Excerpt: the quest's the thing

[Irda Ranger]

If people agree to play the game one way ("your choices matter") and actually you decide to play another, totally different way ("your choices don't matter"), I think its dishonest and patronizing.

I think you're reading too much into what Mourn said. If the PCs take the Eastern pass (rather than the Western pass), what do they find? There's no right answer here other than "Whatever Mourn says they find." He's the DM. But here's what doesn't happen:

1
PC: We turn around.
Mourn: You can't. A, um, a ... an avalanche has blocked the pass behind you.

2.
PC: We go back and take the Western pass.
Mourn: You find a wizard tower, just like the Eastern pass.

Because that would be obvious and un-fun. All Mourn is saying is that he's got some monsters statted out in his notes and a couple maps, and he finds ways to work them into the quest rather than think "Darn, they took the Eastern pass! Now I have to improvise a whole adventure right on the spot! If only they had turned right!" Because that would be dumb.

 

[The Little Raven]

All Mourn is saying is that he's got some monsters statted out in his notes and a couple maps, and he finds ways to work them into the quest rather than think "Darn, they took the Eastern pass! Now I have to improvise a whole adventure right on the spot! If only they had turned right!" Because that would be dumb.

This. I have plot points. I have encounters. They will happen. When and where is a factor of what my players do.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

While I'll have one bit end goal in mind, and I'll try to nudge players with a couple different plot points, if one of them talks to me afterwards and says "I've got an idea..." I'll generally roll along with it and try to fit it into that Big Bad at the end.

In the door example, if one of them out of the blue said "Know what? Stand back. I'm FIREBALLING BOTH," I'd find a way to go with it (Or burn them to a crisp when they don't stand back. Silly players). I had one group decide they didn't want to fight the Big Bad, at least not alone, so instead of going into some dungeons and looking for a holy sword meant that kiled him in ages past (None of them was a paladin, I should mention), they decide to raise an army and assault him directly. So I went with that, too.

As I said earlier, just because you start at A and end at C doesn't mean you have to hit just B in the middle. You don't even have to hit B. There can be as many points in between, as connected as you want. Or as unconnected.

That said, if there IS an established threat, make sure it's actually threatening. Nothing makes a BBEG lose his "evilness" more then just sitting in his tower and brooding. If the heroes don't want to come after him, then he starts working his way to them.

 

[Spatula]

The only social contract I'm assuming is that the choices the players make will matter. Assuming that's part of the social contract, if you're breaking that, I think it's dishonest.

If the social contract is "I only have so much prep time, so let's go with what I have prepped", that's open, honest communication and cool.

If you can turn a little bit of prep into a full night of adventure, that's good DMing. It's not being dishonest, any more than any exercise of DM fiat is dishonest. DM: "You get attacked by five ghouls on the third watch." Player: "What?! You didn't roll each hour to see if wandering monsters showed up, or to see what monsters, and how many, attacked! That's dishonest!" The players trust the DM as the custodian of "stuff that happens" in reaction to their actions. "Stuff that happens" includes what they run into when they go down a particular path.

I'm sure every DM has had some point early on where they lavishly detailed some part of an adventure, only to have the PCs completely bypass it or go in a different direction, leaving the inexperienced DM with no idea of what to do. Now, if you're an amazing ad-libber this isn't that much of a problem, but most people are not amazing ad-libbers. So there are ways to deal with this situation if you're not. What I tend to do is have a broad plot outline in mind, a few key encounters, and I'll prepare a bunch of different possible enemies to fight. If the players go to location A, they fight some of the enemies that I prepared and possibly have one of the key encounters. If they choose to go to location B, the same thing will probably happen, even if they arrived at the encounter in a slightly different fashion.

You can also over-prepare, detailing every choice just in case. This is what I used to try to do, but eventually I realized it was a lot of wasted time. It was better to put more effort into a flexible list of "cool stuff" than to spend a little bit of time detailing every possible player choice.

 

[LostSoul]

This. I have plot points. I have encounters. They will happen. When and where is a factor of what my players do.

Ah, sorry Mourn. I was in a mood to read you in the worst light possible. Sorry about that.

My own personal preference would be for you to tell me that; but Irda Ranger's right, I was making too big of a deal about it.

edit: To make up, let me link to some actual railroading experiences.