Let's get (un)Linear, (un)Linear.

[Eodred]

Sung to "Let's get Physical" of course...

Wanted to reach out to the community to get some ideas. What do you guys do as DM's to keep a story, or the players options from being/feeling too linear? I realize that it's not reasonable to have a completely open world that they can just run around in and do whatever they want whenever they want to do it, and that there has to be a story and a plan.... but what do you guys do to give players more options? I don't want it to feel like I'm always trying to force them down a path, put them in a dungeon with only one eventual way through it, etc.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Actually I would say after running sandboxes for 35 years that it is ABSOLUTELY possible and reasonable to just let the players go play around and do whatever they want. Obviously they aren't going to be capable of achieving any old thing at any level, but you most surely CAN just cut them loose and let them do stuff.

Now, developing a sandbox and running it is a particular art and you'll find a lot of different definitions of what elements and practices fit within one. Personally I don't have many problems doing it. For one thing I basically know where the players are headed 95% of the time. Once they dive into an adventure they won't usually change their minds halfway through and turn around for instance. They might wander off on a side quest or whatever but the obvious points where that is likely to happen usually exist.

It is also worth noting that the players being ABLE to wander off in various directions or initiate adventures isn't the same thing as the players actually doing it. There are plenty of plot hooks and motivations that I supply. The players will often ignore a plot or create one of their own, but 4e is pretty easy on the DM as far as throwing stuff together. I have lists of NPCs, locations, etc that can be quickly thrown into play and I'm pretty good at making up an interesting story on the fly.

What I would say is introduce elements at a pace and in a fashion you're comfortable with. When the characters get to a place, say a new town, give them 2-3 hooks. Maybe they arrive with some plan in mind. Toss in an option they hadn't thought of. When they find an interesting item give it a bit of history and maybe an interesting story. Say they find a sword, it could be the weapon of a well known fighter. Maybe the characters know this fighter also had some other cool items they might want. A few hints and they could head out looking for his final resting place. Stuff like that.

Basically I always lead with a carrot and rarely with a stick. I never debate with the players about what they are going to do next, I just give them the goods and let them go. NPCs may try to motivate them in different ways, but they have the ability to ignore or defy NPCs that try to push them around. I will encourage instead. Maybe a character has a prophesy. Usually the player will have been involved in choosing that character element, so if I feel like having the party do X then I might tie it into the prophesy. Chances are they'll seriously consider doing X.

 

[nnms]

As a DM, I create situation and never create plot. I don't plan in advance what happens. And as Justin Alexander writes, it actually takes less prep and things have a less likely chance of screwing up when the DM doesn't plot things out in advance:

The Alexandrian - Misc Creations

 

[Rabbitbait]

I have a number of overarching themes to my world that I keep in mind. The players may or may not follow the hints that I drop in regard to those themes (if they even pick up on them) or they might do their own thing. I keep on dropping in new options for the players to follow - after an adventure there is never one obvious path to follow, they need to choose between two or three, or follow some of the stuff that has come up from their character backgrounds.

I use character backgrounds a lot and keep on bringing characters pasts back to haunt them. I also try and tie what they wrote for their backgrounds into what is happening now, or what might be happening in the near future.

In short:
Give lots of options
Use character backgrounds as part of those options.

I've found that the heroic/paragon/epic portions of the game make it much easier to pace out what might happen. It's also much easier in 4e to scale up something that the characters ignored earlier but then decide to go back to.

 

[pemerton]

I will start by offering two links.

One is to LostSoul's thread on this forum where he talks in detail about running his modified 4e sandbox. One important feature of LostSoul's approach is that the players have a lot of information upfront about the nature of the world and the challenge level of different areas, and there is no rule about not letting the PCs act in accordance with metagame knowledge. Because the players are able to metagame in this way, they are able to make their own choices about where they go in the world and what quests they take up.

The other link is to a thread on The Forge - the post by Paul Czege, about halfway down the page, talks about how he frames a scene - he is very aggressive in how he sets it up (which is sort of the opposite of AbdulAlhazred's idea of 2 or 3 hooks that the players may choose from) but the way the scene resolves depends on how the players respond to the stuff he throws at them in the course of the scene.

I especially like the idea that he shapes the NPCs' motivations during the course of play, in order to building meaningful responses to the players' choices. This is different from a sandbox approach, but is an alternative that I think can work well.

I have a number of overarching themes to my world that I keep in mind.

<snip>

I use character backgrounds a lot and keep on bringing characters pasts back to haunt them. I also try and tie what they wrote for their backgrounds into what is happening now, or what might be happening in the near future.

In short:
Give lots of options
Use character backgrounds as part of those options.

I agree with this, especially about grounding the PCs in the world.

My own approach is to work with the players in designing their PCs and incorporating their backstories into the gameworld, and then to present situations that will speak to those backstories. So, for example, if one of the PCs comes from a city destroyed by goblins, I will present him with goblins threatening a human village and see what he does. I will have him meet his mother, now an enslaved servant in a goblin fortress, and see what he does.

What I've found works for me is to not punish the players for the choices they make, or to be judgmental about it (which means, for example, be very very careful using alignment, or gods, or law enforcement, in an aggressive way to direct your players' choices). So to continue with the above example, if the PC is fighting the goblins and they surrender, what does he do? Suppose he decides to execute them on the spot - this tells us something about the character, and it changes the PC's place in the gameworld - maybe the villagers he's rescuing cheer as he decapitates the goblins, maybe he gets a reputation for being bloodthirsty, maybe his mother can't believe what her son has become. Any of the players' choices should lead to repurcussions that build future encounters and future adventures. They shouldn't feel that they have to make the "right" choice (ie the GM-sanctioned one) in order to be able to keep playing the game with the PCs they want to play.

 

[Aenghus]

It isn't as simple as giving people more options. To have meaningful choices the player needs to have enough information to make an informed choice (as others have already said in this thread).

How much work it is depends on the players and referee involved. Ideally, in this style of game players create PCs with strong motivations and background ties that give them direction in the setting (and actually follow these up). On the other hand, some players are prone to bouncing from plot lead to plot lead refusing to commit, which can significantly increase the referee workload.

 

[pemerton]

It isn't as simple as giving people more options. To have meaningful choices the player needs to have enough information to make an informed choice (as others have already said in this thread).

How much work it is depends on the players and referee involved. Ideally, in this style of game players create PCs with strong motivations and background ties that give them direction in the setting (and actually follow these up).

One way to get the players to follow up these motivations/relationships is to bring them to the players.

So instead of waiting to see whether they go and visit their parents, have their parents be kidnapped! Or at least threatened. If the PC is sworn to exterminate devils, have an imp turn up and make an offer to good to refuse. Etc etc.

 

[DIANNE158]

well done, mate