I'm debating how to handle this particular aspect of the plot. I'm torn between "make it a big surprise" and "include the players in the process".
Surprises definitely have a place in games, and I'd be stupid not to use SOME elements of the unknown some of the time. This decision is a lot more in-depth than that. It's something that would fundamentally change the character- let's say; he sprouts wings overnight, or becomes 16 fee tall.
But this wouldn't happen to just ONE character, EVERY character would face something huge, dramatic and honestly challenging within the first few runs of the game.
I'm currently considering putting a "warning label" on the game before I start it. With enough up front disclosure that SOMETHING BIG would happen, maybe player agency won't be lost.
There's always the option of letting the players help decide what happens to them, but keep it a surprise as to when or even if it actually happens.
It's a lot to consider.
Players: would you want to be involved, be warned, or be totally surprised? What factors might change how you feel about this sort of scenario?
Hmm, interesting question. Several years ago I probably would have said give me some warning, but nowadays I'd have to say surprise me! (With the caviat that you don't screw me up so bad that the character becomes unplayable.)
ReplyDeletelately I have found that I really appreciate having my characters be "surprised". It really takes a lot of roleplaying to react to said circumstances, which I am getting more and more into.
Tom
I've noticed that about you lately. I think that the WOD game and it's constant level of "surprise" makes one roleplay a lot more for sure.
DeleteFree Girdles of Femininity to everyone!
ReplyDeleteGod, I`m glad I didn`t see my own face when I was a pubering teenager, DnD`ing with my fellow pubering teenagers, and the DM pulled that one on my character.
Yeah, that one's a tough sell, even with adults and good natures....
DeleteI think that a total surprise could disappoint some players...
ReplyDeleteA "warning label" could do the trick, maybe get an eye on character creations, the important thing is (IMHO) that players can play the way they like.
Good Luck!
Well, that depends on the surprise...
ReplyDeleteI'd prolly be a lil' miffed if it was: 'You've been eaten by a grue. Whoops.'
But I'd be cool with: 'You've stumbled on to a nude maiden bearing a striking resemblance to Megan Fox. She is conveniently chained to a radiator.'
Like I said...depends on the surprise.
:)
P.S. Don't you judge me.
:P
I laughed so hard when I read that... You gremlin, you =)
DeleteSurprise me...
ReplyDeleteThat being said, do you have room? When will this happen?
Well since this is still "in theory", yes I have plenty of room. I am thinking summer-ISH.
DeleteI usually make characters with an eye to playing that character in a certain way. A defining concept, if you will. If my GM were to throw a surprise at me that helped or was irrelevant to that defining concept, I would probably be happy.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if the GM were to throw a surprise at me that fundamentally altered that defining concept, then I'd be upset, and I probably would no longer want to play that character, because that character is no longer the one I set out to play. There's a difference between character development and simply rewriting a character, and I as a player would not take kindly to the latter.
A warning label would help, but the thing is, if I'm not invested in my character, I'm not invested in the game. And if I don't have agency in shaping my character, then I won't invest in him.
I have a lot of those same tendencies, so this is what I'm most concerned about as a GM. Thanks for your comment, it's really helping me think about how I want to approach it.
DeleteI'd suggest letting the players know there WILL be a game changer that affects who their characters are... people don't like the fundamentals of their characters being changed after putting a bunch of effort in to them. A heads up, without details, should be all that's required.
ReplyDeleteI'd also suggest planning each big change after getting character backgrounds and character sheets... this way, you might be able to choose changes that strike their characters personally... I'm not saying it has to compliment their abilities.. just something that resonates with them.
I really like the resonance idea. It's pretty much what I thought of anyway, just described a lot better.
DeleteI agree that putting a warning label on the game would be a good idea. I'd also make sure that the players went through some role playing "exercises" with regard to their character so that they'll know how "they" would react to whatever big surprise you are planning on having. It can be an innocently worded quiz or a bunch of random situations to react to, just make sure that they are in their characters' shoes when it all goes down.
ReplyDeleteJust make sure that the surprise fits the world you're building and you should be good to go if you have a good group. I know I'd like it/have enjoyed it in the past. Stupid neice getting possessed by a demon...
This is happening to the player *characters*, not the players, right? ;-)
ReplyDeleteIt's a trust issue. If I trust the GM, I'd probably be OK with it given the caveats Abakus and Dave G mentioned about not fundamentally altering the character from a STORY standpoint. If I'm playing the Thing from the Fantastic Four, I don't want to hear "oh, you're cured" in the first couple of sessions. If I'm pumped to play Batman, I don't want to see his murdered parents come back to life and crime go away in Gotham. If the changes are temporary, and the players know they will be that way, pretty much anything goes.
This is an excellent point. I don't have a reputation whatsoever to speak of as a GM because I haven't run a game in so long. It's going to be -will my players trust ME to tell a good story and keep them involved along the way...
DeleteThe DC game started out with the premise that "hey, you were all normal people that woke up with powers, and you work for the government."
ReplyDeleteI was hoping that warning them up front that there was a mysterious patch to their lives would galvanize them to whatever that mysterious patch was. So later when I say, "hey, you were all dead and brought back to life," they at least "own" who they were up to that point.
Now, Myrmidon was a blank slate other than "he thinks he's an ancient Greek warrior," so there is, to my GM mind, a bit of a blank check on that kind of character.
However, making Myrmidon and Necromancer into family isn't something I probably would have done without having gamed with the both players for a while and getting a feel for how they might react (i.e. in character it would be a devastating blow to Necromancer at that point, for the players themselves, it would be lots of material to chew through).
So I think a general warning is a good thing, but once you establish that you want to work with people with your surprises, later in the campaign, you have a bit more leeway to further surprise them . . . if you build up that trust first.
Yes, your game started off with that premise. The players got to PICK those powers, and base their characters off that premise.
DeleteI'm looking at something as big as powers being the surprise (I don't want to say what because people that might play read this and I am not done thinking it up yet...)
If the POSSIBILITY of powers was the surprise, would you advertise that?
And the Myrmidon/Necromancer thing isn't a fair comparison, I don't feel. I think you could hand Necromancer's player damn near anything and he'd run with it... and Myrmidon's player seems to be having a blast with it in game and out... but as you said, you knew them and gamed with them a while...
The Wild Cards setting is a perfect example of surprise in a game. Characters start as normal humans and are exposed to the alien germ which changes them, some for the better (Aces) some for the worst (Jokers).
ReplyDelete