Your "Story" Is The Problem

I am nearly done with Reddit. The other day I wrote I was seeing a "common theme" of discontent, but there is an even greater, pervading and UNDERLYING theme that I see over and over again, in complaint and questions alike...it goes something like this:

"Person (X) is being a jerk but I can't kick them because they're integral to the story..."

"Person (X) and (Y) don't get along but..."

"I'm trying to save my campaign that's been going on for (X number) of (months/years), but..."

"Our campaign is getting derailed because people aren't showing up..."

And blah blah blahdiddy-blah.

It's all the same problem: the "story" is getting wrecked, and everything is (thus) CHAOS. Pain and suffering and sorrow...oh, my!

I can't relate.

I can't relate because this has never been a problem for me. Just...never. Not even when I was a player in other people's games. Not even back when I was running Vampire the Masquerade, acting as the "Storyteller" of a "Saga" (rather than the Dungeon Master of a campaign).

We are playing a game...a GAME. The players are playing a game. No one is so "integral" to what's going on that the loss of one or more is going to END EVERYTHING. I mean...

(*sigh*)

Forget for a moment that we are playing (or discussing) Dungeons & Dragons. Let's just...for the sake of discussion...say you're running a game of Vampire. Oh, man, I ran so many "stories" (VtM's word for "adventures") back in the day. Blood Bond. The Succubus Club adventures. Diablerie: Mexico. Ashes to Ashes. The stuff in Denver by Night. Those are just off the top of my head...after all, it's been 30 years since I did the Vampire thing.

Did I ever have players who didn't show up, couldn't show up, or (in one guy's case) just did not want to show up (because he decided he hated VtM and would rather play Toon instead)? Yes, of course. Did it bother me if one of the regular players didn't show up to a session? Yeah, it did. Did it stop the session from happening? Nope...not once. Did it ever "derail" the campaign...er, "saga?"

Never. 

Because even when I was playing a game that used rather explicit language about how it was a "storytelling" game, even when the "adventure" being told was about a particular "story" (for example, a vampire girl who falls in love with one of the PCs but is already blood bound/enslaved to another vampire, etc., etc., blah-blah-blah)...the story is about the story, NOT about the characters. It doesn't matter how "integral" a character is to the story being told (and...spoiler...no PC is "integral")...you're running a world and a situation and if the PC isn't there (because the player isn't there)...so frigging what?

Look, an example: in the Blood Bond adventure (if I'm remembering right...Jeez it was a long time ago) there's this girl (Alicia? I think) who's supposed to fall in love with a PC. And then maybe she gets murdered. Or maybe she doesn't. Regardless it cause a big cluster that has to be resolved by the players. In my game, the PC she fell for was this guy named Michael. But what if I'd had her fall for Ben instead (the guy who really didn't want to play a vampire game but was only doing it because of his friends)...and Ben decided to ditch the campaign? Well, then, we'd say Ben's character disappeared one night (and who knows what happened to him...another mystery to solve!)...and then Alicia would either die or not die, maybe turn to a different PC for love/affection/protection (or not)...and the story would continue on, being a big cluster BUT WITHOUT BEN. Because you have to treat these NPCs as if they have lives and motivations of their own. And Ben (or Michael or Mike) is just ONE PERSON in the (imagined) "world" of the game. And that's how you treat the world as a Game Master.

Back to Dungeons & Dragons.

First off, what part of "Dungeons" and "Dragons" don't these whining people understand? Do their games not have dungeons? Do they not have dragons? What a jaded, sorry-ass world we live in when these things are not enough to get the juices of adventure flowing. NO. We must add DRAMA. And STORY. And BACKSTORY. Because MEANING.

Okay, sure, whatever. So you have some Big Bad Person who has "beef" with one of your PCs and you've laid out this whole series of events...plot points...to try to make an "engaging story" (i.e. "railroad") for the dumbass, er ignorant, er young and inexperienced players to enjoy. And then one of the players turns out to be a secret Nazi or something and the group needs to kick her Hitler-saluting ass to the curb. 

Oh, Nos! Our story!

What on earth is the problem? So, the PC just got eaten by a passing wyvern while relieving herself by the side of the road (it's D&D...shit happens) and now you simply need to adjust your Big Bad's actions to account for the fact that his beefing partner is out of the picture. What? Is he going to retire to a hermit hut and grow strange fruit a la Thanos? Or does he have some other nefarious plan to carry out now that the object of his ire is gone? 

Dungeon Master! Wake up! It is YOUR JOB to think for the NPCs!

You are not writing a script. Stop it! You are not writing a teleplay. Stop it! You are running a D&D game...I don't care if its 4E or 5E or 5.5 or Pathfinder 2 or whatever. You are supposed to BUILD A WORLD with CHALLENGES for the players to EXPLORE. Yes, it is OKAY for those challenges to take the form of an Apocalypse Clock situation or Yet Another Big Bad Evil Guy (emphasis on the YA part of the acronym)...but once you create the thing and set it in motion you must run it without attachment to an outcome. 

This is not scripted television. You are not Matt Mercer. You will (probably) not be paid money for running this game. FORGET PLOT. Forget it! Stop it! Your attachment to outcomes is the thing that causes every one of your complaints. "But, but, Sheila's supposed to defeat Baron Badness and avenge her father's death! I can't let Sheila walk from the game!" Why the hell not? Baron Badness can't make enemies of the other PCs? Heck, the other PCs can't avenge Sheila?

"But, but I created this awesome encounter that can only be resolved by a cleric of the time sphere with a specialization in abjuring magic..." [or insert some other gibberish that means nothing to me...a "Circle of the Moon Druid" or an "Oath of Vengeance Paladin"...whatever] So f'ing what? What would happen if something happened to the character BEFORE your quantum ogre encounter showed up? Huh? Would it happen at all? Is it logical for this shit to go down and mash the PCs? Then best to telegraph it so they know (and can either avoid the encounter or find a suitable replacement for the missing PC). That's nicer than how things work in the real world (where they'd just get mashed) which is FINE because, guess what, it's a game, not the real world. But don't throw a hissy fit about it!

Your "story" IS the problem...that's what this all comes down to. You want to tell me that you're the one who plays D&D the right way, that I am behind the times, that the game has moved on from my clunky 1E, etc., etc....fine. But I'm not the one bitching and moaning about how my game has gotten wrecked because one player or another misses a session or quits or had to get shit-canned for being an [insert-]phobe of some type. I've been playing RPGs for a long time and I've NEVER had this problem...but sure, pal, YOUR way of playing is the "right" way. Got it.

*sigh* Tell your stories if you must. Play your no stakes, no threat, "tea party" version of D&D if that's what floats your boat. Dive into "character development" and your character's inner mental space with all the fervor of a Freud fanboy psych major. Coolio...you do you. 

BUT, for the love of all things holy, STOP having an attachment to how you think said story "should" go or which particular PC is supposed to be "protagonizing" in any given session. Rather than spotlighting players, spotlight the WORLD...the campaign that you are created through the adventures/situations you are (hopefully) designing for your players to tackle. Let the "story" unfold as it unfolds, not as scripted by you...that script is the reason you can't have nice things.

Okay. I'm done.

Batman

Hey! Must be the money!

["Ride wit me" playing in the background as I start to type this post. Followed quickly by another incredibly insipid song, "Butterfly" by the stupid stupid band Crazy Town. Only difference...far as I can see...is that Nelly was nominated for a Grammy for God-knows-what reason]

*sigh* Don't mind me. It's been a long day. And a long week. And a long month.

I decided, a few days ago, that it was time to introduce the kids to the various Batman movies. Of course, they know who Batman is...in addition to numerous animated shows, Lego films, and comic books, they've seen many of the old Adam West sitcom episodes (and the 1966 movie starring the same actor). But for [reasons] we've just never gotten around to watching the later films, not the first series kicked off by Tim Burton in '89, nor the Chris Nolan series from the early 2000's, nor any of DC's rather sorry attempts to create something like the Marvel Cinematic 'verse.

Which, considering A) the kids have seen nearly every Marvel film ever made (multiple times), and B) have long proclaimed Batman as one of their favorite superheroes of all time...well, it felt like it was time to fire up Ye Old On-Demand streaming service and get to watching.

Now, a couple+ of preamble thoughts for folks.

1. I've never been what you call a "big" Batman fan. Despite having owned and read comics and toys and (does anyone remember these?) colorforms of the Caped Crusader since I was a wee lad of 3 or so, he was never very high on my list. Captain America, the Hulk, and Spider-Man certainly outrank him. Within the DC universe he'd definitely come in somewhere below Green Arrow, Green Lantern, and Wonder Woman (heck, I owned more Blue Devil comics as a teen than I ever owned of Batman titles). He was just never one of my favorites, okay?
2. Having said that, I've seen many of the various Batman films over the years. Well, I watched the first Michael Keaton one, and I've seen all the Chris Nolan films (multiple times). And I have seen Batman vs. Superman and rather enjoyed it (right up until the ending with Wonder Woman and Doomsday making trashy fan-service appearances)...Affleck may be my favorite Bruce Wayne of all time. 
3. As an adult I do enjoy a LOT about the Batman concept...though I probably still prefer Batgirl.

So, after running through the trailers for all the various Batman films, the kids decided that the first (1989) one with Jack Nicholson and Alec Baldwin's ex-wife (sorry...hold on. Kim Basinger. Jeez, my memory).  It was...pretty good. Some of it is really good. Not, unfortunately, most of the Keaton bits...he brings too much comedic sensibility to the role, something that doesn't fit very well with [my perception of] Batman. But I rather love all the other members of the cast, and their performances.

And here's the other thing I quite liked about the film: it wonderfully captures a near picture-perfect look at the starting career of a 1st level superhero in Heroes Unlimited. Of course, I'm talking an early edition of HU, not that bloated "2E" version. Burton's Batman could easily be a 1st level Hardware character from HU Revised (you need the Revised edition for its rules on building super-vehicles) splitting the character's budget between his car, flimsy "bat-jet," and computer-filled lair.

Grapple gun? Check.

Which I love (duh) as it gives me great ideas for the types of encounters, story, and staging one would do for such a character/game.

A day or two after this, we sat down to watch Batman Returns, the kids having thoroughly bought in to the project. Having never before seen the film, I was quite taken aback by how strange and surreal the thing is...far more of a Tim Burton film, I suppose, but quite dark and strange for a superhero film...especially a pop icon superhero like Batman. 

[and which led me to research the strange development history of every single Batman film. Fascinating, though quite a deep rabbit hole to tumble into]

Also it's a bit...mm...tedious? I fell asleep during the movie (a lot of long days lately, did I mention...?) and so will probably need to go back and re-watch the ending. But this film, too, struck me less as a coherent story, and more of a series of images, scenes, and situations designed to provoke emotional responses...which is fine (some films do that), but I guess it's not my preference.

However, Batman Returns still feels like someone's Heroes Unlimited game...probably more so, due to its overall weird disjointedness. Watching it felt like Burton was the young GM who, fresh off a successful romp in HU with his one buddy (Keaton, playing the bat-themed hardware character) brings in a second, NEW player (Michelle Pfeiffer) and tries to find a way to integrate her cat-themed anarchist into the ongoing campaign. It's still low-level, high-competence gameplay of the HU variety...no world vaporizing Thanos on the horizon, no Kryptonian mothership crashing into New York, just a weird penguin-themed villain teaming up with smash-able stooges with guns...with the usual, expected results.

Yeah, "expected." It's a tad strange to watch Batman casually murdering folks in these movies (as compared to the comic character or the later Nolan films), but casual murder of mooks and villains is par for the course in your average Heroes Unlimited game. Well, in my experience...probably there are GMs out there who have seen more Principled (in the HU alignment sense) behavior from their PCs. 

It's just tough when hand grenades retail for $60 a pop.

Anyway. The busy-ness continues (it's taken me some three days to find the time to write this up). Another multi-game soccer tournament going on this afternoon on the other side of Lake Washington. The stress of life events has been...getting to me, a bit, I guess. If the dog gets me up at 2am, I can find it difficult to get back to sleep, especially if I start to dwell on all the stuff I've got going on. Which sucks. I might have to get back on the regular coffee. Musings about Batman and (especially) Heroes Unlimited is a welcome distraction from everything.  Might have to get a game going, in the near future. Stuff like these old movies are fairly inspirational.

One last interesting (to me, anyway) thought. When the 1989 Batman (Burton) film premiered, I was 16 years old, and definitely NOT a Batman fan. I think I might have still been collecting Silver Surfer comics at the time(?)...a bit more "cosmic" in scope in terms of conflict. I had been exposed to the Heroes Unlimited game by this point (friends in high school), but they were running something far more high powered with the Revised rules in combo with Transdimensional TMNT. Those guys (they were all guys...my gaming with females ended at middle school and didn't start up again till university), were BIG into comic books in general and Batman in particular (I'm sure they saw all those movies, while I tapped out after the first). And, yet, they never ran anything "street level" in their games...instead they added as much "twink" as they could, even creating a list of "mega-powers" when HU's major powers weren't deemed beefy enough. Thinking back, it really makes me wonder what the appeal Palladium held for them, at all. Crunchy character building? Granular move-by-move combat? Bullet calibers and grenades?

Weird. They never did want to play Rifts and ridiculed that game soundly (unlike myself). 

All right. That's enough for now. Time to wake the family.

Childish Things

Saturday night I managed to lose my wallet, which is at least as embarrassing as it is inconvenient. There's little in it that couldn't be replaced (aside from the punch cards for my local bierhaus), but still...it's a pain in the ass.

One of the major ways it's a pain is the hindrance to my ability to drive. Oh, I could still drive (one needs a vehicle to drive, after all, not a license), but I just replaced one tail light bulb and I know it's only a matter of time before the other needs a similar treatment...and do I really want to risk getting pulled over for something silly and getting a giant ticket for not having a license on me?

No. I have better ways to spend my money.

Unfortunately, Department of Licensing offices are few and far between these days (government cutbacks), and they're closed on Sundays. And also, apparently, on Mondays (did I mention government cutbacks?). You can get a temporary license on-line (and print it at home)...but you need a bank card to do so. And my bank card was in my wallet.

*sigh*

So, I'm on bicycle, at least till tomorrow. Which is fine, probably good for me (I have a trailer to haul my kids to and from school, so no worries there). I've been biking a LOT lately, something I haven't really done since high school. The wife was in town the last three weeks and her office was doing some sort of "bike month" contest, which (because she's my wife) she was ultra-competitive about winning. We ended up riding nearly 16 miles yesterday before she hopped on a plane for South America.

My "car" this week.

Like I said, it's probably good for me. My muscle tone's been coming back, though that's at least in part due to changes I've made to my diet. Well, not today...this morning I'm down at the Baranof eating biscuits and gravy and hash browns and eggs and bacon (hey, I'll be biking later!). But MOSTLY I've been trying to eat more grains and raw vegetables and less of the crap that I usually do.

[still drinking too much, though. Exhibit A: misplaced wallet]

Spending a lot of time on my bike means firing up old muscle memories and, of course, that means waxing nostalgic about gaming, especially Dungeons & Dragons. Back when I used my bike as my main mode of transportation, the places I was going were (usually) gaming related: I was going to my friends' houses (to game) or we were riding to and from school (talking about our games) or we were riding to some book store or other (to buy games and game-related product). And just humming along at a leisurely pace, my mind drifts into imaginative brainstorming, thinking about things I'd like to do in-game...

But even if that wasn't enough to (naturally) get me thinking about D&D, it doesn't hurt that the dude who owns the local bike shop (where we picked up some fittings for our bikes) is a big ol' D&D player/DM and hangs out with other D&D DMs (at the shop) shooting the breeze about the hobby. This is all news to me, though totally unsurprising. The D&D hobby seems to enjoy a healthy following in the Greenwood 'hood, even though I've never before made the acquaintance of any of these people. I am either incredibly anti-social or incredibly self-involved. Probably both.

Anyway, had a decent conversation with these folks in passing though (as usual) I spent more time simply asking questions and listening and zero time expounding on my thoughts on the game (don't like to scare people). Interesting tidbits: these guys have played for looooong periods of time. They run separate games (they're not all in the same group). They have kids the same age (or a little older) than mine and have recently been introducing youngsters to the game (at the request of others). For this, they're using 5E, though with heavy edits ("cuts") due to accessibility/teaching issues.

[asked about older editions, one guy said his preferred edition was "3.5" but felt that was waaaay out of reach for most kids...or adults. The other guy joked he'd wanted to make his kids play through every edition of D&D in chronological order, starting at 0E. I'm not sure that's a terrible idea, actually...]

These things, these thoughts, have made me wonder what ever happened to the gaming companions of my youth. I mean, I know where they are (Facebook, yeah?) and a bit about their lives: spouses, kids, jobs, etc. But have they really quit gaming? Have they found other creative outlets for their imaginations? Or has that part of themselves really just withered and died over the last several decades?

It hasn't for me, though Lord knows why not. Even when I'm not gaming, I'm thinking about gaming (or how things relate...or how they could relate...to gaming). I think my parents assumed I'd "grow out of it" (my father probably thinks I did...). My non-gamer wife hoped I'd give it up sometime, though I think she's resigned herself to my hobby at this point.

[gaming is my "porn"...sneaking old editions into the house or looking at PDFs when she's not around or using my book profits as a "slush fund" for buying game product without leaving a paper trail in our bank records. Sorry, sweetie. I'm not dishonest with my wife, but Scorpios have secrets (as she well knows, being one herself)]

'Course it might just be that I've had too easy a life. My old buddy Kris ("the Doctor" or "Doc," as I like to call him) has returned to Seattle after living down in Oregon for nearly two decades. Visited him the other day, and man, he is doing awful. Looks to be in his mid-70s despite being only a couple years older than me. Has a hard time talking because his dentures are all broken; has a hard time moving because his back is all screwed up. He's been on Social Security Disability for the last 25 years and the pills he takes for his bi-polar disorder have him all fucked up...can't use his hands anymore to paint or play guitar (and he used to be badass at both). His parents are dead, he has no one who can look after him, he was homeless in Oregon for a couple years and he's now living with MY fucked up brother in a house owned by our mutual friend who's fallen back into his heroin addiction. Just a f'd up mess. And he hates it. Hates it. But what can he do? You can't find a place to rent in Seattle for the $500 month he has in housing allowance.

Another old gaming buddy of mine (this one from high school) has just decided to move east of the mountains, where the cost of living is 40% of Seattle. That's understandable enough...except that the guy was born and raised in the heart of this town and has lived here his whole life (with the exception of his time at University of Chicago). But despite being untethered to a family or mortgage, he just can't make it here (i.e. survive) as an artist...and art is his raison d'être.

Maybe if I lived in a "survival mode" of scrambling just to feed and shelter myself I'd have zero time for gaming. Maybe...though I suspect I'd need the solace of escapism that gaming provides even more than I already do. Maybe I'm just an asshole.

All right...this is a weird, wandering post that doesn't seem to have much point, so I think I'm going to cut it off. I've got a couple half-finished drafts on the old blogger that'll probably make more sense; I'll try to get them finished and posted over the next couple days. When I'm not busy biking and whatnot.

Later, Gators.