to ensure that such content is mainlined onto play (cementing the consequential trajectory of play), then "yes, that is pre-authored plot in the experience of playing a TTRPG." And then I can say, "that generates a contrast in experience of play with alternative approaches."

Also, does it matter?

Click to expand...

Of course it matters. Different systemization of generating and resolving content, premise, theme, and conflict (and different deftness in the GMing and the playing of those differences) will create (i) different mental spaces for each participant, (ii) different decision-points (type and impact), adding up to (iii) different moment-to-moment experiences of play.

EDIT: I mean, even within the same "family of games," you'll see vast differences in the above. Contrast Moldvay Basic with AD&D 2e with D&D 4e in the D&D family. Contrast Mouseguard with Torchbearer in the Burning Wheel family. Very different kettles of fish (and that is related to the above).

Manbearcat said:

That depends entirely on the particulars of how a game system enacts the process of principally generating and resolving content. There are a host of micro-questions to ask and answer before getting to the big ticket item of "is this constitutive of pre-authored plot in the experience of playing a TTRPG?"

Click to expand...

What questions do you think need answering before you can give a straight answer to a straightforward question? WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY PRE-AUTHORING? If I include in my sandbox proactive NPC organisations with agendas of their own am I, or am I not, committing the unforgivable sin of pre-authoring?

Manbearcat said:

I can say, however, that if the above idea you're presenting is (a) pre-authored and (b) meted out in play via The Three Clue Rule to ensure that such content is mainlined onto play (cementing the consequential trajectory of play), then "yes, that is pre-authored plot in the experience of playing a TTRPG." And then I can say, "that generates a contrast in experience of play with alternative approaches."

Click to expand...

There is a village (population outside the players control), it has a mayor (presupposes a political system that is outside the players control) and he has a problem with monster an bandit attacks (suggests a course of action for the PCs) Is this "pre-authoring? If so, I would say you are correct, it is not possible to play D&D without some level of pre-authoring.

Manbearcat said:

Of course it matters. Different systemization of generating and resolving content, premise, theme, and conflict (and different deftness in the GMing and the playing of those differences) will create (i) different mental spaces for each participant, (ii) different decision-points (type and impact), adding up to (iii) different moment-to-moment experiences of play.

Click to expand...

Sure, and the DM does what is appropriate, for their game, and if free to follow or ignore whatever advice they like. Advice not being appropriate in all possible situations does not make the advice bad.

For example, "Don't write Plot". I will sometimes ignore that, because my answer to "what happens if they don't?" is easy - then I wing it. But I would not say "write plot and wing it if it doesn't work" is good general advice. On the whole, the advice that Justin quotes (but did not originate) is more generally applicable.

In the same way that it matters to people who wish to solve a preestablished mystery if the GM makes it up as they go or if Brindlewood Bay type mechanics are in use it absolutely matters to me if a GM is attempting to set a player character's agenda or establishing scenario details towards specific outcomes.

When the three-clue rule structure is in place the GM is in that moment not relying on don't prep plot - prep situation. That absolutely matters to me because it has huge impact on how I should approach playing the game (if a player) or run the game regardless of whether it changes from moment or moment or not. If it does change from moment to moment without any signaling, then players are left without the ability to lean into the meta of play.

Reading through all of these posts and counter-posts just re-iterates something to me I've believed for a long, long time... any "rule" of DMing is merely just advice, and that for every rule that someone says is definitive and always true... there's will also be times when bending or breaking said rule will be perfectly fine. And it's up to each DM to determine for themselves if/when those times might be appropriate.

Campbell said:

it absolutely matters to me if a GM is attempting to set a player character's agenda

Click to expand...

Campbell said:

establishing scenario details towards specific outcomes.

Click to expand...

So, "the village is being plagued by bandits" would not be acceptable in your game? A mysterious tomb in the nearby hills? A dragon making it's lair in the mountains?

These all suggest an agenda leading to a specific outcome.

I've become convinced that story-now gaming is so fundamentally different from "traditional" gaming that it's not really fruitful to mix the discussion of both modes in a single thread. Clearly, Alexandrian is giving his advice in the context of traditional gaming.