Combat is perhaps the most instantly recognizable aspect of gaming. If you have ever watched a game or played a session or two, chances are you have seen players roll for initiative. Setting off traps, fighting monsters, generally battling your way through foes and fears is often the name of the game.
But there is another type of gaming that is based more heavily on storytelling, drama, and role playing. These games focus heavily on establishing mood and atmosphere with their rules, with combat resolution playing a much smaller part than in traditional RPGs. Often, they even have rules that dictate certain plot developments, simulating structural rules and frameworks used by screenplay writers and authors.
The thing to remember about low-combat story-driven games is that they can come in two varieties. Heavily structured or lightly structured.
Heavily structured RP games are for problem solvers and thinkers who want to be tested by non-violent obstacles. A bank heist or a murder mystery are examples of problems that must be solved by means other than combat. These adventures need to be planned out so that there are multiple avenues to success, with clearly defined puzzles and options for the players. They may even integrate skill mechanics into the game, creating a non-combat encounter that is just as subject to strategy and random chance as any tabletop battlefield.
A session in which the players must infiltrate the palace to steal the crown jewels would be heavily structured. The DM can provide a floorplan of the building, and draw from a list of pre-made security countermeasures. He might be a couple of puzzles or mysteries to integrate into the game. Players might have to roll skill checks to talk their way past guards or pick locks.
Lightly structured RP games are the preference for storytellers and actor types who prefer an organic storyline more than overcoming challenges. These are served the screenwriting styled story-telling systems mentioned above. Examples of such systems include FIASCO, the Cortex Plus system, and Dread.
A lightly structured RP session might have players exploring the rebel base and interacting with its denizens. They will run into various loyalists and revolutionaries, traps and obstacles. They are free to explore in any order, and make connections and decisions that the DM can spin into significant developments for the campaign.
The key principle of games that are heavily RP-oriented is to structure them enough to give the role playing purpose and direction. Of course there should be some content to set the mood and flavor of the campaign, but the bulk of your game should be based on progression, developing the story.
Every group has their own pace, but they should always feel a sense of accomplishment after a session. For this reason it is often helpful to lay out your RP in the framework of individual scenes, like narrative based encounters. A meeting with the viceroy, a surprise inspection of the barracks, or a false accusation from a detective, each have their own twists and turns, and are easier to digest when handled individually. Each one has a number of potential resolutions, and even if the scene is unexpected and improvised you should keep this in mind. What is going to happen as a result of this encounter? What are the possible outcomes?
Building Towards Resolution
If your non-combat encounters are rich and consequential, they can be just as engaging as the battles. Sometimes a game doesn't need a single fight in it to be fun for your players. Especially if they are into acting out their characters and letting them grow and interact with the game world. Some sessions could consist entirely of this, with players initiating scenes and encounters in which they play out their role and make key choices that will affect the direction of the adventure as it progresses.
When you run game sessions like this, there is one key structural rule to keep in mind for a productive game. Every role playing scene should lead to some sort of resolution, which in turn triggers a new consequence. Engaging storylines are formed by decisive action, so lead your players to take a clear direction with their choices. Noncommittal answers and meandering will break the 'momentum' of the story and slow the progression. "I won't" doesn't go as far as "I will."
This doesn't mean that every resolution needs to be an extreme action, like fight or flight. It could be as simple as revealing a previously unknown character trait. The player needs to be able to describe how a scene has changed things with its resolution. Maybe the cleric trusts the thief a little more than before, or maybe the thief trusts the cleric a little less.
In any case, players should be encouraged to make resolutions that are about doing things rather than not doing things. Negative statements close down options, rather than opening new ones. The fighter who feels cheated by the barony would be limited by saying "I'll never work with barons again." But it would be better if he decided "I will fight against the barony!" or "I'm serving the common folk from now on!" These statements give the story a clear vector that can lead to exciting new developments!
So in the previous example, a trusting cleric might decide to let the thief in on some more of their secrets in the future. The choice has clear consequences and direction. It doesn't have to be spoken every time, but if it doesn't seem to have an effect, you might want to gently coach your players with some friendly reminders: "Sarah, isn't this new information about the town guard something you would share with your new best friend?" (You can use these cards as role playing aids for these kinds of situations.)
In any case, you are trying to avoid answers like "I dunno," or "Nothing has changed," responses that will be more likely to lead into a stagnant and monotonous game. This is why I hardly ever role play merchant encounters, because a negotiation with a random shopkeeper is rarely going to have an effect on. (If the shopkeeper also shares insight into local affairs or intrigues this might be an exception.) Kind of like going to the bathroom, there are certain aspects of your fictional characters lives that are obviously essential but pointless to describe. Even if a scene is there to establish a tone for a setting, it will have a consequence of some kind. The characters' attitudes and opinions should reflect what they experience. An impressive palace could wow the wizard with its splendor, delight the thief with its wealth, and annoy the cleric with its decadence. If your player characters respond with indifference to every occurrence it will make for an uneventful scenario.
In improvisational performance, this is called the rule of "Yes, and..." in which the participants accept their partners statements and add on their own details. While this isn't a rule that should be followed religously in RPGs, the concept itself drives home the point that affirmative statements are more useful to creativity, and that you can always build further or modify the information presented.
Keep these rules in mind when preparing and running non-combat encounters and your game will not only keep your players attention, but remain a memorable campaign for many adventures beyond. Happy ventures!
No comments:
Post a Comment