The Dreaded Meta-Plot... Do you feel compelled to use them?

[Carl Gleba]

So this comes from a discussion in the Dimension Book forums. The Invasion of Center - Big deal or not?. Over the years Palladium has offered a variety of plots and Meta-plots. In some cases the plot was the theme of the book, like Rifts Africa. The most famous of the Palladium Meta-plots being the Siege on Tolkeen and the Minion War being the latest.

So when a book has a meta-plot do you feel compelled as a GM to include it in your games? As a GM, for me its optional. It depends on what story I am trying to tell and if the meta-plot enhances it I'll use it. If the my current game doesn't then no I won't use it. For me its that simple. My story comes first and the book is an aid to help enhance my stories and provide me with ideas and other avenues to explore.

So fellow GM's what are your thoughts?

[Severus Snape]

I voted optional. Like most things in the rules, I like to have my own ideas and campaign stuff, and if the meta-plots provided fit in then I use them. Most of the time I forget that they even exist, and they never show up in my campaigns.

[St. Evil]

I will use it as a teaser to the players if they want to get involved then fine, but if they go their own direction I try not to force feed anything. I do however have it at the minimum in the background.

[Reagren Wright]

I have a feeling this will be a topic your guys will bring up during the Freelancer Pow-Wow.
I'd say the way you did it Carl is the best way to handle the mega-plot. You lay out the
scenario. Gives us the principle players, the causes and the effects, and the outline of what
will take place. Then you back way. This allows us as GMs to take the scenario and run with
it. I love the way its done in ArmU. There is so much I can do with this thing and run all
kinds of adventures with it. Now, I would have liked more info on events occurring in Century
Station, but the great detail of Doctor Vilde island is beautiful, maps and everything. Now I
would say the way Kevin did it in Siege of Tolkeen is probably not the way many fans
wanted to see it go. It reminded me of the old D&D modules or what I call the plot train
(Cho-cho), you get on the train and no matter what happens you always end up at the
scheduled destination. You know if you don't open the right door and everyone dies, and
you have to solve the one riddle or everyone dies. In other words, Tolkeen was doomed to
be destroyed at the beginning of Book 1 and not matter what the players did who started
the adventure, all their hard work was for naught. Even though it doesn't have to be that
way in you games, many people are tunneled vision and obey what the books say.

I did a fantasy game when I had Lictalon do some stuff with the players. Then Hades comes
out and we find out he's a prisoner. Now did that mean our adventure never happened? No,
but we now have his official status. That doesn't mean you still couldn't do an adventure like
I ran.

I think the big thing you guys can do for books like ArmU is to let readers, GMs, and players
know that although this is cannon material that effects the world they play their game in, it
doesn't have to be in their games. Don't buy the book or use it. I'd hate to see Mega-Plot
books disappear because they can be great fun. Besides they provide a great blueprint for
G.M. to utilize to start their own ideas too.

That's my two cents Carl. You guys have fun brainstorming up there.

[Misfit KotLD]

I want to vote Optional and Twisted. I might use it, and if I do, I might change it to git my game.

[Grand Paladin]

I voted 'Optional' Carl. I tend to enjoy the elements of various meta-plots tha have come out of Palladium Books. However, if in my games I have a different vision/theme/meta-plot of my own, I'll use the source material and deveop it into the campaign. My philosophy is use it if you like it, or not if you don't.

[Cinos]

I'm odd on them, some where between Optional and Twisted. The first time or two in a game, I'll generally use presented plot ideas with only a few changes (generally when I see something that fails to connect or is wrong some way). After that, they tend to grow and extrpolate, but to support this change, I need to change some of the founding ideas of that plot, by the time I'm done, things have taken an entirely new life.

I do think general Meta-Plots or direct plots are fine, if done well. If done poorly, or in a forced way, they can be incredibly bad.

[Prysus]

Greetings and Salutations. I'm not quite sure which one this falls under (maybe Optional), though I'm going to vote "Other" for now because I'm not entirely sure. There are a few factors for me to consider. I'll try to explain ...

1: One of the most important factors is whether or not I've done anything to contradict the metaplot yet. An example of this would be Reagren Wright mentioned with Lictalon. I'm a huge fan of continuity, so if something contradicts what I've already done then I'm going to ignore it.

2: Simiarly to 1, if we've passed that point in history (as the metaplots are often dated) then I'm not going to go back and change it, and if we're too far before the date I'm not going to fast forward my campaign to include it. More often than not my campaigns won't mesh up with the setting.

3: If the timeline meets up, then I'm likely to use it.
a: If the players are in the area of affect, they may influence some results, but I'd likely keep a similar end result. So, for example, the SoT series ... Tolkeen will still be defeated. Though I'm likely to include a lot of what they do to influence how that happens (somwehere between Yes and Twisted options). The overall feel will be the same, many of the actions will be the same, but there will be smaller subplots of importance. I've never read SoT, but I'll explain. So the players are CS, and they want to help take down Tolkeen. The books say NPC1 did Action A and this brought about the fall of Tolkeen. With the players I'd probably let them carry out some important act, and while the book never says it (and what they did may never be known) their actions are pivotal to why NPC1 succeeded in Action A. So without the players what the book said happened wouldn't have been possible (but the book still is technically accurate). Similarly, if they were on the side of Tolkeen, they may have played important roles in helping Tolkeen last so long, and maybe helped large groups escape so there are some refugees while it would have been a total massacre otherwise. I'd generally avoid this option as it involves lots of reading and work on my part to keep everything as accurate as possible. I actually did something like this with my Starcraft campaign. My players enjoyed it and didn't even realize what was going on until halfway through the final mission. Once the players realized what was happening, they happily just went along for the ride with the set outcome. Note: These are examples without having read the SoT all the way through.
b:If the timeline matches up and doesn't contradict anything, but the players aren't in the area then it's just something that will happen in the background and they may hear about. Included in full, no harm done.
c: If the game comes after the metaplot and doesn't contradict anything, then it will be included in full again. The players may encounter the aftermath and can be a reoccuring theme after. This can actually be a pretty fun option.

That was probably a lot more long winded then you needed, but I'm one for being thorough. There are too many variables for me to answer with only one of the choices. Of course, these days, I tend to use my personal homebrewed settings so I don't have to worry about any metaplot but my own. Though once in a while I do play in a pre-established Palladium setting, and when I do I tend to stick with the metaplot as best as possible. I'm being on continuity, so I'll stick with the metaplot when possible ... unless it ruins the continuity I already built or becomes way too restrictive (like zero wiggle room for any type of player role). Anyways, I think that's all for now. Thank you for your time and patience, please have a nice day. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[DBX]

voted "other". tend to use a mixture of the suggested options above.

for me "official canon material" is just that " official canon material". It becomes part of our game world. adjusted to fit as needed to our current scenario or campaign. I use official material because its official. i want to game in the official world setting as much as possible.

I think as many fans have shown by becoming freelancers, that there are many gamers who are good enough to create their own scenarios and adventures (maybe not good enough to publish, but it's enough to meet their gaming needs). Therefore one of the reasons they get their hands on new books is to get official material.

if time line moves forward then events happen and change occurs. official canon events may not be to my liking but i think it's a good idea for events to occur. if you state the year is 201 P.A instead of 101 P.A, then NPC's will die or change, go from villian to hero or hero to villian, nations rise and fall.

If possible we adjust our scenarios/campaigns continuity to fit with the new "official canon" just to feel that our gaming is part of a greater whole.


I don't think our group feels compelled to use meta plots or anything else in rpg books, BUT we would like to be able to game "official canon material" because after all, that is one big reason why we get hold of official rpg books

[Vrykolas2k]

Meta-plots irritate me.
I prefer how the Xiticix were described/ dealt with in the sadly ignored World Book 11, as a for instance.
Handwavium to let some Coalition people have a free pass (and they would have needed supplies on that long sojourn as well) seems very wrong to me.
And letting the pcs have a part in getting rid of the "bugs" is better, in my opinion, than saying, "Well, the minor threat of Tolkeen is gone, now the O'Mighty Coalition will mop up those xiticix pests, which probably won't even moderately damage the CS forces."
So, I vote no.
As well, the Demon/ Dyval invasion of Centre should spell the end of that little dust-up. Not only would theose forces have been handily contained and exterminated, but however many second-stage Prometheans that exist would likely have been annoyed. Each is about as powerful as a deity.
Not conducive for long life, even for a demon lord...

[The Dark Elf]

I dont like meta-plots but I need to ensure I have the right take on things. So go easy if I dont.

SoT is a meta plot because all official sourcebooks after that include that Tolkeen war happened. Right?

Are all future 3G books including that Center was attacked? If not does that not make it "just" an adventure idea?

I dont play that parts of Timiro were invaded by ogres because of the ogre invasion adventure. I choose to ignore it.


With SoT I havent played it yet. I think that I will play that it hasnt happened until I have played it as a campaign. After that, I think I would continue as it happened and not ignore this meta-plot.

[Supergyro]

Meta-plots are adventure fodder, at least they should be. Meta plots should expand adventure possibilities instead of ignoring or limiting them.

I found this to be the primary weakness of the Seige on Tolkeen books, the CS attacking another power had only a limited number of adventure permutations, and definitely not six books worth. It may have been interesting from a military fiction standpoint, but from a gaming standpoint, it went on too long with not enough varied hooks for PC's.

Triax 2 had a similar problem. The metaplot of the NGR having the Gargoyles on the run may have been something the fans wanted, but it gave *less* for PC's to do in Germany, not more.

Mechanoids was the opposite. The mechanoids expanded adventure opportunities, and GM's used that. That was some good metaplot.

I don't think it's a matter of GM's having any obligation to the metaplot, it's the other way around. If the metaplot is chock full of interesting and enjoyable adventure concepts, GM's will use it. If however it limits possibilities, GM's wont. The percentage of GM's who use the metaplot is a measure of how compelling the metaplot is.

[Killer Cyborg]

I try to stick to the official material as much as possible, so I do feel some level of compulsion to use metaplots as they arise.
On the other hand, I make changes. In my campaign world, for example, the Duluth Hive was destroyed. The CS didn't know how the heck it happened, so they pulled back and played things more defensive and the Siege of Tolkeen hasn't happened yet in my timeline.

I agree with Supergyro's assessment on what makes for a good metaplot: promoting adventures.

Overall, the problems with metaplot in Rifts have been:
Inconsistency The Mechanoid book introduced the dangers to Rifts Earth, and were presented as one of the dangers, but later apparently dropped in favor of the Xiticix, and little further mention of the Edict of Planetary Distress has popped up. Which, considering it was a series of planetwide psychic visions of doom, seems kind of odd.
Back when my group first bought Rifts, we all wanted to see what happened with the CS and Tolkeen. We argued back and forth whether the lower powered TW powered lasers of the mages would work well against the CS troops, how various creatures might fair against various armors, how effective spells were, how effective Dog Boys would be, etc. etc.
Then when the books came out, none of what we'd been thinking about really mattered because a crapload of new spells and weapons were introduced in the SoT books, along with new rules gimping mages ability to wear armor, souped-up (non)Cyber Knights, and a bunch of other junk that wasn't there before.
Why's that matter?
It's like eagerly looking forward to two teams you've been watching all season compete for the Super Bowl, then when time for the game comes, the team rosters have changed, they've got new equipment, and the rules of the game aren't even the same.
It might be interesting to watch, but there's no point in really paying attention next season, since the outcome doesn't seem to have jack to do with anything that happens before the final game.

Bad Writing Siege on Tolkeen. The bare bones of the plot are okay, but there are a LOT of things that don't make sense, shouldn't have happened, should have happened differently, and should have been more interesting. If you're going to write about a war, study up on how wars are conducted, and put some serious thought into the logistics, tactics, and strategies that might be employed.

We got the stats on Tolkeen only right before it fell, and only covering the time period right before it fell. If we want to run an adventure that takes place any time before the Siege, we're kind of out of luck. The information presented is only good for a campaign that takes place during the Siege, and isn't even necessary for that.
If you're going to use a knife in the fourth act, don't just spring it out of nowhere in a deus ex machina fashion, show us the knife early on. If you're going to show us a knife early on, use the knife.
Otherwise there's no real point in the action taking place, and it's hard to hold interest.

Power Creep Actually, metaplots are one area where power creep CAN be justified. The Naruni are a great example: they have better plasma weapons than anything else on Earth, and they're selling them to the public (until the CS shuts them down). That changes the average power level of the soldiers, mercs, and adventurers in Rifts Earth, bumping it up a notch... but it's explained in the context of the game, and it's actually part of the story being told.
The boost that Cyberknights isn't explained, it's a retcon. It's not part of the story, it's just a sudden boost in power for a class that didn't need such a boost in the first place, and one that doesn't make much sense.
Only boost power for the sake of the story, and only do it if it makes sense in the context of the story.
And if it's a good story, it probably won't need any power creep at all, because good storytelling is based on a lot of things besides power.
The pattern writers seem to get into is that they want their new badass bad guys (or good guys, or monsters, etc.) to be a significant threat to existing stuff in order to be taken seriously, but if they're really serious, they won't need bigger guns (or claws, etc.). They'll be fleshed out enough, and crafted carefully enough that they can pose a threat to their enemies without fancy gimmicks or new special powers.
Sure, people like new gear.... but "new" doesn't need to mean "more powerful."
"Different" is a much more important factor, as is "interesting."
One of the best examples of this would be the game Cyberpunk 2020. They had a wide variety of weaponry, a much wider variety of cybernetics than Rifts presents, and a lot of miscellaneous gear, and most of it pretty well balanced against the other stuff.
For a lot of it of it (like Shower-In-A-Can, Light Tattoos, or the Mr. Stud Implant) power wasn't even a factor. It was just useful stuff that fleshed out the setting without power creep. Players liked it, they wanted their characters to have it, and they bought books in part because of the new gear that would be there.

Abandonment The world of Rifts doesn't need any (or many, at least) new metaplots; there are plenty already lying around. There are STILL cities from the main book that haven't been described, and there are projects that seem to get forgotten about and ignored. When Xiticix Invasion came out, for example, there was a heck of a lot of stuff in there explaining what a huge threat the bugs are, and talk about them expanding their territory in the immediate future.... but other than a mention in Aftermath, that whole plotline has been left lying in the dirt for years. Which gets back to inconsistency, actually, because the bugs should have been very obviously active by now. A lot of this is due to Palladium's revolving cast of writers, each of whom has their own project, but this kind of thing still needs to be considered.

[lather]

I'm mostly pleased with the poll results.

[Armorlord]

I use them, and like them for the most part. Keeps the world from being stagnant, makes the settings feel more alive. While the players are over dealing with one threat, they can hear news from other areas. They can get caught up in the events around them, have it interfere, ignore/avoid it, or dive fully into the events. If they can find a way to affect larger events, skewing things wildly, then more power to them, even if it means adjusting for the change from 'canon'. More often than not, I like to see the Quantum Leap approach, not necessarily affecting the grand scope of history, but rescuing people, saving lives, and doing the right thing in ways that might seem small in comparison to the larger events, but have an impact that ripples along, they affect people that affect other people and they get to deal with those affects on the world. The greater the effects they wreak upon events, the greater the ripple. Say for instance that a DBee cyberknight sacrifices himself to save a CS soldier from a horrible attack, the chances that they eventually hear about a CS soldier releasing prisoners from a death camp because he owed a DBee that sounds like their fallen comrade his life are pretty good.

[Dog_O_War]

Hellz yeah I use the meta-plot; it's my primary draw to the Rifts setting.

I may not involve direct contact with the elements, but they are there, unchanged and unchallenged.

[Cybermancer]

*Snip*

I agree with pretty much everything Killer Cyborg has said. Couldn't have said it better myself, in fact.

I will add that I hope that this poll is not a prelude to a "You can ignore it so there's nothing actually wrong" statement or argument. Because its a fallacy.

You can ignore the check engine light on your dash if you wish. It is even quite likely that depending on what triggered it, your car will continue to run just as well as it did before the light came on.

That does not mean there is nothing wrong.

There are people who do not like meta-plots. Telling them that you can ignore them does not resolve the issue. Saying that you can ignore it is especially dangerous to a company that makes its money from selling books based on their content. If you can ignore it, there is no sense in purchasing it. It's self defeating. The goal is to have material in the book that will appeal to as many as possible and if possible, have something for everyone. But again, if large swaths of the book are 'ignored', then why pay for it?

As with most things, I think there is a right way and a wrong way to do meta-plots. The Coalition/Tolkeen war turned out to be an excellent example of the wrong way to do it. Again, see Killer Cyborg's statement above for why.

I bought the book with the attack on Center in it. As I don't play or run any games in the three galaxies, I don't have any strong opinions on it either way. If I did use Phase World products as anything other than source material for other games, then I might have a stronger opinion.

I have also bought Armegeddon Unlimited. Overall, I liked it despite a few groaners (another Palladium Nazi villian? Really?). I think it is an example of a meta-plot done right. Because while the world is at risk, it is still basically just a fairly detailed adventure. It is left open ended and there are no rail tracks to resent. Maximum freedom is provided to the GM and players to tell their story and make it their own. What I really like is that while it may have to potential to rewrite the setting of my Heroes Unlimited world, it doesn't have to. And it doesn't require me to ignore it for it to not upset my setting. I can run it as written. The players all get to feel as though they're part of something truly epic but the outcome is entirely in their hands. There is nothing at the end that says, "Side A ultimately prevails" or "the world is changed in this way." At worst is says, "IF the plan works, then POSSIBLY the world as we know it COULD end." Heck, the players could utterly fail and the BBG's plan could still not work.

It's all up to the players and the GM.

And that is how should be.

[Misfit KotLD]

I didn't use it much in some other games, but Palladium excels at metaplot. Sure, it is optional, but it is always so good I feel like I'm robbing myself by skipping it.

So long as you're having fun, it's good.

[Armorlord]

I almost always use the meta plot. I didn't use it much in some other games, but Palladium excels at metaplot. Sure, it is optional, but it is always so good I feel like I'm robbing myself by skipping it.

I tend to feel similarly. I generally like the metaplots, and my brain tends to run it's own version of the WayForward software 2.0, even though some people trying to justify things seem to be only running 1.5 beta-test version, so things tend to fit together pretty well in my games.

Though I think part of my feels of success and goodwill toward the metaplot is that I acquired most of the Siege on Tolkeen after it was complete (not through any great planning on my part, I just missed it at the time ) and still have years of in-game time within my campaigns before the events went down. Thus I've had time to incorporate NPCs, places, and developments into my campaigns.
If I had been trying to run SoT while the books were still coming out I would be right there with Killer Cyborg on some of his complaints. Fortunately I wasn't keeping up with new books at the time and my campaigns move through time rather slowly (barring the occasional rift and temporal distortion), so all the knives from the fourth act have been on display in one form or another for awhile in my games.
Having the opportunity to sprinkle things in advance for various major events is awesome, like the PCs being hired for an escort job by a shifter heading out east to respond to a job offer- not long before the Mechanoid crisis.

On a side note, hats off once again for the forethought of having a few books in hand already before starting off the Minion War, the pace of their release has been proceeding nicely.

Free towel for the first person to get the WayForward reference.