Campaign Gaming and "Plot B"

 "Plot B" is a concept in media, but mostly pops up in Sitcoms. Like almost every sitcom episode ever made since the 50's.

Usually in the case of sitcoms, it's a means to fill things out if the main storyline won't fill up the slot. Most if not all episodes of Seinfeld leaned heavily into it. Some even have C plots. Like the "Festivus" episode that had a side story with Kramer protesting his old bagel shop, and also one with Elaine trying to get a free sub sandwich. And for god's sake, there was D plot - Jerry's "two face" girlfriend. Whew, that's a lot of subplots. 

The Simpsons pointed this trope our back in the day, where Lisa is given a long vision of her family years into the future. When she asks the shaman "why did my vision include a plot where Homer was looking for buried treasure?", the magic man replies "I guess the spirits thought the main plot was a little light."

So anyway, I try to get these little subplots going in a campaign. Always have, though in the past I didn't have to think about it so much. I ran a lot of city campaigns back in the day and was winging it like crazy like you often have to do in a city setting. PC's often going off to do their own thing, and maybe 10-15 minutes having do be devoted to their activities. But at least these days I have a phrase for it. We do live in a time when we have to label everything, right? 

So your main "plot" might be the characters going to Keep on The Borderlands. It could be a full railroad "go to the keep, get rooms at the inn, hear some rumors, go to the Caves of Chaos, fight some shit. Take the treasure. How many experience points do we get. 

Fuck no. That shit needs padded out. When I ran this module last, I set up the Castellan of the keep (and named him and everybody because they didn't bother to come up with names in the original material), his seconds, the NPC's running the inn, and some interesting NPC's to fill out the market area. Enough personalities with some color to help them stand out so they can get interacted with. A prostitute, a pick pocket urchin, a handsome ranger of whatever sex. Anything to fill the dead air. If I recall in the material the only major NPC within the keep is the evil cleric who wants to be besties. That just ain't enough. Now, not all your NPC's will get interacted with. But the point is to have a wealth of them and see what might stick. 

In my last couple of posts I talked about a couple of potential antagonist NPC's who ended up piquing the interest of members of the party. But initially I packed this campaign with interesting NPC's. Most of them being part of the high-end merchant caravan the PC's would be a part of. 

There was Marge, the boisterous seasoned caravan master and boss of the outfit. 

The merchants themselves were all from the big city of Tanmoor and selling all high end, expensive wares. 

Like Lacy the clothes seller. Or Bradly the Bookseller. Or Waldorf the Wine Seller. Several NPC's whom the characters can assist along the way and get to know if they so choose. Callie, the lovely paladin and secret Aasimar, was roped into a fashion show by Lacy for a local Counts daughter to see:

Callie, the glue that holds the party together. 

Lacy kept slapping big city outfits, makeup, and wigs on Callie and rushing her out to be ogled. And it was a hoot. One of my players who had singing experience started singing "Girls just Wanna have Fun" as I revealed each image:

It was just one of the many side bits that came out of having a variety of NPC's around. Like in that particular session, this little fashion show was Plot B. And all the characters participated in a way, that is, they got to see a party member, a shy seeming, cookie baking village girl, in a different light. It was a little thing that IMO had a bit of an impact. 

Injecting things that can promote "Plot B" type things is very effective if you have players who are into role playing at all. And I'm not talking community theater here. But many players enjoy a world where lots of things can happen outside of the railroady main quest. Especially with the advent of video game RPG's, such as Skyrim where you seem to do endless side quests. 

But just making side plots possible is part and parcel of emergent gameplay. YMMV.

Man, I can't get enough of that word. "Emergent." Just rolls off the tongue. 

Cheers. 

Negative Continuity in Gaming

 "As you may recall, our last episode had nothing to do with the previous episode. Or this one either."

—The Pigs in Space announcer, The Muppet Show

Last year I wrote a post about rebooting certain adventure locals in my games. 

I discussed my decades of trying to remain true to a certain continuity in my world. Such as when the Isle of Dread was explored for the first time, that locale would no longer by as in the book. The island was now a know commodity, and ships would sail to it from time to time looking to trade with the local tribes that had been placated by the original visitors. When it gets visited now there is a mainlander company outpost among the native huts to serve visitors after the long and dangerous journey. 

But in the most recent decades I stopped worrying about it so much. I mean, since around 2010 I've used the Lichway twice, making for a total of at least 3 times I've used it. And when later characters got there, no, there were no legions of undead roaming its halls. I simply reset the location. I've done the same with my long used adaptation of Runequest's Apple Lane. I've used it close to a half dozen times as is. And why not? My player roster changes fully every few years (with the notable exception of my oft-mentioned long time player "T"), so who was I fooling? Just reuse the shit, nobody cares. Most importantly me. 

So I was using the term "reboot" or "reset" for this concept, but I recently learned a new term that sounds much better to me, and most people won't even know what it means in the way the automatically do when you say "reboot."

That term/concept is "Negative Continuity."

We've seen it for years in things we enjoy in the media. We saw it in the Simpsons for decades. And my earliest experience with it was probably the evil dead movies. The second one was big time a full on reboot, but if you squinted your brain a little you could find ways to tie in the first. And the ending of 2 lead into Army of Darkness, although that was tweaked big time (Ash became a hero to the English knights he encountered at the end of 2, and at the start of 3 he's actually beaten and enslaved by them).

But my first exposure to the term was in my Lupin the Third fandom. In a previous post I talked about having discovered Lupin, and my full-bore love of the series. There have been 6 series of the show, the first in the early 70's and the most recent from last year. And though most elements stay the same (Lupins gang members Jigen and Goemon, and the betrayals and obsessions related to femme fatale Fujiko Mine), the series are very different, and often offer different origins of the characters and how they came to meet. While you cannot directly tie in each series, based primarily on the time periods set, newer episodes have given some fan service to episodes decades prior (such as Goemon and Lupin being enemies at first and scenes of their old fights). But they are different animals altogether. Each series kind of living in its own little dimension. 

And of course as a comics fan you grew up very aware of the concept, but that was kind of baked into both Marvel and DC. Fans called it "Retcon." That lead directly the popularity of the "Multiverse" both Marvel and DC movies are tapping into. Its no new idea to us old comic book wonks. 

So the Lichway, Apple Lane, its all negative continuity. Reset. Reboot. Whatever. Though with Apple Lane, I'm keeping a certain amount of continuity from past games. Years ago, in my last use of Apple Lane's Rainbow Mounds portion of the adventure, I had an enchantress become involved with the characters, and she herself entered The Mounds, to eventually be killed by the players, along with White Eye and the other inhabitants. So of course White Eye and company will be there, and the enchantress will be resurrected as well. But as she was a newer addition to the setting, I'm going to have her be vaguely aware of her situation and previous experiences, but her sort of cursed to not be able to leave the place unless she survives and White Eye and his forces are all killed. If the characters want to converse with her, I'm going to have her perhaps talk to them about her situation, and the timeless nature of Apple Lane and The Rainbow Mounds. The repeating nature of it all. It seems like it might be fun to kind of parody what I've been doing with the location over the decades. And if a character should die in there, well, he can be a part of my next use of the location (although the next game might be the penultimate and final use of the location, unless I ever run Runequest again). 

But "negative continuity." It has a nice ring to it. 

Cheers.