D&D General Let's Talk About How to "Fix" D&D

[fearsomepirate]

Illusion of Choice sound a bit pejorative, but it's accurate. The thing is, as long as players never see the adventure book, if it's written and run well, they never really know when they're on a branch or a convergence point.

The choices in OoTA largely do not matter, beyond sub-level things like "which NPCs travel with you" and "whether you're overleveled or underleveled when you decide to enter the Wormwrithings," but the players don't know this. The only really momentous choice is whether or not to assist Vizeran in destroying Menzoberranzan, or to have Tuesday Night Smackdown staged at a different location.

 

[Reynard]

Illusion of Choice sound a bit pejorative, but it's accurate. The thing is, as long as players never see the adventure book, if it's written and run well, they never really know when they're on a branch or a convergence point.

The choices in OoTA largely do not matter, beyond sub-level things like "which NPCs travel with you" and "whether you're overleveled or underleveled when you decide to enter the Wormwrithings," but the players don't know this. The only really momentous choice is whether or not to assist Vizeran in destroying Menzoberranzan, or to have Tuesday Night Smackdown staged at a different location.

To be clear, I am not using "illusion of choice" as a pejorative. It's just a tool useful for some kinds of games and less useful for others.

 

[R_J_K75]

illusion of choice

Am I right in that as far as RPGs goes, the players can make a choice or series of choices that ultimately don't matter because any choices they make all lead to the same outcome, all the while the players are under the impression that their choices made a difference in the outcome? I did a Google search on the term and it appears that this concept is not unique to RPGS or game design (or lack thereof) so I'm just inferring from what was said in previous posts.

 

[Reynard]

Am I right in that as far as RPGs goes, the players can make a choice or series of choices that ultimately don't matter because any choices they make all lead to the same outcome, all the while the players are under the impression that their choices made a difference in the outcome? I did a Google search on the term and it appears that this concept is not unique to RPGS or game design (or lack thereof) so I'm just inferring from what was said in previous posts.

Correct. The most extreme example is something you see brought up on message boards sometimes where GMs suggest it doesn't matter whether the PCs go right or left at the fork in the road because the adventure the GM prepared is going to be wherever they went. Other examples include a dungeon where any doors not leading to the BBEG lead nowhere, or when the PCs are given an opportunity to form a plan of attack that ultimately doesn't change the outcome of the GM or designers predetermined events. Players are meant to feel like they are making meaningful decisions but because the next step in the adventure is already determined, those choices are irrelevant.

 

[R_J_K75]

Correct. The most extreme example is something you see brought up on message boards sometimes where GMs suggest it doesn't matter whether the PCs go right or left at the fork in the road because the adventure the GM prepared is going to be wherever they went. Other examples include a dungeon where any doors not leading to the BBEG lead nowhere, or when the PCs are given an opportunity to form a plan of attack that ultimately doesn't change the outcome of the GM or designers predetermined events. Players are meant to feel like they are making meaningful decisions but because the next step in the adventure is already determined, those choices are irrelevant.

I think that as long as its not over used or totally blatant to the players then it serves a purpose. As a DM I don't want to write or prep 2 or 3 possible endings if one will do just fine. I've written adventures that I know more or less how they are going to end so no matter what the players do in between point A & point B I can always just circle back to get them where I want them to go without them ever knowing. But as you said, if every room is empty and you then conveniently reach the climax of an adventure then as a player I'd be upset.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Yeah, I mean the term's been around for a while, I just get why some people don't like it. The main difference between a sandbox and a path is there are no "waypoints" or "branches" in the sandbox. I think you could hybridize the two, but thus far, attempts have looked more like "you can complete the waypoints in any order!" which is really not the same thing.

What I am picturing is something more like having One Big Thing the party needs to do (e.g., slay a Big Bad, discover what is at the bottom of the mine, etc), and, rather than providing the DM with the list of things to do first, the DM is given a map of the surrounding area, with some things filled in, other things only sketched out, some guidelines for filling in blank spots a few hooks, and no real "gate" to the endpoint other than them getting their butts handed to them if they're underleveled or their plan is stupid. The DM might also be given suggestions of what players might do in the sandbox to facilitate their access to the One Big Thing, rather than the typical, "Once the players have secured the alliance of at least three cities, Little Lord Fauntleroy announces that the assault on the Giant King's Keep will commence." This would by necessity be an advanced adventure that a novice DM would have some difficulty running, the purpose of suggestions being largely to introduce newbies to the wonderful world of just wingin' it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I'll share on the issue of choice that something I've done before in planning a dungeon is to have about a dozen encounters of various difficulty and put them in a strategic order. When running the dungeon, I would describe various points of navigation (doors, turns, stairs, etc.) and when the next room was reached, by whatever manner, I would run the next encounter until the final encounter was reached and the "dungeon" was cleared.

It removes the need to stock an entire dungeon when only 30% of it might be used.

It is like when preparing random encounters for overland travel. Unless the terrain/climate is unfitting, the PCs will run into those encounters whether they travel to city A, town B, or head out to cave C.

FWIW, this also allows me to budget encounters for purposes of awarding XP at a pace I want the game to run.

 

[R_J_K75]

What I am picturing is something more like having One Big Thing the party needs to do (e.g., slay a Big Bad, discover what is at the bottom of the mine, etc), and, rather than providing the DM with the list of things to do first, the DM is given a map of the surrounding area, with some things filled in, other things only sketched out, some guidelines for filling in blank spots a few hooks, and no real "gate" to the endpoint other than them getting their butts handed to them if they're underleveled or their plan is stupid. The DM might also be given suggestions of what players might do in the sandbox to facilitate their access to the One Big Thing, rather than the typical, "Once the players have secured the alliance of at least three cities, Little Lord Fauntleroy announces that the assault on the Giant King's Keep will commence." This would by necessity be an advanced adventure that a novice DM would have some difficulty running, the purpose of suggestions being largely to introduce newbies to the wonderful world of just wingin' it.

The 3E Forgotten Realms campaign setting did this pretty well. Most campaign settings or supplements do too. The suggestions are in the metaplot, or sometimes in smaller location descriptions. towards the end of 2E it was almost impossible to open a FR sourcebook to any random page, point and find an adventure idea.

 

[TheSword]

Yeah, I mean the term's been around for a while, I just get why some people don't like it. The main difference between a sandbox and a path is there are no "waypoints" or "branches" in the sandbox. I think you could hybridize the two, but thus far, attempts have looked more like "you can complete the waypoints in any order!" which is really not the same thing.

What I am picturing is something more like having One Big Thing the party needs to do (e.g., slay a Big Bad, discover what is at the bottom of the mine, etc), and, rather than providing the DM with the list of things to do first, the DM is given a map of the surrounding area, with some things filled in, other things only sketched out, some guidelines for filling in blank spots a few hooks, and no real "gate" to the endpoint other than them getting their butts handed to them if they're underleveled or their plan is stupid. The DM might also be given suggestions of what players might do in the sandbox to facilitate their access to the One Big Thing, rather than the typical, "Once the players have secured the alliance of at least three cities, Little Lord Fauntleroy announces that the assault on the Giant King's Keep will commence." This would by necessity be an advanced adventure that a novice DM would have some difficulty running, the purpose of suggestions being largely to introduce newbies to the wonderful world of just wingin' it.

Pure sandbox adventures Are exceedingly rare however. Mainly relegated to homebrew where the writer can do it as they go along.

If we take two classic sandbox adventures. Slumbering Tsar by Frog God Games and the Night Below. Both the adventures are open world with almost no scripted railroad in their areas. Players can go where they like in whichever order they like. However... they still have checkpoints. A bit like crossing the border from France to Spain. Eventually you’re gonna need to cross the Pyrenees. If you want to explore that area.

In slumbering Tsar the players have to overcome a dragon and they have to summon the temple of Orcus. Two locked points that prevent the following area. Night below needs the gates to the underdark unlocked and the overcoming the City of Glass Pool.

Do these points invalidate the fact that the entire rest of the campaign is a sandbox, or spoil the feeling of player agency - of course not. It is perfectly possible to see the adventures as three smaller sandbox adventures (which is exactly how their books are presented).

This discussion is being position as black and white. Any control points in an adventure is railroad. Only an adventure without any constraints is a sandbox. This is a false choice that doesn’t take account of how adventures have adopted the Sandbox format and improved adventure design with it. While still maintaining a fully fleshed out practical campaign product.

This is not the same as illusion of choice.

 

[R_J_K75]

This discussion is being position as black and white. Any control points in an adventure is railroad. Only an adventure without any constraints is a sandbox. This is a false choice that doesn’t take account of how adventures have adopted the Sandbox format and improved it.

I think no matter what, in any sandbox adventure there is going to come a point that the players next option or set of options are going to be limited or restricted based on their previous choices. If this isn't the case then again their choices don't have consequence and don't really matter.