D&D General [+]APs, Railroads and Other Linear Adventures

[Reynard]

I just started a campaign using the Pathfinder Iron Gods AP in 5E, and so I wanted to talk a little bit about Adventure Paths, Railroad* Adventures and other Linear Adventures: their advantages, how to do them well, and how to keep them from feeling constrained for both players and GMs.

Note that I tagged this thread as positive [+], so if you hate APs, do not believe linear adventures or railroads* can ever be good, I appreciate that you feel that way but please start another thread on the topic. I want to keep this one from degenerating into a fight between sanboxers and conductors. Thanks.

I will open with this: having run Descent into Avernus very successful as a linear adventure (I know you can open up the sandbox, but I didn't) I discovered that milestone XP (which I am generally opposed to in most "open" campaigns) was a very useful tool. It kept the PCs from hunting down every enemy and helped keep them on the path, since it was progress that led to advancement, not counting XPs. I have already informed my players that we will be using milestone XP (many of them were in that Avernus campaign) but did mention that a little exploring was still beneficial since there were chainswords and blasters to be found...

What are your thoughts and/or advice on APs, railroads* and/or linear adventures?*I am using the term "railroad" because it is familiar, but I actually prefer the term "rollercoaster" -- same implications about its linear nature, but more emphasis on the fun.

 

[toucanbuzz]

Customized characters. I've gamed with all types including many who prefer a linear adventure design as they can create characters specifically tailored for that campaign and immerse even more. In Curse of Strahd, we immersed in gothic Transylvania style art, music, and characters (e.g. no dragonborn, no tieflings) just for that ride.

Player Personalities. Some gamers don't respond well to "make your own adventures" and I see some players tend to dominate the roleplay and adventure generation in those circumstances. If you see only 2 people tending to do all the planning, it's a concern. For me, it increases the involvement of gamers because everyone begins focused on the same overarching goal (e.g. escape the Underdark or Barovia).

Epic focus. You expect a linear adventure to be epic with an epic finale. Sometimes, it's fun to take that ride for that reason, intending to effectively take on the role of major movie characters who are united in the effort to throw the Ring in the Volcano.

Maps and Encounters. With linear adventures wherein you know players are headed for Castle Ravenloft, you can, in advance, work up more detailed maps, traps, and encounters than you might when having to generate material on the go. I had players make desert pieces for a Dark Sun campaign, and in an Out of the Abyss module, some gamers printed and painted 3-D massive minis for our demon lords after I hinted what I would want on the table. Because players are voluntarily accepting the "railroad" (roller coaster is better), they can get involved in a different way than full sandbox.

 

[Lanefan]

One thing I've learned is that the number-one way to make a linear adventure sequence work is to somehow get in-character (and thus player) buy-in first, before or at the start of said sequence.

This can be done by running a few stand-alone adventures first, during which you drop well-baited hooks for the AP and hope the players/PCs bite (and if they don't you might want to reconsider running that AP as there may not be much interest in it).

One example, taken from a game I played in: during what seems like a stand-alone adventure the PCs find a crystal with a cryptic poem wrapped around it; said poem has clues that point to something bigger and also to some things that need doing en route (in this case it was finding two more crystals, as they were a set). If the players' in-character reaction is "Cool, let's follow this up!" then boom, the train's on the track and away you go.

Put another way, if you've got solid buy-in they largely won't notice or care they're on rails as those rails will be taking them exactly where they want to go anyway.

 

[Jahydin]

Adventure Paths (APs) are my preferred way to game and I've ran quite a few to completion. I enjoy the clear "win/lose condition" they bring to my table. A win being finishing the AP, a loss being failing that in some manner. Players love a challenge, so present it to them in that way.

Terms like "linear" and "railroad" bother me a bit. Thanks to the nature of RPGs, even though there are constraints, there are still limitless ways to accomplish objectives. For instance, if the goal is to gain the prince's loyalty or fail the quest, the characters could take on an adventure for him, get into local politics and garner him influence, sneak into his manner and discover something awful about him to blackmail him with, etc... Hardly seems like a railroad situation to me. I realize some APs would be written with only one of these scenarios in my mind; they only have so many pages after all. My advice is that as long as its in line with competing the AP's goals, run with it anyway and reward them extra if works.

You mentioned "milestone XP". If by that you mean you reward XP for completing objectives, then that's a great idea to get them motivated. If you meant you just level them up at specific points in the adventure, I would strongly recommend not (just imagine what a drag it would be if a video game did this to you!). Both methods do exactly the same thing, but one gives the freedom for extra rewards as well as the satisfaction of slowly earning the level. I don't do individual XP however; I like no matter who earns the XP the entire team benefits.

Hope you have a ton of fun!

 

[Reynard]

You mentioned "milestone XP". If by that you mean you reward XP for completing objectives, then that's a great idea to get them motivated. If you meant you just level them up at specific points in the adventure, I would strongly recommend not (just imagine what a drag it would be if a video game did this to you!). Both methods do exactly the same thing, but one gives the freedom for extra rewards as well as the satisfaction of slowly earning the level. I don't do individual XP however; I like no matter who earns the XP the entire team benefits.

Well, there's no functional difference since you can't move on until you have achieved certain objectives. The reward for exploring beyond the scope of the "main quest line" is exploring itself. Especially in the case of IG, there's high tech loot and weird encounters and strange creatures to see.

 

[Bitbrain]

Back in Pathfinder, I played through Rise of the Runelords, Second Darkness (until we derailed it), Curse of the Crimson Throne, and I think Wrath of the Righteous. We had to plug this nasty hole connecting this one country with the Abyss in a “Mythic” campaign.

We were going to play Iron Gods, but then 5e came out and we switched over.

Honestly, it isn’t the railroad nature of Pathfinder APs I have a problem with, but the mechanics of Pathfinder 1e. The adventures themselves were pretty cool (well, mostly. My old DM did have to clean up Paizo’s take on Ogres for the group) and slowly learning about Thassilon over the course of a campaign was awe-inspiring for me.

But by all the gods of Golarion, I HATE the city of Korvosa.

While I’ve never run a Pathfinder AP myself, I do find them a fantastic resource to pull ideas and campaign locations from, and Iron Gods is definitely my favorite of them.

 

[Jahydin]

Well, there's no functional difference since you can't move on until you have achieved certain objectives. The reward for exploring beyond the scope of the "main quest line" is exploring itself. Especially in the case of IG, there's high tech loot and weird encounters and strange creatures to see.

Leveling up early/late compared to the AP's expectation is enough of a functional difference to me.

As a player, knowing when I grow stronger is dictated by the AP and everything is balanced just right for that is kind of a drag. Also, APs are set up in such a way players should be able to progress the story, so rewarding them on just that alone hardly feels earned IMO. Kind of like just about everyone graduates high school, but graduating with straight As is much harder and should be recognized and rewarded.

The last negative I see is it might discourage creativity. Why risk lives, resources, and time if an idea the AP didn't lay out doesn't work? Much safer to just "go with the flow" (since APs design their "expected paths" to be obvious) and guarantee obtaining that milestone. And loot in 5E isn't the greatest, so if it came down to exploring an area I know wouldn't progress the story (and therefore no XP), I'd pass on it every time unless the GM straight up told me there was at least +2 gear to be had.

From experience, there's nothing better than seeing my players' faces light up after being rewarded for clever playing or putting in extra work. XP is crucial to that. Just my opinion of course.

 

[Reynard]

Fom experience, there's nothing better than seeing my players' faces light up after being rewarded for clever playing or putting in extra work. XP is crucial to that. Just my opinion of course.

To be clear, I agree with you in other circumstances. But the point of using an AP is to experience it, not get experience points.

 

[Oofta]

While I don't generally use AP's I do play in them now and then, and there will sometimes be linear aspects to my own sandbox style campaigns because the PCs will choose to follow a subplot that simply fits a linear style. So following are my suggestions.

First, get buy-in ahead of time, hopefully even before a session 0. Let people know you're doing a linear campaign, give them a rough idea of plot lines and goals. Set the expectation and social contract that the group is committing to this. If it's not enjoyable it can always be discussed, but sometimes you just have to accept that your PC is committed to the plot of the game.

Second, just because it's a linear AP doesn't mean that you don't have wiggle room. My group enjoys a lot of RP, so even in linear arcs I throw it in. Depends on what the players (including DM) have fun with of course. If they find the pacing of some political aspect of an AP boring, feel free to condense or skip sections. If they're really into it, add some fluff and extra content that doesn't affect the overall plot.

Last, but not least, check in with the group now and then. Are they still having fun? Are they intrigued? Are there certain aspects they're enjoying more than others? If there are times when a specific part of the story feels like it's dragging you can always just narrate certain sections or skip over them entirely. Don't feel like you have to use content just because it's there.

There's nothing inherently wrong or less fun with linear campaigns, you just have to get buy in from everyone at the table.

 

[Lanefan]

To be clear, I agree with you in other circumstances. But the point of using an AP is to experience it, not get experience points.

I thought the point of using APs was mostly to reduce the prep workload on the DM.