Creating conflict in your D&D campaign
Posted by Yax on January 8, 2008
Conflict is the foundation of a story. And conflict doesn’t have to come from an uber-arch-villain opposing the PCs plans. You can notice it when you’re reading a novel - a good one - even apparently trivial scenes are laden with conflict. Some of the most entertaining stories are based almost entirely on conflict between the protagonist.
Conflict between the PCs
If you’re lucky you get to sit back and watch you players’ character argue or bicker at each other every now and then. If you don’t have any conflict between your players there might be a way to create some.
Conflict between PCs and NPCs
That’s easy. An army of goblins raid villages - the players stop them. A power-craved villain want to rule the world - the players stop him. This is usually how stories start. Something is wrong with the world and heroes confront the source of the problem.
Internal conflict
If the villain in your campaign isn’t completely evil what are the PCs to do? That NPC is clearly doing something that the PCs don’t like but maybe the NPC has doubts about what he’s doing. Maybe he is forced to do it, blackmailed.
Conflict with allied NPCs
The PCs need help from someone they would rather not work with. That’s always entertaining - especially if it leads to conflict between the PCs!
Conflict is easy to create. Not all conflict is good, though, and it’s usually easier to create bad conflict than good.
PC vs. PC
Bad conflict is the sort that disrupts the party and isn’t really that constructive. For example, the chaotic neutral Barbarian killing the Paladin when the Paladin tells the Barbarian that he should turn himself in to the law. (true story)
Good conflict is the sort that makes the players make hard decisions. That’s what a game’s about, after all, decisions. The paladin and the chaotic good fighter arguing whether they should go quietly with the law, even though both know they were framed, for example.
PC vs. NPC
Bad conflict is the simple stuff that’s not engaging and quickly forgotten. Goblins attack the village. “Ok, initiative, attack, attack, gold, level up, next.”
Good conflict engages the PCs. It should threaten something the PCs care about (side note: PCs should have something to care about; if they don’t, give them something to care about, then threaten it). The goblins attacked the PCs hometown, killing Bob’s dog and kidnapping everyone’s parents and siblings. It’s also nice if the answer isn’t so clear cut (Do we trust the rogue samurai with the circumstantial evidence which implies our master is really the dark shogun?)
I don’t enjoy inner-party conflict and neither do the remaining players I have. Whenever one of the former group members mentioned their claustrophobia, their dislike for the ranger’s pet weasel, or their dislike of the party’s decision making process, the others started groaning silently and going cross-eyed. I’m sure there’s a fun way to have inner-party conflict, but I haven’t seen it and from my past experience it seems hard to keep the balance just right.
I would have posted a longish reply, but Asmor already said everything I would have added and doubtless did it better than I would. So just read that reply again or something.
I gotta go with Alex on this one. When PCs come into conflict (even just arguing) it usually gets nasty quick. A little disagreement is one fine, but seeing as how violent D&D is (at least all the games I’ve been in), it’s usually not long before initiative is rolled, and that’s that. Think about it: how are most disputes with NPCs settled in D&D land? Why should the PCs behave any different to each other.
I try to throw a steady stream of external conflicts at them to keep them together. When the entire rest of the world is trying to kill you, then you tend to appreciate the friends you have.
Asmor and Alex both have good takes on in group conflict. I’m fine with it as long as it remains in game– after some disasters in the past, I’m for explicitly requiring both players to say they’re enjoying it OOC before allowing it to become part of the game world.
Given a good system, the discussions can be great; I strongly enjoy character discussions of justice and mercy in Dogs in the Vineyard, for example. But that’s because it’s the focus and the system really supports it. Inter PC conflict is horrible when the only mechanic you have at hand is a combat mechanic…