Thanks guys that is indeed helpful. I would like to say that planning plotlines is not entirely what I meant. I suppose I misrepresented the idea. Like I said I have difficulty coming up with NPCs or challenges on the fly so I like to try and plan a very rough idea of some of these things for each potential path I can think of that there is a fair chance of the players taking. Also when I talked about subtly guiding the players I was talking about situations similar to the one exit mentioned but I see it ahead of time and think, "Oh wouldnt it be super cool if..." In such situations I like to encourage the players in that direction without them knowing it.
Thanks for the help
FRONT: Megadeth - Brute/Chopper (Leader of the Reapers) IMPULSE: • To control the east side STAKES: • Will he ever figure out who is killing his men? • Will his Alpha status be challenged? • Will OG King move in on his territory? PORTENTS: • Sound of motorcycle engines nearby, unseen • Tales of people being interrogated by Reapers • Being followed/observed by a pack of riders • Someplace gets shot up by the MG on a jeep • Battle between King’s men and Reapers | FRONT: O.G. King - Hardholder of "GG" (Golden Gardens) expanding his turf IMPULSE: • To control all trade in Vegas STAKES: • Will GG take over the Strip? • Will GG suppress the Reapers? • Will King get taken out by the assassin from LA? PORTENTS: • More GG patrols on streets • GG tagging appearing on new blocks • Firefights between GG and local scav crews • Firefights between GG and Reaper squads |
I am absolutely not going to railroad them at any point but subtly guide them towards things. The plan is to introduce NPCs and events to create that interesting conflict and character interaction.
[...]
-I need the plotlines to create interesting motivation for each character
- I found myself using the same descriptive words for NPCs and using very similar voices for them culminating in them not feeling unique
-this will obviously lead my PCs to not think of them as characters but targets to shoot or quest givers
-I need to be able to come up with NPCs that are unique and interesting
-I need the plotlines to create interesting motivation for each character
-Also they should cross over at times so that PCs may switch from one to another (Difficult)
-thus they can interact with all the other PCs
- I can think of ways to do this for the climax of the story but not before
-conflicts need to seem to be able to be solved by multiple methods
-so that PCs do not solve every problem with shooting all the things
-Need to still be challenging
Regarding Daniels comments.Success!
I think I may have misrepresented how much I am planning and trying to lead the story. I only mentioned the climax at all because I thought of a thing I could decide about the PCs back stories that would create a fantastic reveal for them. A reveal that would have to happen at the climax of the story. That being said your post as well as the rest so far have helped me realize that I have my own habits that also need breaking.
I need to ask more questions and the right ones. I also think I just need to be more direct with my players and tell them directly that they get more input in AW and need to put that forward. They are used to being told what is happening not discussing it in a conversation.
As to the PCs already having Hx with each other and having personal connections. The problem I have is that most of the decisions they made with respect to Hx and personality of their characters has resulted in most of the PCs being dicks who would not seek out interaction with each other with out coaxing.That's a problem. I'd nip that in the bud right now.
I suppose this would be a good time to mention that I have a learning disability in writing and aspergers (albeit high functioning). I kind of feel like the writing inability and the social deficit from aspergers might be affecting how I MC here. I am pretty good at interpretation in social situations. I read people well. But that is a learned skill not a natural intuition like most people have. I wonder whether in this case because I am creating NPCs that are not real I have nothing to read and as such have trouble figuring out how they would react to things. These are things I work around all the time and obviously I just need to figure out how to work around them in this particular situation I have not really struggled with before.I can understand how that might pose a challenge. I'd keep the NPC motivations very simple and straightforward. They want X, they need the PC to do Y to get it. They want Z, but the PC also wants Z. Etc. Where X and Z could be anything from food, to gas, to love, to adoration, to power.
I suppose the heart of my concern is that my players are not in the proper mindset for this kind of game and as a result the game will suffer and they will not enjoy it.Hopefully they will. Not everyone can or wants to. But there's no real way to know short of playing. If they're willing to go into it with an open mind, you really can't ask any more than that.
Yeah, this asking questions and conversation thing is pretty big, fun too. Here's NPC creation in Apocalypse World (at least my favorite kind of NPC creation):
GM: So, Farley, that's a cool ride you got there. How do you keep its tanks full of gas?
Farley: I guess I must buy it from someone, right?
GM: Yeah, Tippy sells gas out of this little shack. She buys it from some scroungers that come into to town every few weeks. One of them's her cousin or uncle or something, called Rolfball...You banging Tippy for free gas?
Farley: Yeah, sometimes, I guess. It's not a big deal though.
GM: Hmmm...she still sleeping with Silo? I hear he's back in town.
Then maybe you turn to the Hardholder and ask him what he sent Silo out to do and how he feels about having him back. Stuff like that.
NPCs: Agreed on doubling-down on asking the players. I love to introduce just a name or a single detail and ask the players questions. They almost always give me better stuff than I could come up with anyway. ;) But for every NPC, just ask yourself what it is that they want and what they're doing to try to get it. That will go a long way toward giving you ideas for how to flesh out the NPC more fully.
That's a problem. I'd nip that in the bud right now.
Your characters don't have to be friends, but they do have to
know each other, and they should be basically allies. They might
become enemies in play, but they shouldn't start out enemies (Page 101).
Hopefully they will. Not everyone can or wants to. But there's no real way to know short of playing. If they're willing to go into it with an open mind, you really can't ask any more than that.
[quote/]
They are capable of appreciating different kinds of play but currently used to the D&D style and aren't great at breaking habits. I just need to help them along in changing their mindset so they can appreciate this great system. I just don't want this first campaign to be mediocre as a result of their mindset because they probably wouldn't give it a second chance.QuoteAlso, I find that giving each NPC a defining feature helps. Could be a physical feature (nervous tic in the left eye, tattoo on the forehead, etc), could some aspect of their past with the PCs (this guy dated your sister, that woman helped you out once a long time ago), could be a pattern of speech (this dude is a complete badass but it's hard to take him seriously because of his bad lateral lisp - probably why he's such a badass, come to think of it), could be an article of clothing (guy always wears spit-polished wing-tip shoes, woman wears a necklace made from an old Hello Kitty keychain, etc). Give everyone something to show their human side - flawed, frail, weird, indomitable, funny, or whatever. Do that and you'll have great NPCs to whom your players can really relate in no time.
This is just something I need to spend time working on getting better at. I have trouble of thinking of those features on the fly. I will be trying the previously suggested method of making lists of possible features for characters beforehand.
I think in this regard I've realized that I have to break my habit of deciding all of the world building/NPC stuff. I also have a slight concern that some of my players will use that to try and make things easier for them but that can be worked around and reduced though.More than that. This is great! Let them. Everything they build to try to make life easier is just one more thing for the MC to fuck with. They have access to food, water, gas and ammo, cool! That's four NPCs that the PC now relies on. That's four NPCs with leverage.
My players also justify this as roleplaying their characters well and not meta gaming to force characters together. I am alright with that perspective on meta gaming and I think this issue isn't as important anymore and I can work around it.This is completely fine. It's a world of scarcity. They're going to have to work together. If you make a move like "take away their stuff" and one of them they're out of ammo, or gas or food, they're going to need to do something about that. If one of the chopper's gangs bike breaks down, he'll need to cut a deal with the Savvyhead. Or maybe talk to the operator about getting a new part, or the hard holder.
They are capable of appreciating different kinds of play but currently used to the D&D style and aren't great at breaking habits. I just need to help them along in changing their mindset so they can appreciate this great system. I just don't want this first campaign to be mediocre as a result of their mindset because they probably wouldn't give it a second chance.I totally get that.
I am going to try to quote in this post to make my replies easier to co-ordinate but I have never done it before so I apologize if it's not working right.
I think in this regard I've realized that I have to break my habit of deciding all of the world building/NPC stuff. I also have a slight concern that some of my players will use that to try and make things easier for them but that can be worked around and reduced though.
As to this, I did make sure that they started as somewhat allies. Some of the relationships were a tad strained but definitely not antagonistic. The problem is that they decide to play their characters as somewhat allies too each other but primarily indifferent without much reason to want to seek each other out. My players also justify this as roleplaying their characters well and not meta gaming to force characters together. I am alright with that perspective on meta gaming and I think this issue isn't as important anymore and I can work around it.
Sure, I agree with that too. As above, circumstances may force them to work together. As to whether or not this will forge friendships is an entirely different matter but dealing with that strain and situation of 'needs must' is (hopefully) fun and enjoyable.Yeah, I said they're going to have to work with each other above. I should have said they're going to have to deal with each other.
Oh man. I'm sorry. I just realized how bloody massive that thing I just posted was. I think I'll start I new AP thread and paste this in there. My bad.Heh. It was a bit of a text wall ;)
Heh. It was a bit of a text wall ;)
Try really really hard to never think or say the word "conflict" anywhere near Apocalypse World. I mean that both in the SG jargony way and also the plain English way.
Action and consequences -- that's what you do. "Conflict" is too abstract, too movie and stage, too neat and tidy. So, don't set up conflicts between characters (even though that's fun in other games). Don't think about how this could be in conflict with that. Don't think about how you can drive the game towards conflict. None of that.
The questions I've had the best luck with when generating situation have been "Who do you hate most in the world?" and "What scares the crap out of you?" Both were asked in the first session and both have come back to haunt players.
In addition, I read through that thread you linked and found some of it quite interesting. Nice to see also that other people had the exact same problems in the exact same way. It's interesting for me to note that Apocalypse World has a more structured set of rules than it may originally appear. When you look at a lot rules it seems kind of ambiguous and weird sometimes but then once you start too understand what the rules actually mean in play it makes a lot more sense.
This bit is by John Harper who created the extra character sheets if I remember correctly. Although I definitely did not get that at all first session. I'm admittedly never going to be able to eliminate that part of myself that takes great pleasure at knowing that I am orchestrating a big surprise reveal or cool conflict when I think of them. It's only really those situations where I see a potential conflict and think, "Oh it would be so cool if _____ happened!" As such I admittedly have certain things in the current campaign about certain player backgrounds that I don't want them to figure out for quite a while because I thought of an absolutely amazing reveal for the climax of the campaign that would require a couple things to be hidden until then. So far they players don't seem like they're gonna figure them out too fast so it's fine and I don't have to manipulate stuff. Besides the fact that I shouldn't manipulate stuff.
I also find this interesting. I may try doing something similar to this with some big hitting questions that teach my a lot about that character. I am a big fan of bringing new moves, changes, or questions to the table at the beginning of a new session just to shake things up a bit and keep the players off balance a bit.