PDA

View Full Version : Tips to Help Avoid Railroading



Another_Poet
2009-12-16, 07:11 PM
Recently some player feedback has led me to worry that I am railroading my campaign to unacceptable levels. While a certain level of plot-planning and luring is unavoidable and quite acceptable, I find "putting the PCs in your own story and letting them roll dice" to be the number one worst sin of GMing.

However that doesn't mean it's easy to avoid. When you have a big beautiful world laid out, with all the details ready and the players try to throw it to the wind - how do you handle it? When you have fun scenarios planned out based on the PCs' stated intentions, and they suddenly want to change them, what do you do? If you want to show something behind-the-scenes or do a reveal and the PCs ain't interested... what next?

You get the idea. Trying to keep a world with politics & events going without taking the spotlight off the PC's or robbing them of meaningful choices. Please help.

Aron Times
2009-12-16, 07:26 PM
Here's what I do; ask them for one or more short term goals and one or more long term goals beyond moving the plot forward. Basically, ask your players for adventure hooks and build adventures based on their feedback.

drengnikrafe
2009-12-16, 07:28 PM
Being flexible is one of the most difficult things to do. It either requires a very quick working mind, or a world that is much less influenced by the PCs.

If you're really having trouble, I would suggest one of the following:
A) Give it time between each session. Time enough to see what the PCs have done to the world, and how the world has reacted.
B) Have a less detailed world. Maybe the PCs helping the king will change his outlook, and the nature of the people therein, but isn't it a lot simpler to say it didn't? Yes, the reality of the world will take a hit, but you can't be perfect right away.
C) Don't prepare the world so much. If the entire world is set out, and PCs don't take the bait, the world will not change as your predicted it to.

In the end, though. If you're really having trouble with it, try to get your PCs to be somewhat linear in their thinking, and work from there. Your friends should be kind enough to be a little less weird, if it helps you that much.

Or... give every character a personality. This ones a good one, albeit time consuming. If every character has a real personality, they can react logically to the world. That reduces the need for a preset script.

Or... Just keep railroading them, just be gentle about it. The world may change the way it was going to anyway. It's not like everybody can change the world everytime they sneeze.

nightwyrm
2009-12-16, 07:32 PM
One tip that may be useful is to ask for campaign changing decisions (we want to explore the haunted house instead of investigating the murders) to be made at the end of a session so you know what to prep for the next session. Trying to prep everything so you can anticipate the PCs' every move is too time consuming and probably futile.

Also, don't be too attached to your world, NPCs or storyline. As a DM, I know how tempting a beautifully crafted world is, but I try to maintain a principle where nothing is set in stone until the PCs interact with it.

Temet Nosce
2009-12-16, 07:33 PM
Recently some player feedback has led me to worry that I am railroading my campaign to unacceptable levels. While a certain level of plot-planning and luring is unavoidable and quite acceptable, I find "putting the PCs in your own story and letting them roll dice" to be the number one worst sin of GMing.

However that doesn't mean it's easy to avoid. When you have a big beautiful world laid out, with all the details ready and the players try to throw it to the wind - how do you handle it? When you have fun scenarios planned out based on the PCs' stated intentions, and they suddenly want to change them, what do you do? If you want to show something behind-the-scenes or do a reveal and the PCs ain't interested... what next?

You get the idea. Trying to keep a world with politics & events going without taking the spotlight off the PC's or robbing them of meaningful choices. Please help.

First off - the world is independent of the campaign. Regardless of what the PCs do or do not do, it will continue on. Anything you came up with for your NPCs to do, or any plots going on will proceed even if the PCs don't encounter them then (and may pop up later in worse form if they didn't bother originally).

Second - railroading (even in the form of planning and luring) isn't necessary at all unless you have some specific story you want to tell, and in that case you should probably warn the players and get their agreement. It'll avoid frustration in the long run.

Third - If the PCs aren't interested... don't describe it. Skip the whole thing, and tell them about what they are interested in. I may never describe every building in a city, but if say a PC wanted to find a whore house well then I'll describe the thing.

BRC
2009-12-16, 07:48 PM
Advice 1: Don;t plan specifics more than 1 session ahead.


You see, DM's hate wasting work, and players doing unexpected things causes DM's to waste their work. If you've planned out a long chain of events, you're going to want to see that chain occur.
Alot of Railroading comes from DM's thinking "ooh, it would be awesome if____", then trying to make ____ happen. If you think it would be really cool for the PC's, in the course of their investigation of a murder, happen to discover that the local baron is actually a Vampire who has been controlling his bloodlust by feeding off his guards, then paying for a cleric friend of his to cast Restoration on them. Now, knowing this isn't necessary for the murder investigation (That was, of course, done by the captain of the Baron's guards, who is planning a coup). The PC's could solve the case without discovering the Baron's secret, but two sessions from now you have an awesome idea involving the PC's trying to protect the Baron from a crazy cleric, so you railroad their investigation into some way that causes them to stumble upon the Baron's secret.
So, the proper thing to do is make a note in the margin "Baron is a Vamp, PC's may find this out", and keep the crazy witchhunter as an idea in your head, but NOTHING ELSE. If the PC's solve the case and figure out about the Baron, well start statting out Father Crazypants. If they just put facts together and figure out it was the Captain, then don't try to shoehorn the Baron's vampirism into things.


If it's not somthing you expect to happen in the next session, don't record anything about it except a few lines, and do NOT stat it out (Unless Statting it out just means writing down a page from the Monster Manual). Statting takes lots of time, and you'll be loathe to have wasted that work.


For politics, have a list of players in the political scene. After each session, evaluate the current political situation, then decide what their current plans are (NOT what they are going to do, what they PLAN to do). After each session, see if what the PC's did forces any of those plans to change, and change them accordingly. If the Duke of Place was dethroned by the PC's, then the Lord of Location, whose plan involved marrying his daughter to the Duke of Place's son and using that to get the Duke as an ally in his bid to capture land belonging to the Baron of Region, he'll need to change his plans. Meanwhile, the Baron's plan, which requires turning the Lord of Location's brother against him, has been unaffected and can continue.

Advice 2, don't think about the next session as "Scenes", but as "Challenges to be overcome". When you imagine a challenge, pull back and think of all the ways that challenge could be overcome:
There is a troll guarding the bridge, you could kill it, sneak past it, talk your way past it, bribe it, or use the survival skill to find someplace to ford the river.
Now, seperate these ways into three catagories, Workable, Potentially Workable, probably unworkable, and unworkable.
A Workable solution is one that makes sense in context, and which it would be very contrived to not have as an option. For example, sneaking past the Troll. Unless the troll does nothing but stand in front of the bridge all day staring straight ahead and instantly detecting anybody that gets close, you could sneak past it. Include Workable solutions in your adventure plans.
Potentially workable solutions are solutions that, with the information presented (There is a River, a Troll, and a Bridge) may or may not work. For example, finding a good place to Ford the river. Now, it's possible that a small group on foot or horseback could find someplace besides the bridge to cross the river, but not guaranteed. It's good to plan for Probably Workable solutions, but if you're pressed for time you can eliminate them (The River flows very swiftly for many miles both up and downstream of the bridge).
A Probably Unworkable solution is one that could potentially work, but require something unlikely to be true. For example, the Troll could be a lover of stories, and if the offer is made, will allow the PC's to pass if they offer to tell him a good story. Nobody would say "That's rediculous" if this works, but nobody expects it to be an option. If your PC's try it, kudos to them. You never have to plan for this type of solution, but it's nice to have one or two.
An Unworkable solution is one that makes no sense whatsoever or relies on something incredibly unlikely. Like there being a second, invisible bridge that the PC's can cross.

Megaduck
2009-12-16, 07:55 PM
Here's what I do; ask them for one or more short term goals and one or more long term goals beyond moving the plot forward. Basically, ask your players for adventure hooks and build adventures based on their feedback.

I'm going to have to agree with this. Ask your players what direction they want the game to go then build the plot in front of them.

Forevernade
2009-12-16, 08:02 PM
If you want to describe things in your world, describe them 'on the way' to others, do not 'feature' descriptions, and keep them plentiful and short.

If they are complaining about being railroaded, make things take longer by introducing meaningless sidequests where they can show their personalities by thinking creatively.

Give them 'city time' where they can get themselves in trouble, make items, do their proffessions and research spells - as long as you keep the city reactive to these simple tasks, Players will 'react' back.

If the players 'skip' over something that was meant to trigger some plot, you can add an NPC party that does it for them, and they can then deal with this NPC party if they dont like it.

If the players defeat something without asking the right questions or doing the right things, let them run off, and a session later send them a letter updating them about the 'right' information, saying the local authorities investigated or tortured the info out of what was defeated, and they sent them a letter because they thought they might find it interesting.

Hope this helps! :smallbiggrin:

jmbrown
2009-12-16, 08:05 PM
However that doesn't mean it's easy to avoid. When you have a big beautiful world laid out, with all the details ready and the players try to throw it to the wind - how do you handle it?

By letting them throw it to the wind.



When you have fun scenarios planned out based on the PCs' stated intentions, and they suddenly want to change them, what do you do?

Take elements from the planned scenario and use them while improvising the current situation.


If you want to show something behind-the-scenes or do a reveal and the PCs ain't interested... what next?

Move on pure and simple.

The biggest kick-in-the-groin to "storyteller" DMs is that the world revolves around the PCs. This may sound weird and counter-productive but these guys are the focal point. They may be small, level 1 players but the game revolves around them and so should the adventures.

If something happens in the background and they don't care, move on. Introduce elements that you like and remind players that things are happening without them but don't expect to take them on a guided tour through your creation. You might have this amazing, detailed world planned but the players are at the heart of the action and you're creating adventures for them.

grautry
2009-12-16, 08:10 PM
Apply copious amounts of this (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Ptitleocg6iflv079q).

Lemme give you an example: the players are fighting against Dark and Evil Cultists and they need to know where should they head next in order to stop their Evil Rituals of Doom. In simple terms, they need to discover some information on how to proceed.

Typical railroad scenario: the way you've planned this is that there's a magic crystal with relevant memories in it behind a secret door in a dungeon. The door can be opened by solving a puzzle.

Here, you can already see the seeds of flexibility. The door can either be opened by solving a puzzle, can be simply smashed through if the players are sufficiently buff, disintegrated, the answer can be divined through magic or they can simply find a key that bypasses the puzzle on someone's corpse in the dungeon.

But wait, there's more. What if the players don't even search for a secret door in the room? Well, it's not a problem at all. If the players don't do that then you can find logbooks or diaries within the library that could give you similar information. If they don't find that then they can simply interrogate a cultist if they've captured him alive.

If none of that happens then simply make it so that the next room the players explore actually contains the information they need.

If the players just decide to piss on it and teleport back to town then maybe the locals know something if the players question them. If not, then transplant the 'next step' in the Evil Cultist Plan near that town and place half a ton of Evil Omens there like big flashing arrow signs of "go there".

If the players decide to ignore that, then the Evil Omens were just a distraction that was meant to pull in any forces of good to the area and with some means XYZ they find the actual location of the Evil Ritual.

And so on and so forth.

In other words, the best way to avoid railroading is to simply prepare multiple paths through which an individual goal can be reached(assuming you don't have an entirely player-driven campaign in mind). As much as possible, have a goal-oriented campaign and leave the "how do they do it" to the players.

As an analogy, if your plot can be thought of as a series of steel doors that have particular keys which the players must have in order to progress, then you're doing it wrong. If your campaign is a series of doors where the players can lock-pick them, smash the wall next to the door and pass through the hole, rip the door out with brute force, melt it or invent any other reasonable solution, then you're doing it right.

If a player comes up with a reasonable solution to an idea then never ever block him "just because". Only disallow a solution to a problem if there's a damn good non-arbitrary reason for why it shouldn't work.

One of the thing that stops most GM's from doing stuff like that is pride. I know, you've created this just awesome NPC or this beautiful location or this incredibly smart, funny and super-duper awesome puzzle or a scenario. You want to show it off to the players and punch your chest while yelling "I'm so awesome".

But that's the thing about being a GM. You're not in the spotlight, you are the spotlight. The adventures are about the players and if you can't accept that sometimes, players just won't be interested in your shiny awesomeness then either beat down that pride or just accept that maybe you're not suited for GM'ing.

Also, read this (http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/three-clue-rule.html) for some more information on running campaigns in this way. This is about mystery intrigues rather than RPG's in general but it still applies to virtually any game.

ZeroNumerous
2009-12-16, 08:11 PM
You get the idea. Trying to keep a world with politics & events going without taking the spotlight off the PC's or robbing them of meaningful choices. Please help.

On doing this: Simply do it. Politics and events happen. Whether the PCs get involved or not is their choice, but if Evil Nation X is going to invade Good Nation Y and the PCs don't do anything to stop it then it simply happens. Plug in a rumor, describe refugees or something but always plug it in as a foot note. Like a rumor about the king being assassinated or the princess being kidnapped, but don't force them to go after it. After all, a savvy players knows that all rumors lead to adventure.

Otherwise, let the PCs choose where to go. They know what they like, and they'll go where they can get what they like. Whatever happens aside from that just happens.

Lysander
2009-12-16, 08:14 PM
Make non-linear adventures. For example, let's say the BBEG has his soul split into 9 pieces and bound into artifacts, each guarded by a monster in a different corner of the world. Let the players decide which of the 9 quests they go on first. Do they feel like going on the jungle adventure now or trekking to the arctic stronghold? It's up to them. The other adventures can wait until they're ready.

Tyndmyr
2009-12-16, 09:48 PM
The key to avoiding railroads and other failures is to avoid goals, hopes and dreams. They are the first step along the road to disappointment and failure.

valadil
2009-12-16, 11:46 PM
When you have fun scenarios planned out based on the PCs' stated intentions, and they suddenly want to change them, what do you do?

You don't have plans. You have NPCs. Your NPCs have plans. If their plans don't pan out, the NPC should improvise.

Nobody is going to stand around and wait for the PCs to show up. Let's say that farmer's daughter got captured. Farmer hoped to ask the PCs to save her, but instead they decided that the brothel was awesome and stayed there for three weeks. Farmer might get other help. Farmer might go try to reclaim daughter himself. Farmer might admonish the PCs for advertising their adventuring services and then spending on their time on hookers and blow. Whatever course he takes, the farmer is not going to sit there and wait for the PCs to be on camera.

This approach has several useful effects. The first is that you don't own your plots. Why is that useful? Because you don't take it personally when your PCs ignore or derail the plots. Instead you have this NPC who is there, built in to the plot, who can react appropriately.

This will also make sure that you have a realistic and dynamic world. D&D worlds fall flat when the world only turns when in view of the PCs. Keep the world turning in the background, even when the PCs aren't present. By making events based on the absence of PCs, you're ensuring a deep, moving world.

harpy
2009-12-17, 08:03 AM
A few things I do:

Start sessions in medias res (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_medias_res) if the campaign feel allows for it. I did this all the time in Star Wars Saga, as it was perfect since all of the Star Wars movies began that way.

Make a great rollercoaster ride of an encounter that players normally would never allow their characters to get into, such as a burning airplane that is out of control and heading towards a mountain, but there are bad guys aboard trying to kill them and also grab the parachutes. Players normally would never tolerate situations reaching that point because they tend to be overly cautious and try desperately to avoid losing control. So just plop them into those situations right at the beginning.

Another thing that I do a lot of is practice "illusionism" with my GMing. Basically the idea is that you pre-plan your encounters or other situations, but you let them "float" in the storyline just enough that you can plug them in at the right time.

Say you have a cool encounter that you spent hours putting together and you definitely want to have happen. Rather than brazenly corralling your players toward the encounter with a lot of "no" statements, like "no you can't go down that road because the police have put up a roadblock" instead you say "yes" to your players as much as possible.

Basically, give a problem or complicated situation to your players, such as they need to sneak into the secret fortress. Let the players ask questions, make plans and give them lots of information. Make some things sound difficult. Then let them come up with a plan.

In your mind you don't care what plan they come up with, whatever they think up you will let it work. They key though is that you make it seem as if it is hard. Throw up some obstacles that make them duck now and again, or have to make some kind of check, but let them pass, or at the very least not screw up so bad that it fouls up the whole plan.

Consult your notes, make it seem as if there is this whirling physics engine of a world being simulated. Make a die roll every once in awhile and mark a hash mark down on a sheet of paper, etc.

Then when they've gotten inside the fortress and found the princes just push the encounter button at a point that makes sense and let the cool BBEG encounter start.

Ultimately you're creating this illusion that the players ideas and plans actually matter. They don't really, because you're going to let them get to wherever you want your plans to crystallize. You just have to make it seem in your own behavior as a DM and what you describe in the game that gives the players the idea that they are doing something that is risky and tangible.

One other key element here is that as a GM you NEVER EVER talk shop either in game or after the game. Don't ever pull back the curtain and explain what was really going on. Always keep the mystery of the metagame hidden. You may desperately want to explain all of the cool design elements or other story tangents, but don't, talking about it just bursts the bubble for the players.

If you can develop your illusionism skills well then you can railroad away, tricking the players into thinking they're playing in an open world, when instead they're just acting out their roles in your story. After everyone's gone home you can then let out a huge MUHAHAHAHA! ;)

Somebloke
2009-12-17, 08:21 AM
If there is one important mindset that you need to take away, it is that as a DM, Awesome is cheap, infinite and reusable. Suppose you create an awesome scene involving an epic seige where the players can fight off hoards of monsters. Said plan is scuppered by the players heading off to negotiate a treaty. Remember that-

-Awesome is infinite. You didn't waste up your awesome in that one scene; if you could generate that one scene you can generate others just as good. Think of it as an opportunity to prove your abilities as a DM to create even more awesome.

- Awesome is reusable. You didn't use the scene, so the players haven't run it. That means that you have a ready-made scenario, tucked away for you to bring out again if you (or the players) so desire.


Therefore, awesome is cheap. Don't be afraid to abandon it if you need to.

I had a moment in one of my campaigns where the merlin-style character was butting heads with the players (my fault as a DM, I admit). It came down to one of the players killing a prisoner in front of her after shoving her out of the way. I panicked and played for time that session. Then I thought about the possible consequences of what would happen if the players left her company, and generated a quick handful of adventures around that instance...I was actually a tiny bit dissapointed when both parties agreed to back down in the end...but it got me thinking of how I could use the scenarios in different circumstances.

jseah
2009-12-17, 08:47 AM
Ultimately you're creating this illusion that the players ideas and plans actually matter. They don't really, because you're going to let them get to wherever you want your plans to crystallize. You just have to make it seem in your own behavior as a DM and what you describe in the game that gives the players the idea that they are doing something that is risky and tangible.This has a tendency to not work if the players do some really off the rails things.

I remember one time when I was DMing a 3.5 campaign that a player came up with a list of actions that, if carried out, could change the setting into an unrecognizable state.
Well, it's my hobby to see how magic can be used as technology and in doing so, it is understandable that suddenly turning Industrial Age (in a mere few years) would stuff up a lot of plans.

bosssmiley
2009-12-17, 08:55 AM
"Create Situations, not Plots."

It really is that simple. You set up the Rube Goldberg disaster dominos series of events, but its up to the players to trigger the thing. If they don't, dismantle the gizmo and re-use the parts elsewhere in the game. :smallwink:

IonDragon
2009-12-17, 09:03 AM
I don't care what you do as GM as long as you follow this one rule, and it is the same rule for optimizers:
Do NOT purposely gimp the rest of the party. (As the GM, this would mean ALL or most of the party)

The Reason:
I had a GM once, who somehow in every campaign nerfed, nullified, or destroyed members of the party's usefulness (class abilities, special gear, etc). He also liked to keep our cash ridiculously below wealth by level. I once had a level 13 character who's only magic items were a Ring of Protection +1, and a Tome of +1 Cha. Another example: not having time to prepare for a spur of the moment game change (working and all) I asked if he wouldn't mind rolling me a simple caster. Something I could play for a session, and maybe keep, and maybe throw away. He rolled me a Necromancer in an area where Necromancy was forbidden(ish) so I had to hide all of my magic. Then he insisted I take a -1 level if I rolled a new character.

Zeta Kai
2009-12-17, 09:03 AM
Frankly, I for one embrace railroading & find that there is nothing wrong with a little bit of it in every campaign. The real problem lies in bad, obvious railroading, the kind that the players can see (& resent) from a mile away. Railroading should be subtle, & the DM must be able to play events off as if they were naturally/directly flowing from the players' choices.

I'm not saying that the players' choices don't affect the campaign's plot; they have an enormous impact. I've run the same exact starting scenario for two different groups, & each groups' decisions took the campaigns in completely different directions. And I'm not saying that I slavishly follow my plot; a certain flexibility is a given, & stubbornly funneling the players into scenes that don't apply well isn't fun for anyone.

But I am saying that, IMO, everyone enjoys a good story, & participating in such a tale is more rewarding to players than any in-game treasure. I try to take my players on a journey, allowing them to fulfill their own goals while engaging them in a growing evolving mythos. This may not always take them where they expected to go, & they may not know how they got there, but their sense of accomplishment in a dynamic saga of their own making is my primary objective.

So yeah. I railroad 'em. And they love it.

Emmerask
2009-12-17, 09:13 AM
Frankly, I for one embrace railroading & find that there is nothing wrong with a little bit of it in every campaign. The real problem lies in bad, obvious railroading, the kind that the players can see (& resent) from a mile away. Railroading should be subtle, & the DM must be able to play events off as if they were naturally/directly flowing from the players' choices.

I'm not saying that the players' choices don't affect the campaign's plot; they have an enormous impact. I've run the same exact starting scenario for two different groups, & each groups' decisions took the campaigns in completely different directions. And I'm not saying that I slavishly follow my plot; a certain flexibility is a given, & stubbornly funneling the players into scenes that don't apply well isn't fun for anyone.

But I am saying that, IMO, everyone enjoys a good story, & participating in such a tale is more rewarding to players than any in-game treasure. I try to take my players on a journey, allowing them to fulfill their own goals while engaging them in a growing evolving mythos. This may not always take them where they expected to go, & they may not know how they got there, but their sense of accomplishment in a dynamic saga of their own making is my primary objective.

So yeah. I railroad 'em. And they love it.

Indeed good railroading won´t even be noticed by the players they will think it was their idea all along to go to that place and will be impressed by the level of detail you came up with :smalltongue::smallbiggrin:

Everyman
2009-12-17, 09:14 AM
Make non-linear adventures. For example, let's say the BBEG has his soul split into 9 pieces and bound into artifacts, each guarded by a monster in a different corner of the world. Let the players decide which of the 9 quests they go on first. Do they feel like going on the jungle adventure now or trekking to the arctic stronghold? It's up to them. The other adventures can wait until they're ready.

I'm actually quite fond of this, but with some broader implications. What I find works well is to go ahead and decide what kind of challenges and events my party will face over the course of a campaign. However, I stat them all with the same CR. As the party's ECL goes up, I simply increase the power of the challenges accordingly. Any "railroading" that I do is dropping information that naturally lends itself to exploring locations were those events should take place. If you're really clever, you may even have a few events with no paticular location in mind. Those you can drop in whenever you want (after increasing the CR as appropriate).

Its not a perfect system (and I don't think there is one), but it works. I've found that this allows me to drop and add events as needed, giving me a lot more flexibility in the long term.

valadil
2009-12-17, 09:48 AM
Frankly, I for one embrace railroading & find that there is nothing wrong with a little bit of it in every campaign. The real problem lies in bad, obvious railroading, the kind that the players can see (& resent) from a mile away. Railroading should be subtle, & the DM must be able to play events off as if they were naturally/directly flowing from the players' choices.


This is why I treat my games as a sandbox with rollercoasters. Players can go where they want and do what they want, but littered through out the world are rides with big arrows pointing to them. The players can choose to go for a ride on the tracks or they can go elsewhere. Railroads exist, but the players don't have to ride them.

Sir.Swindle
2009-12-17, 09:53 AM
I like to set up a scenario where the PC's end up putting out fires so to speak.

I set up multiple plot points, BBEG's, inpemding disasters, ect. and let the characters decide which is the most important to them. As they deal with each point the others get worse and worse.

Say they left a BBEG unchecked while they saved the kingdom from an orcish invasion. Well now that BBEG has positioned himself as an advisor to a newly coranated child king in a neighboring nation. He would have been statistically as big a threat as the orcs were when the PC's foiled them but in his new position he is more powerful and thusly a higher level encounter.

Immersion through an evolving world plus logical level scaling. A win-win if i ever saw one.

Lapak
2009-12-17, 10:07 AM
You may find some of the advice given to someone who was asking about running a sandbox-style campaign helpful; you can read the whole thread here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7017030&highlight=sandbox#post7017030) or my own advice in this post. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7017030&postcount=8) Much of what it boils down to is making sure your preparation is loose enough that you can fit it into whatever the PCs decide to do, but I'd definitely take a look at the thread.

On the other side of things, don't be afraid to make the PCs aware that their decisions have consequences, but don't imply judgment for it and they won't feel railroaded. If they decide to shift gears away from, say, the political intrigue they were involved with last session? Well, make sure you were prepared for that, as detailed in those links, but also follow through on whatever was going on in the background. Not every threat is world-shattering, and the setting rolled along just fine without the PCs in the past. If a region descends into war because they decided things were too complicated in the city and went out to loot a forgotten temple, there's nothing wrong with that either for them as players or for you as DM! In fact, they might very well find that interesting enough to motivate them to revisit the place and try to resolve things.

Or they might decide to clear out altogether and head to another part of the world. That's okay too. They're NOT kings or nobles (unless they are, then things are different), and they don't necessarily have to feel like the welfare of the kingdom is their responsibility, even if they are chock full of good-aligned characters.

fusilier
2009-12-17, 06:15 PM
"Create Situations, not Plots."

It really is that simple. You set up the Rube Goldberg disaster dominos series of events, but its up to the players to trigger the thing. If they don't, dismantle the gizmo and re-use the parts elsewhere in the game. :smallwink:

This is basically what I do. I think up a series of scenarios, sometimes they are linked to specific locations, other times they can be linked to general locations -- i.e. raiders attacking the party along a road, it doesn't matter which road any road will do.

My games tend to be short and often have obvious plot lines. But the plot isn't too specific, it's more like the general goal of the game. Also the nature of the adventure can also matter. For example, if the players are searching for a lost item, then they will generally follow the clues and the GM can lead them about fairly easily. However, you will still need to be able to improvise, especially if they misinterpret one of the clues. So you will need to understand your own world very well, when the players pull something unexpected. In my last GURPS campaign, the party totally dodged the final combat I had planned, and decided to resolve everything in a political manner. I was able to come up with that on the spot because I had a basic idea of the local politics, and the relationship between clergy and the civil authority (one of the PC's was a Jesuit), which allowed the PCs to operate.

Another thing you can do, is simply constrain the world. The last campaign I ran was a Doctor Who campaign using a homebrew system. The first game took place entirely in what was essentially a space-station, and the second along the early Stockton and Darlington railroad. The characters had little/no reason to explore outside of these areas, while attempting to meet their goals. So most of the work could go into the fine details of these small areas, that the players could then explore.

I know of only one GM who could keep an entire, very detailed universe in his mind, with very few notes. Sometimes it was frustrating because sessions might start with -- "Ok, you're on a planet: what do you do"? And it could be sometime before we discovered the adventure hook! Although it was still a lot of fun. :-)

Having said all this, sometimes I run out of ideas about how to keep a party together, so I just tell the players this. On the other hand, there have been situations where I can make it appear that the party is splitting up permanently, then get them all back together.

Gamerlord
2009-12-17, 06:32 PM
To avoid railroading I:
*I improvise for the remainder of the session once they do something unexpected
* After the session, I start preparing for the next session, as usual, only instead of planing "The battle against the bandit king" I start planing "The ambush on the town guards" if instead of fighting the bandits, they decided to work with them.

And in sandbox campaigns, I prepare every area they might run into, have a set time line for each region if the PCs don't bother it, and I still prepare for the unexpected (Me, during one 3.5 session: "You want to hurl the nine hells into Celestia? Are you sure?" )

Kaun
2009-12-17, 06:39 PM
IMHO you have to learn your players.

Players are simple creatures even at there best and will often follow patterns.

Once you learn there patterns and the best ways to motivate them you can channel them down roads of your choosing.

Keep an eye on the things that spike your players intrests especialy the more dominant players in your group.

Watch how they deal with situations. Looking for common ways they deal with events and solve problems.

Once you have fleshed out a list of motivaters and patterns you can start setting out a lot of paths for there choosing but stack the odds on the paths of your choice.

...Just thinking about it i had a player who used to only have fun if he thought he was ruining my plans so i just made him think he was.

Xzeno
2009-12-17, 07:00 PM
IMHO you have to learn your players.


This works the best for me as well. I have the advantage of knowing my players fairly well, and they are very predictable. The like to deviate from what they think I'm planing. They'll do something (like change sides mid adventure) that they think will throw me through a loop, but I keep going as though it was all in the plan... because it was. They got me once by doing something perfectly reasonable IE contacting the proper authorities.

So I guess I'm saying that I avoid railroading by knowing my players and the rails they want to follow.

Raum
2009-12-17, 09:52 PM
You get the idea. Trying to keep a world with politics & events going without taking the spotlight off the PC's or robbing them of meaningful choices. Please help.You simply (though not necessarily easily) need to plan on a bigger scale. In other words, plan NPC goals instead of step by step actions. By planning goals, you can easily adjust actions to fit changed situations. No need to force situations to fit actions or vice versa. Only plan actions when they are not dependent on the PCs awareness, cooperation, or even participation. Even then you have to allow for PC interference.

Two other important items to remember are the world is not static and actions (or lack thereof) have consequences. You don't always wait for the PCs to show for action to happen - particularly if they're off doing something else. These two items are how you drive the game while leaving the PCs freedom to choose their own actions.

Finally, have three to six plots or subplots (story lines or arcs if you prefer) going at once. Some may be related others may not be, but multiple lines make it easier to ensure you always have some action ready to go. Bonus points if some or all of the story lines are based off of PC actions or backgrounds - that will pull most in to the game quicker than anything else. One caveat - don't have so many things going on that players can't follow them. The game goes far smoother when the players either know the goals or have some of their own. Secrets in character are great but out of character secrets often simply mean someone is simply adrift and potentially bored.

Jolly Steve
2009-12-17, 10:18 PM
Don't have a single villain/quest/conflict/plot , have a 'multi-polar' world with lots of competing groups. As someone said above, don't have plans, have NPCs who have plans.

Thus the players can opt out of any given conflict or choose not to explore any given dungeon, without 'wandering off the page'.

You might want to have apparent plot hooks which, if followed, lead only to danger and complication, so as to 're-train' your players.

Fight On! magazine has several dungeons (for OD&D) which might provide some inspiration.

PS I'm a player rather than a GM.