Confession: I like Plot

[Raven Crowking]

I generally try to run campaigns where there is a background change going on in the world. This change may be good, bad, or unclear. If the PCs notice this change, ask questions about it, and get involved, well, then it becomes a major thread in the campaign. If they don't, the change will still happen, but they will have no role in it.

Mostly this, although some background changes will affect the PCs, whether they will it or not.

I have no problems whatsoever with having prophetic dreams come true, even if the PCs don't follow up those hooks.

Example: A PC dreams that Selby-by-the-Water collapses into Lake Ellidyr. Selby-by-the-Water has partially collapsed in the past.

* If the PCs investigate this, over time they learn that aboleth are under the city, using skum to eat away at the foundations. They may prevent the dream from coming true!

* If the PCs do not investigage this, Selby-by-the-Water collapses into Lake Ellidyr, so that the prophetic dream comes true!

In neither event do I need to say "Oh, it was just a dream".

IMHO, plots in the world should lead to interesting choices for the PCs to make. They should not lead to railroading. "X will happen if not stopped" thus leads to "Should we stop X from happening? Is stopping X more important than stopping Y?" rather than "I guess the DM wants us to do Z to stop X.....We'd better get this over with."

It is always a goal in any game I run to have PCs act upon the world. Eventually, it is hoped that the PCs attempt plots of their own, trying to modify the world to better suit their needs.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think the point about buy in is absolutely on the head. If I want to run a campaign based on an epic quest, by the nature of that campaign, because it is more restrictive than other types of campaigns, I absolutely have to get the players on board at the beginning.

This also.

And it should be noted that there is nothing wrong with running a linear game within the same milieu as a sandbox, or vice versa. In the linear game, the PCs become part of the great events occurring in the background of the sandbox, making the sandbox all the richer for their involvement. Meanwhile, the sandbox gives needed context to the more linear game.


RC

 

[Stoat]

One could argue that this is actually the textbook definition of a railroad, but your players have agreed to get on the train and are enjoying the ride.

In my opinion, there isn't a railroad unless the players want to do something that the DM doesn't want them to. As I see it, the fundamental aspect of "railroading" is tension or conflict between the players and the DM. If the DM has a linear or scripted game planned, and the players go along, I don't think that's a railroad. It's just a linear, scripted game.

 

[gamerprinter]

It depends on the storyline...

In developing a module, I try to place a storyline that drives the party in pursuit of a preset goal, however, getting to that location or destination is up to the party. Still I place plot devices that impell responses with as little railroading as possible.

For instance, in my Kaidan - The Gift: Part 1, the PC party have been hired by a merchant to escort a gift being delivered to a powerful lord in a foreign land. By that definition, this exists a pre-built railroad. The party must deliver the "gift" to a specific destination. Because "travel papers" are required to enter and move about country, there is a pre-built time limit on accomplishing this. In a way Part 1 is strongly railroaded by all these limitations, but then it is the reason for going there in the first place. After delivery is made, new consequences are revealed imposed on them by the actions of their employer, and they are implicated in a situation forcing them to get out of country or be arrested.'

While seemingly contrived the story makes sense, as its intended to be a three adventure storyline with a defined structure from start to finish.

Still there's plenty of room for PCs to choose their own path, however the more "sandbox" they get, their travel papers will expire, and a brand new set of dangers will be implaced. Its up to the PCs to manage the threat levels throughout, as best they can.

GP

 

[pawsplay]

In my opinion, there isn't a railroad unless the players want to do something that the DM doesn't want them to. As I see it, the fundamental aspect of "railroading" is tension or conflict between the players and the DM. If the DM has a linear or scripted game planned, and the players go along, I don't think that's a railroad. It's just a linear, scripted game.

I'll agree with that, with the qualification that the players, and PCs, have the right to deviate from the planned plot in a reasonable fashion. For instance, if Frodo decides to head south and try to seek the aid of the Blue Wizard, the GM should probably toss out what he had planned for the next "chapter," salvaging as many encounters and NPCs as possible, and feel things out for a session or two to figure out if an alternate ending is workable. If not, events will logically guide the PCs back to Mordor in good time.

An example of a source of tension might be if the GM wants to run a game of colorful but heroic trouble-shooters, but does not make this explicit to his players, and ends up with a reluctant hero in the group. Ideally, the PC should either have been designed with freewheeling adventure in mind, or the GM should have a plan up front to burn the reluctant hero's village and turn him into a reluctant hero driven by a need for retribution.

 

[Ariosto]

Creating plots is one of the most rewarding parts of being a DM. The thing a DM needs to do to avoid railroad syndrome is to just make sure that none of the plots are his or hers.

Yes, I think there is some confusion among different meanings of the word "plot".

There are "plots" of the mice-and-men sort, which may or may not bear such fruits as the plotters anticipate. PCs can have 'em, and so can NPCs.

A GM can "plot" courses of ships and storms, plagues and politics, as hypothetical projections under the assumption that relevant conditions do not change. It is likely that the players shall be unable to change many such things. That is not a literary plot, though, as the unfolding story of the characters is not thereby preordained. On the 24th of May, an earthquake shall lay low the city of Gharlick. Where will the PCs be then, and what will they do? That depends on the players.

 

[Ariosto]

If the DM has a linear or scripted game planned, and the players go along, I don't think that's a railroad. It's just a linear, scripted game.

"If it's our pet, it's just a Sarcophilus harrisii."

"Railroad" is shorter than "linear, scripted game". I don't expect "we got linearly scripted" to replace the established terminology any time soon.

 

[pawsplay]

"If it's our pet, it's just a Sarcophilus harrisii."

"Railroad" is shorter than "linear, scripted game". I don't expect "we got linearly scripted" to replace the established terminology any time soon.

While a linear, scripted game is a precondition for railroading, it is not sufficient nor even perfectly necessary. Railroading is specifically a degenerate form of gaming in which meaningful choices are negated to produce the GM's preferred outcome. If you think railroad means "linear, scripted game" then you are attempting to replace the established terminology.

 

[Stoat]

"If it's our pet, it's just a Sarcophilus harrisii."

"Railroad" is shorter than "linear, scripted game". I don't expect "we got linearly scripted" to replace the established terminology any time soon.

Neither would I, because the players are happy. For my money, a game isn't a railroad until the players and the DM are at loggerheads. A railroad is the suite of negative tools that DM's use to force the PC's in a certain direction. The inescapbable prison, the choking fog outside the dungeon, the army of draconians that push them toward Xax Tsaroth. The essence of the term is the involuntary aspect. The player is not allowed to do what he wants to do.

If you're playing a linear, scripted adventure and try to get out, and the DM bludgeons you back in line, that's railroading. Until you try to get out, you can't tell if you'll be railroaded or not.

I think it's worth distinguishing between linear or scripted adventures, which some people enjoy, and railroads, which are universally condemned.

 

[MerricB]

It's not exactly plot I like, it's goals I like.

Goals give shape to the campaign and - perhaps more importantly - meaning, which I crave more than just having encounter be "kill the monsters and take their stuff".

How structured the path is to that goal depends greatly on the players and DM; some players prefer the more linear progression of encounters, others will create their own path.

Cheers!