I'm not really a fan, but in the club we've had to deal with this in oWoD mostly, but coming up we have a lot of stuff planned.
I stay as far from metaplot as I can when it's present, but some of the GM's I'll be running the game with want to use some of the settings as presented, with metaplot and all. A lot of them are first time GM's that the club is sponsoring, and I'll simply be there to make sure the game runs smooth without 'rulebook stalls'.
So, what are your favorite / most hated metaplots, for which rpg's and why are they your picks?
How do I like my metaplot? Gone.
Favorite metaplots? None. Extensive backgrounds, however: Vampire the Masquerade's, Orpheus's, Nephilim's come to mind. The nuance between metaplot and background to me is that the latter is completely optional in my mind. I include some allusions to it or not in the game, use some of its elements or none, as warranted. The background of a game is never, ever "canon." I do with it what I want. If I HAVE to use some published "storylines" for the game to make any sense, then there's a "metaplot," and that sucks.
I like metaplot as background but I feel that once the core setting book is published Canon should end. Everything after should not change what's come before. I think you need a strong coherent background with most games these days. I played/ran a ton of VtM and Werewolf using the core rules and players guides and I have no complaints about the background rich setting material contained within. The splatbooks on the other hand were good only as idea mines because they threatened a lot of the concepts I had already introduced into my campaign. Same thing with Star Wars. The movies were canon and everything else was mined for ideas. Same thing with Shadowrun 2e. Core book, stteet sam, riggers book, deckers book and grimoire were all I bothered with.
Pete
Oh yes. And I really don't like settings that keep moving chronologically. My campaign is not your campaign, Mr. designer. Stop trying to tell me what happens in MY world once you've published your book, thank you very much. Showing the same setting in two completely different eras is not problem, when there's a point to it. Moving the dates of a few months/years between supplements and assuming I bought them all IS a big problem.
Open-ended, or none at all.
Metaplot sells supplements. I get the attraction, especially since most people who buy games don't play them. If you're just reading the books and imagining what it would be like to play, then metaplot is great. Like cliffhangers in an old serial.
But as a GM? All canon is just fodder for your own campaign. Take what you like and toss the rest.
RIFTS has the whole Tolkeen disaster. I either play pre or post the war, but avoid the during. Too many players are invested in canon and many can't wrap their head around alternate options.
I like them inspiring, maleable, and non-disruptive, with few metaplot-connected NPCs.
Quote from: Blackhand;419632So, what are your favorite / most hated metaplots, for which rpg's and why are they your picks?
Faction War for Planescape stands out in my mind. It messes up the assumptions by which PCs are made (Factions) and IMO, it slaughtered and/or merged the most interesting factions.
Traveller as of The New Era. Totally changed the setting. Not just the setting details or backdrop, mind you, but the whole tone. Changed it from a hardish gritty space opera to a post-apocalyptic fascist wankfest.
The original Dark Sun suffered by having the first major conflict of the setting solved in the novels.
Having trouble thinking of metaplots that I point to and say "that was good". Most of them I start thinking of, I come around to saying that the game/setting didn't really have a metaplot. I mean I like stuff like Scarred Lands... lots of recent history, lots of implications, lots of places to go... but nothing happens until the GM sets it into motion. Though I suspect if the novel line had taken off, that would have been different.
I only use my own stuff; own settting; own adventures; etc.
I've never understood why others do, really. It's lost on me.
But I suppose metaplot is one of the reasons why. It takes some of the reasons why I make my own stuff and squares them.
Quote from: Spinachcat;419660But as a GM? All canon is just fodder for your own campaign. Take what you like and toss the rest.
This is it for me. I don't mind metaplot if I'm using a published setting. I'll ignore, adapt, mutilate, etc what I need for my own campaign. Ideally metaplot is just a suggestion for places to take your own campaign.
That said I've never really run into one that I like.
You could argue that The Enemy Within is metaplot for WFRP as v2 references events in TEW in some sourcebooks.
Q: How do I like my metaplot?
A1: I never metaplot I didn't like.
A2: Burned in a cut down, rust flaked 55 gallon oil drum, with me wearing fingerless gloves warming my hands over it.
-clash
I dont mind it is background but I dont like it when it is so defined that the characters can't really do anything significant.
Star Wars is a great example of a game where players can create little waves in the world, but nothing big (like blowing up the Death Star). That is what turns me off about Metaplot so I avoid games like that when possible
Quote from: Daedalus;419696I dont mind it is background but I dont like it when it is so defined that the characters can't really do anything significant.
Star Wars is a great example of a game where players can create little waves in the world, but nothing big (like blowing up the Death Star). That is what turns me off about Metaplot so I avoid games like that when possible
When I run Star Wars, I specifically tell my players that things they do could very well change the entire established Canon -otherwise, they wouldn't play.
Quote from: LordVreeg;419664I only use my own stuff; own settting; own adventures; etc.
I've never understood why others do, really. It's lost on me.
But I suppose metaplot is one of the reasons why. It takes some of the reasons why I make my own stuff and squares them.
Same here, but I'm eventually going to do a Spell Jammer fantasy space travel thingy and I'm going to tap into a lot of other homebrews and professionally produced settings as ports of call, or so I am thinking now. This will allow me to visit some of these settings without being married to them- if I decide to go this way.
As for metaplot, no thanks.
You mention Spelljammer...is there a lot of metaplot in that?
I have to ask because I skipped most of that during it's heyday and now I'm in the middle of tracking down the line so that it can be run in our club.
Never had a chance to read the material but I got to play it enough times to want to drop some cash on out of print boxed sets.
I only have the first boxed set. I don't think there is any real metaplot presented therein. Truthfully though, the interior artwork is so bad that i could never bring myself to read through the whole thing. No art would have been better.
I like the idea of fantasy/ science fantasy space stuff though.
Quote from: Aos;419796I only have the first boxed set. I don't think there is any real metaplot presented therein. Truthfully though, the interior artwork is so bad that i could never bring myself to read through the whole thing. No art would have been better.
I like the idea of fantasy/ science fantasy space stuff though.
Nah, there's no metaplot in the Spelljammer boxed set. I like the art myself, but you know what they say. Tastes and colors and shit, right?
The deck plans and ship illos are fine. they don't get me going or anything, but he interior character illustrations are crap (pages 52 and 59 of the concordance are typical examples of what I'm talking about). Normally I'm with you on the taste thing, as you know, but the idea that anyone could like that stuff breaks my suspension of disbelief.
Quote from: Aos;419802The deck plans and ship illos are fine. they don't get me going or anything, but he interior character illustrations are crap (pages 52 and 59 of the concordance are typical examples of what I'm talking about). Normally I'm with you on the taste thing, as you know, but the idea that anyone could like that stuff breaks my suspension of disbelief.
Jeez, now THAT is serious.
Quote from: Aos;419802The deck plans and ship illos are fine. they don't get me going or anything, but he interior character illustrations are crap (pages 52 and 59 of the concordance are typical examples of what I'm talking about). Normally I'm with you on the taste thing, as you know, but the idea that anyone could like that stuff breaks my suspension of disbelief.
It's mostly Jim Holloway as I remember? He's widely hated, but I always loved the guy's work.
I like metaplot in the background: mysterious, mythical, prophetic etc.
Some people are great at looking at a blank page and writing down an awesome setting/adventure.
Some people are great at looking at an existing scenario and using it as inspiration to get the creativity flowing. I'm one of those. As a result, I actually like game with metaplot even if I never use any of it, because a metaplot game means the designers are going to spend a whole lot of time on things other then rules, which just gives me a big pile of stuff to take and hammer into the shape I want it.
As to whether I think the metaplot should have any bearing on what actually happens at my table, well you know the answer to that already. :D
With Chianti and fava beans.
Seanchai
Quote from: LordVreeg;419805Jeez, now THAT is serious.
Indeed.
Quote from: Cole;419806It's mostly Jim Holloway as I remember? He's widely hated, but I always loved the guy's work.
Yeah it's, Holloway. I'm actually totally baffled by the fact that anyone can like his stuff. for me, every time I see one of his pieces, it's like someone set off a bordom grenade in my brain. I feel like I'm 8 years old... waiting in a long line at the bank with my mom.
Quote from: CRKrueger;419810I like metaplot in the background: mysterious, mythical, prophetic etc.
Some people are great at looking at a blank page and writing down an awesome setting/adventure.
Some people are great at looking at an existing scenario and using it as inspiration to get the creativity flowing. I'm one of those. As a result, I actually like game with metaplot even if I never use any of it, because a metaplot game means the designers are going to spend a whole lot of time on things other then rules, which just gives me a big pile of stuff to take and hammer into the shape I want it.
As to whether I think the metaplot should have any bearing on what actually happens at my table, well you know the answer to that already. :D
I need to write my own metaplot. Seriously.
Becasue I am able to often have trickles and echoes of it reach all the way down, like a deep forshadowing, that the players get a little bit more of, over the years, and suddenly start seeing the pieces start to fit together...
Quote from: Blackhand;419632I'm not really a fan, but in the club we've had to deal with this in oWoD mostly, but coming up we have a lot of stuff planned.
I stay as far from metaplot as I can when it's present, but some of the GM's I'll be running the game with want to use some of the settings as presented, with metaplot and all. A lot of them are first time GM's that the club is sponsoring, and I'll simply be there to make sure the game runs smooth without 'rulebook stalls'.
So, what are your favorite / most hated metaplots, for which rpg's and why are they your picks?
What really woke me up to the problem was WhiteWolf's recuring cross-genre villain, Samuel Haight. This was, of course, in modules but the instruction over and over again was to keep the PCs from dealing successfully with him to keep him alive no matter what, until the final encounter when the instruction was reversed and the Storyteller was instructed that Samuel Haight must die in the encounter. Raeding ths led me back to every frustrating stupidity I had had as a player of the games and made me wonder how many of those and just been jammed into the game.
I remember in one oWoD Vampire game the PCs were all members of the Prince of New York's council on the eve of the Sabbat takeover of the city. Called together by the Prince to discuss how to deal with the Sabbat threat it soon became clear that the Prince was either insanely incompetent or had thrown his lot in with the Sabbat (as a player I believed the latter but my character was open to the former having seen better minds crumble during the French Terror). Dismissed we all left in the same limousine, (something the Storyteller dictated but which seemed as dumb a notion as getting a haircut and shave in an open shaving parlor after your family had declared war on another during Prohibition) in which I discovered the bomb. Two of the characters tried to disarm it, I tried to kick out the rear windshield, the other three tried to force the doors open. We all failed and the bomb went off. The Prince had set the bomb (or rather, had it set) to eliminate us as opposition to the new Sabbat masters of NYC; he had worked with us for decades, if not centuries, and should have had a good idea on how tough we were; we failed utterly to escape or stop the bomb; so the bomb plot worked perfectly from the Prince's point of view; meaning that he set the bomb not to kill us but to piss us off because even though we failed to even mitigate the effect of the bomb, it was utterly incapable of even inconveniencing us for more than a few seconds. See, story trumped events in both examples and as a player it drove me crazy that my enemy set up a situation to kill me that logically he had to know would fail, just as it drove me crazy as a Storyteller that I had to keep Samuel Haight alive until the "right" moment for him to die. I don't hate oWoD notion of self-loathing monsters, but when the "story" trumps the mechanics (and especially when it trumps the logical consequences of success and failure) it has to go.
Quote from: Werekoala;419757When I run Star Wars, I specifically tell my players that things they do could very well change the entire established Canon -otherwise, they wouldn't play.
You can do that and it works to a point (we did that in our Star Wars Game) but the major events they are already set in stone. Your way allows the characters to make small "waves" in the universe, but nothing huge.
Never use Metaplot. Never run published adventures.
Even when I run Amber I get rid of all the elder Amberites (exception being in a con or something where they are a useful touchstone to get the players on the same page).
One of my pet hates is PCs not being able to have a significant influence on events. Therefore I hate casts of uber tough NPCs. I will throw in my own tough NPCs allies and enemies but I ahve to make them my own.
I played 007 for years and the players never met Bond once. In fact it became a running joke.
M: Ah 003 you just missed 007, yes he's off on medical leave that grenade made a real mess of his knee. Which brings me to your new mission....
Quote from: Daedalus;419920You can do that and it works to a point (we did that in our Star Wars Game) but the major events they are already set in stone. Your way allows the characters to make small "waves" in the universe, but nothing huge.
Well, not really - call it an alternate universe if you like. For example, the most recent one I've run had them as a group of Sith from outside the galaxy (a monestary type thing) that had been sent into the core to depose the Emperor, who was actually one of their Order who had gone rogue. That's a fairly major change in established canon.
I`m undogmatic. There is good m and bad m.
I like the idea of a metaplot driven by input from player groups. I participated such as one could in metaplots for Torg and Metascape. But they didn't really seem to work well. And metaplots designed by the publishers never work. I am against.
I don't like metaplot in published settings. I like to add my own, but I don't want my setting screwed up by the latest sourcebook.
Yes, the latest sourcebook would still be usable, but not as usable if there were no metaplot.
In principle, I don't like metaplot at all. There are some, however, that are far more damaging while others are basically ignorable. Metaplots that end up fundamentally changing the nature of the world/setting are usually the worst kind, particularly because all too often they make no sense (changing those things that suit the present game designers but otherwise trying to maintain the status quo to the point of the absurd in everything else).
RPGPundit
I hate metaplot.
Ironically the Shadow World line has developed a creeping Metaplot.
Probably my falt for writing the theatrical adaptations. But hey I had to get in there first and do them right.
I don't mind metaplot if it is interesting and I can use it. However, I like in in one big dose, not sprinkled over time in a 15 books I have to buy. And I usually view them as 100% optional.
I know a lot of people didn't like it, but the Grand Conjunction was something I enjoyed (even though it was sprinkled over several modules) running. And I felt that the effects of the grand conjunction improved the setting (though it was a blatant example of using story to revise unworkable elements of the game).
I think that you can probably divide metaplot into "history metaplot" and "story metaplot". History metaplot is really an attempt to create a sense of time going by in the setting. Story Metaplot is a metaplot related to a particular story the game designer wants to tell.
History metaplot may or may not be bad.
Story metaplot almost always is, especially if its a personal story. (that is, a "story metaplot" about "nation x goes to war with nation y" is bad enough; but a "story metaplot" about "NPC X has an awesome adventure" is much much worse).
RPGPundit
Those seem like fair divisions to me Pundit.
I guess the gray area is when personal stories effect the flow of history in the setting.
The best metaplot I've seen was Heavy Gear's prior to the bombing of Paxton Arms and the transformation of the default game from "gritty hard sci-fi mech pilots" into "planet-hopping action hero mech pilots".
They did a pretty good job of giving GMs enough information about the important players in the ongoing history of the setting to use or ignore it as they pleased. They used a chess piece system, and it was fairly sensible, so that a GM knew that if they killed off the Emir, of course their Terra Nova was going to diverge from the baseline. This was presented in fairly neutral language, neither encouraging nor discouraging one from doing it.
They packed most of the actual metaplot into a set of small books published separately so that you could ignore them if you want to. Each one covered a couple of years in the setting, and focused on the most important political and social events of that year from an IC perspective.
Of course, that was great until they changed the default game-style. I've never really been a fan of metaplot since, though I don't mind occasional updates in settings.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;420984Those seem like fair divisions to me Pundit.
I guess the gray area is when personal stories effect the flow of history in the setting.
Yes, but all too often the "personal NPC story" metaplots are precisely the ones that end with a huge Reset button in terms of the bigger history. That's one of their greatest flaws (aside from, you know, turning the PCs into either helpless agents or powerless cheerleaders for the game designer's pet NPCs).
RPGpundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;421592Yes, but all too often the "personal NPC story" metaplots are precisely the ones that end with a huge Reset button in terms of the bigger history. That's one of their greatest flaws (aside from, you know, turning the PCs into either helpless agents or powerless cheerleaders for the game designer's pet NPCs).
RPGpundit
You know, the best dragon lance game I ever ran started in the Spring before dragons of autumn twilight, and the first game took place in Solace. The party met one or two of the heroes of the lance, but noted that they took off and wouldn't have anything to do with the war. They even traveled with Tika for a while.
Probably my favorite stand alone game is Palladium's Nightbane. It is full of every kind of metaplot you have mentioned. It gives specific important NPCs and their activity. Sunfire, Lilith, the leaders of the ADA... tons of it, too much to remember.
But playing it was fucking awesome. I'd keep and use all of the metaplot I found, not that the party always came into contact with it.
I guess I don't see anything wrong with metaplot, other than I'm not likely to run Nightbane again, because I'm tired of it. Games with a lot of metaplot have a short lifespan because there isn't a lot of reason to go back to them, but, I think they are hot while they are hot.
Quote from: RPGPundit;421592Yes, but all too often the "personal NPC story" metaplots are precisely the ones that end with a huge Reset button in terms of the bigger history. That's one of their greatest flaws (aside from, you know, turning the PCs into either helpless agents or powerless cheerleaders for the game designer's pet NPCs).
RPGpundit
I agree that PCs as helpless viewers of the designers unfolding plot is not desirable. I don't mind, if the PCs have the option of going against the NPC and being his enemy (that usually makes for a better adventure anyways), but killing him should be a real possibility.
Quote from: Cranewings;421647Probably my favorite stand alone game is Palladium's Nightbane. It is full of every kind of metaplot you have mentioned. It gives specific important NPCs and their activity. Sunfire, Lilith, the leaders of the ADA... tons of it, too much to remember.
But playing it was fucking awesome. I'd keep and use all of the metaplot I found, not that the party always came into contact with it.
I guess I don't see anything wrong with metaplot, other than I'm not likely to run Nightbane again, because I'm tired of it. Games with a lot of metaplot have a short lifespan because there isn't a lot of reason to go back to them, but, I think they are hot while they are hot.
Sorry, but was that "Metaplot" or just Characterization? Because Palladium tends to often create great NPCs with their own agendas and activities in all their games, but its not actually "metaplot" unless you are talking about something that creates big "events" in the game setting that affect future books. In that sense, the only "metaplot" I've ever seen Palladium do has been the Tolkeen War.
I don't follow Nightbane, though, so it may have the same thing.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;421835Sorry, but was that "Metaplot" or just Characterization? Because Palladium tends to often create great NPCs with their own agendas and activities in all their games, but its not actually "metaplot" unless you are talking about something that creates big "events" in the game setting that affect future books. In that sense, the only "metaplot" I've ever seen Palladium do has been the Tolkeen War.
I don't follow Nightbane, though, so it may have the same thing.
I don't know about Nightbane, but Rifts did have some minor metaplot other than the Tolkeen War.
They did tend to move the time period forward with each book, eventually changing out all the Coalition standard weapons and equipment (and plans to do the same for Triax stuff last I heard).
Also, future books in the lines did often assume you read the previous books in the line and did keep building on the background plots (or in some cases, made mentions about background plots from previous books having resolved themselves already). Granted, this kind of thing was pretty minor.
There was also that Megaverse battle between Hell and Hades thing in the last couple of years (not sure if that ever finished).
The "war in hell" thing has not finished yet. And yes, there are a few other instances, but the others were more a general advancing of the timeline; there's nothing really in it that is a "personal metaplot" type of deal the way Tolkeen was, where the PCs who participated in those books would theoretically be directly involved in the metaplot itself and theoretically unable to change it (without invalidating the books).
RIFTS actually gives a very good example of both types of metaplot: books like the coalition updates, the stuff on Archie, and the relatively horrible RIFTS Africa were all examples of "history metaplot". RIFTS Africa, in spite of not being very good, at least does metaplot in the least harmful way possible, it assumes that the PCs themselves would be the architects of stopping the the Four Horsemen. Likewise the RIFTS: Mechanoids sourcebook.
On the other hand, the Tolkeen war and the "War in hell" stuff is much more "metaplot as story" of the kind that is meant to "create vast changes" in the setting which the PCs really can't do much of anything about. This to me is by far the worse kind of metaplot.
RPGPundit
I guess with Nightbane, the plot didn't really move forward, other than to become more stable. The game is suppose to take place a few years after the big event, and as far as I know, no other big events occur.
I don't mind history for a setting. I don't really consider that to be Meta Plot. Meta Plot tells us how things should develop or proceed in the setting rather than how things were up to the point the game starts. Forget that. I want my PCs and NPCs to make things happen in the setting - Not someone's Meta Plot.
The worst Meta Plot I've encountered was in the Legend of the Five Rings RPG. They actually allowed players of the card game tourneys to impact how the supplements for the RPG were being developed. If it happened in the card game, they found a way to bring that over into the RPG as canon historical material. It was ridiculous. The Lion Clan using Blood Magic? Absurd.
You can always ignore Meta Plot, but if Meta Plot is heavily marbled into the meat of the supplement you are trying to use, you have a lot of fat to cut out of it. I'd rather not have it in there to begin with.
I was never into L5R but seriously? That sounds fucking awful.
RPGPundit
Quote from: PaladinCA;422524You can always ignore Meta Plot, but if Meta Plot is heavily marbled into the meat of the supplement you are trying to use, you have a lot of fat to cut out of it. I'd rather not have it in there to begin with.
Ayup.
It seems to me, many metaplots go along fine up until the "bad metaplot decision", after which supplements written to it become less and less useful if you decide to ignore it.