A proper tabletop RPG is not for passive players who only react and never take the initiative. The fundamental feedback loop favors the Man With a Plan, the enterprising player who actively seeks out opportunities to make his fame and fortune manifest in the world.
You, Mr. GM, have to do your part. You have to present a setting where that opportunity exists. Putting them on a Chosen One path is not that, at all. (Yes, this means the bad aping of Epic Fantasy "Save the World" plots has to stop because it does nothing but keep all these bad habits going.) Take your Not-Sauron figure out back, pop a bullet through his dome, and be done with it. Less Tolkien, More Howard.
The setting needs monsters, traps, and ruins. Not overarching villains trying to conquer or destroy the world. Far too often this push to ape Tolkien turns into Railroad Roundup- and videogames do this style of play far better than tabletop does, which is why so many who prefer that style quit tabletop RPGs for that competing medium. Tabletop does sandbox play, especially West Marches play, far better than any videogame can do (or will for years to come). The excuse is always Muh Story, but games don't need stories- and RPGs sure as hell are not storytelling media and don't need them to be good games. Never have, never will.
There is absolutely no need whatsoever to fudge things for or against the players. The dice are plenty sufficient to account for random factors, so if the players legitimately secure victory before engaging in battle, don't you dare fudge it otherwise. Let them enjoy the victory that they properly prepared for and executed effectively. This is why RPGs are not a Narrative medium; if you earn your wins, you get them.
You, Mr. Player, need to get off your ass and show up with a plan. You are responsible for your man's success, just like in real life, and not the Gm. Your failures are your own. Your successes are your own. There is nothing and no one to shirk the blame to when the shit hits the fan; it's all on you. It is not the GM's job to entertain you. Neither is he a server there only to send and receive data; the campaign is his, not yours- you are an invited guest, expected to be personable and friendly. You can, and will, get kicked out if you don't measure up.
The reason you need a plan is because the campaign relies on you to drive it, not the GM. You are to go out there and explore that wilderness, those ruins, etc. and see what's there. It's on you to decide what to do with the more intelligent NPCs and monsters you encounter. It's on you to recover the treasure (whatever it is) and bring it back to town. How you do it is on you also. Make friends, court allies, and all that stuff- just like real life. Sure, you'll have to do some favors in return; suck it up. That's the price for having those friends and allies, and you want them because it makes getting what you want done a hell of a lot easier.
Screw "Save The World". Take some real risks, and Make Your World instead. Fortune favors the Bold fora reason. Go for it.
You hit on why the Hasbro/WotC version of D&D is a failing enterprise for real FUN and ADVENTURE, and why the original forms of the RPG still have drawing power: it ain't all just "Save the World" out there!
ReplyDeleteOriginal RPGs could be played in the small realm quickly and easily. A good GM could build a one-off game (crafted an hour before play with a pencil, a sheet of paper, and maybe a table or two from a monster guide) to explore a hex on a map.
Perhaps run a short event, like the rescue of an abducted child by a bandit gang, the heist of a box of ancient coins from a hedge wizard's lair, or the recovery of an old amulet from a cave guarded by a bear-like creature. All of these scenarios are easy, on-the-fly, fun, and eminently runable evenings of fun and adventure.
The games scaled as you needed for the most part, and the books to make things easier for the GM to construct their world followed for a bit. The original modules did as well. Early products such as B2, "The Keep on the Borderlands", and T1, "The Village of Homlett", are excellent seeds and jump-start modules. The many modules that followed unfortunately lost that concept.
The problem started when the books started leading the game, rather than the GM's imagination. The modules became world-spanning linear adventures, where every final event shaped the course of the game world. The "Return to ..." modules were most egregious villains here, but old TSR began the trend itself with the Drow threading through the ADD 1 Slavers, Giants, and Underdark series of modules.
While I enjoy the World of Greyhawk, it too was a culprit in devolving the D&D game in this respect. (I also blame themes in post-1960s comics, specifically Roy Thomas' original Kree-Skrull War saga, for fanning these flames.)
The Module-as-Adventure-Seed was lost as a concept, especially when coupled with tournament play, as the structure and strictures of a module were needed for scoring a large tournament. TSR sowed the seeds of its own downfall by publishing modules for in-tournament use as standard in-home RPG play, though I also understand why from TSR's business perspective at the time.
Once the modules were seen as integral to running the RPG, supplement books naturally followed (especially for ADD 2), and soon the simple concept of using your imagination, with the help of some basic guiding references, was lost.
Now we face the Hasbro/WotC behemoth implying that one can't run a game unless the Publisher hands you the completed adventure packet first. Extra SJW sauce not on the side, of course.
My experiences at recent game conventions convinced me that the old ways are the best, and they produce the most fun for those at the table. That's my path.