The Sandbox vs the Railroad in D&D (and a 3rd option no one talks about)

[@theDMLair]

𝐏𝐀𝐓𝐑𝐄𝐎𝐍 - Monthly high-quality D&D 5e adventures and DM resources ▶▶ www.patreon.com/thedmlair 𝐊𝐈𝐂𝐊𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐄𝐑 - Pre-Order my level 1 to 5 adventure module, Into the Fey, here ▶▶ www.kickstarter.com/projects/thedmlair/into-the-fey

[@splitirisbear4589]

Very insightful. But you forget one thing Luke. It's funny when I get to say to my players "Yes, I'm railroading you".

[@Ambers128]

Choo choo

[@JustAnotherPerson811]

As a player, it might be funny for you, but it is definitely not fun for me.

[@aunderiskerensky2304]

ran an attempt at a sandbox game where the players literally started on a train. they destroyed the train. it was later turned into an airship. i think that's how you're supposed to do it... right?

[@karsonkammerzell6955]

I once told them, via NPC, that there was a huge sandstorm wall they'd have to navigate and they couldn't fly through it due to the dangers of their ship getting torn apart. One of the players out of character says, in a friendly tone mind you, "DM are you railroading us?" I replied via the NPC, "The captain absentmindedly starts handing you railroad tressels and comments, "I have no idea what you're talking about."" Needless to say they all got a laugh, lol. I made it pretty dangerous on foot, too, but I was prepared to improv if they really, really wanted to pursue flying through it.

[@splitirisbear4589]

@@PaperadiGomma123 I've got 120 people, including Luke who would say "yeah".

[@ruenvedder5921]

I call the three playstyles "The Architect, The Gardener, and The Shepherd". The architect plans everything, typically delivering a more linear experience. The gardener is essentially a good sandbox gm, as defined in your video. They cultivate the game world, trimming the things that the players don't focus on, and focusing on the things the group seems to gravitate towards. A shepherd gives the players the freedom in their "field". Unlike the architect, the shepherd doesn't prepare the solutions for their problems, but unlike the gardener, they know what their campaign is going to look like at the end of the session.

[@anthonygeorge4116]

Players will help the Shepherd to get past conceptions of knowing what the players might and should choose.

[@priestesslucy]

Shepherds are fantastic if the group are proactive players (or have decided to make a proactive player their leader)

[@wolfenfloffen7066]

George?

[@Yazpo]

The ones I use are: The Sandbox, the railroad, and the theme park. Because with a theme park the DM gets to design all the rides and the players get to decide which deathtrap we get on.

[@IdiotinGlans]

Players will curse the railroad then wait for a train in the sandbox

[@shiskeba1130]

Happens son many times...

[@Axiom_Link]

The biggest problem is Sandbox games require PROACTIVE heroes, and about 90% of D&D players are REACTIVE heroes. Games on rails work well for both types of heroes because they afford options. “Railroads” have options IRL. It’s like people forget that trains only go forward or backward, BUT they use levers to switch tracks and therefor the destination.

[@MonkeyJedi99]

@@Axiom_Link Yes! Switches!

[@meikahidenori]

@@Axiom_Link it's also difficult to run a sandbox unless you've got alot of experience. I've tried it a few times and found it really hard to keep players engaged, some just doing whatever they could to just waste time or just avoid adventuring. I know that is something that comes with experience, but I've had more success running modules and 'Ablibbing' as you go along making it feel open instead of leaving it up to the players otherwise our games wouldn't go anywhere.

[@maverickman6486]

So true. That's why linear adventure with options is best. Let's players have choice or at least the illusion of choice. Just like the philosophical argument is a man's fate predetermined or does he determine is own fate.

[@JohnWass79]

There are moments when it feels like you're railroading the players, because they just aren't connecting the dots and, in retrospect, it looks like you forced the plot to advance. That isn't railroading, that's just advancing the plot with NPC actions. Now, if the players stand around and wait for direction and answers at every turn, you might have conditioned them to expect a railroad.

[@timdood3]

I adopted another DM's (who I don't know) players, who've been conditioned to expect railroads abound. If I don't make it clear to them something is a hook, they discard it immediately and I have to remind them two or three times. Conversely if I mention something mundane but out of the ordinary, they'll assume it's some super important hook and drop everything. (They were on their way to go shopping, and I mentioned a slowly gliding by overhead. They dropped everything to pursue this immersive detail.) How do I break them of that conditioning?

[@secret12392]

@@timdood3 Your best bet would be to talk to your players about it, and come to a working conclusion with them about the situation. Plus, as they say, old habits die hard.

[@maverickman6486]

@@timdood3 Start giving a variety of adventure hooks and make the obvious adventure hook into a near death experience or as they continue on the adventure it should become obvious that they are walking to their death if they continue.

[@PaperadiGomma123]

@John Wass : BIG NEWS: it doesn't matter what kind of elaborate plot the DM built behind the scenes! It's a game, if players don't connect the dots and are not having fun just shuffle your cards!

[@mcbunson]

In all these opening skits I have come conclusion that the barbarian has really low INT but really high WIS.

[@hyodonightcore2183]

Sounds about right, because of their low int they do a lot of unintelligent things but they learn from them. So, as long as they have done it once they know if its a good idea for them to do or not

[@agsilverradio2225]

"Sandbox," and "railroad," may be less "categorys," and more opposite ends of a spectrum?

[@sillyjellyfish2421]

Not really. There is a real clear difference - linear games (aka wrongly called railroad) have only a single plot hook with a single adventure provided for players at time. If players are given a chance to choose between 2 or more adventures at the same time without the necessity to complete one before starting another, it's the sandbox. Easy as that

[@michaelramon2411]

I use "Linear Freeform" as one of the major axes all campaigns fall on. (The other two I use are "Narrative Simulationist", describing how important the PCs are to the world, and "Soft Play Hard Play", describing the ratio of "fluff" challenges like roleplay, puzzles and intrigue to mechanics-based "crunch" challenges like combats and traps)

[@kaemonbonet4931]

@@sillyjellyfish2421 nah, I think it's not a binary. Sometimes either kind of game can have self directed quests. any linear game can have multiple plot hooks. adventures can be set up more like shadowruns where your players are given a goal and tons of freedom to accomplish it.

[@agsilverradio2225]

@@michaelramon2411 What I mean to say, is that "railroad," and "sandbox," are the extreme ends of the "Linear Freeform" spectrum.

[@agsilverradio2225]

@@sillyjellyfish2421 Yes. there are clear differnces between true railroads and true sandboxes, but there are things that fall between, like linear games hence a spectrum, upon witch "sandbox," and "railroad" are opposite points.

[@rainfyre2694]

The party confronted me about having not enough main quest and then derailed the next session to look for winter wolves…

[@EvilShadow7777]

This is why player characters are mortal, if the player is unpleasable you might as well get some pleasure from them squirming when they realize their favorite OC might die :)

[@nucleargandhi2709]

@@EvilShadow7777 Found the toxic, adversarial DM.

[@BelegaerTheGreat]

Well then 20 winter wolves may be enough for a TPK. JK

[@meikahidenori]

@@EvilShadow7777 yeah sometimes the threat is enough to get the message across. Unfortunately there are some that just don't care and won't listen until you've run them to the last hp...then they'll take note. It's not something you want to do or encourage but it's unfair to the players who do want to enjoy the adventure. Usually players like that who don't get the message aren't invited back unless we got something they might enjoy more (Usually a beer and pretzels adventure with no story, just hunt for treasure and kill stuff. Sometimes you got to tailor your games as not everyone is going to suit your main style.)

[@littlegiantj8761]

"Who uploads at 4 in the morning??" Luke: "OH BOY, 4AM!!"

[@NiyumiGoldpetal]

14:29 "It's almost like people think that if they can attach the negative level of railroading to something, even if it doesn't fit, they can just win the argument" This is called the straw man fallacy, where you paint you opponents argument as something much easier to attack.

[@djsutr1134]

Ironically, most of the video is the same thing in reverse. Well, the first 10 minutes of it at least, but still that's a notable chunk. :D And I mean no offense, i like Luke a lot and he still has a point, but there are no crows flying around him either: :D

[@Axiom_Link]

Colville calls that the Wang Rod defense. And Wang Rods think it’s a bullet proof argument.

[@lelanischutte1524]

My Eberron campaign is, in essence, a Sandbox game. But I always have a timed main quest going that has personal stakes for PCs to complete. The players can do what they want before the deadline. They can even choose to ignore the deadline. But then there are some severe consequences due to said personal stakes 😶 But for the pre-deadline sessions, I do have the group discuss pre-session what they want to do/achieve during that game. It gives me more of a direction on what to prep.

[@Boss-_]

1:09 - In my experience, half the time a sandbox game is me doing prep and then having to improvise everything anyway because the party gave up on the quest due to getting intimidated or getting a different idea, or doing something crazy and force us to go in a different direction. Also a lot of paperwork. More like Dungeons & Accountants

[@nonya9120]

Like that old early 80s (failed for most everyone but the kid that came with 2 calculators and an abacus) alternative to D&D.... Paychecks and Paperwork. Game on.

[@richardhealy]

As a brand new DM started runnning Nyanzaru in ToA as a Sandbox. I'd prepped a number of adventure hooks at a number of shops and NPCs and I was ready to respond to my players interests. They had no idea what to do where to go or who to talk to do. I had some short term quest and medium and long term quests. And they could take on any of them. And after a while (around the time they walked in on Zitembe being hassled by some Zhentarim and they received some info from Ortimay Swift and Dark about smuggling in the harbour) my party *pleaded* with me: STOP GIVING US SIDEQUESTS! Just tell us where to go and give us like 3 choices! ^ basically the linear model discussed in the video. So I switched up my prep and began preparing specific instances of stuff I could improvise with. And now my party are about ready to head into the jungle I have prepped a number of fun encounters I rolled up and when they get to Mezro: there are 5 areas to that city and I've been prepping some fat juicy hooks for each of those too but which they do, in what order and how I leave up to them.

[@gattorosso4784]

You know, I'm relieved. I was afraid that as a first time DM (homebrew campaign) I was railroading my players and instead I designed a linear game. I'm often surprised on how they overturn my expectations in terms of plot! =)

[@michaelramon2411]

Yeah, there are a lot of people on the Internet who seem to feel that all linearity and structure in a campaign is bad, which is total nonsense. As long as you let the players control how they resolve problems (within in-universe reason, of course), there is nothing wrong with having a pre-planned structure to the events.

[@OrangeyChocolate]

I've had my players circumvent an entire combat encounter by breaking up through the floor of the room where a nobleman's daughter, whom they were trying to rescue, was being held captive. A linear game with a prewritten plot doesn't have to be a railroad if the DM can improvise. :)

[@joshuapersons4833]

I have a campaign that I'm working on, my first ever campaign, and I realize now that I was making a linear game. It's honestly really cool to look at what I've prepared and think about how the players can work with it, how many options they have available.

[@sentor98]

Throwing a like up for that sweet sweet Heroquest DM screen.

[@northwestnerd4950]

Dude, I thought that looked familiar!

[@Ing0s]

The best thing about Heroquest is this cracking screen! Not only is it covered with blistering artwork, it is also the finest perch in all the land from which to drop falling rocks on unsuspecting fools in unrelated games. It also prominently features the gargoyle!

[@aritus33]

I run linear one shots "Monster of the week" style with a main story running in the background. The reason i do this is we all have different work schedules I have 7 players but can only get 4 or 5 to a session. By concluding the story every session i can chop and change the party with people coming in and out. I cant guarantee my players being available every session so we cant be stopping halfway through a dungeon. My players love it and doing the "Monster of the week" if they want a more combat/mystery etc style adventure they just need to ask and I can change it up.

[@Volvandese]

I shifted my current campaign to something similar to this about 10 months ago. It's been great, my players have loved it.

[@jasonreed7522]

And it takes much less time to make a linear game, which if everyone has busy lives its not fair to expect the DM to try ti make something Matt Mercer level when they simply barely have the time to make a "railroad". Respecting eachothers time is a basic 2 way street between DM and players, DM doesn't have to make a ton of unused content and the DM doesn't TPK excessively wasting the prep work and investment of the players. Time is our most valuable resource, so don't waste other's time.

[@williamozier918]

One thing that I like to do is to make a sandbox but give each character a personal quest. Generally, just ask them a sweet magic item they want, and that is what they are looking for. Then give them a 3 step quest for it, so they have to go to encounter 1 to get the first clue, then another for the second clue, etc. Then as the DM I have the clues come together until it turns out all three have to go to the same place for their final boss fight. Also, I like to build in a ticking clock. So maybe they dont go face the lich in the castle. OK, but then more and more undead keep popping up until the unbeatable zombie army is destroying the land.

[@fizzlestyxx8507]

My sister and I are brand new to D&D, but haven't found a group to play with so I've been running a linear game for my sister to play in. The game we have going right now is in its third session and I think it's going fairly well. However, I have seen some of those videos talking about railroad games and was worried that I was railroading by their definition. Thank you for talking about the difference between railroad and linear.

[@greasysmith3150]

You're misusing the term module. Curse of Sthrad is a Campaign book, I6: Ravenloft is a module. The difference is modules are meant to be modular, as in they can be dropped in relatively easily. They are meant to support sandbox style play, which is why many come with rumor tables to get PCs interested in checking out the adventure site. They're used to add more to a world to help cut down preptime a bit. They also tend to be relatively short. A typical module is around 16-40 pages. Sometimes more if it introduces a lot of new monsters or magic items. Campaign books on the other hand are a series of interlinked adventures sometimes presented in one book (most 5e adventure books) but they used to be divided into multiple sequential adventures (G1-G3 which together form Against the Giants)

[@theolddm]

This is one of my favorite videos you've produced yet, Luke. Great job!! As an experienced DM, I still run the linear type game and have for years and years. My games are module based and I weave in the overall arc plot throughout them all. And my modules are all the older 1e/2e/3e modules updated to 5e ruleset, so from level 1-20+, the players go on many an adventure as they progress. I also do throw in some homebrew quests and adventures as well depending on the choices they make, etc. I've tried true open sandbox games in the past, and like you, my players just wander around with no clue and eventually start asking for what they should do. I personally think that the glory of sandbox games is more hype then anything as most players want some direction at least and would prefer actually going through the adventure than stumbling around trying to find the adventure. The key point you make, which I completely agree with, is that with linear games, you provide only 1 or 2 plot hooks to the 'next' adventure, during those adventures the players are free to choose whatever they want in completing it. I've had players skip major portions of modules, kill the BBEG early, etc. It's really up to them once they start the adventure. The other thing to point out is a session 0 is great for setting up this kind of play. When the players know that plot hooks are important and not to ignore them, it never really even feels like they aren't making choices, it's just they have already made the choices ahead of time, and as long as they are good with that, it's all golden. EDIT: On a side note, I never will get why people would down vote something like this since it's just opinion and suggestions. Must be the Sandbox Purists, lol.

[@yespotato7508]

I made a sandbox on accident. It was supposed to be a one shot campaign, but I made way too much content. Now there is 30 different areas with a total of 700 or so things to do. I am excited to see how my players interact with this world.

[@corchonga]

I like to run "linear sandbox" campaigns. I don't know if that's a thing, but this is how I called it hehehe. It's like having the main plot of the campaign been crossed by several quests determined by me or the players. And those quests may or may not be linked to the main plot. This approach gives me the power to always create the illusion of free will in almost any decision the players do. Also gives the players the chance to include (without knowing) NPCs or plots THEY care about in the main plot. Think of a linear campaign devided by "checkpoints" which are important or connections through the line (this is the main plot). And now think of that line been crossed by a "sound wave" (the quests). It takes a tiny bit more preparation than a normal sandbox, because sometimes you have to include details from one plot to another. But the resulting illusion of free will in the campaign is awesome to me to run and to my players to play :). Hope I explained myself correctly. Cheers from Argentina!

[@justinguyer7474]

Let the almighty algorithm accept this humble offering and let it be known across the land that Luke doesn't completely suck.

[@anthonygeorge4116]

He does not suck. DMLair is pretty good, but he did not ask for that level of review for KZbin.

[@gnarthdarkanen7464]

OMinous dominus fos mortuum TU butait en LU ella CARBorUNDUM!!! ;o)

[@ysendoorn]

Omg! This might be the first (and last) time I already used the tips. Asking your players what they want to do before The session is fantastic! It’s like a giant billboard with missions and players can choose. Great video Luke!

[@theDMLair]

Exactly. It usually works very well.

[@WhItErIcEgRoNsKeR]

Learned this lesson very recently the hard way as I've watched several sandbox games fall apart, usually do to poorly prepped choices or weak/uninteresting hooks. I've been experimenting more with structure and would also recommend to DMs that they try both and even possibly combine them. Include sandbox areas with many hooks to draw them towards a single conclusion/goal and then turn the next section into a more linear drive towards said goal. Definitely an important message to get out there, especially for new DMs, thanks Luke!

[@henning7491]

dear youtube, this channel does not completely suck

[@AustinBecht]

One thing I've always found interesting is the idea of presenting options but always routing those back to the same, desired conclusion. Take your orc fortress example. Do they sneak in at night? They run into some guards that start waking up the rest of the orcs. Do they cause dissention in the ranks? The warlord recruits more to fill in the gaps, or the dissenters were lying and are still loyal, showing up once the heroes assault the fortress. And so on, so forth. In the end, the result is the same. Theyve gotta fight through the fortress and reach the warlord to kill him. They were given the illusion of choice, thats the only difference. I know this wouldn't always work, but I think under some circumstances it can.

[@karlmarxjr7049]

The best way to describe it is it should FEEL like a sandbox, while still having paths. It's important for story's to actually have hooks. Otherwise you could just ask the players what they want in a session zero

[@MonkeyJedi99]

Extreme sandbox is directionless. Extreme railroad is one set of tracks and the train only moves forward. I like to find a middle ground, more like a road network. Some roads get you to the main destination faster, some get you there slower, and some will lead you nowhere near the main goal. And you can pull over to investigate a pile of sand, grab lunch, or ask for directions. You can also turn around and/or change roads.

[@superk-boy5299]

Exactly, that's how run my games in any case.

[@gnarthdarkanen7464]

Over the long haul, I've found it most useful to have more than A Session-0 for asking the Players about the Game as we move from one Adventure to the next. I've often called them "Tween-Sessions" where we have the conversations about what's going well, what's wrong with what's not going so well, and we can bounce ideas around about where and how the Game in general should shift or go in future Arcs or whatever... Quite often, Players will come up with a Character Concept they want to try for, usually from some reference(s) in Pop-Culture. It's all well and good, but as a GM, to just sign a blank check for THE Character they ask for is almost NEVER a good idea... That Character they want from this movie they saw is a FINISHED Character... NOT a first-level... AND in growth in MY Game-World or Setting, it's rare that the Character's growth arc is going to match exactly to that original concept in the movie... Without railroading (a lot), you're not going to just conjure up Wolverine (from the X-men) in D&D... It's feasible to get something similar, but not likely to create one in the same... Why bother (as a GM) even trying??? THEN you have to deal with the fact that Wolverine (in his prime at least) is basically indestructible... where a first level PC is not. You'd have to very carefully get through around 10 or 12 levels to reach a similar grade of Character as to compete with Wolverine... SO by then, you have a PC with several Adventures if not a couple complete Adventure Arcs under his belt... AND I fail (utterly) to see the point of railroading at least 10 or 12 levels worth of Campaign time to get this Player his "Logan" built up to become the Wolverine he saw in the movies or comic books... Sorry, but I'm just not going to do that... SO... my usual ploy is to NOT quite ever really give the Player(s) exactly what they're asking for... It seems counter-intuitive, but the Players seem to get motivation so long as they gain "close to" what they originally wanted or intend. Sometimes it even helps to add an idiosyncrasy or two that they didn't personally design into their Character, as it gives you some controlling leverage (in the beginning anyway) and THEY get something to work out, work around, or build off and eliminate eventually. SO that PC who was designed to become Wolverine might not quite have the claws and adamatine skeleton precisely as the Comic hero, but can spontaneously generate extremely tough and sharp spines from any part of his anatomy, with the dubious side effect of them "popping up" from time to time unintentionally when he's getting too excited or losing his temper... AND tungsten might not be quite AS indestructible as adamantite, BUT it's fairly rigid, and has a bonus of density that can boost the damage of a punch (depending on quite how much of the stuff really lines his knuckles)... It's just up to the Player to pursue the "self control" to be master of his particular "flavor" of the super-power... adding antics and situational drama (and comedy, obviously) along the way. BUT all this comes with a dubious drawback of unintentionally "disappointing" a Player... One who's so seriously intent on being THE Wolverine might lose his or her sh*t over the weirdness and drawbacks... SO the "Tween Session" is where I coach a little bit, that there ARE still available work-arounds, and we get to the bottom of what exactly the Player is trying to create, while we figure out how to eventually get there... NOT to totally frustrate them out of their mind or (worse?) out of the Game... Session-0 (bottom line) is NOT the only time a GM should have "those conversations" with his or her Players. ;o)

[@superk-boy5299]

@@gnarthdarkanen7464 Wow.... that was comprehensible and fascinating to read, thank you.

[@gnarthdarkanen7464]

@@superk-boy5299 Always welcome... and thanks for the feedback. I just hope to share in shorter order what I took a few years to figure out. No sense in me spending 30 years getting "good" so you and others also have to spend 30 years getting "good"... You can maybe take more like 20 years and get "great" or better. ;o)

[@wagnerjunior8325]

Hey Luke, im a big fan from Braziland. I really apreciate your videos, they always be helping me with my development as a DM. Ty

[@theDMLair]

Awesome. Happy to help. Greetings to Braziland! 😀

[@IronicCliche]

I do a hybrid of linear and sandbox. The main campaign is linear, but I have the players choose their adventures between plot points. I ask what they want to do at the end of a session so I have enough prep time, but will only suggest adventures of they aren't sure what they want to do. I can be a lot more freeform during the side quests because the main quest has put them in a place where they have a broad idea what they can do. So far it's lead to eSports tournaments, a drag race around a black hole and the ancient dragon mall.

[@michaelramon2411]

Linear/Freeform is a continuum that all campaigns fall somewhere along. As with most continuums, the extremes are usually bad - Extreme Linear (AKA Railroad) is rarely fun (as the players feel controlled and restricted) while Extreme Freeform (AKA Ultimate Sandbox) leaves players wandering around in search of something to do. The correct balance always depends on the preferences of the players and the GM - some players in need of structure do really well in linear games and some GMs with lots of ideas but a poor sense of planning or pacing are better off doing freeforms. In addition to all of the examples Luke gave, I think young or new players benefit quite a lot from a linear game, because they know less about the world and rules, so it is harder for them to make big decisions in an informed manner. Personally, I am an experienced GM who likes doing pretty linear campaigns. Part of that is because I actually prefer them as a player. Part of it is that I feel they have better pacing and coherence than a freeform (and as a "there for the story" person, that means a lot to me). And part of it is my background as a writer. While I do NOT treat a campaign like a novel (players control the characters and how they solve the problems), my writing style is heavy on plot twists, suspense, foreshadowing and mysteries, and those are most enjoyable to the audience (in this case the players) if the author has more control over the timing of everything. As Luke said, the key difference between Linear and Railroad is not whether the GM controls what problems are before the players, but whether the GM gives the players flexibility in dealing with the problems. I also have a variety of tricks I use to give the players choices while also ensuring that they go where I want them to go. Some people might disagree with that (both legitimately and because there are a lot of agency fetishists online who believe "player choice" is the metric a good campaign is measured by, rather than "player enjoyment"), but I think of it like a stage magician. You know rationally that a stage magician is tricking or manipulating you, but a good one is so subtle about it that you forget and/or don't care, because the results are fantastic.

[@conradhansen6180]

You are a criminally underated youtube channel, you should get more subs

[@PATHAKkumarANKIT]

I have good improv, and my players are really good, so as a thing, i have the world where it is episodic story with a quest of month stuff. And I'll be honest, all of us improv ing and making the entire story from scratch is really fun! It's neither sandbox nor railroad just pure improv that results in chaotic yet fun sessions. And yes there are times that i have to prep for a future villian as a setup but they are understanding enough to know that I can mess up here and there since we are all same age grp and understand each other

[@jakobianweller]

The way I like to approach it is have all the choices towards the end of the session. That way you can plan the bulk of each session as if it were linear but can customize the following session based upon what the players want to do. (So give them three plot hooks for example during the session and find out which one they are doing so you only have to plan around that specific one)

[@anthonynorman7545]

For sure!

[@B.OKwithShay]

Massive spider Web 🕷 🕸 words diagram and my handdrawn map. That along with backstory you stumble into a big bad within 8 sessions.

[@RonnieMcDee]

I ran an "open world" but it was just frozen slick because I am new. Little did my players know the 3 plot hooks all led to this quest.

[@Insert_Bland_Name_Here]

How to run a railroad game: Write a fantasy novel. Edit the draft until it's actually good. Send the edited manuscript to the players for feedback. This will actually be more entertaining for them than you running a railroad game.

[@Axiom_Link]

The weird thing about this video is I’m confused as to if Luke is calling out Matt Colville by using his image from his Sandbox vs The Railroad video. But in that video, Colville specifically says the third option is running a game “on rails” which is kinda what the third option is according to Luke...?

[@FearGrounds]

It really is nice to hear someone giving advice on how games can be run, instead of how they should be run. Keep up the great work Luke.

[@notrebelbuffoon522]

I have found that Sandbox games are far more work and prep time than Linear or even Railroad games... And also more fun to run, as a DM

[@bonbondurjdr6553]

The problem with railroad games is that with no prep it turns into a chaotic mess making player choices moot in all situations...

[@notrebelbuffoon522]

@@bonbondurjdr6553 any game you run with no prep turns into a chaotic mess.. I fail to see how what you said is relevant to my comment and you replied to mine with it.

[@michaelramon2411]

I personally find Linear the most fun to run (it's easier to have dramatic plot twists and over-arching storylines), but I agree that Sandbox can easily be the most work in preparation, especially if you are a simulationist who dislikes making up lots of stuff on the fly. A true Railroad is actually more work than a proper Linear, because you have to spend so much time plotting every detail and then making things up to constrain players to the set path, instead of writing down "the PCs deal with the problem somehow" and moving on from there.

[@OtepRalloma]

Not sure if 8:40 is about Colville's "Downtime" video, but in case it is, I'm sure the context is that they're giving other DMs a chance to run their own major campaigns while they do one-offs and to give the feel of that time passing between adventures. I mean, of course if it's not your cup of tea, that's fine! But I think it's a pretty cool set up if the table is cool with it :3

[@cookwithsalt2577]

The whole video is a rant about Colville it seems. The thumbnail image is even from a Colville video.

[@OtepRalloma]

@@cookwithsalt2577 If that's the case, I think he may have missed the point of the videos. ESPECIALLY the part where Colville says "But hey if that's not fun then do what's fun for your table!"

[@leorblumenthal5239]

Since the pandemic began, I have been running games on VTTs. As a result the campaigns I have been running are more linear, by necessity. My players seem to be enjoying the campaign, so hopefully things are going well. Modern D&D modules are mostly linear, with some sandbox options, but it wasn't always the case. In 2E in particular, dozens of modules, especially ones that promoted a "metanarrative" were total railroads. One module I remember purchasing, but not running for this reason, was the 2E Ravenloft module "Adam's Wrath". In this module, no matter what the PCs do, they are going to be killed at some point in the module, and turned into flesh golems by Doctor Mordenheim. There is no way to avoid dying and being turned into a flesh golem, because the module is on rails. By contrast, a linear module, which is commonly accused of being a railroad, "Hoard of the Dragon Queen", provides advice for the DM about how the PCs can interact with NPCs, what to do if they opt for stealth vs. combat, what to do if they get captured by the Cult of the Dragon, and other helpful advice. A linear adventure or campaign may lead from one event to the next, but the PCs have the choice of how to resolve encounters. In a railroad, the DM has taken that choice away from the players, and this should be avoided at all costs.

[@VitorRedes]

Very nice video. There is a lot of DM's that really think their crap unprepared games are "sandbox"...

[@jgr7487]

but, Luke, how can I burn my house down? "How to Run a Railroad game" is a great April Fools vid, btw.

[@danielcrafter9349]

I used to run a 40-person LAR, for about 5 years. Our 5-day weekend events were full to the brim of Linear adventurers - players love them

[@Brashnir]

I like to run what I call a "breadcrumb" style game. It's similar to a linear game, but there really is no set path to the end. I take note of the things that seem to interest the party and adjust future adventures accordingly. Sometimes they arrive at the expected ending, sometimes they don't. My players seem to get a sense of perverse delight from sending me off-script when I'm running a game, so I've adjusted my style to allow it. I'm pretty good at improvising when they get off track, and while my improvised encounters aren't as mechanically sound or interesting as the planned ones, those always seem to be the ones with the most chaos and the players having the most fun. In our last session they completely short-circuited the ending of the mini-campaign I was running, and we ended up finishing like 3 hours early, but I know they'll remember it for a long time because they sent the campaign out on their own terms. I told them what the planned ending was after we wrapped up, and they seemed satisfied with their decision. And all that stuff they skipped? It can be re-packaged for another campaign in the future.

[@citcoin-official2681]

An easy way to tell if someone is Railroading Vs just having a Linear Game: It's not a Railroad if you let them choose how they get where they're going. How they Do 'The Thing', Who they get to help them do the thing, what they do to make doing 'The Thing' Easier or Harder, Later or Sooner. Just because you've established a Goal, doesn't mean it's a Railroad. Railroad VS Linear is about the Journey, not the destination.

[@Jeldin486]

CoS has absolutely been a kick in the pants for me as a DM with learning how to run a proper sandbox. Went in with the wrong mindset and was fine up until they finally left the Village of Barovia...and then the true sandbox kicked in and I was completely overwhelmed by the amount of prep I had to do compared to the past 4-5 sessions of Death House and VoB. Went to prep for the next week's session after the PCs leave Madam Eva's encampment, realized just how many things I had to prep leading to and in Vallaki, and just had an immediate feeling of being overwhelmed lol Thankfully everyone was understanding and we ended up rescheduling so that I could have another week. But, yeah, its completely changed my entire mindset for session prep.

[@quonomonna8126]

using a hexcrawl just have to prep for everything the party could get into within a day's travel, maybe 2 if you're running a longer game session

[@RuBoo001]

...I think my planned MLP Pathfinder game was a bit of a... Sandbox-linear game. A number of tasks to deal with before tackling the BBEG, they choose the order, and I even had a plan to shake the last one up. Or, last _two_ , if that’s how you want to look at it. There’s also a few side quests and other flavorful bits that they can take or ignore, so... In the end, though, the tasks must be done, the artifacts collected, and they must be used to defeat the final boss. In a deus-ex-machina kind of way... So yeah, sandbox-linear...

[@Sarados1980]

Isn't a "sandbox" basically nothing else then giving your players the freedom of choosing between multiple "linear adventures". ;) I normally run my (sandbox) games this way: At the end of an adventures I give my players the "plot hooks" for the next X-Linear adventures or let them come up with their own "adventure hook". I then have the time to prep this adventure for the next session(s). Additional to this I normally have one "Meta-Plot/Adventure", which interlocks with the single linear adventures. So when prepping the linear adventure I also think about how this adventure and the "left-out" plots will affect the Meta-Plot (I use a simple "Progress Point system to track it). Also for this it's very helpful to have a rough timeline of the Meta-Plot (going back to your "Time matters"-video^^). But again, thanks for the aweseome video, very helpfull again.

[@jburns272]

I would argue that a simple 'railroad' (read linear) is the better way to go with new players or someone DMing for the first time. It makes things easier for new players to understand what's going on and for the new DM to prep. I think some of the 'whole, wide world; do what you want!' mentality about sandboxes may have come from some video games such as Minecraft.

[@SamWeltzin]

Okay, so I HAVE been running a sandbox. Wasn't totally sure, but you present a pretty good definition.

[@PackRatGirl]

This video was an enormous relief. I created a very linear game that my players love. But I kept hearing screaming about how railroads are bad, players will hate them and I kept doubting myself. So thank you!

[@theDMLair]

Yeah no problem. I think the majority of folks don't really know what a railroad is. A linear game is a 100% legitimate way to run DND. Most games are linear. A railroad and something totally different

[@errantvenatus6732]

I tend to run a mixture of linear and sandbox game I suppose lol. I usually start campaigns out linear and then slowly expand what they can choose to do. Like I started my most recent campaign with a mission from the Queen to investigate Undead rising in the area and specifically around a wall between them and their neighboring country that kept trying to invade. Once the adventure is over they'll have the option to go on any of the adventures that they discovered while on the path to fight the Draugr King lol

[@mikeyost3672]

In my old Shadowrun campaign I was blessed (and cursed) with a table full of clever and creative players. After one major operation one of my players asked how they were supposed to have extracted the target and I honestly answered "I had no idea, I knew you guys would come up with something."

[@Dhyfis]

My favorite campaigns are linear campaigns with elements tied to everyone's back story tied into it. My experience with sandboxes on both sides of the screen has actually been less investment and excitement all around.

[@justintime5021]

Totally agree.

[@Sephiroth02103]

A friend of mine wants to start DMing so naturally I sent him to your channel. I think this video is a good starting place for him. So as usual you seem to come out with these videos right on time! Keep being awesome Luke!

[@manuelyausaz2976]

Very accurate. It happened to a table a friend of mine runned during summer holiday. He presented us an open maritimal world, very big, and he told us “you can sail anywhere, and colonize, just discover or do what ever...” We drifted for 3 sessions ‘cause we didnt know what the heck to do, where to go. I played an Old one warlock, and tried to contact him to give me guidance jajajajaja... anyhow, witho no clear objective, a sandbox can clearly become soooooo boring.

[@Y0uWinY]

I am fairly new DM, but I run a mixture of sandbox and linear in one campaign. But one thing I notice is that, if your player is invested in your story, they will usually go along with what you plan.

[@Notsogoodguitarguy]

You prepped 3 things and they picked a 4th? Well, you know what that means, don't you? ORCS ATTACK! (buying you a session to prep the 4th thing)

[@SpitfiretheCat16]

My first proper homebrew setting will be a real sandbox, where you get your main quest, and the there's 50 different subquests, that always serve to advance the main plot.

[@dantherpghero2885]

Instead of 1 on 1 sessions I run what i call 'vignettes'. One character is the star, but the other players are there to give them advice and bounce ideas off of. When combat ensues i hand out NPC stat blocks to the other players and let them roll for the minions/cannon fodder. I run the major NPCs and handle strategy for the bad guys. The first time i did it my group was six players. The campaign was at a natural mid point and we were about to advance the calendar a few years. Two or three of the characters had some story related stuff they needed or wanted to do. The players had so much fun I ended up designing a vignette for each character in turn. When we got back to the campaign two months later the players were excited for all their characters to be back together again. It was like a real reunion after being separated for a few years. The in character talk between players was priceless.

[@GuardianTactician]

I have the power to add the first like.

[@captainshark-bait364]

THE POWER!!!

[@nerdysniper6194]

Unlimited powaaaaahhhhh!!!

[@teridactyl1250]

*palpatine-like cackling (but legally distinct for copyright reasons)*

[@charlesedwards4772]

Try to imagine if Lord of the Rings was presented like a sandbox game. How would you do that? Also, I like to borrow the MMO term "theme park" instead of "sandbox".

[@JaydenBarker]

I love that explanation of sandbox game. Well done, Barbarian!

[@shadows-xn3ed]

The level of editing is so good I can’t see where he over lays the two videos of him talking to himself 😂

[@TheThorement]

Thank you Luke! Hopefully this video helps to clearify the discussions around this topic

[@bigH101]

Another great video Luke. For those who haven't koined his Patreon, it is well worth it. I just recently subscribed after watching his content for a while.

[@yeahhi27]

Also there is an easier way to run sandbox games. You can sometimes see or just simply ask the players about their characters' intentions in the game and prepare accordingly, while instead of preparing a ton of adventures you should really only have enough content for 1 session + a good idea of what the adventures are about and why. It makes the campaign much more immersive and very believable. Basically if you took a little bit of time to create an area in which they will play(a village, city, kingdom, continent or w/e) you can easily improvise even the options that you didn't think of for the players - for example they heard of a certain city a few times but without any particular hook and they successfully connect it to something else in the campaign that you didn't even think of and somehow teleport there, given that you've mentioned the city you probably have some idea of what can be found there, then you just put some interesting things in front of them for this session and you're all aces. Kind of a rudimentary example but w/e. Also if it is a sandbox game then it is probably a campaign, and if it is a campaign then you can have a bunch of things and encounters that can happen almost anytime. It can be just some bandits that steal from them or attack them, it can be someone from a characters backstory that they find in that city. There is a bunch of those things that actually need little to no prep thanks to knowing your game world. Also you can have a cool concept for a tavern and just have it ready for just a random situation if you aren't very good at improvising. The most important thing is to have enough interesting things for the rest of the session. Let's say they come to this city and just go to a tavern because that is often a tendency, depending on how much time there is left of the session you can make a brawl happen or an assassination attempt at someone. Now, you don't need to know too much if the fight will end right about the end of the session, maybe have someone say something interesting or dramatic right at the end of the session like a cliffhanger, write it down or remember it and then prepare the next session according to what happened, maybe make a plot twist or connect it to something that they were doing. If they had great logic to go to that city you can easily connect it to the campaign so that it actually was a fantastic idea and rewarding them with this especially because you didn't think of it until they did. It will make them feel smart and awesome and make them think of how vast and thought out your world is, they will be immersed and completely believe it. All that happened purely because of them and you didn't have to prepare whole adventures, you just had an idea about a few and your world. The advantage of this as well is that you aren't going to have moments where the story and the players made one of your already prepared adventures unplayable or nonsensical and all of your adventures are going to have things in them that relate to other things players liked and wanted to explore. Makes it a lot easier to connect everything together so that you actually have an awesome story in which everything seems like it should have gone that way when in reality no one at the table had any idea where it will go.

[@douglascolquhoun8502]

KZbin, this man does not completely suck. Seriously, you did a good job explaining the difference. I personally prefer more open choices; however, I keep ending up in groups where some of my fellow players shut down from overload if presented with three doors to choose from.

[@razorboy251]

Yeah great video and very much on the nose. Sandbox campaigns tend to be a little bit more rewarding in the long run I find, but after a while the burnout from them is real. And while Sly Flourish and Crawford's advice about never prepping more than one or two adventures ahead is great, it's still some additional prep because the players can always just veer off.

[@JadeyCatgirl99]

I think for a long form campaign, a branching approach might be best. For this the Dungeon Master has several adventures figured out, and the players decide which order to face them in. Take the classic concept of an RPG video being broken up into several main realms (eg Paper Mario, Legend of Zelda), but the players decide which realm to go to next. They don't even need to have all options available at once. Choices they make in one arc, will have consequences for future arcs. In my own campaign, my players got a boat from a Duke so they could search for a Water Temple. They found the temple, and now the world is much more open because they have their own boat to navigate with. Early on though, they were limited to wear they could walk to, or what limited transit they could afford. Use natural obstacles to present the players with quest options, and interesting challenges.

[@BlackJar72]

Sandboxes come in different sizes. "Keep on the Borderlands" and "The Isle of Dread" are both sandboxes, but the isle is a lot bigger than the caves of chaos or even the whole surrounding area map. In either case, or any, it only works if players agree to enter and keep their characters inside the sandbox -- if you give them a sandbox but they choose to run across the yard things may not go well. (Now it seems the desert nomads series was linear par excellence.)

[@Zarkonem]

My friends and i run the sandbox-ish archetype. We have 3-4 plot hooks with a basic understanding of what we are doing with them, and when the players complete a plot hook, they tell the DM which of the remaining and/new plot hooks they wish to tackle next session and then they do that next week. We also like to create random event trigger scenarios. Basically, you just come up with something that happens the next time the players do a thing. Example, While on the road on their way to the next plot hook the players chose, they run into a bunch of pigs that are magically on fire, but while the fire is still causing pain, it doesn't cause any physical damage and the fire cannot be put out by any means. They solve this mystery, which takes about 15-30 mins and head on their way.

[@codyhanson1344]

Throughout 2020 I planned out my own Homebrew world and campaign with lots of places, concepts, and even quests/adventures planned and fleshed out. I wasn't able to get a chance to actually start it, but then in 2021 the whole concept of running a D&D game online came to mind (a bit behind the curve) so now I'm running the campaign in this already fairly fleshed out world, that my players can do pretty much anything in and adventure will be waiting for them. With that said, I also have a main plot hook as sort of a guideline for when they either don't know what to do, or don't want to do anything else. Also, I do have to go over my notes right before they go certain places, and possibly even prepare certain changes depending on what all has happened in the campaign so far and how much time has passed, but that definitely beats having to come up with multiple quests from near scratch or banking on them sticking to one thing at the end of every session.

[@yodaleiaheehoo9960]

I have been running the same sandbox campaign for over 2 years. I was shaking my head vigorously when you mentioned how much more prep it takes. As the campaign has gone on the prep time has gradually increased. I love it though!

[@TerryAVanguard]

I agree that a sandbox is a lot more prep, but my general rule, is putting up plot hooks and before the session ends getting the players to agree on where and what to do next. Because I know their plan ahead of time I can plan for that each session. This is also where a shorter game comes in. If the game only runs 2-3 hours then you dont have to prep for as many possibilities but can really lean into your players choices because you have more time to plan between major decision they make. (As they can only make so many in a session.)

[@yanaleigh]

I'm running my first long campaign and it is an open world sandbox. I love running it, and I love doing the prep work even if my players don't use it. World building is one of my favorite parts of being a DM. However, I am currently working on a high-level campaign (12-20) that will be linear. I had someone tell me it sounded like a railroad and I said, no. The players will start the game knowing that their job is to stop one of the elder evils from ever coming back to the material plane. How they do that is up to them. Presumably they'll kill it but knowing this group they might surprise me. I said, that's not a railroad. That's a goal.

[@NevarKanzaki]

I run a very sandbox game and I would say that one of the cons of running one is player differential. Some players are naturally better at picking stuff up than others. This happens to be something I have to balance very precariously because my game has some mystery elements to it. I told my players at the beginning that there would be those elements. They're free to pick them up or not. If they do, it could be dangerous but could yield great rewards. The more they discover, the more high adventure the campaign will likely become. One of my players is very sharp and I only have to leave the tiniest of hints for him to sniff it out and be on the hunt to find out new things. Some of my other players need plot hooks to dance around in front of them with neon lights to get it. As a result, I can't throw out anything too obvious without accounting how much my more astute player will glean from it but also can't make them too subtle without going over the heads of the rest. As a result, I put out a gradient of hooks but I have to do a lot of fine tuning exactly how much information I give out where to make sure everyone is getting the full experience. On the bright side, luckily for me, I don't have to prep a lot while running my sandbox game because I keep such a large amount of information in my head. As it is impossible to have maps for every possible thing my players could do, I fish some out early but often times I find myself googling up a map while running a social encounter because my players dug into any of the dozens of plot hooks that they all of a sudden put together and have run into an encounter that I have an idea of the contents of but haven't actually loaded up.

[@jacksonschumacher175]

I have a very similar system to the sandbox style you mentioned and here is what I do to minimize the prep time for myself. The party is lower levels and they do need to travel either by foot or by boat. So, last session for example I have 6 choices, yes 6. All I did was write a paragraph about each hook, have a general idea with what happens and where they needed to go. Then I determined that I only need to prep 2 encounters, One on the seas, and one on the forest. This in total took me about 2 to 2 and half hours(including creating the battle maps). Now my game sessions are on the shorter end usually talking 2 hours but in about 2 hours I can buy myself enough time to have a plethora of options and next week(which this is a weekly game) I can flesh out the adventure they choose for that session.

[@clurmpus286]

Thanks so much for this video! As a new DM this reassured me that I'm not just railroading my players by trying to run a module.

[@FrostSpike]

I tend to start a campaign with a railroad trend that takes a scenic route to introduce players to plot hooks, locations and NPCs. The players can stop off at stations and have an amble about the local environs to explore an area more and then jump back on the tracks though. Once the players decided they know enough about what's going on and have the "lay of the land", they can pick one (or more) of the plot hooks that they want to follow and then it becomes more like a sandbox but with linear parts that spider out from the basic story thread from that hook (sometimes it's "All Roads Lead to Rome" though, but is that a railroad?). So they tell me what generally they'd like to do, and I put something together for them for the next 2-3 sessions. We usually play three weeks on, one week off so that cadence fits quite well and gives me some upfront prep time for the next "sequence". I like to have a major storyline, a minor storyline, and a couple of background seeds running concurrently (aka festering in their minds), plus some character plotlines that get woven in when suitable - and these often become the seeds which blossom into a proper storyline if the players decide to go down that route.

[@RIVERSRPGChannel]

Nice definition You always need to prepare something for your players even in a sandbox game Yes the players will pick options you hadn’t thought of

[@LesDempseySoloLesta]

I'm a new player and DM. I'm in the middle of writing my first campaign. Thank you so much for presenting the facts. I stumbled on this notion of the railroad and was worried my whole idea was gonna have to go into the bin. I plan to run my campaign a bit like a Zelda game. Yes you kinda have to do all the dungeons in order but in town there are side quests.

[@C0365086]

My strat is very similar but involves even LESS prep: present several story hooks, and then up to 4 "random encounters" such that whatever path they take, they will find engaging gameplay while you get downtime between sessions to prep their chosen quest.

[@10moonj]

I'm glad your talking about this subject luke. It's so frustrating. I'm running a linear campaign at the moment. The party is leading an expedition on a newly discovered island. The game is fairly straightforward but it's definitely not a railroad. Just last session I was expecting the party to fight this bandit camp. I prepared a bunch of different battle maps and homebrew statblocks, but when It came down to it, they where able to negotiate their way out of the situation. I was very impressed with their arguments, and they rolled really well. So who am I to argue 🤔?

[@EdVeal]

During one of my games the players were escorting a noble from one location to another. I had some random encounters set up and one was that they were ran across a group of cultists. Well they ended up being very intrigued with this random cult. Once they finished the escorting of the noble they chose to dive into investigating this cult. Fortunately for me this as near the end of a game session so I was able to build out the cult and a couple of future adventure based on this cult. Yes, I run a sandbox with a few plot hooks with prepared adventures for them to choose from and we are off. That said most of the hooks tie into world events that I have going on independent of what they are, however, their actions end up having affects on off screen events. Also they are the heroes, there are no super high level NPC running around to save the day. Things are up to them.

[@dyderich]

I really appreciate the content you put out. The last time I DM'd a game was 30 years ago and it was 1st edition. Jumping into 5e was a bit of shock, but my 13 yr old son wanted to play so I put together a group. I've made a few blunders but I'm adjusting. Keep the content coming.

[@theDMLair]

Yeah Thats awesome! Happy to hear you're getting back into the hobby! And you are very welcome. 😀

[@SgtTeddybear66]

This is how I see D&D and Real Life. You have choices you can make. You can choose which path you go down. Sometimes, once you are on a path you must follow it to the end. Same with D&D. If players make a certain choice, then they have to follow where that choice takes them.

[@tinaprice4948]

You mention different style of adventures: rescue missions, stealth missions, diplomacy missions, sabotage missions, frontal assault missions, assassination missions and so on and so forth, would love to see a mini series about all the different types!

[@VaSoapman]

Oh I guess I've been running a linear game. I've just called it a goal oriented game. Invent a problem, let the players solve it. Sometimes, once they've accomplished a goal I'll run an open ended "sandboxy" session. Then, once they've gotten a goal from that I'll lock them into that adventure for a bit.

[@ryuuducat]

Im preping a semi sandbox episodic campaign for my players and i think this might be rly helpful!

[@michaelasmitty]

You should do a video on how you pitch options to your players without giving everything away. I am worried players won’t pick if they don’t know enough but I don’t want to spoil everything

[@gnarthdarkanen7464]

It's a tricky balance to keep. The casual warning "Everything is NOT as it seems." tends to work at Tables where I've run, but it won't always float... In the beginning, it's okay for the "pitch" to have spoilers, just so the Players start to get to know how your vocabulary works. It's a matter of teaching them to speak your language, in a sense, rather the way some movies have to teach the audience their internal language in the introduction phase of Act 1... I would recommend starting a Campaign with at least 2 or 3 "straight forward" Adventures, in a relatively obvious "building" plot, and THEN do something to clearly "Flip the script" without being entirely up front about it, only giving them the generic, "Everything is NOT as it seems." warning once they've stepped onto or started down that proverbial path. It can be an obvious (if a bit lame) script-flipping, too. I once earned an entire bag of dice hurled at me when my Players realized they weren't on a quest to save a beautiful Princess from a Red Dragon... BUT rescuing the Red Dragon from a HORRIBLE Sorceress who just happened to be of Royal blood... Her family was clearly worried about her disappearing, BUT she was plotting to use (and abuse) the Dragon's powers to usurp her father's throne... AND the Dragon... while not exactly the nicest or fluffiest of species was intelligent enough to understand a "debt" when rescued. It was a hell of a Campaign after that screwy little twist, too... AND among my favorite lines from the Players was... "Just how BAD does someone have to get before you actually feel sorry for the f***ing RED dragon?!!!" The point is, after that outright snub of my nose to stereotypes and tropes, they picked up quickly and were more open to thinking WAY outside of the figurative "box"... While I rather shattered all expectations around Dragons and draconic imminence, I was also freed (relatively) of having to explain every tidbit of whatever storyline or Adventure Arc I was about to toss at them. ;o)

[@mikegould6590]

How I prep ties to how I keep track of the game. At the beginning of every session, I have the players recap the events of the last session. That informs me what plot hooks worked, what NPCs or events gained their interest, and what their intentions are. This will typically inform what they will do for that upcoming session. It also informs me what I should do for the sessions after that, and how further hooks should be placed or set up. My prep after that is basically point form and short hand. There's a LOT of improvisation from that point, but that's my strong point. Once I establish some maps (which I can also create on the fly), names of NPC, and perhaps an item or clue, I let the players sort out where they want to go. Since I also tend to use the clerics, paladins, warlocks and druids as their own plot hooks through visions and dreams, the players will tend to put this information into their decision process. I should also state that all of this information and prep is informed by the player backgrounds...and by backgrounds I mean a ten minute interview I do with each player one on one. I do not accept written backgrounds. I'm not in the mood to read pages and pages of narrative about how a level 1 killed a dragon. I will, however, ask the players a series of questions that better inform their intent and direction. That direction informs my prep and story hooks (See, I got there eventually). This also means that players that do not inform me with feedback or ideas get fewer hooks, and this less prep. I should also state that, despite this sounding very "sand boxy", I view it more like a tree. Plot hooks are the choices, and they choose which branch to take. Events are planned for those intersections, which lead to limited choices. Which lead to the next pat, then the next choice, then the next path...until they reach the end of that branch and the end of the campaign. I prefer my campaigns last a year or so, with the longest lasting two. There's not a lot of time to muck about with "why do spoons exist/" and "where does the water go?" The players either get busy or the villains do.

[@tenntanovo]

Hello From Brazil! Very good! Excellent! Right on the Spot.

[@brynnp3038]

You are undoubtedly the most entertaining Dungeons and Dragons streamer.

[@darttgaming1515]

I actually run a 5E D&D sandbox campaign. It's a ridiculous amount of work. And I've noticed something: no matter how many quest hooks I present, the players inevitably chase the highest percieved reward least percieved risk ones first, and leave the least percieved reward and highest percieved risk ones for last. And if they think something is too much risk? They'll ignore the hook altogether.

[@christophermurray9777]

Good topic. I hear these same misconceptions a lot.

[@whiskeykitty]

It's so relaxing to watch Luke rant about DnD! 😇

[@theDMLair]

Well thank you. 😀

[@Billchu13]

This is an awesome video and distinction between linear vs modular dichotomy and sandbox vs railroad! Well put.

[@RottenRogerDM]

Adventure League Rules. Sandbox drools. Okay. AL just give me access to more players from the game store. And each DM will run the same module slightly differently.