Guiding the players to the adventure

[ffilz]

So as I gear up for my session tomorrow, I have a thought question for folks.

How do you encourage PCs to use an ATV to get to the adventure site (and this have those nifty animal encounters and such) rather than use an Air/Raft, the ship's shuttle, or even the ship itself?

I could lean on the 4 seat capacity of an Air/Raft, and at least an Air/Raft wouldn't totally eliminate the encounters. On the other hand, how hard is it to bypass the 4 seat capacity utilizing the 4 tons of cargo...

I'm not going to use techniques like "oops, you Air/Raft is broken and you can't get a spare part for a week".

One assumes it''s highly frowned upon to land one's ship other than at the star port, but what are the consequences?

 

[Timerover51]

So as I gear up for my session tomorrow, I have a thought question for folks.

How do you encourage PCs to use an ATV to get to the adventure site (and this have those nifty animal encounters and such) rather than use an Air/Raft, the ship's shuttle, or even the ship itself?

I could lean on the 4 seat capacity of an Air/Raft, and at least an Air/Raft wouldn't totally eliminate the encounters. On the other hand, how hard is it to bypass the 4 seat capacity utilizing the 4 tons of cargo...

I'm not going to use techniques like "oops, you Air/Raft is broken and you can't get a spare part for a week".

Well, depending on the planet's profile, weather conditions, such as regular high winds or severe electric storms, could preclude use of the Air Raft. You would have to work that into the adventure. Or simply allow them to start off with the Air Raft, have them encounter a storm, where a lightning strike disables it, even it is it grounded. Flying will build up a nice static electricity charge for attracting lightning. As for the Shuttle, it would depend on how it was powered. If you are using a fusion reaction maneuver drive, the use of those in an atmosphere would be highly frowned on. Use it to go somewhere, and when the players get back, they find out that their ship has been seized and they are imprisoned.

One assumes it''s highly frowned upon to land one's ship other than at the star port, but what are the consequences?

If it is their ship, the Space Port authority may send a Police ship after them, with orders to disable the ship and capture the crew. Would you care to think of what would happen if a laser burned through a tank full of Liquid Hydrogen in an oxygen atmosphere? If it is not their ship, then have some fun role-playing the ship's captain or owner as they try to convince you to land the ship anywhere but the Space Port. Also, ships are heavy objects, requiring a very firm landing pad. You could let them take the ship, leave it secured, and then come back to find a large sink hole where the ship had been.

In something that I am working on, a small Space Viking ship lands near a city with a small Class D/E star port where a Space Yacht is landed. The local city officials come to a deal with the Yacht owner to use its laser-equipped ship's boat to zap the landed Space Viking ship. As a large part of any ship is fuel tanks, and these tanks for the Space Viking are already full of Liquid H for the quick getaway, when the laser burns through a fuel tank, the Vikings attempting to raid the town see a very large fireball from where their ship was, followed by a very large "BOOM", and very quickly figure out that they are not leaving the planet any time soon.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

How do you encourage PCs to use an ATV to get to the adventure site (and this have those nifty animal encounters and such) rather than use an Air/Raft, the ship's shuttle, or even the ship itself?

You're just a Referee. Players can decide what they'll do. They'll probably create their own trouble. That's where you Referee things.

 

[kilemall]

• Limited grav lanes, which are too far away from the destination
• Getting local grav license, either in general or this region, not soon enough for mission
• Unauthorized grav vehicles flying to unauthorized places get shot down
• Even if legal, too much attention
• Better cover story re: scientists or work crew
• Budget (if the grav vehicle costs are six figures)
• As noted too heavy for raft, not so for ATV.
• Need at least a little armor

As for ships, a lot is going to depend on starport, law level, tech level and population- the lower all four are the less fuss.


Course a really good reason even then is not to connect theft/appropriation/questionably moral deed to the ship, which could have consequences throughout the subsector.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

So as I gear up for my session tomorrow, I have a thought question for folks.

How do you encourage PCs to use an ATV to get to the adventure site (and this have those nifty animal encounters and such) rather than use an Air/Raft, the ship's shuttle, or even the ship itself?

I could lean on the 4 seat capacity of an Air/Raft, and at least an Air/Raft wouldn't totally eliminate the encounters. On the other hand, how hard is it to bypass the 4 seat capacity utilizing the 4 tons of cargo...

I'm not going to use techniques like "oops, you Air/Raft is broken and you can't get a spare part for a week".

One assumes it''s highly frowned upon to land one's ship other than at the star port, but what are the consequences?

local law restrictions: while not a issue at the starport where imperial law applies, any pilot wishing to fly outside the starport needs a local licence (imperial credentials are not accepted, or are just the foot in the door to start the process), which involves using deliberately convoluted process that takes more time than is available. the process is deliberately convoluted to encourage the starport users to use local haulage firms for moving freight around the planet (and thus add a bit to the local economy).

site unreachable by air: the air travel route either requires passing though restricted airspace, or the end destintation is underground, a cave or some other location where the air/raft would only get them part of the way and leave them with 4 tons of cargo stuck 2 miles form the destination.

grounding of all flights: all air movements have been suspended by the Port Authority. no one takes off, period. reasons include a security threat, extreme bad weather, local restrictions due to reglious reasons ("No flights on the High Holy Days"), or even just the ATC are on strike over pay.

 

[flykiller]

How do you encourage PCs to use an ATV to get to the adventure site (and this have those nifty animal encounters and such) rather than use an Air/Raft, the ship's shuttle, or even the ship itself?

environmental regulations. or the environment itself - "it's the mating season for the purple fly, it eats ship gaskets." unions - "you have to use our certified transport system". the driver has a special skill the player characters need but don't have themselves. or simple law - "no flight. period." maybe because of some environmental concern - "it frightens the banded bungees." or an insurgency is in progress that automatically shoots down anything airborne.

 

[Adam Dray]

If you're designing (or purchasing) adventures that absolutely have only one path to all the prepared material, then just tell the players that:

"Hey, travellers, for reasons that will be obvious later, the adventure today hinges on you taking an ATV to a certain place. Can we fast-forward to there and come up with a reason you all did that?"

If they say no, then there might be no game tonight, or you wing it and do something else.

This is why I prefer sandbox-style adventures in the first place.

I really dislike the GMing style that tricks players into doing something so that they can have fun. I know that a lot of people swear by it, but it's not for me (and even makes me mad as a player when I realize I'm being manipulated that way).

 

[ffilz]

If you're designing (or purchasing) adventures that absolutely have only one path to all the prepared material, then just tell the players that:

"Hey, travellers, for reasons that will be obvious later, the adventure today hinges on you taking an ATV to a certain place. Can we fast-forward to there and come up with a reason you all did that?"

If they say no, then there might be no game tonight, or you wing it and do something else.

This is why I prefer sandbox-style adventures in the first place.

I really dislike the GMing style that tricks players into doing something so that they can have fun. I know that a lot of people swear by it, but it's not for me (and even makes me mad as a player when I realize I'm being manipulated that way).

I definitely agree that coming up with excuse after excuse is not the way to go. I want to approach things as much as possible from a sandbox point of view, and so while I actually have a module in use for tomorrow (last session, the PCs already agreed to the commission), and I have a specific interest in my question for tomorrow, I also have a general question about these things. As least the players aren't insisting on taking the ship (and maybe forgot about their shuttle...).

I also asked over on Facebook, and have been getting some good discussion there (as well as plenty of "force the players to do what you want" ideas).

I'd also note that in this specific case, the "adventure" isn't even ruined if they take the Air/Raft, but there is a general question, how does one make the animal encounter system interesting if the PCs mode of transportation seems to negate most of the encounters (terrain events like chasms really don't affect Air/Rafts...). And actually, it seems like an ATV renders many of the animal encounters irrelevant.

My feeling is there are ways to use modules in a sandbox without having to get explicit buy in, or use trickery.

Frank

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

I also asked over on Facebook, and have been getting some good discussion there (as well as plenty of "force the players to do what you want" ideas).

I sandbox my NPCs with the players PCs. Watch Johnny Quest for ideas on how animals can interfere with all matters of transport. I never force players to do anything, so I can't help there.

 

[ffilz]

I sandbox my NPCs with the players PCs. Watch Johnny Quest for ideas on how animals can interfere with all matters of transport. I never force players to do anything, so I can't help there.

Oh, I don't want to force the players... Guidance is probably even too strong, I am committed to sand box play, on the other hand, there has to be something that keeps the game focused and interesting.

Frank

 

[BytePro]

I'm down with Adam Dray's advice.

If you just want to use the random encounter/events - well, they may randomly just not happen anyway. Referee fiat is fine if that is the game folks showed up to play.

Just be honest with your Players - they typically will get into imposing their own limitations on their PCs.

If your players don't want to accept certain limitations - then they probably won't enjoy the situations you want for their PCs. As a player, if the referee starts making up in game stuff to manipulate things, its likely I will see those as the challenges to be overcome. Ex: get involved in a strike, research (even violate) a no-fly edict, fix any broke shuttle/ship/Air Raft, etc. Thus majorly derailing your plans.

And that being said, any air raft, shuttle, ship - they all will surely need to land somewhere. So, that is where the action occurs. You can simply make the call (Ref) that something interesting happened - and still roll to see exactly what form an encounter/event takes.

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

Oh, I don't want to force the players... Guidance is probably even too strong, I am committed to sand box play, on the other hand, there has to be something that keeps the game focused and interesting.

Frank

Just have events that are happening all around the NPCs and PCs. Players can choose to interact with them, or do their own thing as they may already have planned. Things would depend on the scope for the game session.

 

[vargr1]

My feeling is there are ways to use modules in a sandbox without having to get explicit buy in, or use trickery.

The players want a certain type of game, so does the GM. The problem comes when one part tries to force their way on to the other part - usually (at least, according to the posts on rpg forums) it's the GM trying to 'force' the players into certain activities or behaviors.

"Explicit buy in" is exactly what a good GM and gaming group wants. It's the only thing that allows the players their agency and avoids the problem of Shrodinger's Ogre.

This is even more important when running a sandbox type of game. When player's are able to exercise their autonomy, there has to be a lot of trust in a gaming group, and the group needs to all be on the same page.

I'm about to start a campaign that will be very much about running around in wildernesses, encountering wild beasts, and strange native sophonts face-to-face. The player's wont be floating above it all (even though they could easily be) because they *want* to get down and dirty and intimate with the world they are going to visit. That's the game they want to play, and that's also the game I want to run.

We're all aware of the genre conventions of the game because we decided upon them together. I know for a lot of people that seems like a violation of the 'GM is ghod' rule.

Well, so be it. We're going to have one helluva game.

As for the actual question, the occasional problem on a planet that doesn't allow them to use an air/raft is acceptable (weather, magnetic anomalies destabilize gravitics - see how rough your starship landing was?). Player's will see that it's not being used often - and isn't being used to screw them over - and will trust the GM and go with it. When the GM uses air/raft problems on every planet and in ways that screws the players over, then something massive is wrong. When the players start to think that the GM is an adversary instead of another person also playing the game, then the game starts to fall apart and become unfun for all.

 

[Adam Dray]

I definitely agree that coming up with excuse after excuse is not the way to go.

Oh, hey. Just realized who you are. We've chatted at the Forge years ago. Sorry if I told you lots of stuff you already know about GM Force.

 

[Adam Dray]

So after reading a bit more (including your clarifications over on the Facebook thread), I understand what you're asking a bit more.

If I understand correctly, it's not "how do I solve this problem for this one adventure" as much as it's a more general "how do you make an air/raft a viable option in Traveller games without sacrificing all of your ground-based fun." Right?

Carrots

I know you would rather use the carrot than the stick. So what are the carrots?

If players spend all their time air/rafting around, just make the planet boring. They can go from settlement to settlement, but nothing really happens there. Especially on worlds with constant cloud cover or vegetation cover, they might not be able to really see what's happening on a planet from the air.

They can notice ground-based problems from the air. There's a fire in this spot and smoke rises. There's a distress call on a radio. There's a weird magnetic anomaly in this spot. The goal is to get them to land and explore.

You can't really talk to people from your air/raft. Make them land if they want to communicate with the natives. Give them reasons to ask people stuff.

They can't really explore or search from the air/raft. Make them land if they want to search caves, houses, crash sites, tight ravines, or underwater.

Put more adventures in the air! Large platforms, tall cliffs, laccolith towers, treetop villages, and so on--all will make the players glad they brought an air/raft.

Sticks

On the stick side (and I suspect people have mentioned this), air/rafts are usually open-top (routine vacc suit checks required for descent from orbit) and are very susceptible to weather (wind / lightning).

That means that if there's a highport but no downport, the local planet might want to control means of descent for various reasons: security, monopoly, unions, environmental protection, safety.

Consider the portmaster in certain islands today. A big ship comes in and wants to dock, and the portmaster takes over the ship for the last leg. The thought is, if the ship crashes into anything important, this small island's economy could be devastated for years while they rebuild their facilities. Roatan Island in the Caribbean has a large barrier reef, so large ships can't dock at all; they have to tender in (on large hovercraft!).

A planet might want to protect wildlife (weird flying jellyfish!) in a certain area of the planet, so they forbid any air traffic in large zones across the planet. If the PCs need to get there, they have to go on foot or maybe get a permit to take an EPA-approved ground vehicle.

There might be dangerous flying wildlife in an area, too, so while air/rafting might not be illegal, it's certainly discouraged. A laser rifle isn't going to be enough to protect them in their open-top gravitic flyer; and everyone on the planet knows that grynoks love attaching their suckers to gravitic drives and draining their power. Can't do that on every planet, obviously.

 

[ffilz]

Oh, hey. Just realized who you are. We've chatted at the Forge years ago. Sorry if I told you lots of stuff you already know about GM Force.

No problem, I wasn't clear enough in my OP that I was looking for non-force solutions.

Thanks to the various threads, I have enough suggestions to run a campaign from

I've also been giving the particular scenario thought, and the real adventure isn't the travel to the adventure site anyway...

Frank

 

[whartung]

Funny, semi-related.

There has been a long term battle over flight in World of Warcraft.

The community and developers are at loggerheads over it.

Currently, you basically need to play the entire game in order to open up flight, in contrast to before where you simply had to level to max level and buy flight for gold.

It's been quite a row for sometime, the developers were ready to get rid of flight completely in new content in the previous expansion, but backed off to the current model.

But nothing is settled. It's a constant point of contention between the community and the developers.

 

[Adam Dray]

I've also been giving the particular scenario thought, and the real adventure isn't the travel to the adventure site anyway...

That makes me think about adventures that DO involve travel, where the meat of the adventure is found in the journey, not the destination. I think that "road trip" movies have a lot of ideas to be mined. They're typically about relationship changes, learning about oneself, waypoints along the journey (stops for food, rest, fuel, local color), and obstacles to completing the journey (fuel, break-downs, arrests).

Basically, this is the Traveller experience, but how much writing has been dedicated to this "fruitful void" of it?

 

[ffilz]

That makes me think about adventures that DO involve travel, where the meat of the adventure is found in the journey, not the destination. I think that "road trip" movies have a lot of ideas to be mined. They're typically about relationship changes, learning about oneself, waypoints along the journey (stops for food, rest, fuel, local color), and obstacles to completing the journey (fuel, break-downs, arrests).

Basically, this is the Traveller experience, but how much writing has been dedicated to this "fruitful void" of it?

Yea, and so far, it seems like my group will be involved in a long term "road trip" around the rift that is the central feature of my setting. Which will be cool, and entirely one of the options the setting was intended to inspire.

And in that context, what happens on each individual world need not always rise to the level of "adventure", or said "adventure" could be short circuited without diminishing the overall road trip.

Frank

 

[nobby-w]

[ . . . ]
How do you encourage PCs to use an ATV to get to the adventure site (and this have those nifty animal encounters and such) rather than use an Air/Raft, the ship's shuttle, or even the ship itself?
[ . . . ]


How about some sort of no-fly zone? Perhaps the king is on safari somewhere nearby and all air traffic in the area is grounded for the next three weeks unless you can get your flight plan vetted by the security services.