And I agree on that. I've seen games turn into "you're along for the ride on my story".

I asked because I didn't want to assume.

Heck, in my younger days my stories did that.

You were certainly right to ask, I didn't want to be exclusive. This setting draws a lot of new people to the hobby and I would prefer to encourage participation and eschew any sort of elitism.

And the value of talking it over shines through once more. ^__^

My sessions is usually a mixture, most of the time we have been along for the ride, however within the last year we have started to develop independance. You see we have a system of alt characters to play when the main isn't present, so one session, while doing a job for Lando (we are actually fairly old friends with Lando in this countunity, largely because we are the handymen that sort out his little problems.) of setting up a empire day presentation, 3 members of the party left in rapid succession to deal with personal tasks.

My character Tobin went to Nar Shaddar to hunt a nemesis (with the lure being a second lifting of the jewel of yavin) after offering a deal with a major mastermind to get release in exchange for a ceasefire betwne

The enigmatic stormtrooper turned ally returned to her old planet to assassinate a governor imposing marital law on it's people, in doing so she stole another characters "ship" (technically a party resource, though one player always claims ownership of it) to get there faster.

And a dashing pilot called Dex that, despite cybernetic eyes was recognised by an old flame, the wife of an Rear-Admiral Rathbone, which they decided to flee cloud city immediately before the visiting admiral could envoke his wrath.

Ended up being a interesting time that the DM worked into his plans quite nicely, the "captain", furious his ship was taken decided to track Ghost down in the Honey Badger (a YZ-775 modified with hanger), what followed was a daring assassination, a devastating discovery (the Governor was ghosts father!), rumours of plans regarding the smugglers moon, a recovery of the ace pilot and followed by the hunting of imperial cells, along aside a reckless hiest and a confrontation with Tobin's nemesis in a hotel room, all the while, despite actions to disable bombs planted by imperial cells that threatened to devastate the cities surface, followed by an invasion of the empire to bring Hutt space back under their firm control, which began a desperate attempt to destroy Rathbone's Flagship, the Rickenback, before the Hutts routed (explaining 8-10 sessions worth of action in a paragraph HOOOOO)

It was cool to pretty much have a series of sessions spawned from motivations, and I kind of look forward to another series of sessions inspired by the like soon enough.

You know, I hate to brag on myself, but I saw TFA with two of my players (they literally bribed me to go!) and when we came out, moderately entertained, one turned to me and said:

'I'm really glad you didn't do that.'

But hey, my game was extensively written to be a playable RPG with all the emphasis on the PCs. It's NOT the same thing as a movie. As a GM, I wanted to do something different. If I was Disney, I'd do exactly what they did and play it safe.

(And oh, I loved 'Guardians of the Galaxy'. It's more 'EoE' than any SW film I've seen, and it's influenced my game more than any official canon thing did.)

And the value of talking it over shines through once more. ^__^

I like to believe we're a good bunch of people!

Depends on what you mean by "spoonfed"...

For clarity, I mean a one-way consumption, not a give-and-take between the people at the table.

Is there an alternate definition I'm not aware of? Shades of grey so to speak?

50 Shades of Grey? WTF!! How the hell did this derail??? Oh, sorry.. that was me!

A lot of times I have trouble reading that guy, but this one was very good. Yeah, he's still subject to fits of tangent, but aren't we all? I think one of his best points in comparison was looking back at IV and that the galaxy was already in motion before the farm boy came along. Things were going to happen and he changed some things that would have happened. Was there suspicious timing? Sure... to increase tension...

Showing things to be in motion is an art. I probably do too little to provide a different perspective on things that are happening across the galaxy that are going to affect the players. I am guilty of too much long play and not doing cut and dried story arcs. I should focus on that a bit more in the future for pacing and tension...

Separately, do you guys feel video games have any responsibility in how players play RPG's today?

I won't say that video games have affected every RPGer, I know that video games have affected many RPGers.

Most of us who play the pen and paper games also play their electronic cousins. I know I do. I know when I began playing P&P games I was a terrible roleplayer. I was a great rollplayer, though. Combat, traps, dungeons! Sweet! Talking . . come on, blah blah. I matured. I care more about story and characters.

Then MMOs became cool. Then pay-to-win MMOs became the thing. Now an RPG group has to contend with instant "Max Level in 1 DAY!" "End game tier *^*&^ ultraviolet level gear for $15.99!" The stories in these games lag behind the money making opportunities. Sadly, companies don't make money off of great stories as much anymore, they make money off of micro-transactions. And this sort of easy button instant win playstyle has drifted into the gamer consciousness.

It just takes some good conversations between players and GMs to work out how the story will be told, and what sort of behaviors should be included, and which ones shouldn't. I know one gaming group in my are that basically plays Murder-Hobo: The Retelling, part XVI. They all love it. It's not the game for me, but it works for them. I know of another group that really really roleplays. Like, they roleplayed ordering and eating breakfast in a tavern. For 45 minutes. I would seriously consider slitting my wrists in that kind of scenario.

For most groups, balancing the straight forward approach that video games entail with the roleplay aspect is what draws us to P&P. You can include all of it, or some of it, or none of it. When properly balanced for the group currently involved, P&P story, combat, leveling, interacting, all of it can be amazing. When poorly mixed, you get bored players, angry players, frustrated GMs, and in the end, the game ends. Every story needs a little TLC to keep it going, they don't just keep going by themselves, they aren't the Energizer Bunny.

Separately, do you guys feel video games have any responsibility in how players play RPG's today?

I won't say that video games have affected every RPGer, I know that video games have affected many RPGers.

Most of us who play the pen and paper games also play their electronic cousins. I know I do. I know when I began playing P&P games I was a terrible roleplayer. I was a great rollplayer, though. Combat, traps, dungeons! Sweet! Talking . . come on, blah blah. I matured. I care more about story and characters.

Then MMOs became cool. Then pay-to-win MMOs became the thing. Now an RPG group has to contend with instant "Max Level in 1 DAY!" "End game tier *^*&^ ultraviolet level gear for $15.99!" The stories in these games lag behind the money making opportunities. Sadly, companies don't make money off of great stories as much anymore, they make money off of micro-transactions. And this sort of easy button instant win playstyle has drifted into the gamer consciousness.

It just takes some good conversations between players and GMs to work out how the story will be told, and what sort of behaviors should be included, and which ones shouldn't. I know one gaming group in my are that basically plays Murder-Hobo: The Retelling, part XVI. They all love it. It's not the game for me, but it works for them. I know of another group that really really roleplays. Like, they roleplayed ordering and eating breakfast in a tavern. For 45 minutes. I would seriously consider slitting my wrists in that kind of scenario.

For most groups, balancing the straight forward approach that video games entail with the roleplay aspect is what draws us to P&P. You can include all of it, or some of it, or none of it. When properly balanced for the group currently involved, P&P story, combat, leveling, interacting, all of it can be amazing. When poorly mixed, you get bored players, angry players, frustrated GMs, and in the end, the game ends. Every story needs a little TLC to keep it going, they don't just keep going by themselves, they aren't the Energizer Bunny.

Thanks for the great reply. My search for that "balance" has recently brought me to running one session, modular, standalone adventures that are loosely tied together from one week to the next. Before, I focused on 'the long play' (2-4 session long adventures) and discovered that it was too much for the attention span of my players (ages 25 to 45). I realize every player is different, but these players couldn't remember what happened the prior week, names of important NPC's, etc. They wanted to kill the bad guy and save the day, and the best success we had as a group in that regard was running one session games where they got to do that every week, and didn't need to remember anything from one week to the next. It's been a struggle and a process. So many different players want so many different things.

A little re-cap Crawl can go a long way, if you haven't tried it.

". . . and far less of a mess than Guardians of the Galaxy."

And thus his opinion was instantly rendered invalid. And the opinion of his mother, of his father, and of every descendant for the next thousand generations.

I was reading with interest until that point. The guy didn't like Pacific Rim AND Guardians of the Galaxy? I stopped reading right there because everything he says afterwards can't be serious. Thank you kaosoe for the filtered summary.

GotG was very good, not great -- but they did lay on the "after school special / power of friendship" aspect a bit thick.

Pacific Rim was horrible Hollywood extruded movie product, loaded with cliches dripping with overdone tropes.

I just skipped that comment and went on to read the rest of the article and see what the author had to say.

". . . and far less of a mess than Guardians of the Galaxy."

And thus his opinion was instantly rendered invalid. And the opinion of his mother, of his father, and of every descendant for the next thousand generations.

I was reading with interest until that point. The guy didn't like Pacific Rim AND Guardians of the Galaxy? I stopped reading right there because everything he says afterwards can't be serious. Thank you kaosoe for the filtered summary.

Gee, how many tribal hairs can we split? Maybe if you liked Pacific Rim, I should never talk to you ever EVER again! Harrumph!

<evil baby pout>

". . . and far less of a mess than Guardians of the Galaxy."

And thus his opinion was instantly rendered invalid. And the opinion of his mother, of his father, and of every descendant for the next thousand generations.

I was reading with interest until that point. The guy didn't like Pacific Rim AND Guardians of the Galaxy? I stopped reading right there because everything he says afterwards can't be serious. Thank you kaosoe for the filtered summary.

Gee, how many tribal hairs can we split? Maybe if you liked Pacific Rim, I should never talk to you ever EVER again! Harrumph!

<evil baby pout>

Eh, you got me, I was being hyperbolic for effect! I mostly stopped reading because I don't find the F-Bomb spam in every sentence particularly funny, and he lacked any structured argumentation, which was hard to follow (and kinda ironic, considering that's one of the things he was criticizing Force Awakens for). The Guardians of the Galaxy comment just negated what interest I had in reading his article in the first place.

I do kinda agree with what he's saying, or trying to say, just not the way he does it, I guess!

I understand his style is not for everyone, it's a shtick that some find grating. But just speaking for myself, I've gotten more substance out of his articles than 99.9% of the posts on these boards or elsewhere, and I feel like it has really paid off in my games.

Welp, read the whole thing, and his article was actually interesting. I stand corrected, and I apologize for being too quick to judge. I do think you can use some elements of an "And then..." plot to good effect to create an "Out of the skillet and into the fire" atmosphere to an adventure, but only if done right, and in limited proportions. In those situations you want to create panic in your players, not make them feel like they're on rails.

A story shouldn't be built upon ". . and, then . ." moments, but, they are great for when the party keeps rolling Despairs.

I understand his style is not for everyone, it's a shtick that some find grating. But just speaking for myself, I've gotten more substance out of his articles than 99.9% of the posts on these boards or elsewhere, and I feel like it has really paid off in my games.

I always enjoy his articles (even if I don't agree with them some of the time), but I had to unfollow him on twitter.

He takes his "shtick" to obnoxious levels to the point of being obtuse when others try to engage him in a thoughtful debate.

Fortunately, with his articles, he has time to formulate his points and explain them in more than 140 characters. Plus he has an editor.

To be fair, I tried reading - and no, I don't mean in this in a snarky way - but his style was a tough go for me, so I gave up half way through.

I understand his style is not for everyone, it's a shtick that some find grating. But just speaking for myself, I've gotten more substance out of his articles than 99.9% of the posts on these boards or elsewhere, and I feel like it has really paid off in my games.

For me, I recognize that there might potentially be some substance there, but I find it so difficult to read past his “shtick” that I very rarely finish reading anything he ever writes.

If someone offered to “tl;dr” all his posts for me, maybe I might find something of value there.

Wow, how did I not catch this thread before. Third page already.

So, I did manage to read most of the article, the writing does go off on tangents, but I managed to skip down and follow the main part of the thread.

Followed most of the discussion on board so, a few bullet points I picked up before I go into my input.

• I stand with you who defend Guardians of the Galaxy! Silhouette 0 Heavies rule!
• I'm glad I already saw the movie, because I think his attempt to shadow the big spoiler was pretty thin
• I agree that cause-effect and character agency are important.
• It's not just GMs who carry the burden of guilt or responsibility, here.
• There were a few references to spooning and 50 Shades of Grey . I'll be in my bunk.
• This GM-unit has been known to run "and then" scenarios... From time to time.
• Yeah, I know, he meant to give away the big spoiler all along.
• Oh, that was spoon fed . My bad. Where was my mind?

So here's a line in the article that I connected with.

Now, a movie, if it is entertaining enough and involves human characters we like, it can get away with “and then” plot.

I would argue that there are times that an RPG can get away with it as well. With those same prerequisites of being entertaining and involving characters we like and can relate to. (emphasis on "we", not just the player controlling the character) Perhaps more in episodic games than in an ongoing campaign. Some groups require a bit of "and then" explanations. For example, my games were posted on a meetup site, and we frequently had new players. "And then" this new guy was there. We gamed twice a month for a little over 3 hours, so we didn't want to spend a lot of time with new introductions. (aside: we later decided to provide new players with recurring pre-gen characters their first time)

The game itself gives players opportunities to introduce "and then"s through talents like Bad Motivator and Improved In The Know for example. These talents let players say things like "and then the security guard's weapon scanner stops working" or "and then the Imperial Moff suddenly remembered that the ISB received a tip that we would be coming out of hyperspace near Fondor."

While they are hard-written into the rules, they do generally require GM approval, with the expectation that the player using them can provide some narrative reasoning as to how that happened, and not just that it could happen. Similarly, the GM has essentially unlimited freedom to introduce elements into the story, and while there is no rule that it requires the players' approval, a good GM will make the effort to get the players to buy into the story, because if you don't get the players to buy in, they'll stop playing. And that's where another nugget was found in Angry Rants...

So, when you build a game — especially one that you improvise — you should be able to answer TWO questions about every plot development. Why is this happening NOW? And how can the players figure out why this is happening now?

That's your out if you're going to throw in a surprise. You can pull a whole game session out of thin air and not have it come off as "and then" if you are able to answer those two questions. I also do a lot of improv, but with a fair amount of setup and understanding ahead of time. I rarely make things up out of thin air, but will look at what happened in past adventures or even the current session to see what might have led to this particular "surprise" showing up.

I make frequent use of Retroactive Continuity - (RetCon). The RetCon has been present in Star Wars gaming since West End Games created ships and devices out of Ralph McQuarrie's concept sketches, and gave full species content to characters who appeared in the background of the Cantina. An example of my doing this was when I had a Chiss NPC show up out of the blue (get it?) to provide information to the players about an artifact from Archaeologist's past. The players actually did get part of the information themselves on a previous adventure, but killed the rival after getting just the plain confession from him, thus being able to clear one PC's Criminal obligation. However, I used that player action to have the evidence trigger a further investigation into what actually happened to the artifact, and have the interested party seek the PC's help as the only other expert in the field.

For me, I recognize that there might potentially be some substance there, but I find it so difficult to read past his “shtick” that I very rarely finish reading anything he ever writes.

If someone offered to “tl;dr” all his posts for me, maybe I might find something of value there.

Right there with you, buddy. As I age I find myself less tolerant of long diatribes and seek the bullet-points for things like this. That's not to say I don't read, hoo boy do I read. But if someone's trying to impart wisdom, cut the chaff and get to it. Of course when you're paid by the word it makes sense to ramble a bit, but I prefer my verbosity in novel form.

Different strokes for different folks, they say. I appreciate that Angry has energy and drive to contribute to the community at that level, which is more than I'm doing.

For me, I recognize that there might potentially be some substance there, but I find it so difficult to read past his “shtick” that I very rarely finish reading anything he ever writes.

If someone offered to “tl;dr” all his posts for me, maybe I might find something of value there.

Right there with you, buddy. As I age I find myself less tolerant of long diatribes and seek the bullet-points for things like this. That's not to say I don't read, hoo boy do I read. But if someone's trying to impart wisdom, cut the chaff and get to it. Of course when you're paid by the word it makes sense to ramble a bit, but I prefer my verbosity in novel form.

Different strokes for different folks, they say. I appreciate that Angry has energy and drive to contribute to the community at that level, which is more than I'm doing.

The one that I can't stand is the "video blog" that takes 20 minutes to deliver information that could be read in under 5 minutes, can't be referenced or quoted easily, "Here, watch my presentation!" No -- we live in a deeply literate society, put your information in written form -- if it's not worth the effort for you to write it, it's not worth my time to watch it.

And now companies are starting to do it, for example Bioware burying important upcoming changes or details for SWTOR in their "chats" that take an hour to watch, instead of in articles that would take less than five minutes to read and that can be searched for keywords.

And then no and then, dude.

Hey all. I won't get too involved. You've got your thing going here and that's fine. Thanks for reading my stuff. Sorry some of you don't dig the schtick. And thanks to those of you who put the schtick aside and read it anyway. Even if you don't agree. Hell, you don't need my permission to run your game any wrong way you want. That's the beauty of RPGs. I just like to get people thinking (and maybe arguing) about things. Nothing I say is an absolute. You should be willing to have surprise if you think it's going to work. That's why I spent so much time talking about cause-and-effect and agency. Because, even if you don't agree with me saying "and then... sucks" you still have these useful ideas that help you assess how you're structuring your game. So, keep chatting. Don't worry, I'm not going to jump in here and fight.

Just want to correct two things that have been brought up.

First, I'm not paid to write for The Mad Adventurers Society. Not by the word. Not at all. I've recused myself from receiving any payment from them and I do two projects there: The Angry Rant (the weekly rambly ranty unstructured thing) and I write the scripts and do the research and fact checking for The GM Word of the Week.

Second of all, on my own website (theangrygm.com), I don't have an editor. I do my own copy-editing. And if you like what I wrote at MAS but found it unstructured, ranty, and rambly - well, that's what it is. It's a specific column - if you want meatier, focused, critical discussion of both narrative and mechanical RPG issues, check out my website. It's long and it's shouty, because that's who I am. But it's also a lot more in depth and I think some of what I've written gels well with what some of you are observing.

I'm not going to apologize for Guardians of the Galaxy. Yes, the plot was VERY well structured. I never said it wasn't. But it had other problems. But, if you liked it, you don't have to care what I think. Keep liking it.

And as for Pacific Rim, the plot was EXTREMELY well structured. Too well structured. You could see the bullet points. It was a checklist of Syd Fields' "Screenplay" with a bunch of Campell's Heroes Journey slathered on top. And nothing else. No heart or soul. But again - if you liked it, you don't have to care what I say.

Keep gaming!

^ I understand your style of writing on your websites and articles has to match with your "Angry" persona you project.

That being said, this kind of writing right here would interest me a lot more. Personal preference.

I'm new to GMing and so far have been running 4/5 groups in the same campaign to start them off (by the end they'll have some xp, some credits and a ship. The plot will be a little more loose after that.)

The campaign largely involves a mystery and I find it somewhat challenging to lace scenes with clues without making it seem incredibly obvious. Basically, I'm trying to avoid the "and then" stuff. Anyone have advice on that?