Your "Story" Is The Problem

I am nearly done with Reddit. The other day I wrote I was seeing a "common theme" of discontent, but there is an even greater, pervading and UNDERLYING theme that I see over and over again, in complaint and questions alike...it goes something like this:

"Person (X) is being a jerk but I can't kick them because they're integral to the story..."

"Person (X) and (Y) don't get along but..."

"I'm trying to save my campaign that's been going on for (X number) of (months/years), but..."

"Our campaign is getting derailed because people aren't showing up..."

And blah blah blahdiddy-blah.

It's all the same problem: the "story" is getting wrecked, and everything is (thus) CHAOS. Pain and suffering and sorrow...oh, my!

I can't relate.

I can't relate because this has never been a problem for me. Just...never. Not even when I was a player in other people's games. Not even back when I was running Vampire the Masquerade, acting as the "Storyteller" of a "Saga" (rather than the Dungeon Master of a campaign).

We are playing a game...a GAME. The players are playing a game. No one is so "integral" to what's going on that the loss of one or more is going to END EVERYTHING. I mean...

(*sigh*)

Forget for a moment that we are playing (or discussing) Dungeons & Dragons. Let's just...for the sake of discussion...say you're running a game of Vampire. Oh, man, I ran so many "stories" (VtM's word for "adventures") back in the day. Blood Bond. The Succubus Club adventures. Diablerie: Mexico. Ashes to Ashes. The stuff in Denver by Night. Those are just off the top of my head...after all, it's been 30 years since I did the Vampire thing.

Did I ever have players who didn't show up, couldn't show up, or (in one guy's case) just did not want to show up (because he decided he hated VtM and would rather play Toon instead)? Yes, of course. Did it bother me if one of the regular players didn't show up to a session? Yeah, it did. Did it stop the session from happening? Nope...not once. Did it ever "derail" the campaign...er, "saga?"

Never. 

Because even when I was playing a game that used rather explicit language about how it was a "storytelling" game, even when the "adventure" being told was about a particular "story" (for example, a vampire girl who falls in love with one of the PCs but is already blood bound/enslaved to another vampire, etc., etc., blah-blah-blah)...the story is about the story, NOT about the characters. It doesn't matter how "integral" a character is to the story being told (and...spoiler...no PC is "integral")...you're running a world and a situation and if the PC isn't there (because the player isn't there)...so frigging what?

Look, an example: in the Blood Bond adventure (if I'm remembering right...Jeez it was a long time ago) there's this girl (Alicia? I think) who's supposed to fall in love with a PC. And then maybe she gets murdered. Or maybe she doesn't. Regardless it cause a big cluster that has to be resolved by the players. In my game, the PC she fell for was this guy named Michael. But what if I'd had her fall for Ben instead (the guy who really didn't want to play a vampire game but was only doing it because of his friends)...and Ben decided to ditch the campaign? Well, then, we'd say Ben's character disappeared one night (and who knows what happened to him...another mystery to solve!)...and then Alicia would either die or not die, maybe turn to a different PC for love/affection/protection (or not)...and the story would continue on, being a big cluster BUT WITHOUT BEN. Because you have to treat these NPCs as if they have lives and motivations of their own. And Ben (or Michael or Mike) is just ONE PERSON in the (imagined) "world" of the game. And that's how you treat the world as a Game Master.

Back to Dungeons & Dragons.

First off, what part of "Dungeons" and "Dragons" don't these whining people understand? Do their games not have dungeons? Do they not have dragons? What a jaded, sorry-ass world we live in when these things are not enough to get the juices of adventure flowing. NO. We must add DRAMA. And STORY. And BACKSTORY. Because MEANING.

Okay, sure, whatever. So you have some Big Bad Person who has "beef" with one of your PCs and you've laid out this whole series of events...plot points...to try to make an "engaging story" (i.e. "railroad") for the dumbass, er ignorant, er young and inexperienced players to enjoy. And then one of the players turns out to be a secret Nazi or something and the group needs to kick her Hitler-saluting ass to the curb. 

Oh, Nos! Our story!

What on earth is the problem? So, the PC just got eaten by a passing wyvern while relieving herself by the side of the road (it's D&D...shit happens) and now you simply need to adjust your Big Bad's actions to account for the fact that his beefing partner is out of the picture. What? Is he going to retire to a hermit hut and grow strange fruit a la Thanos? Or does he have some other nefarious plan to carry out now that the object of his ire is gone? 

Dungeon Master! Wake up! It is YOUR JOB to think for the NPCs!

You are not writing a script. Stop it! You are not writing a teleplay. Stop it! You are running a D&D game...I don't care if its 4E or 5E or 5.5 or Pathfinder 2 or whatever. You are supposed to BUILD A WORLD with CHALLENGES for the players to EXPLORE. Yes, it is OKAY for those challenges to take the form of an Apocalypse Clock situation or Yet Another Big Bad Evil Guy (emphasis on the YA part of the acronym)...but once you create the thing and set it in motion you must run it without attachment to an outcome. 

This is not scripted television. You are not Matt Mercer. You will (probably) not be paid money for running this game. FORGET PLOT. Forget it! Stop it! Your attachment to outcomes is the thing that causes every one of your complaints. "But, but, Sheila's supposed to defeat Baron Badness and avenge her father's death! I can't let Sheila walk from the game!" Why the hell not? Baron Badness can't make enemies of the other PCs? Heck, the other PCs can't avenge Sheila?

"But, but I created this awesome encounter that can only be resolved by a cleric of the time sphere with a specialization in abjuring magic..." [or insert some other gibberish that means nothing to me...a "Circle of the Moon Druid" or an "Oath of Vengeance Paladin"...whatever] So f'ing what? What would happen if something happened to the character BEFORE your quantum ogre encounter showed up? Huh? Would it happen at all? Is it logical for this shit to go down and mash the PCs? Then best to telegraph it so they know (and can either avoid the encounter or find a suitable replacement for the missing PC). That's nicer than how things work in the real world (where they'd just get mashed) which is FINE because, guess what, it's a game, not the real world. But don't throw a hissy fit about it!

Your "story" IS the problem...that's what this all comes down to. You want to tell me that you're the one who plays D&D the right way, that I am behind the times, that the game has moved on from my clunky 1E, etc., etc....fine. But I'm not the one bitching and moaning about how my game has gotten wrecked because one player or another misses a session or quits or had to get shit-canned for being an [insert-]phobe of some type. I've been playing RPGs for a long time and I've NEVER had this problem...but sure, pal, YOUR way of playing is the "right" way. Got it.

*sigh* Tell your stories if you must. Play your no stakes, no threat, "tea party" version of D&D if that's what floats your boat. Dive into "character development" and your character's inner mental space with all the fervor of a Freud fanboy psych major. Coolio...you do you. 

BUT, for the love of all things holy, STOP having an attachment to how you think said story "should" go or which particular PC is supposed to be "protagonizing" in any given session. Rather than spotlighting players, spotlight the WORLD...the campaign that you are created through the adventures/situations you are (hopefully) designing for your players to tackle. Let the "story" unfold as it unfolds, not as scripted by you...that script is the reason you can't have nice things.

Okay. I'm done.