How to not railroad

[WarKitty]

So, this has come up once or twice in the campaign I run. The players randomly decide to explore some piece of scenery. In one case they wanted to explore some woods that, well, were just plain woods instead of going into the big mansion right in front of them that had all the plot stuff inside. In the second case, they decided to start trying to convince random NPC's to help them (which by all rights should have gotten them killed by an angry mob).

Here's the issue: I don't want to be the "railroad DM," but I'm not sure how else to, well, get them to actually advance the plot. How would you guys deal with this?

[Drakevarg]

Don't build a wall: build an open field. Let them explore the woods. Make them the most boring woods in the world. Eventually they'll go back to the mansion, where there's actually interesting stuff happening.

[Tengu_temp]

Scenario 1: nothing important happens, maybe throw them a random encounter if they look long enough. They want plot, they need to head to the mansion.

Scenario 2: the NPCs refuse, unless they somehow manage to roll really high and/or use really convincing arguments. If they start to insist, the NPCs get annoyed and shoo them away.

[Mastikator]

If they'd rather explore the mysteries of a tree than the mysteries of how the duke suddenly vanished at the same time that the eternal rain started, then let them.
Eventually they'll get bored with the tree and complain that nothing happen, then you can tell them about all the plothooks you threw at them that they ignored.

That ought to shut them up.

[awa]

ive always found making the party fail at whatever their doing gets them on track pretty well. they want to waste time looking at the woods and ignore the logical thing to do well then the plot moves on with out them that normally gets them going where i need them to be. (note this method only works if the pcs care about the campaign world most do but Ive played with some that don't and they do make it much harder not to railroad.)

[Oracle_Hunter]

Instead of making the woods boring, throw in a random encounter (and a hook) that leads back to the mansion. It could be a corpse dressed in finery (with the manor's seal) with a key - perhaps it's to a treasure vault in the manor! Or maybe a poor servant getting assaulted by gnolls who, after being rescued, asks for an escort back. Sometimes players are just interested in something you consider unimportant (e.g. your "scenery" woods) and in these cases it is best to just perk their interest with whatever you had planned.

If your players are just being contrarian, speak to them OOC and say "guys, I designed a plot involving the manor. Since that's clearly what you don't want to do, what kind of adventure would you like to go on." Then adjourn that session and build an adventure along those lines.

[QuantumSteve]

Instead of making the woods boring, throw in a random encounter (and a hook) that leads back to the mansion. It could be a corpse dressed in finery (with the manor's seal) with a key - perhaps it's to a treasure vault in the manor! Or maybe a poor servant getting assaulted by gnolls who, after being rescued, asks for an escort back. Sometimes players are just interested in something you consider unimportant (e.g. your "scenery" woods) and in these cases it is best to just perk their interest with whatever you had planned.

If your players are just being contrarian, speak to them OOC and say "guys, I designed a plot involving the manor. Since that's clearly what you don't want to do, what kind of adventure would you like to go on." Then adjourn that session and build an adventure along those lines.

^This. Don't punish your players for not following you plot hooks. That's tantamount to railroading. A gentle in game nudge or yet another plot hook is much better DMing.

[Yakk]

All of the previous posts seem like ways to railroad players.

If you don't follow my plot, you get punished/don't get rewarded.

Instead, what about making the players right?

The forest has a hidden entrance into the manor. Maybe you actually pick up something that was in the manor, and place it as an out-building in the forest. Maybe most of the NPCs are indifferent, but one of them is actually helpful, or drops a hint that is useful later.

You can even sort of hide it, and then act surprised that players found it. You can improvise new content. You can create a different plot, and save the one you wanted for later.

[Comet]

Yeah, a certain amount of improvisational skills are a must for any GM, I think.
But if you are really set, for example, the forest being a very uninteresting place, just tell it to the players. It's no fun to let them search for something that isn't there and then going "haw haw, you should've read my mind to find the interesting parts of the game!".

In short, don't make the players search for the fun. Either improvise and play along with their ideas, or just skip through the boring parts with a quick "nothing interesting there" and gently nudge them in the right direction.

[aivanther]

Scenario 1: nothing important happens, maybe throw them a random encounter if they look long enough. They want plot, they need to head to the mansion.

Make said encounter worth almost no xp...you know a lvl 5 party stumbles upon...two wolves!

"Yay, you all get 10 xp. "

"What? It's woods. Wolves live in the woods, you found some. I'm trying to help you guys since this is where you want to be."

I mean, they can ignore your plot and go where they want, it happens, and you have some realistic things happen. If the woods aren't haunted and full of dire bears and minotaurs, they find what's normally in woods...a bunch of animals that want to be left alone.

[WarKitty]

Thanks guys. They're not trying to be contrary, just creative. And some of our more creative players spook rather easily...I've got a bunch of newbies. We're most definitely a "rule of cool" group.

I can kind of see what I should have done on the woods, in retrospect (they were supposed to be haunted). The second one was harder. I had a city were the people were effectively brainwashed into complacence. They kept trying to get some of the brainwashed NPC's to snap out of it, realize what was going on, etc. Just generally trying to make a scene. By all rights they should have been killed by a peasant mob backed by a few clerics/monks.

[Oracle_Hunter]

I can kind of see what I should have done on the woods, in retrospect (they were supposed to be haunted). The second one was harder. I had a city were the people were effectively brainwashed into complacence. They kept trying to get some of the brainwashed NPC's to snap out of it, realize what was going on, etc. Just generally trying to make a scene. By all rights they should have been killed by a peasant mob backed by a few clerics/monks.

Graduated response is the key here.

Have the brainwashing turn an individual insanely violent when someone tries to break them out of brainwashing. Having to deal with one unarmed civilian shouldn't be hard and the PCs will understand that the "snap out of it" strategy won't work.

If they continue to be a nuisance, have the Overlords tip their hand a bit. Poison in their beer, chambermaids turned assassins, etc. Again, small threats that can be resolved without blowing up the adventure.

[Vaynor]

All of the previous posts seem like ways to railroad players.

If you don't follow my plot, you get punished/don't get rewarded.

Instead, what about making the players right?

The forest has a hidden entrance into the manor. Maybe you actually pick up something that was in the manor, and place it as an out-building in the forest. Maybe most of the NPCs are indifferent, but one of them is actually helpful, or drops a hint that is useful later.

You can even sort of hide it, and then act surprised that players found it. You can improvise new content. You can create a different plot, and save the one you wanted for later.

That's still pretty much the same thing, a way to push the players into following your preconceived plot. That is a good idea however, one I frequently use when players ignore my plot hooks. If I designed an adventure that takes place in a castle lorded over by a green dragon, and they decide to go to the nearby swamp instead, they will probably find an underground cave lorded over by a black dragon. Try not to railroad, but adapt.

If you don't railroad at least a tiny bit you're going to have trouble having a steady plot. Obviously you should avoid forcing the players to do what you want (I had a DM that literally put a geas on all of the players so we'd follow his plot), but gentle nudges as suggested above let the players still explore the woods if they want, but just because a player wants to explore woods doesn't make them interesting.

[oxybe]

how to not railroad?

set a backdrop and let PCs interact with it. have the PCs state out their motivations for adventuring and work with that to create an environment they would want to go and travel in. if the game is set in a setting where unless a ragtag group of unlikely, intrepid and brave heroes stop them, the Vile Lich Timmy and his general Vorpal von Hackenslash will take over the world using undead and eldrich horrors, then barring PC interaction, the world will be ruled by zombies and mindflayers.

if the pcs don't want to actively try to stop Timmy & Vorpal, don't keep pushing them to do it. let them continue playing in this world while the zombies & brain munchers are taking over. maybe they go from town to town setting up defenses? help liberate prisoners from zombie camps? disrupt zombie transport caravans? actually help Timmy & Vorpal's plans to rule the world?

shakespear said "all the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players". so set the stage and let the players play.

[WarKitty]

Graduated response is the key here.

Have the brainwashing turn an individual insanely violent when someone tries to break them out of brainwashing. Having to deal with one unarmed civilian shouldn't be hard and the PCs will understand that the "snap out of it" strategy won't work.

If they continue to be a nuisance, have the Overlords tip their hand a bit. Poison in their beer, chambermaids turned assassins, etc. Again, small threats that can be resolved without blowing up the adventure.

That was the original plan...except they decided to do the snap out of it thing by yelling in the middle of a crowded temple...

[Oracle_Hunter]

That was the original plan...except they decided to do the snap out of it thing by yelling in the middle of a crowded temple...

Then they should have been mobbed and probably chased out of town.

Seriously, just because you have a story to tell doesn't mean that it has to have a happy ending. If your players are going to be dumb, make them pay for it - but leave them an out. Let them have a few rounds while the mob organizes to beat feet - but if the PCs stay to fight the mob, they should suffer the appropriate result.

One caveat - never design puzzles that only have one answer. Your PCs may not notice it and then you're out a story. In the brainwashing scenario, for example, let there be several ways to break the brainwashing - or to figure out how to do it. And give many, many more hints than you think is necessary.

[Sitzkrieg]

It might be a good idea to prepare a back-up dungeon and let it sit in your notes until something like this happens. If it's just a simple dungeon crawl, and not too environment specific, you will be able to improvise by using it as the main adventure any time your adventurers leave the beaten path. It won't advance the plot necessarily (although many of the above suggestions hold, such as adding keys or a servant of the mansion on the fly), but players should never be punished or bored just because they aren't moving in the right direction. Regardless of what the DM intends, letting the players have fun comes first.

As for the second example, I don't have enough knowledge to see how working with the NPCs derailed the plot except that it was unexpected. In general though, allowing conflict to escalate between PCs and relatively defenseless townspeople can end badly for everyone involved. Instead, if PCs insist on causing trouble in a town, it might be best to just get all the townspeople, even guards, out of the streets, and not let anyone roll initiative or enter combat rounds. This might help to defuse a situation before you get into the uncomfortable Unlimited Town Guard vs PCs situation.

[graeylin]

several great ideas already presented here.. i use two of them all the time:

Let them explore, and hone your skills at describing and filling in details. lovely trees, maples by the looks of them (knowledge check to make sure), early in the spring. The leaf buds are just greening. Fiddlehead ferns (knowledge check), mushrooms, rocks, bubbling creek, insects, etc.. give them everything you can about the woods.. sounds, insects, maybe a mouse or vole. let them explore, camp out..

heck, even a random encounter or three.. wolves, as suggested, or insect swarm, or a bee hive, or... For me, nothing big though.. 5 to 10 EXP for each. When they realize they aren't finding gold or magic, and using up their own, they will change.

And/or, i love the idea of putting a map, key, clue carved on a rock, etc. in the new area, to lead them gently back to where you want. Railroading? maybe, but they can stay and fish all day long in the stream, if they want. I am merely making it profitable and easy to get more magic and wealth if they hit the castle or cave than wherever they are.

DnD is not just random die rolling, there IS a plot or three involved.

[Anonymouswizard]

In one case they wanted to explore some woods that, well, were just plain woods instead of going into the big mansion right in front of them that had all the plot stuff inside..

Start them of with a few animals. Then the local druid sends them on a quest to get all the interesting creatures back (driven off by adventurers no doubt).

Let the story progress for a few weeks without the PCs. IF they were hired their lack of results leads to another adventuring company being hired, who may not even be as competent as they are. If not let the progress of the non-completed adventure be tracked, and if it can be reported they have a 50% chance of hearing about it (the other 50% is just random adventuring news: New, more accurate 10 foot poles now available).

Or for the next campaign put them in a country with a high level threat, a selection of mapped dungeons with monsters for all levels and no written path to get there. Then make several paths slowly materialize out of the results of the first few sessions.

For the second one: attempted brainwash? (They resist, but now are assumed to have been brainwashed).

[Escheton]

wing it. Take into account every table and monster you know that concerns wherever there are and whatever is going on. Consider the timeline and what the bad guys are doing.
Push forward the players actions. Ask questions to each what they are doing and how they react to each other. Let noone be standard prepared or particularly aware and just have fun with it. As soon as they get remotely bored with actual roleplaying (which is fast) BOOM!! RANDOM ENCOUNTER!!
After that they will probably look to you again for something to do. Partly because they are bored otherwise and have their free roleplaying fun over with. And partly because they look to you so much during combat it gets ingrained in.
Then just continue where you left off.

[WarKitty]

Just for the record, the plot can't advance without them, since the whole overarching story revolves around them getting out of the random plane they got trapped in.

I think what surprised me on the second one was, well, them actually deciding to HELP random NPC's.

[Totally Guy]

I'm afraid to say that I think he vast majority of this thread has been pretty terrible advice.

I'd ask each player for some kind of goal that they have with some kind of action to it.

Then when the players want to go to the woods ask them why. What's there? Until they tell you what they hope to find. If they have no motivation for going there then what would be the point? Once you know how the players believe that exploring the woods will further their goal then you should challenge that.

"We're going to the woods because we think there is a legendary weapon there, we can use that in our fight against Manannan." (although it may sound presumptuous) is way way better than "I think we'll explore the woods".

Then you've got to improvise a small scenario around challenging that concept.

You might be concerned that such a rabbit and hat approach will hurt verisimilitude. That shouldn't be the case because the players we the ones who thought it sounded conceivable enough to motivate them into exploring the woods.

The other advantage in this kind of play is that the players get to do the thinks they like doing in the game.

If you've got a player who comes to the table for the scenes where he gets to talk out high stakes negotiations then that player would be more likely to say "We're going to the woods to negotiate with the druids for their support against the Art Cackle land purchase."

Plot is not something you write alone. Your players should all have some motivation revolving around conflict. And you should challenge your players around that. In future sessions write material around those motivations, then you know the players will be interested in that material because it come straight from them.

[AslanCross]

Don't build a wall: build an open field. Let them explore the woods. Make them the most boring woods in the world. Eventually they'll go back to the mansion, where there's actually interesting stuff happening.

This is it, pretty much.

Railroading is not giving the PCs viable options. Even giving them subtle clues to go back is not railroading.

Railroading is making the PCs get sucked back into the mansion by the eldritch forces of P'Lot, the god of cosmic order, no matter what they do.

[Lev]

Make a curve, not a dead end.
Allow the plot to go through the woods, but then put in a flood or something and make them flee back to the mansion hoping for higher ground.

[Totally Guy]

But if you make the woods boring then you have a boring session! That's a bad thing.

And that's the best case scenario.

If you make the woods interesting then it could be good, it could be bad, but at least there'd be potential to play an awesome game.

[Lev]

But if you make the woods boring then you have a boring session! That's a bad thing.

And that's the best case scenario.

If you make the woods interesting then it could be good, it could be bad, but at least there'd be potential to play an awesome game.

FWOOMP your party falls through a natural hole into an underground cave. INSTANT DUNGEON CRAWL, and it could lead past a brick wall, the players break it down and it leads to the mansion cellar!

[AslanCross]

Well, I was thinking more along the lines of simply saying "After an hour of exploring the woods, you find nothing but the regular flora and fauna." instead of narrating every inch of it.

That said, I guess there are some better suggestions above---having them meet plot hooks that lead them back to the manor (such as the servant that was mentioned above, or maybe a strange light coming from the manor's direction, or whatnot) might be a better idea. I think it's best to pique their curiosity instead of forcing them if you want to avoid any suspicion of railroading. For example, have them find a key with the initials of the noble who owns the manor, or a caravan traveling toward the manor, or a dead guard wearing the livery of the manor's servants. I think that's a gentler way of dealing with it than "Suddenly, a hailstorm!"

[Sliver]

Railroading isn't bad, bad railroading is bad.

[Totally Guy]

If the players insist on exploring a forest "for no reason" then that's probably the best way to handle it. There's no conflict in that.

The players need to care about what they choose to do. That's up to them.

[AslanCross]

Railroading isn't bad, bad railroading is bad.

It would boil down to how one defines "railroading." Some people define the presence of any plot at all as railroading and as such contrast it with sandboxing.

I prefer a more general definition of railroading: denying the players viable options, or the effects thereof. As such, a sandbox could be railroaded if there's nothing to do no matter where they go, or if they can't change anything. A plot could be railroaded if no matter what the PCs do, they can't affect the events in the story.

As such, I always see railroading as bad, because it ruins the enjoyment of the players.