PDA

View Full Version : How Do I Not Sandbox?



TeddyKazooie
2013-07-01, 08:39 PM
I'll get into a few details about some of my sandbox issues below, but overall I'd like to ask for advice about how to make the distinction between railroads and sandboxes? What are some good ways to implement 'path' based games without being too open or too narrow? Are there methods I can use to gauge, outside of my own subjectivity, whether what I'm doing is too open or too narrow?

I have a problem and that problem is making my games too open ended. In terms of online posting this leads to inactive threads due to loss of interest or an uncertainty on what the players want to do. On the tabletop this has lead to quietly looking back and forth wondering how to proceed until I throw something at the players to get them engaged. I'd like to avoid too many cliches, but using 'maguffins' and the like might be the only option.

So where am I going wrong?

Example 1: I ran a future game where all the characters had a loss of memory. I left all the clues to their identities in their apartments and let them decide how they wanted to go about investigating themselves and their situations. Eventually, the last few people still around met up and had to confront the issue plaguing their community. Two out of ten players finished the game and enjoyed it while the others either dropped out or gave up due to being unsure what to do.

Example 2: I ran another solo series of games where the players each had to find a maguffin with the clues they were given. They were told they could do whatever they liked and they would eventually find the maguffin if they stayed true to their characters. Four out of the nine players managed to find the maguffin and complete their personal goals for the campaign. One of which, sadly, pressured his ideas of how his story should be which ended up railroading me.

Example 3: I gave the players a map I had sketched up of an island. A 'lost continent' where they could go wherever they chose, interact with monster cultures, and decide themselves where they wanted to go. I sadly had to stop DMing due to personal issues, but the entire time I ran the game I realized they were looking to me to find out what I would suggest they do. To their credit it was one of the first few times the group had played that particular system. I couldn't help but feel like I was railroading them simply by giving them the tools to do what they wanted.

It's very likely I'm just high strung. Any suggestions for plotting campaigns that may be closer to railroads than sandboxes would be appreciated. I simply find I'm not having as much fun as I'd like and the players are getting frustrated when things are too 'open'. Help?

Jair Barik
2013-07-01, 08:52 PM
Well from what you have said here are some ideas to help you.

1. Let the players design their plot hooks. Give them some setting details, alignment/race restrictions with a clear idea of what unifies the party (political ambitions, a singular mutual organisation, all working at the same place etc.) The main thing is if the players design their own characters and you build the plot hooks around their backgrounds then they will feel more engaged.

2.Have an idea for a major plot but don't force it down the players throats. The plot doesn't have to be something the players have to follow in a clear set of events but should always be lurking in the background as they prepare to resolve it. It needn't be immediately obvious but could include any number of things (rigging an election, defeating a world ending evil that is being heralded by various signs, overthrowing a dictatorship, revenge against a mutual enemy)

3. Go into your sessions with plenty of ideas for side quests/daily events. If possible make these relate to the major plot (as mentioned in point 2) even if it is only slightly. If the players stumble into a quest as a result of their own actions as opposed to being told to go places constantly it doesn't feel like railroading.

valadil
2013-07-01, 09:00 PM
I have a problem and that problem is making my games too open ended.

Been there. I have a really easy time at the start of the game. Every interaction the players have can be spun off into its own plot. Like you said, it's overwhelming and it makes the game damn hard to end.

Part of fixing this is just discipline. When the game is big enough or when I've decided I'm ready to think about drawing to a close I stop spawning plots. It's easier said than done. You have to let some interactions go.

Next up is that I tie plots together. When the players follow the plots for ong enough eventually they converge. All of them. Well, not the one offs that end of course. But the plots that are going to last will eventually all wind up as threads of the same uberplot. This isn't easy either but it's very rewarding and usually fills the creativity needs left open by my refusal to spawn new plots.

TheThan
2013-07-01, 09:03 PM
I think i posted this elswhere on the forums but I think i bears repeating.

TheThan’s 6 point method to building RPG campaigns :

1: create interesting villain(s), decide personality, abilities and goals.
2: create situation that causes villain to start working towards his goals. (this can be background fluff, but not necessarily.)
3: create situation that causes PCs to influence villain’s plans, this can be positive or negative (depending on the perspective you choose to take).
4: villain takes steps to neutralize or recruit PCs,
5: repeat steps 3 and 4. as needed
6: allow for pcs to thwart and/or have their final showdown with the villain.

Example:

1 villain wishes to worship dark god X on top of massive ziggurat.
2: Villain doesn’t have a ziggurat so he decides to build one. So villain enlists the help of slavers to raise an army of slave labor to build his ziggurat.
3: Pcs bust up major slave ring, slowing down Villain’s plans.
4: The lack of fresh slaves causes the villain to hire a squad of mercenaries to take pcs out which would allow him to reestablish slavery.
5: PCs have learned about the ziggurat and plan to assault it, destroying the unfinished construction. They assault it, free all the remaining slaves, and plant explosives.
6: PCs battle villain atop his unfinished ziggurat, they slay the villain and escapes from the ziggurat as it explodes around them action movie style.

Doorhandle
2013-07-01, 09:52 PM
Some required reading for you:

The Alexandrian: node-based design. (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/7949/roleplaying-games/node-based-scenario-design-part-1-the-plotted-approach)

Mutazoia
2013-07-01, 11:22 PM
You could always try the Reeses Pieces method. Remeber in ET where Elliot lays a trail of Reeses Pieces to lead ET out of the shed? ET could have gone anywhere he wanted to once he stepped outside that door, but he followed the trail...

Make a trail for your players to follow. Sure...it's an open world but there REALLY something interesting you might want to look at over HERE...

1) The PC's village is attacked by Orcs. The PC's get to fend off the attack and in the process find out that the Orcs attack was directed by some mysterious figure. The PC's are prompted to find out more about this figure and head off in search of him/her....where every you make the clues point...

2) The shining sword of super slaying is rumored to be interred with it's last owner. His tomb is rumored to be in the Umptysquat mountains in THAT direction....

In short have a set goal in mind for your campaigns and then lay out the Reeses Pieces for them to follow. Have a couple of alternate paths they can follow. For instance in the first example the PC's want to track down the instigator of the attack on their village. The info they find says the Orc's came from nearby Flatlandia, but something the mysterious instigator drops says he's from East Bumphuk. The PC's can back track the Orc's to their camp, or head straight to East Bumphuk...it's their choice. Semi-sandbox but your still controlling where they go...just not when. You'll have to have alternate destinations fleshed out when you present them to your players, but they'll still have the illusion of freedom, but if you lay your Reeses Pieces properly, they'll go where you want them to. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2C0ZZ_UwAo)

TeddyKazooie
2013-07-02, 12:47 AM
Thank you all for giving your two cents. I appreciate the speed at which you folks responded and there was plenty of good advice. I may just have some structures to work with in terms of future campaigns.

@Jair: I actually did steps 1-3 you suggested with the island campaign, in a way. The players had told me they wanted to explore so I gave them an island to explore. Sadly, the players only cared about the most basic traits and backgrounds to characterize their toons. I didn't mention that, because I want to believe I could have done more to make things interesting. One character didn't even have a background! It's good to know, from someone else, that that sort of freestyle play involving the players forming their own campaign through characters/desires is a good track to a good game.

@Valadil: Glad someone else knows my pain. I don't think I have a good enough 'internal gauge' to stop expanding plots like you seem to have. I sadly may have to focus on keeping things somewhat constrained, but I do hope to give the players some alternate and interesting things to do. It's hope.

@TheThan: I'm not sure if building a campaign around a bad guy is for me, but that does sound like a good method for forming a campaign. It has a clear goal and if plotted out with some care and using some of the other methods mentioned it certainly could prove to help. Maybe using a villain as a point of interest in the article Doorhandle linked.

@Doorhandle: I found this really interesting. Thank you for posting it. It certainly isn't an end-all be-all, but this system will help me re-format my modern game when I return to my forum play. Modern and Future games have been difficult for me to run due to lacking a focus and the 'clues' system helps me put objectives in perspective.

@Mutazoia: That's an interesting way of putting it. Though that still may require some impromptu work it's still do-able. It fits in well with TheThan's suggestion to start with a villain and work your way out. In this case starting with a villain and placing a candy trail to them. It still flirts with my sandbox 'problem', but it may help me find a line to tow so things don't spiral off course.

I'm still curious for the input of folks if anyone has other perspectives or I missed something someone posted already. It's possible I misread a prior poster. I'm still wondering if there are any methods to objectively gauge how 'open' or 'narrow' a campaign is, but that may be a silly thing to desire. Open, narrow, or in-between may just be too subjective to gauge in that sense.

Balain
2013-07-02, 01:28 AM
I think the best campaign I ever ran was a mix of the two styles. The set up, the party already were friends from previous adventures. I set each player up with a bout 3 plot hooks. It was up to them to decide which ones to follow and how to follow them. Meanwhile there were about 3 major villains all working on their own plans. As time wnrt on the villains were also working on their plans and eventually one of the villains and the plot hooks would meet up. Of course they would hear stories of things happening around the world by some MAge or what ever. The stories get more numerous as time goes on. On top of that wars and stuff are going on between kingdoms that they may have to travel through. Some plague hits a town as they are passing through stuff like that

Autolykos
2013-07-02, 07:13 AM
One thing that works for me is giving the players an ally they can come back to and coordinate plans with. The ally should be about their equal or slightly superior (so he has an easier time to just say "no" to outrageous player demands), but none should have direct authority over the other, and he should have a mind of his own and follow his own goals (that often coincide with the players, but not completely). You need to be careful not to make him into an DMPC, and not tell the players how to do their job. It's more like "I'm planning to break in the evil army's fort at Sometown with my group, forcing them to send reinforcements. You could use that to ambush some of their convoys and steal their supplies...". Basically, you're not paying or commanding each other, the ally is just suggesting win-win plans when the players don't know how to continue (and might likewise join a good idea the players have if there's something in it for him). If the players don't like the plan, either he or they can just suggest another one. The important thing is not to get the players to follow The Plot, it's just to get some kind of coordinated action going to make them advance their goals.
A mercenary captain or army leader tends to work great for this because his team would be suited to different tasks than the players. That way, they need each other and the players can still be the heroes by doing something he couldn't with his group, while he is genuinely useful and on the same power level they are, just by having the numbers and the heavy equipment.
For a less combat-heavy campaign, some senior officer in the police or city watch could take that place. The players have the advantage that they don't have to strictly play by the rules, while he can bring the hammer of the law down on the BBEG, if provided with sufficient information and evidence.

Jair Barik
2013-07-02, 07:14 AM
Glad to help. An example of the structure I proposed would be the campaign I am currently running. (a drow politics game of sorts)

I designed a rough cityscape for the players to work in with several key power players (the matriarchs) and a rough description of what each house specialized in. As a group the players then selected which one they would be working for but I gave them free reign in writing their backgrounds with the players contributing entire cities and geographical locations to the setting along with minor political factions. I then worked out my initial 'plot' and my extended later plot.

Session 1- The players meet with their employer and he informs them that someone higher up the political chain is looking to die soon and that they should prepare to make a power play. He suggests a couple of vague ways the party could help but doesn't command them to do anything (canvass for support, kill the opposition, make their enemies look foolish etc.) the players now had a clear idea of what they should be aiming to do. Leaving the employer they decided to go plot amongst themselves what they would do next and stole some wine that a servant was taking to their boss. During their plotting one of them drunk the wine and almost died from poisoning. Taking the wine in the first place was entirely the decision of the players so it felt to them like they had stumbled onto a plot as opposed to having it thrown at them.

Session 2-3. The players work out the servant with the wine was a doppelganger. They track down the doppelganger and capture it (but it pops a poison pill) and are ambushed by hired muscle on the way. Their chase lead them close to the base of one of the other local powers so they decide to visit them to canvass support whilst they are in the area. After doing so they use magic to interrogate the doppelganger and conclude the assassin and muscle were hired by someone within their own house as opposed to a different one.

Session 4-5. The players do all sorts of things. They compile a list of potential suspects who might have been behind the assassination attempt, they hire spies to check up on local events and pick up tavern gossip. One of the players finds out that his hometown has recently become besieged by unknown forces, one of the other players realizes that one of their suspects lives in said hometown. The party decide to kill two birds with one stone and head off to investigate.

On the road to the hometown the players meet a fortune teller who foretells various doom and destruction.

In general the sessions work off of the players always having the option to pick between several clear plot ideas or if none of those appeal to them they will do their own thing and I will work something out that contributes to the current plot (the political struggles) or subtly hints at a wider plot the players are slowly being drawn into (the return of an elder evil that signs are prophesying). If there is ever a major plot point that I would like the players to explore I try to link it in someway to one of the characters backgrounds so that they feel an attachment to it.

Yora
2013-07-02, 10:30 AM
I approach campaigns by creating the antagonist and maybe one or two other interested groups, and giving them a goal and a certain amount of resources.
And then I see what the players are doing in the first session, and consider how that forces the other factions to adjust their plans. This defines what the PCs encounter in the second session, and so on.

It's not sandboxing, but still quite open ended and allows the players lots of freedom to define their goals and priorities as they want.

thirdkingdom
2013-07-02, 06:38 PM
I have a problem and that problem is making my games too open ended.
So where am I going wrong?

Example 1: I ran a future game where all the characters had a loss of memory. I left all the clues to their identities in their apartments and let them decide how they wanted to go about investigating themselves and their situations. Eventually, the last few people still around met up and had to confront the issue plaguing their community. Two out of ten players finished the game and enjoyed it while the others either dropped out or gave up due to being unsure what to do.

Example 2: I ran another solo series of games where the players each had to find a maguffin with the clues they were given. They were told they could do whatever they liked and they would eventually find the maguffin if they stayed true to their characters. Four out of the nine players managed to find the maguffin and complete their personal goals for the campaign. One of which, sadly, pressured his ideas of how his story should be which ended up railroading me.

Example 3: I gave the players a map I had sketched up of an island. A 'lost continent' where they could go wherever they chose, interact with monster cultures, and decide themselves where they wanted to go. I sadly had to stop DMing due to personal issues, but the entire time I ran the game I realized they were looking to me to find out what I would suggest they do. To their credit it was one of the first few times the group had played that particular system. I couldn't help but feel like I was railroading them simply by giving them the tools to do what they wanted.



I guess I'm having trouble understanding the problem, and I honestly think that part of this issue is with the definition of "sandbox". In my mind neither example one or two is a "sandbox" game. These quotes from your description is pretty telling:


I left all the clues to their identities in their apartments and let them decide how they wanted to go about investigating themselves and their situations. (emphasis mine)

You are essentially dictating what the players are doing -- an investigation style game, specifically researching their pasts. What would you do if the players had no desire to do any of that? Sure, you're letting them decide how to do it, but that's akin to letting the engineer decide what speed to drive the train, not affect the destination.


players each had to find a maguffin with the clues they were given.(emphasis mine, again)
Again, you are essentially dictating what the players are going to do. Maybe they can vary how they get there, but the destination is still set.

In my mind, scenarios 1 and 2 are closer to railroads than sandboxes, because you are saying "this is what your characters are going to do, but you can choose how to do it".

And in the third example it sounds like you just put them on the island and said "what do you guys want to do?" Of course they're going to look at you for more guidance!

I see a sandbox as being more along the lines of, for instance, having the PCs awake in their apartments with no memory of their former identities and introducing a number of plot hooks. Some may be related to their past identities, some not.

So, if you're looking for an example of what I would humbly put forward as a good sandbox pbp game I would recommend checking out this (http://www.unseenservant.us/forum/viewforum.php?f=70)game that I'm running on another forum. Below are the initial plot hooks I presented. Some are from published adventures, some not. We're almost six months and closing in on 4,000 posts. I've only had two people leave, and I actually had to ask them to leave because they weren't maintaining their character sheets the way I asked. There's a waitlist of at least four to join.



A consortium of merchants is looking for a party to clear the Old Mill, on the northern tip of Fogors Isle, of a especially pernicious infestation of giant insects. The group is offering a reward of 500 gp plus a bounty on insects killed.

A large beast, possessing a foul temper and evil dispostion, has been terrorizing the logging camps north of Threshold. No one can say for certainty what manner of animal it is, but the beast has been responsible for the deaths of at least five loggers. The Baron has offered anyone who slays the beast an enchanted blade of ancient provence.

A rash of disappeances has been plaguing the town. Over the past two years, at least two dozen citizens have vanished. It is rumored that many of the disappeared were connected with the Thieves' Guild, so the guard has not made a concerted effort to determine the cause.

The Gnomish caravan is due to arrive in Threshold on the 10th of Thaumont on its annual trip to the capital of Specularum. Two days of contests, festivities, and celebrations are planned, including contests of strength, archery, and intellect.

The merchant Clifton Caldwell is seeking a "Qualified Eviction Crew" to clear the castle he has recently purchased southeast of town.

A merchant named Sindar is looking for people to deliver a package north to the Darokin city of Selenica.

There are rumors of a labyrinthine system of caves near Castellan Keep, far to the northeast. It is said that in addition to humanoid threats there is a cabal of evil clerics located somewhere in the maze of tunnels.

A local cleric named Aleena has been reported missing while on an expedition to some newly uncovered caves. The Church of Karameikos is offering a reward for her return.

The players can pick which hook they want to follow, or, if unsatisfied with the ones I presented, can get more through play. Actually, I hand out plot hooks like candy whether they ask for it or not. If they decide halfway through an adventure they want to do something else, that's fine. Now, that doesn't mean that the world is not happening around them. Since they started playing the first level of Castle Caldwell has been cleared by another party and the disappearances in town have been pegged on a group of thugs and slavers called the Iron Ring by the activities of yet another NPC party. By now Sindar has found someone else to deliver his package.

valadil
2013-07-02, 08:08 PM
@Valadil: Glad someone else knows my pain. I don't think I have a good enough 'internal gauge' to stop expanding plots like you seem to have.

I'm not so sure my gauge is internal. I didn't realize this before but I think my guage for plot density is actually in my notes.

I keep one page in my notebook or one file in my plot folder for each plot in the game. After each session I update the plots that the players touched. Just a sentence or two explaining what happened. Then I go through the untouched plots and write down anything that happened while the PCs weren't looking at the plot. (Pro tip. Advancing plots while the players aren't looking makes the world come alive.)

Anyway, I mention this because it gives me an accurate measure of how busy the game is. If I'm updating two plot pages per session, there's probably room for a third or fourth. If I'm updating a dozen and hoping to end the game soon, the. It's time for the plots to converge. I'll merge the appropriate ones and stop myself from starting new pages.

thirdkingdom
2013-07-03, 12:59 PM
The OP asked for examples. Okay, pretty much most published modules are linear in nature -- the goal is to get from A to B. The good ones provide multiple ways to do this, the less good ones allow for only one or maybe two correct courses of action. Hence the term "railroad". These are what I consider to be "plot-driven" adventures. Basically, the adventure says "there's this thing that needs to happen" -- whether it be rescuing the prince or thwarting the evil or whatever. But there is a spelled out, explicit goal and specific obstacles in the way to reaching the goal.

I can, however, think of two good published sandbox adventures: B2 The Keep in the Borderlands and X1 The Isle of Dread. The OP had mentioned a jungle island game. Here is how I would open a sandbox game with X1:

(Traveling to the isle, landing, blah blah blah).

Rumors of great wealth brought you here (from the preface), and after a short stay with the friendly villagers of Tanoroa you have learned the following:
1)A group of savage pirates has been preying upon the fishing boats from the clan villages. The leader of the pirates is rumored to possess a ring that enables him to walk on water as in land (area 7).
2)Farther inland, past the great wall dwells a nomadic tribe of cat people. It is said they are able to use saber-tooth tigers as mounts! (Area 9)
3)Off the coast dwells an enormous Hydra who's lair is rumored to contain the treasures of all the ships it has ever sunk. (Area 24)
4)One island off the mainland is judged taboo by the natives
It is said it contains the ruins of a race -- by now almost extinct -- older than even the elves.(Taboo island).

Ozfer
2013-07-03, 03:24 PM
Consider talking with players during character creation to put them all in generally the same place, with motivations, affiliations, or loyalties that somehow interconnect.

That way when the plot comes along, the players have a reason to work together.

Mutazoia
2013-07-03, 11:21 PM
Unfortunately, if your game lacks a central plot, your going to wind up with a lot of sandboxing. You have to set goals for the PC's or they are going to run amuk. Design your adventures to lead the PC's to the next adventure. The Reeses Pieces method I spoke of earlier.

Imagine a broken game of Skyrim. You know (from the beginning cut scene) the general idea that dragons returning and that this is supposed to be a bad thing. However, in this game no NPC's give you any clues where to go or what to do [quests] other than "stop the dragons". Do you wander around skyrim at random hoping to trip over something that will relate to the story? or do you go "meh" and find another game to play?

Kaun
2013-07-03, 11:57 PM
To much choice will drown some players in indecision. I say railroad them until they start trying to break free then run with what ever path they choose from there.

JustinA
2013-07-05, 01:54 AM
In terms of online posting this leads to inactive threads due to loss of interest

Let's pause here for a moment. What you're saying is that your games result in players not doing things they don't find interesting.

This is a feature. Not a bug.


Example 1: I ran a future game where all the characters had a loss of memory. (...) Example 2: I ran another solo series of games where the players each had to find a maguffin with the clues they were given.

Neither of these is a sandbox. They sound non-linear, but each of these has a definite and specific scenario or plot that the PCs are supposed to be engaging with. Sandboxes should be strewn with scenario hooks, but they are specifically defined by the ABSENCE of this kind of specific scenario assumption.

More generally, the problem you seem to be having is that your players aren't buying into the premise. (This is even true of the island exploration campaign which sounds more like an actual sandbox.) Simply switching to a railroad is not going to solve this problem for you. In fact, it's going to make it worse.

An easy solution to this is to simply pitch different campaign ideas: Give them give four or five different options. Whichever option gets the strongest / universally positive response from the group is the one you should go with. That gives you the buy-in from the players you need to keep them motivated on your scenario's premise.


...but the entire time I ran the game I realized they were looking to me to find out what I would suggest they do.

Training players who are used to being led around by their noses to play in a sandbox or non-linear scenario can be difficult. I've had some bad experiences with that.

The easiest way to deal with it, however, is to be open with your communication: Explain up front that this is going to be a sandbox. Reiterate that they have to set priorities for themselves. When they're looking to you for guidance, offer them options and ask them to make a clear decision for themselves instead of making the decision for them.

Sandboxes also benefit from having a default goal that can be fallen back on when specific character goals aren't being met. ("Explore the wilderness for the empire" or "go into the dungeon to earn phat lootz" are easy examples of this.) It can also be helpful to focus character creation: Demand (politely) that people have three specific goals that their characters want to achieve when the campaign starts and find out ways to liberally strew hooks relating to those goals into the campaign.


Two out of ten players (...) Four out of the nine players

This leaps out at me as probably being a significant part of your problem: A table of nine or ten players is a really huge table. It's no wonder the group was having problems focusing and setting priorities for itself.

Tridax
2013-07-05, 02:16 AM
I approach campaigns by creating the antagonist and maybe one or two other interested groups, and giving them a goal and a certain amount of resources.
And then I see what the players are doing in the first session, and consider how that forces the other factions to adjust their plans. This defines what the PCs encounter in the second session, and so on.

It's not sandboxing, but still quite open ended and allows the players lots of freedom to define their goals and priorities as they want.

Huh, I like your way of DMing. Perhaps I'll consider it for latter campaigns.

With my group, it somehow comes out a little easier. At the beginning of the campaign I ask them: do you want to be railroaded or do you want to freeroam? In the newest campaign they chose railroading.

Don't be afraid to consult with players. After all, DnD is a game oriented to bring fun to everyone. What's the fun if the DM doesn't tell the story in a way others want? It's better to find a compromise before the excitement leaks away.

Trog
2013-07-05, 11:22 PM
Link to an old post on my blog which may or may not help. (http://trogshead.blogspot.com/2010/05/my-dnd-adventure-design-guidelines.html)

In addition to what's suggested there I'll add that it's a good idea to do at least a little railroading in the beginning of an adventure to really give the general thrust of the overall conflict - a mysterious cult, a monumental military power that is clearly evil and destroys the PC's home – pick nearly any fantasy movie or story's main conflict and use that. Heck, use two. Make it all too clear to the PCs who the bad guy(s) of the region are. Remind them often.

Give them each mysterious side plots – one is after a MacGuffin, one is trying to get memories back from a bout of amnesia they have had ever since a few months ago and keeps discovering things that remind him of past events, one is playing politics with a regional group and is working their way up in the ranks due to several people above them being mysteriously killed, etc, etc. They can choose between the main conflict and side interests. Make them get a free level up if they accomplish their side goal.

Motivation, in short, is the solution.

Motivation is what makes players make their PCs pursue agendas. Agendas lead to encounters. Give them plenty to choose from - write leads down for them on 3x5 cards if that makes it easier for the players to remember. Sometimes a simple aid like this can get players who look for nothing but a hook to see that they have some choices that you're prepared for.

There's some in the RPG community who distain this sort of approach as railroading but, frankly, as I'm sure you know, not every role-player does well with a sandbox approach. A great many prefer to wade into it. And some complex DM approaches don't lend themselves, initially, to good sandboxing. When the campaign is new and Mr. Exposition comes out and drops a lot of setting and history and knowledge on them that they cannot fully process into leads it's comforting to get led by the nose for a bit until the setting and conflict really begins to sink in. Most of it won't until the players experience it with their characters at the gaming table. Lead them by the nose until they start looking to run off into their own direction and then let them do so and reward them for it and they'll begin to come around. Best of luck! :smallsmile: