𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐞𝐲 - Get my level 1 to 5 fifth-edition compatible adventure module featuring new fey creatures here ▶▶ www.thedmlair.com/intothefey 𝐋𝐚𝐢𝐫 𝐌𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐳𝐢𝐧𝐞 - Reduce prep time and improve your games with this monthly D&D magazine ▶▶ www.patreon.com/thedmlair
A linear adventure Is exactly how I run my games, more so with groups with little to no experience so they can learn how to play. And then asking them what to do at the end is so important with scheduling. It gives the the agency they need and allows me to make it as exciting or intense as it needs to be and the new players keep wanting to come back
Railroad = you are all just actors in my beautiful play, all of your choices have been preplanned by me. There is only 1 way to open this sliding glass door and that is the fingerprint scanner set to the BBEG only, please ignore that you could easily smash it. Linear: look guys i only have 2hrs a week to spend preping so just follow the 1 plot hook. Or tell me the your decision to the choice of plothooks given out at the end of the session so i can prep it for next time. Sandbox: I am Matt Mercer and get paid to prep everything and worldbuild so here are several plot hooks, feel free to make you own. Open world: everyone just kinda sit there with analysis paralysis because they have to spend an hour looking for plothooks that might not even be there. Hopefully its obvious that the extremes of the spectrum from Railroad to Minecraft are not good DnD. Beside you could easily set up a fun super linear game where the players are students in a magic training school and get sent out on missions by their Teacher. Melee classes and Clerics could be hired bodyguards to make sure the mages are immediately killed when they run out of spells. Lots of cool world building potential. Also useful for new players if they want minimal choices about what adventures they go on while still figuring out the rules. And it explains why the encounters are so balanced to the party, the teachers know about how strong the mission is already.
I had something like that happen last night. I was running a module where the module assumed that the PCs would kill an opponent. One of them cast Healing Word on the opponent in the middle of the fight. I had him roll a d20 when he did that, he rolled high, and the monster stopped being aggressive.
When I ran CoS for my players, at one point, two of the main PCs had conflicting work obligations, so the others ran around town collecting quests, they literally had almost a dozen open ended quests by the end of the session. The next week, they just chose the most urgent, and followed those. Made my job easy.
I genuinely appreciate you explaining the difference between railroad and linear. I've been DMing for 5 years and always felt bad for linear games because I thought they were railroad like. Thanks!
I remember I was in a group playing when I was a kid. The DM planned out an area for us to go to in the future (it was 2e, and realizing how poorly HP scales, the only way we could have survived if all of us got a certain damage immunity) and we decided to go anyways. It was a trio of dragons who were much more interested in continuing to nap than fight so they kept doing stuff like casting Wall of Stone to keep us out. That did not deter us and the wizard hopped his homunculus to the other side and started fireballing them. The dragons decided to come out. If the DM had not ruled that magic resistance applies to breath weapons then it would have been a 1 round TPK. The surviving dwarf grabbed the girdle of giant strength then the rest of the party (all dead) and booked it.
an other way of having a "suggestive" railroad is something with metaphorical "doors" and them needing the "keys". Example: you want the party to explore a forest first before they move onto the mountains. think of the mountain as a "door" the party would need clothes or equipment that can help keep them warm in the cold climate, this would be the "key". you the DM can control when to give the party the ability to get those clothes, in turn having something linear progression
From the hook side of things, something that might work to disguise a certain level of linearity is to provide multiple hooks that all eventually loop back around to the same place. That approach means the GM needs to have a clear view of the big picture of their adventure, work out different ways players might enter it, and then create distinct hooks that on the surface seem unrelated, but behind the curtain are different symptoms of the same problem. Of course, those opening paths leading to the discovery of the route cause should be different, not just all leading to the same next scene. So when they take a hook, that hook leads them to X, where they discover Y, which leads them to Z, which leads them to discovering the root problem that they now have to solve, but each hook has a different XYZ path that may contextualize the adventure a little differently each. Also, the more specific the overarching objective, the more linear an adventure/campaign is likely to be by it's very nature. If the players discover the BBEG has a plan to steal an artifact to enact a ritual to summon a world ending monstrosity, well, the means of stopping him may be somewhat finite, even if how you try to achieve those means might vary. You have a number of time sensitive goals, but unless the BBEG actively changes his plans, the game is going to be somewhat linear because there are certain finite elements to the problem to be solved. And frankly, that in itself isn't a problem. Linear games are where specific problems must be solved. Railroads are where there there is not only a specific problem to solve, there is only 1 acceptable way of doing it because of GM, not in world logic. Single solution problems should be exceptional hurdles, and even then should have consequences for not overcoming that don't stop the game.
As I started my campaign. I told my players to please follow the main quest hooks. So I can prepare the adventure and certain areas. In these areas are problems and npcs. I also prepare the sources of the problems. How the players do something is up to them. If they come up with crazy ideas. Let's try it and let the dice decide. ^^
I generally prefer playing in linear games than more open-world. The more we play with what the DM prepared for the better it is. Most DM's will have to improv enough as it is, and it's always obvious when they do.
I think the sweet spot is not fully open-world, but not strictly linear. Maybe a quest unlocks other three quests, all in the same "great plot". There is some kind of linearity in there, but players can choose "kind of" which scenario, maybe enemies, and gets one part of the solving puzzle each place (or they can go to the "endgame" with just one piece of the solution and figure it out after)
Going to say this one more time for the folks in the back: If you want to railroad your players, WRITE A BOOK INSTEAD! Games have choices, and role playing games in particular can have widely varying outcomes based on the choices the players make. A DM can tell or ask the players to buy into the adventure that they prepare for that session. Once the DM limits all the options down to one set of "correct" choices, it isn't a game anymore.
Your vids about railroad vs liniar have helped me so much to get past the worry of not giving my players enough choice, and instead focus on the creativity of building the gane around their choices. Hell, they end up finding creative ways to explore what i prepare. Please keep up yhr great work.
I like to set up the setting and have several major conflicts happening in it already. If I can, I tie one or more to the backstory of a player in some way to make it more relevant to them - and yes I always check if they're down for that first. Then I drop hooks relating to a bunch of them and see what the players are interested in most. That becomes the adventure as I have the world react to their interference. If they seem unsure what to do, I pick one and have it directly impact the party somehow. As Matt Colville says, I "chase them up a tree." Which forces them to react and then we are good to go.
I actually often end up prepping all three options for adventures - but I usually keep the two they don't take for later and just reskin and change them to work for a future quest.
I gave my players three options and I asked them in the end of the session which option will they choose so I know what to prepare. One of the players didn't like it and told me that. So I stopped asking. Downside, now I need more time to prep, but they told me a couple of sessions after that. "How do you do it!? Either you know exactly what we are going to do, or you prepared everything". Truth is, I don't prepare everything but I think a lot about possible options so I can improvise easily. Am I good at improv? Not at all. But when I spend a lot of time about thinking about options, I can more easily improvise options that I couldn't anticipate. Thinking about next session is preparing. Even if you don't sit down and write stuff, just think about it - It is preparing.
@@craigmobey954 That was not a big of an issue for him and he tottaly understood that because he is DM himself. I asked all the players "Is there something that I'm doing that you don't like?". I just want to point out that by accepting his suggestion (not a request) the other players have a better game experience. I still give them two or three options but not in a form "You have options A, B or C" but in form of a plot hooks, then I listen to them and I try to guess which option will they choose so I prepare that option more than the other.
@@Ljubomirokic Maybe three explicit options was too prescriptive. I ask an open question. What are you planning on doing next? After they're presented with options. I can then plan accordingly. Over planning isn't something that should be a badge of honour.
@5:56 love this Luke. You sometimes have to dip into the meta to make sure that it's a good experience. I've leveled with my players a few times when coming to a fork in the road so that I can be properly prepared for the next adventure. Most of my plot hooks are kept simple and I don't have too much trouble ad-libbing content or even NPCs - but I'm **terrible** at making maps on the fly. Those I really need time to prepare.
I'm actually running a homebrew module where the bulk of the adventure is collecting five holy artifacts scattered across the world. Once drop the plot hook, my party will be allowed to obtain the artifacts in any order they desire. Each artifact has a small adventure surrounding it, and I'm trying to make each one at least somewhat more obtuse than "go to the place and grab the thing." So far I've got one artifact tucked behind a possible heist/enemy camp raid/Hekkin lot of diplomacy.
I run pretty linear games, but not railroads. I use the motto "I can force problems, but I can't force solutions." In general, I don't have many problems because I've gotten pretty good at making the next hook seem natural, logical and in line with the characters' motivations. You conquer the bad guy fort and find evidence that they sent a bunch of troops to Weird Forest to dig up a powerful ancient weapon, so you go there, and so on. It is also important to have variety in adventure and enemy types ("Hey look! More giants!"), and to give the PCs at least a few days of downtime in a big city to let them develop themselves. (I will note that I also have good players who like this style and follow the hooks rather than deliberately trying to break things, which helps.)
Geezer here... Thanks for a great vid. On what has been a pet peeve of mine for decades. Yes, "railroad", bad, always bad. You mentioned the magic number. 3. Never give the kittens more than 3 choices. It ends badly. Game lag and confusion at best. Game on.
Giving the player options is best. With your riddle analogy you could put that anywhere. You want to climb? Ad you get to a balcony a gargoyle asked you a riddle You knock the door? It asks you a riddle You dig underneath? An old and wise kobold will show you the way if you answer his riddle Even with 1 outcome there can be many paths to it. That's what DMing is about
@@DXYS95 yeah like if they found someone to solve it for them. But if you really wanted to use the riddle You could always use it later in the dungeon Or to get back out.... There's so much stuff a DM can do Taking away player agency should be the last on the list
My FAVORITE moment that came up wasn't actually railroading, but I hadn't considered that the players would just blatantly ignore the risk; just completely ignore it, lol. There was a ruined city they were trying to get to that was caught in a massive sandstorm. The sandstorm was described by their guide and airship captain as being incredibly violent and he did not want to risk flying into it, but rather suggested that they head through on foot where the channels in the rock and such would allow them to keep from getting tossed around. Players straight up went, "Nah. We want to go through it." The captain, who I had played as a sort of overly cautious type to begin with, stuck to his guns on the matter and was like, "I REAAAAAALLY do not like this idea." One of the players, out of character, goes, "DM. Are you railroading us?" On the fly I said, out of character, "I have no idea what you're talking about. But on an unrelated note the captain hands you some railroad ties." It got a laugh and they all agreed to go on foot, lol. For those wondering I was prepared to ad-hoc the hell out of that, but I intended to put some serious challenge into it, because I DID tell them it was dangerous. 🤣
So I walked away from the screen but could still hear the video at the beginning. And I legitimately thought you did the intro where you said never do a railroad and then it went into an ad and I thought that was just the whole video lol
I just wanna say, I'm pretty new to the channel but I really like the content you're making and it always gives me lots of inspiration as a DM. Keep it up 👍🏻
Adding to what Luke has said: Making a puzzle which has only one solution isn't railroading any more than putting a locked door in their path is railroading. Sometimes, there are doors which are too complex for your rogue to pick, and sometimes there are puzzles which are so well designed that only the correct solution will produce the result your players need. But likewise, you don't then make the solution so complex or obscure that your players assume they don't have all the information they need to solve it yet and leave, only to waste time wandering the land aimlessly while looking for nonexistent clues.
I like to start a campaign with a predetermined adventure, maybe two in line, and then present with two or three options for the next adventure. Each one giving one "piece" of the solution of the mystery. After that, maybe the old two + one new, and maybe the final plot (or they can keep going in these adventures to explore a little more of the world).
6:13 that's EXACTLY how I run my games, I make my own campaigns, but I always level with my players like "guys, here are 3 prologues, which of these interest you guys the most?" and then I actually build the campaign from the ground up, this way I can run what I want and my players have choices of what adventures they wanna have, as for running the game I have some sandbox elements but it's mostly a linear game
Linear adventures are great, and my preferred way to run games. Additionally, I use traveling from location to location as a way to fuel rumor mills and provide options. Heading north from Waterdeep? Long Road or High Road? Something is going to happen on either road, and the path you didn't take is going to be the source of rumors in the next city. Always make the PCs choices mean something, while showing them the world exists outside of what they're doing to it.
I’ve heard the term “railroad” many times, but for some reason, reading it this time game me the idea to start a campaign in a train car on a literal railroad.
I use the Dragon Age Origins and Mass Effect 1 approach. I give my players the choice of which "Railroad" (RR) Adventure they want to go on. As an example, I have beginning level PCs start in a Tavern in a large city. I then have notices, rumors & clues that can take the PCs to either the B2, N1, Sunless Citadel, T1, and L1 Modules. Which one they choose is up to them. In other words, I make no attempt to hide a RR adventure. Instead, I give them the choice of which one to go on.
Really like these videos. Straight to the point and really useful. Good job, man! I want to go back to making TRPG videos. But it's hard when you have a full-time job. lol I'll just live vicariously through you until I can make more. XD
I remember once playing in a campaign where we went a direction the GM hadn't planned for. He solved it, in his view, by having a piece of paper fall from the sky. "Note from God: go the other way." Funnily enough, that first session was also the last.
Somewhere in AD&D there is a passage that says something like ‘The rules in this book are guidelines to be used or discarded where necessary’. I also played Paranoia, and that games advice was that if the rules interfere with the fun then the rules are wrong. So i take a fairly loose view of the rules, i follow them until they interfere with the fun. So if i know there is a rule in the book that governs an action the player wants to do but I can’t find it in a reasonable time, then i just wing it. Or if following a prescribed procedure to generate an outcome is bogging the game down i throw it it out. Or if the player describes a really cool move and the rules don’t allow for it then i just make it up. Half my players are not hard core D&D fanatics, in fact they’d really rather be doing something else and are only playing to keep the other half happy. So i need to keep the fun up and the number crunching down, combat needs to be fast and exiting and the emphasis needs to be more on exploration and adventure. I also don’t like the ‘spell slot’ concept. The idea that a wizard has a bunch of pigeon holes that he can assign spells to just sounds too gamey for my liking. I can give up a 4th level spell to cast a more powerful 1st level spell? Nah bugger off. In my games i use the old rules where spells get more powerful with the level of the caster. So when the spell description says ‘if this spell is cast in a 4th level slot it does…..’ then i read that as ‘if this spell is cast by a magic user capable of casting 4th level spells it does…… Anyway each to their own and what ever makes you happy.
I'd add that even when running a module, allow your players' choices to matter. Its okay to be creative and do your own thing, and the players might act in unexpected ways that have unexpected results. Even if the ultimate course of the module is still basically the same, and there are still really only a few ways it could end, you still make them feel as if the world is responding to them. 'Linear' doesn't have to mean 'rigid'.
Made the main plot a simple mcguffin fetch quest... But they dont know where it is and theyre not strong enough to get it if they did. I left the middle open and have other quest givers along the way. I will drop reminders of the main quest if it goes too long. Sprinkle in quests specific to the PCs backstory and boom you got yourself a dynamic world :D
For those interested in the ESIEST way to disguise a linear campaign as open, for those who ENJOY RP, it is controlling information, your player do not and SHOULD not know, what each "option" they have leads them to, as long as they BELIEVE they have made a decision that had ramifications they will be happy with their agency. You basically make the npc's unreliable narrators and the rumor mill, just that rumors, direct quest are paired with strong pc motivation, [treasure or their compelled to do it], but general adventures are more meandering, and reoccurring characters exist with convergent thinking. A few easy ways to do this are false start, remix, and reskin, tell them a THING is going on, any adventure event has a few leads that are all symptoms of the same problem, choose a disposable lead and once their in the place they GET TO sus out the real adventure, your make content out of the false start redirect to your plan. Reskins are going to be set up the same way as false start but you are giving straight up real hints about what is going on, and what they have in store, the elements relating to paths they didn't go down should be discarded, because if the players find out it just feels bad, all around. Like for example your villain is poisoning the well, to gather corpses for undead. One town might have crop failure, another undead roam the streets at night, the third goblins are invading. So for the third example their were ALWAYSE goblin attacks but people are to sick to respond. The third kind of misdirect is remixes, just like on some modules have monster swap DC fixes your going to change core elements of your adventure but keep the skeleton the same. If your BBEG is undead have undead invade multiple towns, the ghouls are raiding the graveyard, the whites are depopulating the forest, the vampire is a tyrant noble. So one town has vandalism at the church, another something is wrong in the forest, and the third a corrupt lord. Your core adventure about investigating, finding the undead and dealing with them remains the same, and NPC's just get rehashed too, the priests become hunters, or the nobles men. The point of all this is that you take a nebulous bunch of information give it to the PC's and they understand just like IRL rumors spread like fire, then you can just take whatever "unused" plot threads and have them be solved by peers or just again rehashed into what you were already planning. PS: Biggest problem with this is if the PC's just straight up break the line, abandon quest mid-way through, but that would screw up anyone, so it's fine~
Modules: If the characters want to creatively bypass certain parts, I point out that: 1. There may be vital information enclosed in the section you are skipping. 2. The future areas may be filled with monsters that are higher level than you. If they still want to do this, I let them. They either get whooped by monsters 2 levels above their own or they don't have that item/secret info/NPC/etc. they need to beat the baddy at the end...or it might be fine. I'm OK letting them take that risk after my warning.
The only time I ever 'railroad' is in session 0. Getting a bunch of edgelord lone-wolf characters played by players who haven't played together before, then getting them to interact with each other is often a long, painful process of everyone playing coy and shady, so I put the kabosh on that and set them up as either knowing one another already when the hook drops or start hot in initiative on session 1. Getting over the social day 1 hump is critical, imo. After that, maybe a linear test drive short adventure to let them spin the wheels a bit. After that, it's largely hands off. Set the hook in session 0 so your party can start functioning as a group out of the gate rather than blowing two hours winking at each other in a bar.
I would say railroading is taking away all player agency when a choice could have ever been presented. But I kinda disagree with Luke's definition here. Linear adventures would be railroading, if that adventure is the only choice given. And that's okay. Because I look at railroading being only a problem in how it is used. Players should have plenty of meaningful choices, that doesn't mean there can be absolutely no cases where things are set. Players can still make meaningful tactical and moral choices while still having a thing here or there necessary for them to complete their objective. It's railroading to make sure players meet the hermit who has the clue to defeat the hag. And a DM can make sure PCs meet the hermit by just placing him wherever they're going. I may have half a dozen such encounters in 10 hours of gaming. Those are railroaded encounters, but players decide everything else that happens. You simply disguise them by making them feel plausible and not forced.
I like the motto "The GM can force problems, but not solutions." I think the reason people prefer the terminology of "linear but not railroading" (besides the fact that "railroad" has become very pejorative" is that when you are on a train, there really is no flexibility in where the train goes or how fast it is going. Where a linear adventure is more like hiking on a trail - you are following a set path, but your pace, when you stop for breaks and that sort of thing are up to the hiker.
Linear Campaign: You must break into this bank and steal the diamonds inside. Would you like the Dukes of Hazard, Pink Panther, Mission Impossible or Fast and Furious theme to play while you- aaaaand you chose Megalovania. Of course you did. Railroad Campaign: You must break into this tower while the Pink Panther theme is playing. No, you can't have Megalovania. Why? 'Cause I said so, and I'm the DM.
Is the coffee cup inset on the lower left there purely so that the viewers have a panic attack every time he sweeps his arm down and nearly knocks it over?
When players are not on the path you want them, tell them they can do the thing they want to do, then roll some dice behind your screen, make a show of writing something down, and have them make perception checks, then tell them they see nothing out of the ordinary, it all seems perfectly fine. They will pile in that railroad car and gleefully ride it to the next stop. Nothing scares players more than being told everything looks fine and ordinary.
I thought this video was going to be about having a literal rail road with trains that travel through your campaign setting unbeknownst to the players because it is disguised as something else.
Even tho railroading is bad to do I feel like if the dm absolutely did not think of a specific way I would say if the dm admit that they did not think of it and then ask them if they are ok with a small railroad
Players need to have the agency and freedom to choose the adventure. If they just finished adventure A, but don't want to go on adventure B, don't force them to take it.
Another answer to the same question, assuming that the question was about linear campaigns, is to present the next adventure where the players choose to go. The next adventure is crypt? The players decided to go off into the desert? The crypt is now in the desert. But, once the crypt is in the desert, that crypt was always there, and will still be there tomorrow. The players avoided the crypt like the plague, never getting close, and found the castle in the forest more interesting? The Big Bad of the crypt is now the Big Bad of the castle.
Why railroad when you can inflict the players with a deadly disease that needs powerful means to cure, and then offer them the choice to a) meet someone who might know how to cure them b) go the other direction and earn a few thousand gold coins Made a massive 50²+ tile battlemap for the second choice, even though they took the first. Worth it.
So, what about those campaigns like Curse of Strahd, where you arrive to a certain location and it becomes sandbox? Do you discourage them to go into areas where they would be clearly underpowered or watch them going to their doom? 🤔
I think the possibility of being underpowered is a feature, not a bug, of Curse of Strahd. Barovia is intentionally a deadly place where not every fight has to be won. The feeling of helplessness and defeat is part of the experience.
Hi me a group of 6 are new to DnD, I'm playing as the DM for the first time we've completes session 0. But I don't understand how the XP works in the game, any suggestions?
Add a random god that shows up for no reason turns you into a ladybug and throws you into a fiery furnace Burns you to a crisp but somehow magically you survive it!! And your back to square One!! welcome to my nightmare 😭
This is an easy one. Give the illusion of choice. All good magicians make you think you made a choice of cards. Reality is you had no choice. The goal isn't player autonomy it's the illusion of autonomy. Prepare consequences for decisions but allow all player decisions to lead to the same place. I like to think a DM manages fate rather than free will.
Set the railroad between a harbor and an airport and blur the borders so the players can buy tickets for all three at the same office. Now it's a transit center. Haha!
Okay new people. The others agree to go visit Hommlet. New guy. "RAIL ROAD RAIL ROAD. We sure turn left at turn and go else where." Three hours later. New guy, "Why are the three witches from Hocus Pocus putting me in a soup pot?"
I say, know your players. Are they reactive or proactive? If they're a bunch of Harry Potters (reactive) they're going to wait for the adventure to happen to them. This is where a very linear campaign shines.
Agree! My group is comprimised almost entirely of Harry Potters (and the ones who aren't usually have nonsensical ideas that hardly ever amount to anything). We need to know where to go and/or what problem needs solving, so we can decide how to approach that and move on from there. Our current DM doesn't seem to realize that, he drops the "What do you do?" way too often, leaving it too much into the group's hands to push the plot forward. Like you said, know your players, and when to give them a little push forward.
My players like linear adventures. The game always stalls when I try to make the campaign more of a sandbox. I give them options; to defeat the Evil Cabal you can A, B or C next. They just want me to tell them (through an NPC or something) go here next. Having said that, once on that path they will break everything I have planned. i.e.; Interrogate major bad guy for key information, their benefactor who hired them made it clear that they need information and this is the guy who has it....nope they killed him out right, in the 1st round. Hmm. This is common, but they have fun so that's how we play.
Hi Luke, I'm new to you pod casting and at first I was concerned for your well-being, you seem hipper angry at times and I felt you Will give yourself an ulcer at least and a heart attack and most, especially with all that coffee ☕ you drink, when you're tankard is full at least. Now to my question do you think this is railroading. My group of players are growing tired of been told or asked by the guild/king/shady guy in a Traven to go on an adventure. They want to pick there own adventure, but every adventure hase someone telling them where to go or how to get to their destination, but that's not what they want. So I had to plan to get them to the adventure without them knowing I was leading them to the adventure. So I created 4 small adventures that had no upfront payment that were on a notice bord, 1 was a find some rare herb's
I don’t think that having NPC’s make requests to do certain tasks is really railroading. They do have the option to say no or negotiate a slightly different objective. If you want to give them an adventure that they themselves fully choose, maybe dangle a few rumors about an item or monster that they can go after on their own. If you really want to try that, it may also be a little more persuasive if you make very subtle hints that it could be related to a character backstory.
But wouldn't a Wizards Tower be exactly that? only one way to enter? I doubt a Wizard, smart enough and strong enough to already have a Tower, would risk having more than one way in for exactly the Case of people trying to enter that they don't want to enter
Ah, now I understand why the trains are always late. The train company doesn't want to force a railroad on their drivers. So... All the drivers are playing sandbox? 🤔 I'm going to be here for a while, aren't I?
I run the opposite of railroads, my entire campaign is completely made up on the spot. The overarching story and combat is made up in the previous 3 or 4 days, but the towns and villages, the people, and the mini-side-missions are made up immediately on the spot.
I disagree about linear games. "Linear games" are railroads, just not as bad as the extreme railroading example you gave. _Hoard of the Dragon Queen_ + _Rise of Tiamat_ are linear adventures and very railroady, especially in the long term, for example. Sandbox ftw! If you aren't winging it for at least half of each session... what's the point? Come at me.
"This is a pet peeve of mine." You're not the only one. If you describe a campaign as "linear", that's one thing. You might just be describing a campaign with very clear goals and direction. But if you describe it as a "railroad", you are basically saying that the game isn't really a game. You are saying that the DM is just telling a story and nothing the players do will alter that story. It is a _really, really_ offensive thing to say about a DM. You're pretty much outright saying that they're dishonest and incompetent. In fact, this hobby suffers _generally_ from a lack of understanding of really basic terminology. The number of people who play (or at least talk on the Internet about) TTRPGs and think "roleplay" = "speaking in character" never ceases to dismay.
Thats because the ttrpg hobby likes to invent their own meanings and definitions that end up being redundant or usless degrading the value of discussion even further, for example what is the meaningful difference between Grimdark ans Dark fantasy? Cause from what i can tell Grimdark is just a self indulgent version of dark fantasy
#1: Whatever direction they go, the planned encounters are there. That's a sand boxed railroad. You planned them to run into a certain tomb. Whatever way they go, you put the tomb in their way.
More of a linear with the illusion of sandbox, it would become a railroad if the players specifically chose to avoid the tomb in question and then the DM shoves them in regardless.
@@teineeva7868 Exactly. If the PCs are just wandering around looking for adventure or whatever and you decide they'll find a tomb, that's cool (I mean so long as it fits the area), but if you actively force them to explore it, that's another matter entirely.
But if you don't make a similar distinction then at any point the players only have one goal the game becomes a railroad. And that's not what we mean either.
Well there is a distinction between a railroad and a linear adventure though it's pretty easy for one to bleed into the other. A big example of this was a lot of 4E adventures where it was linear with nothing but a string of unavoidable combats and skill challenges. That's effectively a railroad. If you've got a relatively linear path but with encounters with multiple solutions, that looks a lot less like a railroad.
𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐞𝐲 - Get my level 1 to 5 fifth-edition compatible adventure module featuring new fey creatures here ▶▶ www.thedmlair.com/intothefey
𝐋𝐚𝐢𝐫 𝐌𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐳𝐢𝐧𝐞 - Reduce prep time and improve your games with this monthly D&D magazine ▶▶ www.patreon.com/thedmlair
I'm going to build an adventure where the entire thing takes place on a railroad. It'll be hilarious.
"I jump off the train"
I built a sandbox on a train once.
The Train Campaign
Night Train to Rigel
I've considered a Snowpiercer campaign for a while now
A linear adventure Is exactly how I run my games, more so with groups with little to no experience so they can learn how to play. And then asking them what to do at the end is so important with scheduling. It gives the the agency they need and allows me to make it as exciting or intense as it needs to be and the new players keep wanting to come back
Railroad = you are all just actors in my beautiful play, all of your choices have been preplanned by me. There is only 1 way to open this sliding glass door and that is the fingerprint scanner set to the BBEG only, please ignore that you could easily smash it.
Linear: look guys i only have 2hrs a week to spend preping so just follow the 1 plot hook. Or tell me the your decision to the choice of plothooks given out at the end of the session so i can prep it for next time.
Sandbox: I am Matt Mercer and get paid to prep everything and worldbuild so here are several plot hooks, feel free to make you own.
Open world: everyone just kinda sit there with analysis paralysis because they have to spend an hour looking for plothooks that might not even be there.
Hopefully its obvious that the extremes of the spectrum from Railroad to Minecraft are not good DnD.
Beside you could easily set up a fun super linear game where the players are students in a magic training school and get sent out on missions by their Teacher. Melee classes and Clerics could be hired bodyguards to make sure the mages are immediately killed when they run out of spells. Lots of cool world building potential. Also useful for new players if they want minimal choices about what adventures they go on while still figuring out the rules. And it explains why the encounters are so balanced to the party, the teachers know about how strong the mission is already.
Good comment.
I had something like that happen last night. I was running a module where the module assumed that the PCs would kill an opponent. One of them cast Healing Word on the opponent in the middle of the fight. I had him roll a d20 when he did that, he rolled high, and the monster stopped being aggressive.
When I ran CoS for my players, at one point, two of the main PCs had conflicting work obligations, so the others ran around town collecting quests, they literally had almost a dozen open ended quests by the end of the session. The next week, they just chose the most urgent, and followed those. Made my job easy.
I genuinely appreciate you explaining the difference between railroad and linear. I've been DMing for 5 years and always felt bad for linear games because I thought they were railroad like.
Thanks!
I remember I was in a group playing when I was a kid. The DM planned out an area for us to go to in the future (it was 2e, and realizing how poorly HP scales, the only way we could have survived if all of us got a certain damage immunity) and we decided to go anyways.
It was a trio of dragons who were much more interested in continuing to nap than fight so they kept doing stuff like casting Wall of Stone to keep us out. That did not deter us and the wizard hopped his homunculus to the other side and started fireballing them.
The dragons decided to come out. If the DM had not ruled that magic resistance applies to breath weapons then it would have been a 1 round TPK. The surviving dwarf grabbed the girdle of giant strength then the rest of the party (all dead) and booked it.
Ref: Disguising a linear module. I do this often as offering "choices" but the players don't realize all roads lead to Oz.
an other way of having a "suggestive" railroad is something with metaphorical "doors" and them needing the "keys".
Example: you want the party to explore a forest first before they move onto the mountains. think of the mountain as a "door" the party would need clothes or equipment that can help keep them warm in the cold climate, this would be the "key". you the DM can control when to give the party the ability to get those clothes, in turn having something linear progression
I’ve found dumping the railroad is hard but so liberating. It has saved our game. Ty Luke
From the hook side of things, something that might work to disguise a certain level of linearity is to provide multiple hooks that all eventually loop back around to the same place. That approach means the GM needs to have a clear view of the big picture of their adventure, work out different ways players might enter it, and then create distinct hooks that on the surface seem unrelated, but behind the curtain are different symptoms of the same problem. Of course, those opening paths leading to the discovery of the route cause should be different, not just all leading to the same next scene. So when they take a hook, that hook leads them to X, where they discover Y, which leads them to Z, which leads them to discovering the root problem that they now have to solve, but each hook has a different XYZ path that may contextualize the adventure a little differently each.
Also, the more specific the overarching objective, the more linear an adventure/campaign is likely to be by it's very nature. If the players discover the BBEG has a plan to steal an artifact to enact a ritual to summon a world ending monstrosity, well, the means of stopping him may be somewhat finite, even if how you try to achieve those means might vary. You have a number of time sensitive goals, but unless the BBEG actively changes his plans, the game is going to be somewhat linear because there are certain finite elements to the problem to be solved. And frankly, that in itself isn't a problem.
Linear games are where specific problems must be solved. Railroads are where there there is not only a specific problem to solve, there is only 1 acceptable way of doing it because of GM, not in world logic. Single solution problems should be exceptional hurdles, and even then should have consequences for not overcoming that don't stop the game.
Reminds me of the 3rd and 4th Sly Cooper games, akin to a fusion between sandbox and linear gameplay.
As I started my campaign. I told my players to please follow the main quest hooks. So I can prepare the adventure and certain areas. In these areas are problems and npcs. I also prepare the sources of the problems. How the players do something is up to them. If they come up with crazy ideas. Let's try it and let the dice decide. ^^
Luke: never run a railroad
Authors: sweating perfusely
I generally prefer playing in linear games than more open-world. The more we play with what the DM prepared for the better it is. Most DM's will have to improv enough as it is, and it's always obvious when they do.
I agree but my players don’t- : (
When you do it right, you can prepare to improv.
I think the sweet spot is not fully open-world, but not strictly linear. Maybe a quest unlocks other three quests, all in the same "great plot". There is some kind of linearity in there, but players can choose "kind of" which scenario, maybe enemies, and gets one part of the solving puzzle each place (or they can go to the "endgame" with just one piece of the solution and figure it out after)
Going to say this one more time for the folks in the back: If you want to railroad your players, WRITE A BOOK INSTEAD!
Games have choices, and role playing games in particular can have widely varying outcomes based on the choices the players make. A DM can tell or ask the players to buy into the adventure that they prepare for that session. Once the DM limits all the options down to one set of "correct" choices, it isn't a game anymore.
But if I write a book, nobody will read it. If I run a game, I have a captive audience!
@@GreylanderTV Haha! "Captive". I see what you did there!
This, 100%.
Amen.
I have this terrible bias in my head
"Only published authors can write books"
But it's not true. Anyone can just write a book. Just do it.
Your vids about railroad vs liniar have helped me so much to get past the worry of not giving my players enough choice, and instead focus on the creativity of building the gane around their choices. Hell, they end up finding creative ways to explore what i prepare. Please keep up yhr great work.
Interesting watching him because of how radically different his dm style is from mine
I like to set up the setting and have several major conflicts happening in it already. If I can, I tie one or more to the backstory of a player in some way to make it more relevant to them - and yes I always check if they're down for that first.
Then I drop hooks relating to a bunch of them and see what the players are interested in most. That becomes the adventure as I have the world react to their interference.
If they seem unsure what to do, I pick one and have it directly impact the party somehow. As Matt Colville says, I "chase them up a tree." Which forces them to react and then we are good to go.
I actually often end up prepping all three options for adventures - but I usually keep the two they don't take for later and just reskin and change them to work for a future quest.
I gave my players three options and I asked them in the end of the session which option will they choose so I know what to prepare. One of the players didn't like it and told me that. So I stopped asking. Downside, now I need more time to prep, but they told me a couple of sessions after that. "How do you do it!? Either you know exactly what we are going to do, or you prepared everything". Truth is, I don't prepare everything but I think a lot about possible options so I can improvise easily. Am I good at improv? Not at all. But when I spend a lot of time about thinking about options, I can more easily improvise options that I couldn't anticipate. Thinking about next session is preparing. Even if you don't sit down and write stuff, just think about it - It is preparing.
I do essentially the same thing. But I've not had a player have a problem with it. Did they give any context around why?
@@craigmobey954 That was not a big of an issue for him and he tottaly understood that because he is DM himself. I asked all the players "Is there something that I'm doing that you don't like?". I just want to point out that by accepting his suggestion (not a request) the other players have a better game experience. I still give them two or three options but not in a form "You have options A, B or C" but in form of a plot hooks, then I listen to them and I try to guess which option will they choose so I prepare that option more than the other.
@@Ljubomirokic Maybe three explicit options was too prescriptive. I ask an open question. What are you planning on doing next? After they're presented with options. I can then plan accordingly. Over planning isn't something that should be a badge of honour.
@5:56 love this Luke. You sometimes have to dip into the meta to make sure that it's a good experience. I've leveled with my players a few times when coming to a fork in the road so that I can be properly prepared for the next adventure. Most of my plot hooks are kept simple and I don't have too much trouble ad-libbing content or even NPCs - but I'm **terrible** at making maps on the fly. Those I really need time to prepare.
I'm actually running a homebrew module where the bulk of the adventure is collecting five holy artifacts scattered across the world. Once drop the plot hook, my party will be allowed to obtain the artifacts in any order they desire. Each artifact has a small adventure surrounding it, and I'm trying to make each one at least somewhat more obtuse than "go to the place and grab the thing." So far I've got one artifact tucked behind a possible heist/enemy camp raid/Hekkin lot of diplomacy.
I run pretty linear games, but not railroads. I use the motto "I can force problems, but I can't force solutions." In general, I don't have many problems because I've gotten pretty good at making the next hook seem natural, logical and in line with the characters' motivations. You conquer the bad guy fort and find evidence that they sent a bunch of troops to Weird Forest to dig up a powerful ancient weapon, so you go there, and so on. It is also important to have variety in adventure and enemy types ("Hey look! More giants!"), and to give the PCs at least a few days of downtime in a big city to let them develop themselves. (I will note that I also have good players who like this style and follow the hooks rather than deliberately trying to break things, which helps.)
Finally someone made this distinction. Now get the word out!
Geezer here...
Thanks for a great vid. On what has been a pet peeve of mine for decades.
Yes, "railroad", bad, always bad.
You mentioned the magic number.
3.
Never give the kittens more than 3 choices. It ends badly. Game lag and confusion at best.
Game on.
Giving the player options is best.
With your riddle analogy you could put that anywhere. You want to climb? Ad you get to a balcony a gargoyle asked you a riddle
You knock the door? It asks you a riddle
You dig underneath? An old and wise kobold will show you the way if you answer his riddle
Even with 1 outcome there can be many paths to it. That's what DMing is about
Or maybe do not present the riddle if the players manage to get around it
@@DXYS95 yeah like if they found someone to solve it for them. But if you really wanted to use the riddle You could always use it later in the dungeon
Or to get back out....
There's so much stuff a DM can do
Taking away player agency should be the last on the list
My FAVORITE moment that came up wasn't actually railroading, but I hadn't considered that the players would just blatantly ignore the risk; just completely ignore it, lol.
There was a ruined city they were trying to get to that was caught in a massive sandstorm. The sandstorm was described by their guide and airship captain as being incredibly violent and he did not want to risk flying into it, but rather suggested that they head through on foot where the channels in the rock and such would allow them to keep from getting tossed around.
Players straight up went, "Nah. We want to go through it." The captain, who I had played as a sort of overly cautious type to begin with, stuck to his guns on the matter and was like, "I REAAAAAALLY do not like this idea." One of the players, out of character, goes, "DM. Are you railroading us?"
On the fly I said, out of character, "I have no idea what you're talking about. But on an unrelated note the captain hands you some railroad ties." It got a laugh and they all agreed to go on foot, lol.
For those wondering I was prepared to ad-hoc the hell out of that, but I intended to put some serious challenge into it, because I DID tell them it was dangerous.
🤣
So I walked away from the screen but could still hear the video at the beginning. And I legitimately thought you did the intro where you said never do a railroad and then it went into an ad and I thought that was just the whole video lol
I just wanna say, I'm pretty new to the channel but I really like the content you're making and it always gives me lots of inspiration as a DM. Keep it up 👍🏻
Adding to what Luke has said: Making a puzzle which has only one solution isn't railroading any more than putting a locked door in their path is railroading. Sometimes, there are doors which are too complex for your rogue to pick, and sometimes there are puzzles which are so well designed that only the correct solution will produce the result your players need.
But likewise, you don't then make the solution so complex or obscure that your players assume they don't have all the information they need to solve it yet and leave, only to waste time wandering the land aimlessly while looking for nonexistent clues.
I like to start a campaign with a predetermined adventure, maybe two in line, and then present with two or three options for the next adventure. Each one giving one "piece" of the solution of the mystery. After that, maybe the old two + one new, and maybe the final plot (or they can keep going in these adventures to explore a little more of the world).
6:13 that's EXACTLY how I run my games, I make my own campaigns, but I always level with my players like "guys, here are 3 prologues, which of these interest you guys the most?" and then I actually build the campaign from the ground up, this way I can run what I want and my players have choices of what adventures they wanna have, as for running the game I have some sandbox elements but it's mostly a linear game
Linear adventures are great, and my preferred way to run games. Additionally, I use traveling from location to location as a way to fuel rumor mills and provide options. Heading north from Waterdeep? Long Road or High Road? Something is going to happen on either road, and the path you didn't take is going to be the source of rumors in the next city. Always make the PCs choices mean something, while showing them the world exists outside of what they're doing to it.
I’ve heard the term “railroad” many times, but for some reason, reading it this time game me the idea to start a campaign in a train car on a literal railroad.
I use the Dragon Age Origins and Mass Effect 1 approach. I give my players the choice of which "Railroad" (RR) Adventure they want to go on. As an example, I have beginning level PCs start in a Tavern in a large city. I then have notices, rumors & clues that can take the PCs to either the B2, N1, Sunless Citadel, T1, and L1 Modules. Which one they choose is up to them.
In other words, I make no attempt to hide a RR adventure. Instead, I give them the choice of which one to go on.
I love watching the kitties
Really like these videos. Straight to the point and really useful. Good job, man! I want to go back to making TRPG videos. But it's hard when you have a full-time job. lol I'll just live vicariously through you until I can make more. XD
I remember once playing in a campaign where we went a direction the GM hadn't planned for. He solved it, in his view, by having a piece of paper fall from the sky.
"Note from God: go the other way."
Funnily enough, that first session was also the last.
Thank you for making this really clear
Somewhere in AD&D there is a passage that says something like ‘The rules in this book are guidelines to be used or discarded where necessary’. I also played Paranoia, and that games advice was that if the rules interfere with the fun then the rules are wrong.
So i take a fairly loose view of the rules, i follow them until they interfere with the fun. So if i know there is a rule in the book that governs an action the player wants to do but I can’t find it in a reasonable time, then i just wing it. Or if following a prescribed procedure to generate an outcome is bogging the game down i throw it it out. Or if the player describes a really cool move and the rules don’t allow for it then i just make it up.
Half my players are not hard core D&D fanatics, in fact they’d really rather be doing something else and are only playing to keep the other half happy. So i need to keep the fun up and the number crunching down, combat needs to be fast and exiting and the emphasis needs to be more on exploration and adventure.
I also don’t like the ‘spell slot’ concept. The idea that a wizard has a bunch of pigeon holes that he can assign spells to just sounds too gamey for my liking. I can give up a 4th level spell to cast a more powerful 1st level spell? Nah bugger off.
In my games i use the old rules where spells get more powerful with the level of the caster. So when the spell description says ‘if this spell is cast in a 4th level slot it does…..’ then i read that as ‘if this spell is cast by a magic user capable of casting 4th level spells it does……
Anyway each to their own and what ever makes you happy.
I'd add that even when running a module, allow your players' choices to matter. Its okay to be creative and do your own thing, and the players might act in unexpected ways that have unexpected results. Even if the ultimate course of the module is still basically the same, and there are still really only a few ways it could end, you still make them feel as if the world is responding to them. 'Linear' doesn't have to mean 'rigid'.
Made the main plot a simple mcguffin fetch quest... But they dont know where it is and theyre not strong enough to get it if they did.
I left the middle open and have other quest givers along the way. I will drop reminders of the main quest if it goes too long.
Sprinkle in quests specific to the PCs backstory and boom you got yourself a dynamic world :D
For those interested in the ESIEST way to disguise a linear campaign as open, for those who ENJOY RP, it is controlling information, your player do not and SHOULD not know, what each "option" they have leads them to, as long as they BELIEVE they have made a decision that had ramifications they will be happy with their agency. You basically make the npc's unreliable narrators and the rumor mill, just that rumors, direct quest are paired with strong pc motivation, [treasure or their compelled to do it], but general adventures are more meandering, and reoccurring characters exist with convergent thinking.
A few easy ways to do this are false start, remix, and reskin, tell them a THING is going on, any adventure event has a few leads that are all symptoms of the same problem, choose a disposable lead and once their in the place they GET TO sus out the real adventure, your make content out of the false start redirect to your plan.
Reskins are going to be set up the same way as false start but you are giving straight up real hints about what is going on, and what they have in store, the elements relating to paths they didn't go down should be discarded, because if the players find out it just feels bad, all around. Like for example your villain is poisoning the well, to gather corpses for undead. One town might have crop failure, another undead roam the streets at night, the third goblins are invading. So for the third example their were ALWAYSE goblin attacks but people are to sick to respond.
The third kind of misdirect is remixes, just like on some modules have monster swap DC fixes your going to change core elements of your adventure but keep the skeleton the same. If your BBEG is undead have undead invade multiple towns, the ghouls are raiding the graveyard, the whites are depopulating the forest, the vampire is a tyrant noble. So one town has vandalism at the church, another something is wrong in the forest, and the third a corrupt lord.
Your core adventure about investigating, finding the undead and dealing with them remains the same, and NPC's just get rehashed too, the priests become hunters, or the nobles men. The point of all this is that you take a nebulous bunch of information give it to the PC's and they understand just like IRL rumors spread like fire, then you can just take whatever "unused" plot threads and have them be solved by peers or just again rehashed into what you were already planning.
PS: Biggest problem with this is if the PC's just straight up break the line, abandon quest mid-way through, but that would screw up anyone, so it's fine~
As soon as I saw that thumbnail I knew that I was in for a Luke rant
Yes the players come up with some really creative ways to solve problems.
On the neighboring channel, the Player's Layer: "How to Spot a Railroad and Pull up the Rail Spikes."
Cool video mate
Wow, I never railroaded any game. I feel happy 😊 now.
Modules:
If the characters want to creatively bypass certain parts, I point out that:
1. There may be vital information enclosed in the section you are skipping.
2. The future areas may be filled with monsters that are higher level than you.
If they still want to do this, I let them. They either get whooped by monsters 2 levels above their own or they don't have that item/secret info/NPC/etc. they need to beat the baddy at the end...or it might be fine. I'm OK letting them take that risk after my warning.
I think a big issue many DMs neglect and what causes them to want to railroad their games is that they fail to give their players agency or motivation
The only time I ever 'railroad' is in session 0. Getting a bunch of edgelord lone-wolf characters played by players who haven't played together before, then getting them to interact with each other is often a long, painful process of everyone playing coy and shady, so I put the kabosh on that and set them up as either knowing one another already when the hook drops or start hot in initiative on session 1. Getting over the social day 1 hump is critical, imo. After that, maybe a linear test drive short adventure to let them spin the wheels a bit. After that, it's largely hands off. Set the hook in session 0 so your party can start functioning as a group out of the gate rather than blowing two hours winking at each other in a bar.
I would say railroading is taking away all player agency when a choice could have ever been presented. But I kinda disagree with Luke's definition here. Linear adventures would be railroading, if that adventure is the only choice given. And that's okay. Because I look at railroading being only a problem in how it is used. Players should have plenty of meaningful choices, that doesn't mean there can be absolutely no cases where things are set. Players can still make meaningful tactical and moral choices while still having a thing here or there necessary for them to complete their objective. It's railroading to make sure players meet the hermit who has the clue to defeat the hag. And a DM can make sure PCs meet the hermit by just placing him wherever they're going. I may have half a dozen such encounters in 10 hours of gaming. Those are railroaded encounters, but players decide everything else that happens. You simply disguise them by making them feel plausible and not forced.
I like the motto "The GM can force problems, but not solutions." I think the reason people prefer the terminology of "linear but not railroading" (besides the fact that "railroad" has become very pejorative" is that when you are on a train, there really is no flexibility in where the train goes or how fast it is going. Where a linear adventure is more like hiking on a trail - you are following a set path, but your pace, when you stop for breaks and that sort of thing are up to the hiker.
Ideally the Evil NPCs are the ones on a rail road.
That way if the party divines- that which is foretold can come true.
My party have literally asked me what the next adventure was after I havet them like 6 possible quests
Linear Campaign: You must break into this bank and steal the diamonds inside. Would you like the Dukes of Hazard, Pink Panther, Mission Impossible or Fast and Furious theme to play while you- aaaaand you chose Megalovania. Of course you did.
Railroad Campaign: You must break into this tower while the Pink Panther theme is playing. No, you can't have Megalovania. Why? 'Cause I said so, and I'm the DM.
Is the coffee cup inset on the lower left there purely so that the viewers have a panic attack every time he sweeps his arm down and nearly knocks it over?
When players are not on the path you want them, tell them they can do the thing they want to do, then roll some dice behind your screen, make a show of writing something down, and have them make perception checks, then tell them they see nothing out of the ordinary, it all seems perfectly fine. They will pile in that railroad car and gleefully ride it to the next stop. Nothing scares players more than being told everything looks fine and ordinary.
I thought this video was going to be about having a literal rail road with trains that travel through your campaign setting unbeknownst to the players because it is disguised as something else.
Very important distinction! Also, has “must needs be” entered The DM Lair dialect? Heard it a couple of times recently and digging it!
Characters talk like that in Final Fantasy 14. Maybe someone in the DM Lair crew plays and passed it along.
I first came across it in A Song of Ice and Fire. I thought it was a typo the first time 😆
I've been confusing linear camping and railroad all this time🤣
Even tho railroading is bad to do I feel like if the dm absolutely did not think of a specific way I would say if the dm admit that they did not think of it and then ask them if they are ok with a small railroad
Players need to have the agency and freedom to choose the adventure. If they just finished adventure A, but don't want to go on adventure B, don't force them to take it.
Another answer to the same question, assuming that the question was about linear campaigns, is to present the next adventure where the players choose to go. The next adventure is crypt? The players decided to go off into the desert? The crypt is now in the desert. But, once the crypt is in the desert, that crypt was always there, and will still be there tomorrow. The players avoided the crypt like the plague, never getting close, and found the castle in the forest more interesting? The Big Bad of the crypt is now the Big Bad of the castle.
my players : "having multiple options, but only one optimal choice, is just 1 choice with false choices. stop trying to railroad us!"
People are always accusing me of this in my Snowpiercer campaign.
Why railroad when you can inflict the players with a deadly disease that needs powerful means to cure, and then offer them the choice to
a) meet someone who might know how to cure them
b) go the other direction and earn a few thousand gold coins
Made a massive 50²+ tile battlemap for the second choice, even though they took the first.
Worth it.
If the railroad is hidden well enough the players will think it's a sandbox 🤯
We've always called it 'cattle shooting', as run the cows to the slaughter house, lol. I guess jargon has changed.
So, what about those campaigns like Curse of Strahd, where you arrive to a certain location and it becomes sandbox? Do you discourage them to go into areas where they would be clearly underpowered or watch them going to their doom? 🤔
You foreshadow but if the players really really want to ignore the warnings?
Whatcha gonna do?? Adapt or let the dice kill the players I guess!
I think the possibility of being underpowered is a feature, not a bug, of Curse of Strahd. Barovia is intentionally a deadly place where not every fight has to be won. The feeling of helplessness and defeat is part of the experience.
How many cats do you have? I saw the one walk by and noticed the other 2, then saw the fourth one sitting in a box. It became a game of wheres kitty.
Hi me a group of 6 are new to DnD, I'm playing as the DM for the first time we've completes session 0. But I don't understand how the XP works in the game, any suggestions?
Now let's challenge the Algorithm for taking away Luke's agency to be a famous UA-camr!
"Luke Hart doesn't suck!"
Add a random god that shows up for no reason turns you into a ladybug and throws you into a fiery furnace Burns you to a crisp but somehow magically you survive it!! And your back to square One!! welcome to my nightmare 😭
This is an easy one. Give the illusion of choice. All good magicians make you think you made a choice of cards. Reality is you had no choice. The goal isn't player autonomy it's the illusion of autonomy. Prepare consequences for decisions but allow all player decisions to lead to the same place. I like to think a DM manages fate rather than free will.
Set the railroad between a harbor and an airport and blur the borders so the players can buy tickets for all three at the same office. Now it's a transit center. Haha!
Okay new people. The others agree to go visit Hommlet. New guy. "RAIL ROAD RAIL ROAD. We sure turn left at turn and go else where." Three hours later. New guy, "Why are the three witches from Hocus Pocus putting me in a soup pot?"
I say, know your players. Are they reactive or proactive?
If they're a bunch of Harry Potters (reactive) they're going to wait for the adventure to happen to them. This is where a very linear campaign shines.
Agree! My group is comprimised almost entirely of Harry Potters (and the ones who aren't usually have nonsensical ideas that hardly ever amount to anything). We need to know where to go and/or what problem needs solving, so we can decide how to approach that and move on from there.
Our current DM doesn't seem to realize that, he drops the "What do you do?" way too often, leaving it too much into the group's hands to push the plot forward. Like you said, know your players, and when to give them a little push forward.
My players like linear adventures. The game always stalls when I try to make the campaign more of a sandbox. I give them options; to defeat the Evil Cabal you can A, B or C next. They just want me to tell them (through an NPC or something) go here next. Having said that, once on that path they will break everything I have planned. i.e.; Interrogate major bad guy for key information, their benefactor who hired them made it clear that they need information and this is the guy who has it....nope they killed him out right, in the 1st round. Hmm. This is common, but they have fun so that's how we play.
Hi Luke, I'm new to you pod casting and at first I was concerned for your well-being, you seem hipper angry at times and I felt you Will give yourself an ulcer at least and a heart attack and most, especially with all that coffee ☕ you drink, when you're tankard is full at least.
Now to my question do you think this is railroading. My group of players are growing tired of been told or asked by the guild/king/shady guy in a Traven to go on an adventure. They want to pick there own adventure, but every adventure hase someone telling them where to go or how to get to their destination, but that's not what they want. So I had to plan to get them to the adventure without them knowing I was leading them to the adventure. So I created 4 small adventures that had no upfront payment that were on a notice bord, 1 was a find some rare herb's
I don’t think that having NPC’s make requests to do certain tasks is really railroading. They do have the option to say no or negotiate a slightly different objective. If you want to give them an adventure that they themselves fully choose, maybe dangle a few rumors about an item or monster that they can go after on their own. If you really want to try that, it may also be a little more persuasive if you make very subtle hints that it could be related to a character backstory.
👍 ❤ 🌟
Never run a railroad? What if I'm a train conductor?
That thumbnail lol
Reskins!
The fights are the fights. Gimmie a day and I’ll reskin the entire cast
But wouldn't a Wizards Tower be exactly that? only one way to enter? I doubt a Wizard, smart enough and strong enough to already have a Tower, would risk having more than one way in for exactly the Case of people trying to enter that they don't want to enter
Ah, now I understand why the trains are always late. The train company doesn't want to force a railroad on their drivers. So... All the drivers are playing sandbox? 🤔 I'm going to be here for a while, aren't I?
Disguising a railroad is cheating the players. Don't railroad. Railroad is not role playing game.
Never run a railroad? Cornelius Vanderbilt would disagree.
I run the opposite of railroads, my entire campaign is completely made up on the spot. The overarching story and combat is made up in the previous 3 or 4 days, but the towns and villages, the people, and the mini-side-missions are made up immediately on the spot.
Nothing sais giving your players choice and agency like telling them ahead of time that your game is an unfinished sandbox.
Railroads are for players who don’t know where they want to take their adventure
Cover it with shag carpet, and pretend its a Bantha.
All published modules are railroads. Anything prewritten is a railroad.
I disagree about linear games. "Linear games" are railroads, just not as bad as the extreme railroading example you gave. _Hoard of the Dragon Queen_ + _Rise of Tiamat_ are linear adventures and very railroady, especially in the long term, for example.
Sandbox ftw! If you aren't winging it for at least half of each session... what's the point?
Come at me.
How to run a railroad giveb3 options that unknown to players take you to the same city just diff locations and names
Please kiss me, YOU ANSWER THINGS BEFORE I HAVE THE QUESTION
So…my advice from a year ago?
"This is a pet peeve of mine."
You're not the only one. If you describe a campaign as "linear", that's one thing. You might just be describing a campaign with very clear goals and direction. But if you describe it as a "railroad", you are basically saying that the game isn't really a game. You are saying that the DM is just telling a story and nothing the players do will alter that story.
It is a _really, really_ offensive thing to say about a DM. You're pretty much outright saying that they're dishonest and incompetent.
In fact, this hobby suffers _generally_ from a lack of understanding of really basic terminology. The number of people who play (or at least talk on the Internet about) TTRPGs and think "roleplay" = "speaking in character" never ceases to dismay.
Thats because the ttrpg hobby likes to invent their own meanings and definitions that end up being redundant or usless degrading the value of discussion even further, for example what is the meaningful difference between Grimdark ans Dark fantasy? Cause from what i can tell Grimdark is just a self indulgent version of dark fantasy
#1: Whatever direction they go, the planned encounters are there.
That's a sand boxed railroad.
You planned them to run into a certain tomb. Whatever way they go, you put the tomb in their way.
More of a linear with the illusion of sandbox, it would become a railroad if the players specifically chose to avoid the tomb in question and then the DM shoves them in regardless.
That's a quantum ogre and it's controversial.
@@teineeva7868 Exactly. If the PCs are just wandering around looking for adventure or whatever and you decide they'll find a tomb, that's cool (I mean so long as it fits the area), but if you actively force them to explore it, that's another matter entirely.
lol the only railroads are one shots. you never hear anyone complaining about how the dm railroaded the oneshot.
I think this definition is splitting hairs.
But if you don't make a similar distinction then at any point the players only have one goal the game becomes a railroad. And that's not what we mean either.
Well there is a distinction between a railroad and a linear adventure though it's pretty easy for one to bleed into the other. A big example of this was a lot of 4E adventures where it was linear with nothing but a string of unavoidable combats and skill challenges. That's effectively a railroad. If you've got a relatively linear path but with encounters with multiple solutions, that looks a lot less like a railroad.