How not to railroad

[AZNtrogdor]

Well, you can occasionally get away with something like this -- in the midst of a large monster assault on a wizard school in my game, my 6th-level party was set upon by a pair of beholders, causing them much anguish and panic. However, before they got blasted to cinders, the bronze dragon NPC I wanted them to become friends with swooped down (also causing the group to panic at first) and blasted the beholders, who then fled.

The group didn't get any XP for "fighting" the beholders, since they hadn't; really all the scene did was establish friendly relations with the bronze dragon. It made for a very exciting moment, tho, and the players seemed to love it. All of the actions taken by the beholders and the dragon were rules-legal, and at no time was the PCs' free will negated.

This is not something I'd recommend doing on a regular basis, mind you.

-The Gneech

That's like the first boss of almost every megaman game.

It's also a classic ending in Greek and Roman mythology where the main character (a mortal) was in so much trouble that at the last second a god comes in and has to save their butt. It should be used with some restraint. You don't want your characters to become dependent on someone else saving them. The no XP rule is a good. Keeps them from the dependency problem. Your idea is very well thought out.

 

[The Shaman]

Even simpler: Don't write a plot. At all. Not even a little one. Just create an interesting place for the characters to explore, and turn them loose. Adminster what happens as impartially as possible.

Honestly, I don't have a plot anymore. I have a situation that changes according to the actions and goals of PCs and NPCs alike.

The first example describes our Modern military game: a series of encounters ("engagements") that are complete unto themselves, like classic 'site-based' adventures. The second describes our Modern horror game: the adventurers are presented with a situation and a goal and then left to their own devices on how to proceed - the NPCs react to the activities of the PCs, but that reaction depends entirely on the circumstances created by the adventurers.

In the military game, continuity is provided by the characters' relations to the other guys in their unit and each other, by the increase in responsibility they receive as they gain combat experience and by the missions they complete. In the horror game, the players have a goal they are trying to achieve and an antagonist intent on stopping them and achieving its own goals - what's left totally open is how the players go about their pursuit of that goal and the means the antagonist will use to prevent them from interfering.

Each of these games has a 'story': it's the story created by the adventurers themselves, instead of a story by me for them to wade through.

A fair number of us DMs just don't work that way. We gotta have an outline of events we TRY to bring about (note I said try, you can't force it, or that's railroading).

What happens if they don't play along? Do you abandon your carefully crafted outline of events? Or do you create multiple hooks that all lead to the same place so that the web of events is effectively inescapable?

The latter is subtle, often undetectable, but it still doesn't present the players with any meaningful choices beyond how they're going to accept your plot hook.

Additionally, I don't like a plotless game. It feels too much like wander around and rescue kittens.

That depends a lot on the players - if the players create goals for their characters to pursue, then the 'plot' is self-directed. Aimless wandering is replaced with purposeful, meaningful action initiated by the players.

 

[ender_wiggin]

First of all, I'm a narravatist, so a lack of overreaching plot would drive me nuts as DM.

Second of all, my short and sweet advice.

Whenever a group of NPCs attempts something that involves the PCs (this is normally hostile involvment but it comes in a variety of forms), you need to have a strong plan for two courses of action.

1) If the PCs succeed (if you're good, this is likely, but not easy)

2) If the PCs fail.

Never assume that something that involves the PCs will happen no matter what. Even if the enemy is several levels higher, the PCs *may* (dependent on their intelligence and creativity, but even if you are smarter, you're playing 1 vs. 4-6) find something that you hadn't thought of. If it's a valid strategy, reward them, don't shoot them down.

That's all.

P.S. Some DMs like to use Shroedinger's Cat a lot. I personally think DMs who use it extensively are pussies; I find that the more you are able to refrain from using it, the better the game ends up being.

 

[Rasyr]

I try to do several things to avoid railroading....

First of all, I do not run fixed plots. I take the setting and then plot out events that will happen. Something like a "future timeline" from the starting point of the campaign. Thus I know that evil priest x will kidnap noble's daughter on the following Tuesday or that merchant y is going to purchase another shipment of dwarven blades to give to the band of kobolds he has working for him (they raid trade caravans and travelers, his own less often, so that he can create his own little trade monopoly with the next town over).

I also ask players to give me a list of goals for their characters. Thus I can also do rough planning for ways for the characters to accomplish the goals.

And then I create plot hooks. Lots of plot hooks for all sorts of different possible adventures, none of which I have more than just the barest outlines for.

And then I will toss out these plot hooks as rumors, job offers, things discovered in research, etc.. Any method that works. I will toss out as many hooks as possible and allow the characters to choose what THEY want to do.

When they get back from whatever path they choose, they will hear more rumors and gossip, all about the events that took place. How the noble's daughter was kidnapped and then found dead just a few days later (this being one of the hooks they passed on) or how yet another group of travelers was found dead, and how they found a dead kobold as well, one wielding a Dwarven sword!. etc...

Their adventures does not stop the world from continuing on.

What I find the most fun is if things work out so that the PCs have to make a decision. Joe the Rogue discovers the chance to accomplish one of his goals at the same time the Morty the Monk finds a way to accomplish one of his. Unfortunately, whichever one the party goes to accomplish (cause each needs the full group to accomplish), the other guy is going to lose the chance to accomplish his goal, at least for a while...

This allows the party to decide amongst themselves what they are going to do (and it usually involves some horse trading between the players..). They get a sense of personal accomplishment by achieving goals that THEY set. The world itself comes to life as they know that time marches on and events continue to happen even if they are not involved.

At most, I only do very loose plotting, and let the character's own actions and goals drive things more often than not. Thus things center around them. If I can tie something that they want to a specific adventure or module, so much the better cause then they are doing what they want while also allowing me to craft exciting adventures for them.

 

[Darkness]

Some DMs like to use Shroedinger's Cat a lot. I personally think DMs who use it extensively are pussies

No name-calling, please. This goes for everyone, of course. Thanks.

Anyway, what DMing technique do you refer to here? While I know what Schrödinger's cat is, I'm not sure what it would be in a DMing context. Do you mean making crucial decisions only right before the PCs confront the thing/situation/NPC in question? Or maybe only revealing important (and/or basic) information to the PCs at the last minute?

 

[Goblyn]

No name-calling, please. This goes for everyone, of course. Thanks.

Anyway, what DMing technique do you refer to here? While I know what Schrödinger's cat is, I'm not sure what it would be in a DMing context. Do you mean making crucial decisions only right before the PCs confront the thing/situation/NPC in question? Or maybe only revealing important (and/or basic) information to the PCs at the last minute?

I think he's referring to the technique of preparing outcomes for several possible routes then only using the one the PCs choose; the players thus are never aware of any plot hooks and/or encounters on the unchosen routes(thus the "you never opened the box; how do you know whether the cat is alive or dead?" line of thinking.)

... Did that even make sense? The Schrödinger's cat thing appears in the other railroading thread, for prolly a better explanation of it.

 

[Mercule]

Even simpler: Don't write a plot.

The danger here, for DMs who like to world-build is that you may end up showcasing your world instead of running things around the PCs. This is aggrevated by passive players, while truly motivated players tend to slap you upside the head when you get into that mode.

Believe me. I speak from experience. Now, I like to keep a vague plot. At least enough of a one that I fall back on action, not scenery. But, that only takes a sentence or two. Otherwise, I'm just planning for the next two or three sessions.

 

[Graybeard]

What I do with my group is plan 2 or 3 adventures/minor plots are see what happens. If they happen to follow one due to rumors or information given to them from an NPC, then fine. If not, I improvise something. I have enough ideas running through my head at any given moment to be able to do this. Also, the minor plots are going to happen regardless of PC involvement. Things like a certain item will be stolen from somewhere, merchant ships will be attacke dby pirates, a certain person will be kidnapped and held for ransom, etc. Things will happen in the world. If the PCs get involved and prevent some of those things from happening then they will get some people mad at them which will result in future encounters. Their actions will also have an effect on other minor plots as well and may prevent them or, change them. I find this style works well with my players. Sometimes they try to overthink situations which is amusing when the situation is really just something simple.

 

[ender_wiggin]

No name-calling, please. This goes for everyone, of course. Thanks.

Anyway, what DMing technique do you refer to here? While I know what Schrödinger's cat is, I'm not sure what it would be in a DMing context. Do you mean making crucial decisions only right before the PCs confront the thing/situation/NPC in question? Or maybe only revealing important (and/or basic) information to the PCs at the last minute?

Sry, I get excited sometimes.

Anyway, using Shroedingers cat is the method of not deciding something plot-sensitive until you are forced to (as DM of course, but it works for any storyteller).

For example, let's say I've got a murder case, and there are two very strong suspects. I expect the PCs to look into the murder, and doing so may involve lengthy investigations that take several sessions. They look into nooks and crannies, and I give them clues.

Here's the catch: I don't know who the murderer is until the PCs do. Naturally, I may want to choose whichever suspect the PCs aren't expecting, just to make the story seem cooler.

Like I say, it can be effective, but I don't like it because go one step too far it becomes cheesy. It destroys the healthy conflict between DM and players because the players are confronted with a catch-22 -- no matter what conclusion they might reach, it's wrong. It also makes DMing exceptionally boring after a few sessions.

 

[Agamon]

Like I say, it can be effective, but I don't like it because go one step too far it becomes cheesy. It destroys the healthy conflict between DM and players because the players are confronted with a catch-22 -- no matter what conclusion they might reach, it's wrong. It also makes DMing exceptionally boring after a few sessions.

I agree. Not knowing what unexpected thing the PCs are going to do or how I'll respond to it is the funnest part of being a DM, AFAIC.