Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Great Railroad Thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 9733798" data-attributes="member: 2205"><p>I know, and I don't at all disagree. I'm just not sure how else you write that kind of thing to begin with. I tend to design my own adventures as a combination of the 5x5 method and the Fronts method; there's a matrix of things that are expected to happen (mostly NPC instigated) about bunch of different things, and the details are left vague, because I'm never sure what the PCs are going to be most interested in, or of course exactly what they're going to do. A lot of the boxes in the matrix might be borrowed, stolen or at least vaguely resemble something that I read in an Adventure Path once. </p><p></p><p>I'm not really a fan of <em>running </em>adventure paths for exactly the reason that you note. But I'm also not clear on any other way to write them. My own preparation to run isn't something that I could clean up and make presentable as a salable product. </p><p></p><p>You could always do site-based adventuring, I suppose, like in the old days, but that market is well served by the modern OSR scene, and the reason that the mainstream trad scene isn't into that is because they were never really satisfied with that type of adventure in the first place. They <em>want</em> the game to feel more like a fantasy novel or movie and less like a fantasy-themed exploratory board game or wargame or whatever... but honestly, the trad playstyle has never cracked the code in terms of how you write adventures in a way that doesn't come across as a railroad. So GMs who are trad style but you don't like railroads have to pretty radically alter how they actually <em>run</em> adventures quite often, or at least be willing to in the event that, as you say, the PCs refuse to do what they're assumed to do for whatever reason.</p><p></p><p>It's just the risk you always take, I think. Although in my experience, it's not really a very high risk. Most players intuitively understand the social contract of "this is the game I've prepared" so they tend to engage with it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Desdichado, post: 9733798, member: 2205"] I know, and I don't at all disagree. I'm just not sure how else you write that kind of thing to begin with. I tend to design my own adventures as a combination of the 5x5 method and the Fronts method; there's a matrix of things that are expected to happen (mostly NPC instigated) about bunch of different things, and the details are left vague, because I'm never sure what the PCs are going to be most interested in, or of course exactly what they're going to do. A lot of the boxes in the matrix might be borrowed, stolen or at least vaguely resemble something that I read in an Adventure Path once. I'm not really a fan of [I]running [/I]adventure paths for exactly the reason that you note. But I'm also not clear on any other way to write them. My own preparation to run isn't something that I could clean up and make presentable as a salable product. You could always do site-based adventuring, I suppose, like in the old days, but that market is well served by the modern OSR scene, and the reason that the mainstream trad scene isn't into that is because they were never really satisfied with that type of adventure in the first place. They [I]want[/I] the game to feel more like a fantasy novel or movie and less like a fantasy-themed exploratory board game or wargame or whatever... but honestly, the trad playstyle has never cracked the code in terms of how you write adventures in a way that doesn't come across as a railroad. So GMs who are trad style but you don't like railroads have to pretty radically alter how they actually [I]run[/I] adventures quite often, or at least be willing to in the event that, as you say, the PCs refuse to do what they're assumed to do for whatever reason. It's just the risk you always take, I think. Although in my experience, it's not really a very high risk. Most players intuitively understand the social contract of "this is the game I've prepared" so they tend to engage with it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Great Railroad Thread
Top