On Quests:

Everything about Illarion that fits nowhere else. / Alles über Illarion was inhaltlich in kein anderes Board passt.

Moderator: Gamemasters

Post Reply
User avatar
Aegohl
Posts: 2568
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:17 pm

On Quests:

Post by Aegohl »

First of all, I just want to say that I'm not pointing fingers or trying to hurt anyone's feelings and I know from experience that entertaining players can be a thankless, nerve-wracking duty. I wouldn't post this if I didn't feel like I had something constructive to say and I would have posted it in the internal boards so as not to embarrass anyone if I didn't think that other players probably have something constructive to add as well.


Lately there has been some grumbling about some of the quests and other GM interactions. It's unfortunate that, I think, players are really desperate to play quests and interact with the GMs as can be shown by the number of players who show up for them and it's unfortunate when they leave frustrated or just feeling ignored. I realize that this is difficult often and when I was a GM I often had quests and other interactions with players that flopped sometimes. You can't win them all, butI feel like I can offer some helpful tips on what to do and some commentary on what not to do. So here it is in bullet points for easy digestion:

Do's:
  • Do have a conflict as the core of your quest. Even if your conflict is one of the many building quests we've had lately whether it's building a training center, a barricade, or a canal. If at no point before the end of the quest did players have something to fight/negotiate/figure out/etc.. then even if something was accomplished at the end it's likely going to be a pretty forgettable quest. All quests should be able to be summed up with the sentence "This is a story about a conflict that players will have against/with x" where x could be any number of things.
  • There should be at some point in the quest a choice that players have to make with any number of options (though two or three are usually the magic numbers. Anything more is starting to get on the complicated end). There should be a consequence to both actions. For example, a cult kidnaps a child and plans to do a ritual on the night of the full moon that will culminate in the child being possessed by a demon. The cult warns that if the players try to rescue the child they will just kill it and kidnap another child for the ritual. Alternatively if they don't try to rescue the child the cult will succeed in their ritual, but just as the players begin to set out demons attack the village. Now the players must abandon the child or abandon the village or split up and risk being outnumbered in both places.
  • Once the players make a decision there should often be a point where just as the players begin to believe they made the right decision the heat is turned up and they have to either make sacrifices to reach their goal or at the very least try harder. The players find the cult just as they do a ritual to make the full moon rise in mid day. The baby is possessed by the demon and grows to full size. Now the players have to face the cultists AND the demon!
  • Do allow players to be the stars. Give them the tools to do the quest and then get out of their way. When the NPC starts to take the spotlight, do whatever you can to put it back on the players.
  • Be clear. This gets more difficult the more players are at the quest. When there are a lot of players at a quest, please broadcast your message to the whole server rather than doing a #me that it's unlikely everyone will catch. I know this might seem obnoxious to the players who aren't there, but I'm sure they can ignore it and continue playing as they were.
  • When all else fails, summon monsters! (No, really!)
Don'ts
  • Don't expect players to solve things in the way that you had planned it. Let them be creative.
  • Don't let people "quest whore." It's unfortunate that there's at least one in every community: the player who just looooves quests too much. The one who hops at the chance to solve the quest before anyone else has the chance to speak. This persists because GM's even love them because they reward GM's with always be ready for a quest and always being excited to partake. It's likely they even send the GM messages after a quest to thank them. While these people should get as much as a chance as the next player to partake and even "win" at quests, spread the wealth around.
There's at least a couple more points I have that I keep forgetting before I have a chance to write it, but maybe I'll come back to them.
User avatar
Achae Eanstray
Posts: 4300
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:03 am
Location: A field of dandelions
Contact:

Re: On Quests:

Post by Achae Eanstray »

A link to idea of a good quest: http://www.edge-online.com/features/eld ... ood-quest/
more mystery ideas which tbh is what I like the best: http://boccobsblog.wordpress.com/2011/0 ... est-ideas/

I am sure there are more ideas and your recommendation can work for some however, just to give a different idea I am telling myself once the monsters arrive "I wish I hadn't brought my char to this one" and try to leave soon.

I also really enjoy the lore quests feeling my char's participation has added to it.

The only "Don't" I see is to have just one ending to a quest. Being open ended giving room for player interaction and involvement makes a quest so much more interesting. Most people are playing this game due to player interaction ...otherwise they would play a solo game with the computer. Player interaction is never concrete.. there is always some surprise even if you know the other player well. Picking one or two players to give you the end you desire... or pushing that end despite other player interaction simply makes for a non-creative quest and eventual boredom. Hence the quests should allow for more then one possible ending. No quest should be set in stone.
User avatar
Aegohl
Posts: 2568
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:17 pm

Re: On Quests:

Post by Aegohl »

Achae Eanstray wrote:
I am sure there are more ideas and your recommendation can work for some however, just to give a different idea I am telling myself once the monsters arrive "I wish I hadn't brought my char to this one" and try to leave soon.
I think your opinion on this point specifically is a minority one. Mas is always a server filler. Historically people talked about "The Lich Wars" years after it happened. In reality there was no "Lich Wars." There was Japeth, Papoitsi, Rinya and myself getting bored and summoning skeletons. The reactions of the players made it what it was.

I don't mean every quest should have monsters in them, but monsters attacking is instant conflict in the most basic way.

Oh, the point I was missing:

Another DO: While some quests can be standalone, the best kind of quests are episodic. An episodic quest ends returning things to the status quo enough that players can go do whatever they want while also having just enough loose ends that players anticipate the next quest. That anticipation will keep players online between quests.

Also DON'T: Don't announce every quest beforehand. If players are worried they might miss something neat they'll log in more often. If they can rest assured that the next quest isn't until a week hence, they'll go play something else until then.
Annabeth
Posts: 502
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:49 pm

Re: On Quests:

Post by Annabeth »

I'd much rather have a thick plot than a thick group of monsters. Myself I only attend Mas the times when I can (Seeing work and sleep is a thing, too), because it is rather "mandatory" for a character like mine to be there the entire time (I have to just RP her being on the wall as the archer she is etc in the down-time when I am at work or sleep). It's not because I enjoy the mass of monsters, or running around for hours just "grinding" monsters that GM's spawn. It's because if you don't attend that specific part of the IG year, players and characters alike will make sure to tell you for the rest of that IG year. That's just how it has become. Personally I don't find quests like Mas fun, even if I appear on the online list there. I'm not out to start a discussion about Mas, I know plenty of players enjoy it and the masses of monsters, I'm just pointing out that Mas might not be the best example of a good quest just because there are a lot of players online during it, as some have the reasons I do to be IG.

A quest with a thick plot, well thought out and with a good informative way to get the plot to the players. A plot that has several options of where it may be headed, depending on how players interact with events that happen in the quest. A plot-line that often lasts over several weeks if not months, in that manner. Those are quests I enjoy.
Sure, if it fits, a few monsters spawned to add to the plot can be good (though as a high end warrior character I don't see the point of spawning a swarm of monsters, it just takes more time to move on, stealing from the quest time that could be used to explain the plot, and it most likely ends up sending a lower level fresher character to the cross, ending with everyone having to wait for their return or them missing out on some of the quest).
A quest like that is what I'd consider good and fun. While characters getting sent to the cross may be an interesting thing to have characters react to, it makes it less fun for those sent there, as they may no longer participate in the quest story-line, if only for a while. Of course there are also "lesser" quests , such as constructions of buildings, renovations, arms practices, that are more singular events, which can be just as fun, though I'm talking about he "larger" quests here. Don't just replace the plot and the interactions with a swarm of monsters, either because you don't have a plot and just want to entertain players with some random quest, or because you think that's what all of the players want; something to kill. Don't make it unnecessarily lengthy either, because there are always players who have to leave before the quest is done, so why not keep that to a bare minimum. Instead spread the quest into several announced 2~ hour quests over the duration it takes to finish it, and then also perhaps some spontaneous quests where players who are active and online at the time without a quest announced can partake in something special solely for being active, though I believe the latter should not be of utter importance for the main plot-line, as people will usually take specific care to have time-off for quests if they are announced (this is taking consideration for those who take time off work and such to play illa quests. I don't care for being considerate to those that log on only for quests, to then go off and spend their free-time playing some other game or the likes, though they would of course also benefit from this.)

I'm not saying "Stop with the monster quests", I'm just expressing my personal view on the matter. I'm sure there are plenty of either group, those who prefer plot over monsters and vice-versa, it's all about trying to accommodate to the majority of the players, possibly by having more quests of both kinds. As for my other points that's just about accommodating to the most players possible with our quests, so none feel left out as there aren't many enough quests or quest often enough to justify sacrificing the fun and participation of some to open up for the possibility of more things for the rest to interact with and react to.

When GM's put in the effort to create a quest, it is important to accommodate to the masses rather than the few, so the most comes out of the effort made, imo. It's also rather important that IF a GM announces a quest in the list, that no other quests are approved for that exact same time, forcing the players to make a choice between quests. That's just disrespectful towards the GM who announced his/her quest first and the effort they put into their quest. In the end though, quests should just be a fun bonus provided by the GM's. Illarion should promote that a player should feel the same need to log in just to roleplay with other players as they feel when they see a quest on the list, like how it used to be before the VBU when most people could just log on knowing they'd find someone to roleplay with in Troll's Bane. We managed it once before, surely we can manage it again.
User avatar
Mephistopheles
Posts: 1059
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:04 pm
Location: Murica

Re: On Quests:

Post by Mephistopheles »

Saw this discussion felt like speaking, while some of us like a few monster masses the real pleasure is the story and the plot. I personally would like some of these conflicts to eventually come to an end but i know some of that is because of players. But i really liked the Zaras quests, the old pirate flynn quests and even the schnellbeil dwarf raids but i think some of them have outcomes too set in stone and when the players dont choose that set route the quest gets abandoned. I agree with mitch completly but i also want to express that stagnancy of things can be rather overwhelming at times. I mean.. we start a conflict with flynn ir the dwarves and then realize " aww we cant kill them off or make them leave or really have much of any kind of victory over these forces because they are set to the map and we'd have to rewrite maybe a dozen npcs" its hard and extra work and I dont have a solution for it, but from some players standpoint they like to see one plot end so they can work on their own or put more effort into another gm plot.
User avatar
Aegohl
Posts: 2568
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:17 pm

Re: On Quests:

Post by Aegohl »

Mephistopheles wrote:Saw this discussion felt like speaking, while some of us like a few monster masses the real pleasure is the story and the plot. I personally would like some of these conflicts to eventually come to an end but i know some of that is because of players. But i really liked the Zaras quests, the old pirate flynn quests and even the schnellbeil dwarf raids but i think some of them have outcomes too set in stone and when the players dont choose that set route the quest gets abandoned. I agree with mitch completly but i also want to express that stagnancy of things can be rather overwhelming at times. I mean.. we start a conflict with flynn ir the dwarves and then realize " aww we cant kill them off or make them leave or really have much of any kind of victory over these forces because they are set to the map and we'd have to rewrite maybe a dozen npcs" its hard and extra work and I dont have a solution for it, but from some players standpoint they like to see one plot end so they can work on their own or put more effort into another gm plot.
Agreed 100%. Every day I play I pass by those portals that were opened up two ingame years ago. It's no longer a thing of dread. It's become "Oh. Those portals we can't close. La!"

In any case, to the monster protesters, I did say "when all else fails." What I meant by that is that I think currently some GM's are afraid to spawn monsters because of the handful of people who aren't combatants when in reality it's nice to have monsters that are there for a reason and a story rather than just respawning around a coordinate of the map now and again. The surprise and rush of it all gets players titillated and even if it's because they need to run away it's a good thing. If I could choose between digging a canal for three hours or digging a canal for three hours and then having monsters attack for some reason, I would pick the latter. I'm not suggesting that every quest should be a combat quest. I am suggesting that if it's that or nothing, I'll take that.
Post Reply