Make Your Players Invested

[@RIVERSRPGChannel]

Good tips NPCs can be crucial to give the players motivations.

[@Roll4Initiative]

Glad you think so!

[@RebelDashOne]

Thanks, lots of takeaways for me to think on and be mindful of in my games.

[@Roll4Initiative]

You're welcome!

[@mmardh799]

thank you!!!

[@Roll4Initiative]

You're welcome!

[@saraphys5555]

The "Quantum Ogre" scenario... Personally, I think its ok to do, but based on the specific scenario... for example, I use it for my plot devices, so that the players...no matter what choices they make...can find a clue that progresses the adventure to the next "scene".

[@nicholasromero238]

I know for me, if I pull a quantum ogre, it's usually a major fight. Like say, if the the arc is about a necromancer trying to conquer the lands, the players will have to deal with them pretty much no matter what unless their choice is to just leave the lands to it's own devices. The choice comes it the planning. Are the players going to rally the villagers together and face off at the town, or are they going to kick in the necromancer's door and try to kill him in his lair? The necromancer is still being fought, but the choices let them choose which stage the fight happen

[@Roll4Initiative]

That's a good way to look at it. They still have the choice in how while still following the story that has been offered to them

[@Archaeo_Matt]

Personally, I think there is a lot of confusion between Player Agency, Character Agency, and what Monte Cook has termed "Narrative Control." Agency simply means the agent has the capability of making decisions that influence outcomes. Agency does not mean that the world suddenly becomes free from the constraints of "rules and [available] resources" in the sense given by Anthony Giddens in _The Constitution of Society._ Agency does not mean outcomes will always meet with expectations, in full accord with the intentions of the agent. I quite understand that people might feel a sense of _anomie_ or dis-empowerment in their daily lives, and may crave an escape where they can be the heroes who make definitive changes in the world, for the better. However, I have to use my free time to make up and run this game; and, I have no desire whatsoever to facilitate that kind of escapist wish fulfillment. I neither want to run, nor play in such a game; I want to play in a world that has substance, depth, and unreservedly holds fast to the stated/expected limits of being in that world. In that sense, I don't even give my own narrative preferences any deterministic control over outcomes; I simply focus on knowing what will, in all probability, occur if the actions of the players don't create some sort of interference, whether direct or indirect. Now, that said, I don't arbitrarily restrict either Player, or Character, Agency. I don't really make up adventures where the players must do A, then B, then C, and then defeat the BBEG to establish victory conditions at the terminus of a foregrounded story. I put the story in the background, it's what the NPCs, monster, environments, and everything else that is not directly under player control is doing. That background story is going to move from A, to B, to C, etc.; however, it is the decisions of the characters, within the game world, that are the unknown perturbations that may disrupt (or not) the flow of the narrative background. On the other hand, for example, if you need to find a key to open a magical chest with many physical and magical protections and wards, then you must find that key or find an alternative to opening the chest with the key. I'm not going to move the key around just for the purpose of putting it in the players' path(s); you either find it or you don't. Now, let's say that what is inside the chest is a means of making a nigh invincible foe vulnerable to attacks that are within the means of the characters. Whether you keep searching for the key, or choose to find an alternative means of opening the chest, it is always possible that the foe will attack before the players/characters have expended enough resources (in terms of money and time) to find the key or the alternative solution. That doesn't mean they've been denied agency; it only means that their choices didn't lead to their preferred outcome. Finally, I don't really mind leaving the door open on player control over aspects of the narrative. I will not usually interfere with minor insertions. For example, if you say your character is thirsty, and wants some water, and I have my NPC point your character toward a well, and describe it as having a bucket on a rope attached to a hand-wound winch, then I don't mind you saying that you reach for the ladle hanging from the side of the well after you raise a bucket full of water. On the other hand, I don't want you to declare that there is a disembodied hand in the bucket. Could there be one? Sure. Would it break the world, or the adventure, to have one there? No. Are we suddenly going to go on some narrative wild goose chase based on some random utterance, rather than any real desire to figure out a "disembodied hand in the well" mystery? Probably. So, what does work for me? I'll often do things like have a "rumors" table, where most of the entries relate to the what is known/knowable about the world; but, the last entry is often something like "one of the players overhears a a bit of folklore, a story, a song, an historical detail, etc. about the world. Have them tell the group about it." This gives them a chance to make up details about the world that can be used to direct future development; but, is also something that doesn't enter the situation as either binding on the narrative, or something to which an outright "no" must be given by the GM.

[@claytongriffin3558]

The best way for a DM to keep the players engaged is to stop trying to tell a story. At best, the game is part of creating a story, not the story itself.

[@Roll4Initiative]

That's an interesting way to look at it!