Collaborative post on RPG.net

I've recently begun posting on RPG.net, collaborating with a few others on the generic design of a cyberpunk scenario.  Some interesting points have been made, and if you can drag yourself away from fraternizing with ladies whose surnames are all .jpg, I recommend checking RPG.net in general, and this thread specifically.

I made a post earlier today which loosely discussed the importance for a GM to have a reason for things happening in their scenarios, and having subsequently considered it some more, realised that what I'm actually talking about is preparation.  Preparation for a games master is everything.  It means your players can go off piste without too much worry, because you're game environment is so detailed, everything seems potentially a part of the narrative.  Preparation gives depths to your stories, your environments, your histories and your characters.  Preparation means you can have four interwoven storylines emerging rather than one - so as to avoid the need to overtly railroad your players.

In the extract below (from RPG.net) I'm talking about the need for having a reason why a particular city (the setting for a proposed cyberpunk genre game) is experiencing high degrees of civil unrest.  I appreciate I'm probably commiting some narcissistic cardinal sin by quoting myself, but I'm really only doing so in order to segue deftly onto a whole piece on preparation.  And besides, before we get blogged down in a meta-argument about the pseudo-intellectual self-mastubatory nature of blogging in general, I'm just going to lay on like MacDuff:

"Firstly, for the sake of atmosphere / intrigue, cohesiveness and making things seem as real as possible, there should be a reason why this civil unrest is occuring.

And I would look to the real world for inspiration. Governments (especially the US) create civil unrest all the time - predominantly in third world nations. They call it 'destabilization' and it gives them new excuses to keep the war machine going, and reasons for passing serious laws like the (otherwise unlawful) detainment-without-proof of suspected terrorists. In a cyberpunk setting, where often the fractures between populaces are not on an inter-country basis, but an intra-country basis, its easy to transplant the exact same agenda. Especially in a genre which typically evinces a shift from government dominance to corporate dominance. The underlying reason behind the civil unrest could be because the local government wants to destabilize the city, so it can pass more stringent laws and put in place a draconian military rule; or a mega-corp wants to destabilize to illustrate just how weak the government is so it can take over the city and turn it into 'Mega-Corp Metro' (not an actual name suggestion ). Or indeed the military could be doing it, so they themselves can become the ruling power and start to dominate everything.

I have an issue in general with 3-4 stories [in a single scenario], and that is: in a single scenario, the GM should strive (IMHO) to tell one story (with the help of the players), else they are in danger of not having any cohesive plot and will be wandering around virtually aimlessly between one potential storyline and another. This is okay in a campaign where you can ultimately tie multiple stories together, or have the party wander off and complete a side mission and then pull back to the main thread. But in a single scenario, its best to keep them [the players] heading in a single direction so you have more control in meting out the drama, suspense, tension, denouement. Furthermore it is more in keeping with the way a police department works [the PCs are all police]: you guys investigate the trouble at the old mill; you guys investigate the explosion that derailed the metro train; and you guys investigate the murder at the steelworks. You know? Police teams are given one assignment at a time. The other GREAT narrative device provided by having the players as police, is that it makes it very easy for the GM to keep them on track. Any time they are stuck, advise them to check back in with their superiors who can advise them on how to proceed. When doing this, ALWAYS give the players at least two options (with each potentially furthering the story), thus keeping them heading in the right direction, though on different branches of resolution. Utilising such a technique is a godsend to the GM as it is realistic and thus nicely sidesteps being seen as railroady.

But what you can do here, and again IMHO should do, is present a backdrop rich enough that the players understand there are more things going on. Have them know that whilst they're investigating the metro train disaster, something at the old mill that their colleagues are investigating, links up. The same man spotted in both scenes. This is a great way for them to compare notes with some NPCs and have the NPCs realistically impart some useful information to the PCs - which can drive the plot forward, and which they may have missed. This is what I call a 'narrative safety loop'.

Also, present characters in this single scenario which don't really amount to anything, but may crop up again in a later game. This adds great depth to your game environment. Someone whom appears to be a nobody in this first game, is actually a significant player in scenario number two."

Again, apologies for the shameless self-quoting. 

Do check out RPG.net, some great stuff there.

I will be going into more detail about some techniques I use to generate narrative and detail when planning a game.  Perhaps someone, somewhere will find it useful.  But I'm not holding my breath.

peas out