Request for GM Quests

[Alatriel]

Hey everybody,
I have a small request.  While I appreciate all the fantastic quotes and poems that have been used lately for the quests, would it be possible to go back to putting in a small description of what the quest will be about, at least a starting scenario?  This way, we can determine which of our characters would be most suitable to join the quest, which one would have desire to go, be most useful, etc. other than simply by level or location.  By all means, keep the sayings and quotes and poems because I think they add a lot and if nothing else expose us to some great lines that we might not have heard before.  But (and maybe I'm alone in this, maybe not) I would really appreciate it if there was always at least a little blurb that would tell me why it was that my character headed that direction in the first place, or which character it was that had her interest sparked.  

Thanks so much, and sorry to bother.

~E

[Carillon]

I won't speak for other GMs, but I think this is a GM-specific preference and you'll find some variety--poems and quotes excluded--on how much if any information is given out prior to a quest. Some quests are meant to have information given out before hand, some quests are intended to be surprises, and you really shouldn't know anything before them! It just depends on the quest, and on the GM.

Personally, I tend to skimp on backstory and setup in the calendar entries and deliver this information through other means--in game, rumors postings, town criers, etc. Right now, that is just a symptom of the kind of quests I am running, though, which have been mostly spur-of-the-moment crisis situations. Any hook I gave would be even more misleading than none, since the reason your character was there would have little to do with the actual quest!

[Asmodean]

For some, like Alatriel, who play evil dark elves and other miscreant type characters, I can see how this could be difficult.  I have sent GM's a PM prior to the quest ( read as a day or two beforehand .. NOT 10 minutes before ) asking which of my characters would best fit the quest...  This allows them to offer a suggestion, based on the goal of the quest, without revealing any further information.  

If the player would like to purposefully cause party chaos and disruption, they should probably bring this to the GM's attention well in advance of the quest.  This would prevent any OOC grievances GM's may have with PC's who do everything in their power to sabotage something the GM has spent a good deal of time preparing.

[Alatriel]

Hehe, actually, I only have ONE evil character  but yes, it is good to know who to bring... hence the request.

However, as far as causing chaos- I don't think there should be any ooc grievances for someone playing true to their character, whatever the cause.  That's why it's roleplay.  We go by what our characters would do, not necessarily based on a preset storyline.  If that was the case, what would be the point of going?  It only has one ending.  We want to be able to affect change in the world.  We want to matter, to make a difference.  

And... sticking with the original point- each character has a different way of feeling that they have made a difference or reached a goal.

[Acacea]

Sometimes just adding to find your own reasons can be helpful - that way you don't end up with half the party roleplaying that they just happened upon the others, and the other half saying they heard there was trouble in the region, you know? Just so everyone is on the same page. Kind of like "scheduled" improvs - be somewhere around x area around y time and stuff might happen. How you get there and who you bring is up to you, but at least you know to do that ahead of time.

I do often like the quotes because they are a glance at the vibe the DM is going for, which for me is sometimes more helpful than an OOC breakdown of the type of encounters to expect.

[EdTheKet]

I have sent GM's a PM prior to the quest ( read as a day or two beforehand .. NOT 10 minutes before ) asking which of my characters would best fit the quest... This allows them to offer a suggestion, based on the goal of the quest, without revealing any further information.

I think this is a very good approach.

[twidget658]

However, as far as causing chaos- I don't think there should be any ooc grievances for someone playing true to their character, whatever the cause. That's why it's roleplay. We go by what our characters would do, not necessarily based on a preset storyline. If that was the case, what would be the point of going? It only has one ending. We want to be able to affect change in the world. We want to matter, to make a difference.
 
 And... sticking with the original point- each character has a different way of feeling that they have made a difference or reached a goal.

 
 Yes, but when a GM has spent a lot of time on a plot and how things should play out, a 'kink in the hose' would be good to know about so the GM can possibly work that out. I do not think it is a good idea to start throwing off a quest just so a player's PC can act IC. A heads up would be appropriate or your PC may just end up in a situation that may start affecting you OOC'ly. IC actions can affect OOC emotions when it starts to disrupt a quest that has many hours poured into it. Sending out spoilers in the quest write up may not be appropriate. Nor should there be a clause saying, "If you have an evil PC, bring them to this one."
 
 When picking which PC to play...play the one you feel like playing. Just prompt the GM prior to the quest out of consideration for the GM. If it is not a good choice or match for the quest, pick another PC. If that doesn't work, wait for the next quest. This is what has worked for me in the past.

[Tanman]

I'll come from two views. One from a DM angle. One coming from a PC. Different strokes for different folks for DMs. I have a different twist from Twidget. I have no qualm whatsoever what the players (characters) want to do. I have spent hours setting up a quest only to have someone (out of their IC actions) end it prematurely after 1 hour.

The way I look at it is this. Our role as DMs are to set the initial scene and then let the players guide us from there. In essence they create the adventure and we respond to it.

Coming from a players  pov, I am with Twidget. Sometimes I find one doesn't suit, and I generally have an idea at the beginning of the quest. If I want to change I do ask the dm in the dm channel if i can change. I think conflict within quests is great. It adds flavour. As a DM I have given RP XP (that have been played cleanly) to everybody that is involved.

My two true.

[lonnarin]

My only request is that closed party quest series be limited to something reasonable, like a maximum of 5 or so closed party sessions in a row.  When I check the calendar and see "session 8, sorry this party is closed.  Only people who have been on the previous 7 episodes are allowed to participate" it's kind of frustrating.

[Dorganath]

My only request is that closed party quest series be limited to something reasonable, like a maximum of 5 or so closed party sessions in a row.  When I check the calendar and see "session 8, sorry this party is closed.  Only people who have been on the previous 7 episodes are allowed to participate" it's kind of frustrating.

Excellent point, though quite often that is as much the fault of the players as it is the GMs.

"What? You just spent the last 4 hours debating wards and you've moved all of 100 feet from your last location?"

It happens.

[mixafix]

I think they should always be open  - unless absolutely necessary.
 
 it may need lore delivered, advance warning for interesting intro etc - even work on behalf of players pre game perhaps but if  they are willing -
 
  it should generally be possible and desirable to include folks.
 
 my 2 true