Big Brennan method campaign

STEREOTYPES ARE TRAPS, AND AVOIDING THEM INEVITABLY CREATES STEREOTYPES

Who on earth enjoys playing common Dnd tropes like "Kill the dragon and get the gold" with no underlying theme? I know I don't! So help me people, I need to make the most boundary breaking, revolutionary, morally challenging campaign beginning with one simple theme; not a "What If..." or a "This But.." but simply a question.

"What is worth?"

Is it someone you love? Or something you need? A home? Or an escape? When everything is ending, what do you save?

Brennan Lee Mulligan focuses his campaigns on philosophical questions with answers that the players themselves have to discover. Power struggles, warring sides, they're all tools to learn. And, it's truly profound. Mistakes are things to learn from, so why shouldn't your big hunky barbarian realize his tribe hates his massacre crusades and changes for peace? 

Here's the Campaign: 

BRUËNOR'S GOLD

"What is gold to one man and stone to another?"

Setting: The grand Isles of Erahbhor, a utopian continent in complete isolation from Toril. Literally. It exists purely in a bubble of time and space between the Astral realm, a place where thought comes before reality, and the Material realm, where reality comes far before thought. In this continent of majestic landscapes and unique ecology, if enough people simply know that there is a bridge spanning two islands, there will be. This system, taking advantage of the world's placement, is called "Certainty" by scholars in the great Dawn University of Newcastle city. Animals take advantage of this, creating incredibly unique food chains of both material and psionic pecking orders. Because of the harsh environment and isolation, peace would have seemed impossible if not for two grand individuals with a mastery of ancient magic destroying any opposition to a united flag of Erahbhor; Romero Ramando and Roberto Ramando (Originally named Rhomand and Ruvalin with no surname). Under their order and combined ideals, only the virtuous are kept in power. These two, with their magical prowess discovered a dark truth to the unique paradise of Erahbhor: It's an experiment, and one of many. This experiment was created by a jealous god desiring the power over creation. Him and his followers created a grand machine at the beginning of time in the Astral realm, where thought becomes reality, that created bubbles of time and space between the Astral realm and the Material realm. This hybrid space that siphons test subjects away from Toril is a place where a hate for divinity may manifest as a real power. You see, the god realized that the power of creation began and ended with the power of man. So, when "Certainty" is thrown into that, strange powers may occur through sheer belief of millions before. Prophecies were created, and a pure faith in this certain ability was preserved for scholars far into the future. This power, a hate for divinity, was dubbed "The Calamity" by the god and his followers. And, the individual with these powers exists in Erahbhor, experiment 612.

 Villians: There are only three factions wanting the power of the Calamity:

1. The machine running the experiments. Why? To fulfill its programming. Answer to campaign: Fulfillment through achievement.
2. The Cult of the Absolute. Way larger now under a united plan to control creation itself. Why? To give the big brain a host and new powers. Answer to campaign: A single all powerful dictator.
3. The Hero's Pantheon. A group of three secretly ascended heroes. Why? To rid the world of bloodshed by the roots: Free will. Answer to campaign: Life without unnecessary bloodshed.

Each attempt to find the host of the Calamity. The mindflayers destroy villages in search of the host, the machine manipulates the experiment to find the Calamity, and the Hero's pantheon take the backstabbing route to attempt to take the power of the Calamity.

The reason why this is a bit powerful close to the end is because each NPC answers differently. The people of Beacon value knowledge and memory. The Netherese twins value law and trust. The Hero's Pantheon values life and joy. The bartender values friendship and trust. The priest values charity and belief. Everyone has a different answer. No single one is right or wrong. Yet, you have to choose. This triggers both sides of the brain for reasoning, short term reasoning and long term reasoning.

Now, that's the Idea, but I have no clue whatsoever what to change and create. For example, I have almost no encounters written down. I just DM what feels right as the next moment while following a general storyline. There's a problem in that, because I really don't know how to make it concrete and useful to other DMs. What are some concerns? any tips? I'd take anything as a valid answer people.

(Ps: If you want to become a disciple of Bonk, a church my cousin created, ask me and you shall receive)

That looks a lot more like you want to write a novel than DM a campaign. All the major plot points are already decided. The characters are just getting batted around from place to place with no say in where they go and precious little say in what they do. The way it’s described, they are practically spectators. In short, it looks like a railroad.

Which can still be fun, just get buy-in from the players that they are on a pretty linear quest.

It's good to have an overarching storyline, but not paragraphs of text for how the game will play out. Things can often change as you play, and having already decided what will happen in the game inevitably leads to struggle when (not if) the players deviate.

Quote from WolfeCriedPup >>

It's good to have an overarching storyline, but not paragraphs of text for how the game will play out. Things can often change as you play, and having already decided what will happen in the game inevitably leads to struggle when (not if) the players deviate.

 Well, there at least several endings in mind, and the way I described it was mostly what happends. Beacon may fall, the Absolute may die, there's still changes to the story. What I have written there was what happened with my most recent players so far and what they plan to do. If you need the basic plan, it's only three major plot points that are slightly interchangeable  and the rest are completely fluid. Maybe they decide to fight the Hero's Pantheon early, who knows? 

I'm sorry if it comes off that way. But if there's any suggestions, I would love to hear them. Again, the major plot points all have different ways they can happen, that's just how it's mostly been so far. Heck, the mindflayer intrusion might even be in a small village where the party saves a dying herbalist. Also, if you need specific systems and 'quests' I have set up, just ask.

Thank you guys, I appreciate the advice

That was a big wall of text and there's a lot to parse. One of the big stumbling blocks I'm seeing is that you establish early on this is a utopia, and then have the players imported into the world to cavort around thwarting injustice. Those two points work against each other, and it suggests either it isn't really a utopia or the players are acting out of ignorance and doing more harm than good. Either of those can be a fun thread to tug on.

You're right that Brennan tackles philosophical challenges in his DMing, but he's doing two things at once when he does that. He absolutely challenges the player characters' understandings of the world they inhabit and how their actions affect the people and the world around them, inviting the characters to examine their personal philosophies. He also presents philosophical arguments as running themes throughout campaigns that are more straightforward statements on the world and argue for changing the world as it is to the world as it ought to be. Without spoilers, the Vampire the Masquerade season of Dimension 20: City Council of Darkness, was a season-long imploration to build community and thrive together by participating in local politics. And at the end Brennan had an NPC break the fourth wall and directly address Dimension 20 viewers to make the subtext straightforward text and explicitly tell the viewer the whole season's philosophical argument that things only improve when people get involved and take action together.

Circling back, I'm not seeing a cohesive philosophical argument you want to explore in that short story. And as others pointed out, with all the plot points pre-arranged what you have is a plot, not a TTRPG campaign. I would go so far as to say throw out all the predetermined plot points and instead focus on building the bones of a world that has enough verisimilitude that it appears to be in fluid motion when the player characters aren't looking and aren't doing anything to affect it. As part of that, build your villain(s) or whatever antagonistic force it is that represents the prime threat along with the stakes that threat presents, and then build the challenges that your players will or are likely to face. Give them options to be proactive but be ready for them to be reactive and waiting for threats to come knocking on their door.

But when you're building all this, if you want to take a philosophical approach like Breenan then have in mind what it is you're trying to say about this world - and maybe even about the real world - and why it should matter to the player characters as they're making their way through the world. If I'm being honest, I don't get a sense of a cohesive philosophical argument in the storyline you laid out. The best teacher I've ever had taught me when writing an argument to start with the thesis clearly stated at the beginning and proceed from there. If that's what you've done here I can only say that your opening statement about stereotypes is not only internally inconsistent, but doesn't appear to be thematically or philosophically tied to the story you want to tell.

Quote from ApplePaladin >>

That was a big wall of text and there's a lot to parse. One of the big stumbling blocks I'm seeing is that you establish early on this is a utopia, and then have the players imported into the world to cavort around thwarting injustice. Those two points work against each other, and it suggests either it isn't really a utopia or the players are acting out of ignorance and doing more harm than good. Either of those can be a fun thread to tug on.

You're right that Brennan tackles philosophical challenges in his DMing, but he's doing two things at once when he does that. He absolutely challenges the player characters' understandings of the world they inhabit and how their actions affect the people and the world around them, inviting the characters to examine their personal philosophies. He also presents philosophical arguments as running themes throughout campaigns that are more straightforward statements on the world and argue for changing the world as it is to the world as it ought to be. Without spoilers, the Vampire the Masquerade season of Dimension 20: City Council of Darkness, was a season-long imploration to build community and thrive together by participating in local politics. And at the end Brennan had an NPC break the fourth wall and directly address Dimension 20 viewers to make the subtext straightforward text and explicitly tell the viewer the whole season's philosophical argument that things only improve when people get involved and take action together.

Circling back, I'm not seeing a cohesive philosophical argument you want to explore in that short story. And as others pointed out, with all the plot points pre-arranged what you have is a plot, not a TTRPG campaign. I would go so far as to say throw out all the predetermined plot points and instead focus on building the bones of a world that has enough verisimilitude that it appears to be in fluid motion when the player characters aren't looking and aren't doing anything to affect it. As part of that, build your villain(s) or whatever antagonistic force it is that represents the prime threat along with the stakes that threat presents, and then build the challenges that your players will or are likely to face. Give them options to be proactive but be ready for them to be reactive and waiting for threats to come knocking on their door.

But when you're building all this, if you want to take a philosophical approach like Breenan then have in mind what it is you're trying to say about this world - and maybe even about the real world - and why it should matter to the player characters as they're making their way through the world. If I'm being honest, I don't get a sense of a cohesive philosophical argument in the storyline you laid out. The best teacher I've ever had taught me when writing an argument to start with the thesis clearly stated at the beginning and proceed from there. If that's what you've done here I can only say that your opening statement about stereotypes is not only internally inconsistent, but doesn't appear to be thematically or philosophically tied to the story you want to tell.

 This is extremely helpful

The argument is created through the exposition. It not what I said first, but what I said later with the question. What I'm trying to do is have not one but many arguments over the answer. It's like Skyrim, in a sense, where each faction searches for a different answer to a general question. It is really a story of letting go. Of the characters they met and befriended, or of the people they had become, and of the world they protected and fought for. Yes, you're right, it's not a utopia, but evil still lurks within the chain of order. It's a falsehood spread simply for the people there to know that the world they live in is a safe place (politics using "certainty"). A certain bard-like character asks them the first time, the question of "What is gold to one man and stone to another?" through song. I'll go ahead and delete that WALL of text.

There's a lot of potential in utopia being false and Certainty being a comforting lie that binds people more than they realize.

I recommend reading "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" by Ursula K LeGuin for an excellent short story treatment on the open lie of utopia and what people are willing to accept and why to keep it going. Star Trek: Strange New Worlds has an episode that basically takes LeGuin's story and makes it the planet of the week, but it was an interesting treatment.

When it comes to Certainty, the first thing that popped into my mind was the Destiny Plan in Gundam SEED Destiny. Admittedly not the best Gundam series (it's largely a rehash of Zeta Gundam), it does have an interesting series-long plot around the big villain trying to institute the Destiny Plan to basically predetermine people's lives and obviate the need for free will. Many of the interpersonal conflicts throughout the show are smaller-scale treatments of the philosophical argument that actually it's bad when people's choices are made for them or when they choose to not be active participants in their own lives. It leans heavily on the argument that those who sacrifice liberty for stability deserve neither, and a predetermined world with no conflict is one simply lurching toward the slow death of stagnation.

Instead of a set-in-stone plot, give your antagonist a goal, which in this case sounds like "use utopia and Certainty" to maintain control over people and take ultimate power. Then determine what actions the antagonist is taking to make that goal a reality. If you're sticking with the player characters being summoned into that world, the positive force that summoned them should give them some idea what the problems of "utopia" and "Certainty" are, and from there the conflicts are going to be driven by how their presence interferes with the antagonist's goals and what actions the antagonist takes in response to their presence (and probably their having thwarted some of the antagonist's other actions). As you introduce factions, present them through the lens of what the false utopia means to them and whether and what they are willing to sacrifice to keep it or change it.

Resist the urge to throw in too many factions, major players, cosmic threats, and plot twists. These things very quickly spiral out of control and leave the players wondering "wait, how did we get to the Astral Sea, why are we in a five-way fight between warring factions, and what does any of this have to do with why we were in a sketchy utopia two weeks ago??" Identify your key thematic threads and stick to them, adding extraneous elements sparingly.