Your Players ARE your D&D Campaign

They cannot derail it
Casting Shadows podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Support the channel via Patreon
/ banditskeep
Discord: / discord
Thumbnail - Ai
My Podcast (s)
Bandit's Keep: www.anchor.fm/daniel-norton
Monsters and Treasure: www.anchor.fm/monsters-and-tre...
My Blog: banditskeep.wordpress.com
Stuff I use and often refer to:
The Hateful Place
PDF - www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...
In Print - sovrn.co/ei4fvwc
Dungeons & Dragons 5e Player's Handbook
amzn.to/3zi717e
Dungeon Crawl Classics (PDF)
www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...
DCC Rulebook Hardcover:
amzn.to/2Sl68HW
Basic Set PDF (BX)
www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...
Expert Set PDF (BX)
www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...
OSE Tome PDF
www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...
Chainmail PDF
www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...
Check out my other channel BANDIT'S KEEP ACTUAL PLAY:
/ @banditskeepactualplay
Where I stream Various TTRPG systems.
Follow me on:
Twitter / banditskeep​
Instagram / ​
My podcast can be found here: anchor.fm/daniel-norton​
#dmtips #osr

[@elgatochurro]

They can ONLY derail it if they're not the story.

[@danielrowan4716]

This guy gets it

[@DjigitDaniel]

Well said, bravo.

[@TheArcturusProject]

Well said

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@zdravkominchev9897]

Very well said

[@gommechops]

There is nothing like the feeling of player action changing the world, creating ripples, driving the 'story' of the campaign.

[@BanditsKeep]

Yes

[@Merlinstergandaldore]

So much is made these days about 'The Story!' It's all about 'The Story!' But putting the players in the driver's seat and letting events unfold IS the story. Not what's planned. I do agree that the spectrum between Sandbox and Railroad is wide, with lots of nuance in between, and while I strive for maximum player agency, sometimes they go down a route wherein they just have to see it through before they are free to sandbox again, and that's fine too as THEY chose the path.

[@jeremymullens7167]

I like to call it emergent storytelling. The story develops but it isn’t planned players and DM’s feed each other.

[@Merlinstergandaldore]

@@jeremymullens7167 Yup, as do I! To the point that some of my friends roll their eyes when I start to say 'emergent!' 🤣

[@SusCalvin]

I think you need to impress upon the players that they are much more in charge of the story and that it won't start and stop with an endless line of rooms where they can fight, flee or hide.

[@BanditsKeep]

Well said

[@militarymann01]

Fun>story>rules

[@hoboogre8023]

Totally agree. Give the players a list of "situations" and let'm go. Best campaign I ever played in, we got a small fief right away. Next session, DM had a map of a single, giant hex, our keep noted on there, and several points of interest, including a few "unknown ruin", etc. That group didn't last long, but I loved those sessions while we explored and "conquered" that fief...

[@BanditsKeep]

Awesome

[@Penfold497]

Oh! What great fun! I had a table of 5 for a faction-heavy game. Each player received word that they had been enfoeffed at a castle a couple of days away. But each was told he and he alone was the lord of the castle!

[@yourseatatthetable]

The players are the sandbox. Best analogy on this topic I've heard to date. Kudos.

[@Cesoide_]

That was the first time I heard the distinction between sandbox and open world, I always assumed an plain open world was already considered a sandbox. That made me start think a little differently about it. Cool :)

[@BanditsKeep]

Awesome, I’m always happy to hear my thoughts and ideas get other creators thinking.

[@filkearney]

Great conversation as always Daniel. :) I'm currently a 5e DM, started back in the 80's. I run 1-20 level campaigns in about 300 hours of play (typically start anew every 15 months ish) Generally our Session 0 is about what kind of a campaign theme does the team want, what kind of characters to they want to play in it and any kind of caveats / conditions / limitations we agree to for the campaign. From there I'm free to create or use any 3rd party content that generally conforms to what they are interested in doing. We'll have a follow up Session 0 every 5 levels (1st, 6th, 11th, 16th) to check in and be sure we're generally having fun, if the players feel the campaign is hitting the marks we agreed to last Session 0, and where the team wants to go / major objectives they're interested in for the next tier of play. In this manner I generally have more plot threads than the team can resolve within the 5 level run, so when the next Session 0 resolves I can cut off or stitch together any loose threads to die off, fold in, or escalate through the next tier of play. I don't really care which threads the team follows because each decision generally creates 2 more threads to resolve or ignore, so in that sense it 's fairly legit Sandbox Gaming, even if for like level 5 - 10 the Temple of Elemental Evil is found. That becomes a thread in the campaign they can either choose to pursue or it will likely braid into a bigger issue during 11-15 or be a possible end path 16-20, but could just drop away as unimportant to where they actually go. Since I'm not really concerned about "the story", whatever the team is having fun engaging with remains the focus of the campaign. all this allows me as the narrator to remain surprised and interested in what the team does next, and how it changes what plot threads are on the table. For me the space between the sessions is where my "solo play" fun comes in, figuring out how the world is adapting to their shenanigans, and what can I do next session to demonstrate how their efforts are making a difference, good and bad. lookin' forward to the Next conversation! Cheers. :)

[@danielrowan4716]

Not all heroes wear capes.

[@GregMcNeish]

I absolutely love that you have planned interim Session Zeroes, so everyone can check back in and discuss what's working, what isn't, and how you'd all like to see things evolve. That's a terrific practice, and a great recognition that sometimes what we thought would be awesome turns out to not be so awesome when we actually play it, as well as how what it is we'd like to experience in the game can change over time.

[@DjigitDaniel]

This is madness. Beautiful, glorious madness. ❤

[@steegen101]

Yes, as the DM I'm the one rapidly putting the tracks down ahead of the train, Wallace and Gromit style, but my players are in the driver's seat (or conductor's cabin?) They lean whatever direction they want and that's where I try to build the potential journey! My favorite moments are when I have to adapt on the fly - it's frantic and a little nerve wracking, but that improv means the players feel they have agency and self motivation. Shuffled or tossed plans means they're autonomous, which is awesome

[@BanditsKeep]

Nice!

[@zachary37]

This is all very good advice that i had to learn the hard way! There is no "story" that doesn't involve the players. They can't derail it, they can only take it in new directions that you weren't expecting, and that's good! That's why we play!

[@BanditsKeep]

Yes!

[@alberthennen7370]

Thanks again Daniel. I have learned ( over the years ) that the players finding a path that I had not predicted is the real juice that makes me love running adventures. More than anything else , this is what challenges a DM to be at their best - to come up with answers and ideas on the fly. When you can pull this off consistently , you are showing the colours of a great DM. Regarding your comments about separating content between your various media , from my perspective I would encourage you to editorialize from one to the other rather than keep the subject matter of one off the other. I exclusively watch your material on KZbin ( I have a bad history with Discord , and while I'd love to join your discussion group there , my technological phobia has me distrusting discord as a medium - in the past it truly F#$%d up my PC , and it was a chore to repair the damage).

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure!

[@Runeslinger]

Setting what sort of characters fit the campaign idea, and how we should think of them (in reference to your point of having the 9 modules and hoping to use them) is important advice. Another good video!

[@BanditsKeep]

Very true!

[@WarpigPSU]

Sandtables started with actual military application. Units would build them so that commanders could communicate to their subordinates their plans. We still used them as late as 2009 when I left the military. I would be surprised if they still aren't used in that capacity. Usually some lower enlisted are tasked with building it. I've seen some really good ones, especially in the National Guard where units are comprised of part time soldiers with full time jobs (like carpenters and other tradesmen).

[@BanditsKeep]

That’s cool, I didn’t know they use them like that.

[@SusCalvin]

The players might want to explore a section of the underworld I know is there have not rolled up yet. Then they get outright told "You could do that, but there's a loading error from me. Check in next week" and in a couple weeks that section will have formed into playable detail. They can announce their intentons ahead, so I don't spend a week rolling up a place they won't go near for months and they save themselves a loading screen. I rolled up a magical mushroom world and the players got so spooked by something in there that they refused to enter. They can totally do that, they are awfully scared the mushrooms will hijack their minds. It might be a problem down the line since they have a fully operational mushroom kingdom in the city that will start doing its own stuff if left unwatched but deciding that they are not up for the challenge right now is entirely reasonable. In sandbox settings I have started to think of the PCs as a regional faction themselves after a while. Other factions will think of them as "the Danish" or "the Sol starcrawlers" or "the Red Hat pirate crew" or something. If a PC shows up, the NPC factions will assume they and their actions are representative of the "PC faction" and start to grow a reputation out of that. When people have heard about the Danish, they know that these guys hate vampires and nihilist party-cults. It assumes they have some sort of shared goal, they are not going to split apart and end up split up as five different dudes with one stronghold each in different parts of the map. I think domain play shouldn't come as a jolting change of pace later, the players and their PCs can be eased into it. They don't have a stronghold with a trade city around it, that is still the goal for name level. But if they have a platoon or even a small company of goons others will treat them as a powerful mercenary company. They can have their own street gang, and that will start giving them leverage over the city. The PC cleric can start to found little congregations to their god and slowly grow the presence of their faith in the region.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@tylerj471]

Hey just wanted to let you know found your content a couple of months ago and have found it incredibly helpful for my campaign! Love the advice, keep doing what you're doing man!

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks you! Glad you found me

[@johnscotto5045]

Daniel, I happen to think this is one of your most powerful videos on how to create a successful game milieu. Thank you for this one

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank You!

[@bobbycrosby9765]

I love players' actions affecting the world. I also love players' lack of action affecting the world. Nothing major, just minor shifting background storylines. I want the world to change and feel lived in, and give the players the autonomy to direct their characters' actions as they see fit - it's a huge reason why I play tabletop rpgs over video game rpgs these days.

[@TheArcturusProject]

This is the most important difference between video games and table top rpgs nowadays. And if it’s ignored, then…why bother?

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure.

[@marktan3368]

Idea for a video - Transit Map Campaign. A hybrid of a sandbox and a railroad. Based of a subway system map. The idea is that things are on rails to a degree, but the players can choose at junctions where to go.

[@Candyapplebone]

Isn’t that like a classic choose your own adventure?

[@vincentfazioiii]

A point crawl?

[@Runeslinger]

"... a sandbox full of concrete" is an awesome description!

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks ☺️

[@onetruetroy]

I love this video, too. I love sandbox campaigns, emergent stories, and want the players to have fun with their characters in the world. I take ideas, expectations, and small talk from the players and PCs, and gradually incorporate that into the ongoing events. At any given time there are at least 5-6 other adventuring parties in the area. The PCs gradually learn about them and their exploits. This serves to inform the party that things do happen based on their choices and lack of action. At one point, the party joined with an available lower level party who wanted experience. Except for certain circumstances, each player had control of another motivated NPC along with their own PC. I had character sheets for them including personality traits, and definite dos and don’ts. They didn’t fully complete the task, but everyone made it out alive, which was a good thing. Two of the NPCs are son and daughter of a local noble, and the other two are cousins visiting from another territory, possibly revealing answers to some important questions the PCs have pondered. Of course, it was their choice, and I wouldn’t have stuck that adventure somewhere else if they declined to follow that course. I’m glad they chose to explore.

[@rogerb181]

I love the challenge of seeing my players make decisions that affect my game setting.

[@BanditsKeep]

I do as well

[@musingsofamadmitch]

I think you really hit the nail on the head when you said that some players do/don't want a sandbox. While I love a sandbox, I know many players that thrive on completing objectives and don't care as much about shaping the world around them. The trick I've found is to give them the clear objectives they want while keeping the sandbox "running in the background" in my brain/notes. Sometimes they have no clue they had a role in bringing something about and other times they do and they revel in that feeling of "we did that"- whether good or bad for the characters!

[@BanditsKeep]

Nice!

[@ForeverYoungKickboxer]

this is the way I play too, man

[@BlackJar72]

I always used the term "sandbox" in a different way from either of those -- usually to mean the lack of a set predetermined goal, a usage I got from video games where I associate "sandbox" with games like Minecraft, SimCity, or The Sims where the player is turned loose to do whatever they want and see what results from it. With D&D I usually use it to describe things like dungeons or islands rather than campaigns -- such as the current explorations a small megadungeon of a few hundred rooms, where there is some implicit goal of getting treasure (we like to play treasure hunters) but not a quest for a certain item, to kill a certain enemy, or accomplish anything specific in the world at large. As for actions having the logical consequences, that may effect the PCs later, I always just took that as something that should go without saying.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@raff3486]

I try to make a game that is between a sanbox and an adventure path, since right now I'm running adventure paths and dislike the idea of the world not moving forward; characters can do quests at their own time without any consequence.

[@jeremymullens7167]

I think the sandbox solution to a non changing world is for the DM to play the villain and change the game world whether or not the PC’s get involved. I often tap into third parties and ask them what they’d do in a scenario and run with it. Could even tell stories of conflict but use different games to decide the out come. Anywhere from chess to super smash bros. I’d recommend Daniels last video if you haven’t watched it. I think style of gameplay talked about in it would create a dynamic world. But I do think a combo of sandbox with linear elements is optimal. And usually the players are often rather predictable.

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool

[@Doodle1776]

I gave up big sweeping stories for an open world. They get some quests that are their only options and some quests that they can pick and choose which to take. I am done with the current central BBEG to defeat in a pre-determined plot stuff.

[@BanditsKeep]

Same with me

[@marcosmiotti7399]

I think you made a great point in this video. I've never really thought or searched about the differences between sandbox and open-world campaigns - I've always considered those terms synonyms. I've always preferred PC-driven campaigns, and now I realize I have been running sandbox campaigns since I started playing, even though I thought I wasn't. What a surprise. Thanks, you just got a new subscriber.

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank you! Welcome aboard

[@johntheherbalistg8756]

The way I do this is build out my world, including storyline starters, and set my players loose. There's always something happening around them, but they can just look at it, say "nope" and walk away. Eventually, they'll get attached to someone or something and react to its peril. My group are not murder hobos (most of the time), so I can trust them not to wreck much, have fun together and let me have fun. The only caveat is that things that they don't interact with will self resolve

[@DM-Nox]

You are awesome Daniel. Thank you for all the various wonderful content you put out. I have learned / am learning a ton. Your videos really help me connect and consolidate my mental dots so to speak :)

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank You!

[@morrigankasa570]

I unfortunately don't have a group to play with:( Nor do I have a computer to try to play online. However, I created 6 different lvl 1 characters in case I found a group. Additionally; last year I was potentially going to be a GM for D&D at my local library, but no one signed up:( Anyhow, I created a few "House Rules/Homebrew" as well as planned a few things with an overarching greater policy. That Policy is: "RULE OF COOL, BALANCED WITH LOGIC"! So for example: say the Player was a Gnome Fighter Character and the party was facing a 10 foot tall troll. They said they wanted to leap on it's back and stab it directly in the Neck. I wouldn't allow that due to the Height Difference being too extreme and illogical to achieve. HOWEVER, if the Troll was somehow brought to it's Knees or Lower then the Gnome Fighter could stab it's neck. Yet if they had been a Gnome Monk, then certain features of that class allows extremes to possibly happen, so that Monk could leap up and stab the Troll's Neck.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@kaden7443]

I love your break down of the spectrum of game types. 😊

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank You!

[@CaseyWilkesmusic]

This is wonderful advice. It’s nice to not see another “which is better?” Argument - we all can make the judgement for their own games. I believe even if the events of the world are planned out “ie; you run a more linear game with rails” there can be built in moments when the players can change course. Some DMs might not want to change course mid adventure but based on the outcome and downtime activities, those can be moments when the players affect the world around them. The DM can alter the next “planned” adventure according to the actions in between

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@goodbuddy7607]

"sandbox full of concrete" perfectly put

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank You!

[@zophalic]

Another great video. I like the sandbox approach, if there is a certain dungeon or adventure I want to run or think the players need to go through for my campaign but the players have bypassed it. I'll introduce some hooks in what ever adventure they're on to point back where I would like them to go, such as a partial map or a letter that might kindletheir curiosity. But if that doesn't turn them back, I leave it be and hope it will get visited another time. Mode times I just have array of encounters and little adventures that aren't regeon specific,so they can be placed anywhere on the map at any time. If keeps me from having that deer in the headlights moment not knowing what to do. My players have a knack of completely laying waste all my well laid plans in the first 10 minutes of the session anyway.

[@BanditsKeep]

Yes, I also have a handful of generic locations I can use if they PCs explore beyond my known area

[@zsheets7483]

13:27 "The world must be mutable. The world must actually be sand. Right? I mean, not literally." ~disappointedly puts away my plans for a Fremen fighter~

[@BanditsKeep]

😊

[@punkbohemian]

I have been watching a lot of your videos because I've been working on building a homebrew sandbox world using B/X as the base and YT videos have been helping me iron out the finer points. A lot of the content in your videos has given me plenty to consider with my approach. For example, I was considering a "quantum gear" mechanic, felt something was off with the idea, and your video on that topic cleared it up for me. All that being said, you had mentioned in a video that there were a lot of merits to Vancian magic. I would love to see a video on that. It's the one element I have the hardest time getting behind. Not so much the fictional logic of fire-and-forget, but how I've seen it play out at the table. Namely, most spellcasters I've seen don't even bother with some of the more niche spells because you can't depend on having the right context for those spells to be useful. I mean, you can telegraph to a MU player that they might have some water breathing in the future, or improvise content around whatever they pick for their spells, but I don't think that really does much for player choice or creativity. Anyway, I'd love to see a video with your thoughts on the topic.

[@BanditsKeep]

The short answer is: they will not always have the “right” spell and this is a feature as they say - it creates a need to go back to locations and continue to explore. If you are running more episodic style, this of course is not ideal. But in a long running sandbox, it is fantastic to see the players overcome obstacles with spells and knowledge they gain in play.

[@punkbohemian]

@@BanditsKeep What are your thoughts on "missed opportunities"? For example, I don't recall often, if ever, seeing someone at my tables memorize Hold Portal. There have been a number of situations where it would have been handy, but virtually never in ways you could see coming, and not often enough to put it in rotation. I've seen a lot of situations where a certain niche spell would have been useful at a particular moment on which you can't really circle back. In my experience, there have been a number of spells that never really get used (unless someone happens to have a wand or something) and are only referenced in a "it would have been cool to have memorized that" sort of way. I'm certainly not advocating for a MU somehow always having all their spells at their disposal. I think there is great value in having to curate what spells you study and add to your book, and then further curate what you're loading up on a particular day. That's player choice (I'm a big fan of player choice), and to make everything accessible pretty much takes that choice away. But, at the same time, Hold Portals and the like will always seem to stay on the bench.

[@BanditsKeep]

@@punkbohemian it’s funny you mention hold portal. I had a very experienced player that mostly played fifth edition, play swords and wizardry for the first time with me. Their pre-GEN -a first level magic user - had hold portal as their spell. They looked at it and said “well this is useless.” Turns out later in the adventure when they were being chased by a much more powerful creature than they could’ve handled the hold portal came in quite useful. After the session, the player laughed about it and said, I guess I need to look at playing a magic user differently to understand that all spells are useful. You just have to figure out when and why. If your players are only taking combat spells, that says something about either the adventures they are playing in or the players themselves. Frankly, if they’re happy, I don’t see a problem with that. Short answer, make the spells useful and people will use them.

[@grumpy_wizard_blog]

Great video Daniel. I run my sandbox games focused on player choices. They can run amok and do crazy stuff and its totally fine. I think that is a thing that a lot of referees who are newish get a little precious about. Being open to players ignoring it, wrecking it, blowing it up is a big challenge to the ego. We spend the time creating all this cool stuff and players ignore it, trash talk that cool NPC we came up with, or start thinking about how they can explode it. Can't be precious about your campaign world if you are running a sandbox.

[@BanditsKeep]

True

[@mikeb.1705]

I'm with you ~ I allow the players to drive the story. I do a "guided sandbox", where I throw out a dozen or so rumors / hooks that can lead to about 4 different adventure possibilities. Many of the rumors are actually related to the same adventure, but you never know which one will actually hook the players. Once the players choose an adventure hook, off we go! Each adventure leads to more possibilities for future adventure. As the adventures proceed they build into a story arc that will eventually culminate in a climax of some sort, but I don't start with that climax already in mind. I let the plot / arc / storyline form organically as we play, and try to base it on what I perceive to be the desires of the players.

[@BanditsKeep]

Awesome

[@tonyhind6992]

I have almost stopped planning games as my players do what they want. They might know who the bad guy is but the rest is up to them. I just have the world in my head and they do stuff in it. My players started a war between to elf kingdoms by mistake and that allowed the vampires to take power as the ones keeping them in check were at war. And that only came about because they called on a favor by a demon at that time. Something I had no clue they would do. I never have a clue what's going to happen. Its the best campaign I have ever run.

[@danielrowan4716]

Sounds just like my own.

[@SusCalvin]

In Esoteric Enterprises and other city games I think it's easier to make a difference when the other factions are small as well. A street gang of 30 people is still a formidable presence compared to the PCs (five level 3-4 PC criminals and four hirelings at base) but knocking out ten of them makes a big difference. Most factions are 15-30 people with the local mob leading the bunch with 60 members and several hangers-on. But even a small PC nudge or a random disaster can change the city. A group of PCs at a con raided the vampire cult of the city and the main PC crew had encountered a group of vampires in the sewers and killed some. Of course they didn't wipe them out, there's enough vampires left, they didn't wreck the base itself and they killed none of the four ancient leaders. But the vampire clan's junior ranks were cut in half, and those were the dudes who ran the prostitution rings on the surface. And now the elder vampires' control of that is slipping as they've decided to pull back and restructure what they have.

[@BanditsKeep]

Awesome

[@Matt_Volk]

Indeed! Players must be cooperative with the intention of the game.

[@BanditsKeep]

True.

[@blueshellincident]

I’d love to hear your campaign stories here

[@BanditsKeep]

I’ll try to incorporate them a bit more

[@danielsimonson3484]

Really good advice. I am planning out a sandbox campaign, and you forced me to rethink some of the choices i have made. Thank you. This is my first SB, and most of my research is in how to not screw it up before it begins.

[@BanditsKeep]

I’m sure it will be awesome, go with what you and your players enjoy.

[@noxiousbones]

Wow. This made me check myself and the way I run games. “A sandbox full of concrete”.

[@BanditsKeep]

😊

[@davidmc8478]

I think the wargaming description of a sandbox is something that is shaped before the battle. Each player might have points to spend, so I would spend one point to have a forest here and two points to have a hill there, while my opponent is doing the same. I am mentioning this because it links to another video or podcast you made about creating the world together. In wargaming the sandbox would not be mutable once shaped, but it can be for a rpg.

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@Sichuanbeef]

Prestidigitation got me banned from playing back in 3.0. Maybe it was spider climb + Magic missle since the DM didn't want to use anything except melee against us. But I would gladly blow a higher level spell slot to keep using prestidigitation for it's multiple effects. Been a forever DM since.

[@BanditsKeep]

😂

[@michaelwest4325]

A good discourse on a thorny subject. I will defend the linear adventure and respect that sometimes the GM is trying to set forth a story to unfold, the wooden railroad may be no fun, but sometimes a journey is worth taken as much as the destination is where we are going! I can't commit to defending the lame railroads, silly handicapping or crushing of player agency to get there, but sometimes you just need to follow the breadcrumbs. Even a sandbox has a box!

[@BanditsKeep]

Having a cool story is fine, IMO directing the players so they have to follow it with no buy in, no so much.

[@jeremymullens7167]

There are two ways to do it. Either the the players are reacting to what the DM does or The Dm is reacting to what the players do. Every game has a bit of both but a sandbox game will have more of the second type and the railroad will have a bit of the first. Some players aren’t sure what to do with their initiative because they’ve been trained a bit by video games and the second style is very hard for computers to do. It’s kinda the same for adventure paths. The second style were DM’s react heavily to players can only happen in table top and is what makes it unique. Otherwise in programming devs are trying to predict what players want. Often they’re pretty good but it won’t have that tailor made quality.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@opaqued2039]

Great video. I like to run a more sandbox style game. I essentially write up different challenges or conflicts the players may or may not come across, including having large scale events in the background they can participate in, and then see where they go. Then if they latch onto a particular thing, I go into more detail and try to take meticulous notes on the things that appeal to them. This also helps me anticipate what they might do next adventure. I do the same thing with NPCs. It's also fun because I find out about the world as they do. That doesn't mean they won't take a predictable path (exploring a dungeon, rescuing a princess, et.), but they often surprise me. A couple of weeks ago, the group acquired a powerful magical sword crafted by dwarves (ripped off the concept of a king sword from the book Storm Blade). One of the PCs is a dwarf cleric/fighter. The party let him decide the sword's fate, and he decided to take it back to the dwarves--before advancing anymore on the quest they were currently on. The party followed suit, and a whole different game took place than what was planned. His character could have kept the blade, which would have had serious potential fun and problems for a low level character, but instead he felt that he wasn't worthy enough (his explanation for a low level character not wanting a higher level sword) and wanted to see it go to the worthy dwarven king. (I let dwarven clerics use any weapon forged by dwarves or really any hammer or axe, playing to the trope there). The rest of the players thought he was insane, but they backed his play. That was one of the very few times I've ever seen a player turn down a magic item that was better than their level. It was a great session.

[@BanditsKeep]

That’s awesome

[@Venzynt]

I've actually had the opposite problem, where my players are so passive/inactive that I end up struggling to explain how their enemies don't just kill them and win lol.

[@BanditsKeep]

If the enemies attack the PCs will need to react in some way, hopefully that will start the ball rolling

[@RoninCatholic]

As a cavalier, I'd say I'm hoping the dungeon holds magical tools like armor, shields, and lances of the ancient times that will help me _better_ protect the rabble than the modern versions of my gear do. That such places also tend to be the long-term nesting grounds of the mighty beasts that harass the innocent, so hunting them down in there is a proactive form of protection and can bring some extra glory as a bonus. No character archetype has a reason _not_ to plunder dungeons, in my opinion, it's a combination of how altruistic your desires for treasure and exploration are that vary from one character are to another. It's only when the genre doesn't _have_ dungeons that _I_ as a player have reason not to seek them out.

[@BanditsKeep]

Makes sense

[@chrisragner7025]

Hey Daniel, Chris here. Long time, yeah, I have been busy. Long time AD&D DM/player, I began my foray into 5e February 2020 (as the pandemic began). So this is how I DM my game. In our initial gatherings I ask the players what they want to play as far as race/species and class. Not super big on backstory but we decided to choose some backstories from the PHB. From there I created a premise that would be the catalyst for the player characters to come together. In this scenario one of the characters was formerly a soldier, a dwarf barbarian who was also a blacksmith. So we agreed that they all were in a unit in the war against Hobgoblins and they retired or the war was essentially ended. Dwarf planted roots as the blacksmith for a Halfling village. A teenage halfling girl was kidnapped. He wanted to help but knew he could not do it alone. So, the father of the girl, wrote a letter to each of his old buddies to come help, seeing that the dwarf could not write in common (I threw that in there as a tease to my player buddy because all he plays is dwarf fighter/barbarian types - for 40 years! LOL) I share this example because I looked at each of the PC's race and class and planned out elements that allowed them to each use their skills and abilities. From this simple premise our adventure has blossomed in all sorts of directions. I ask them what they want to do next session and I build off of that. And what they want is never anything grandiose, but what the next move will be. Believe me, they come up with more interesting ideas than they realize. And here we are, three and half years later and I have built up a section of my world that seems to have life thanks to their play. And now, I have come full circle to this halfling village and this girl. Turns out she was not actually kidnapped as so much as running away; albeit maybe forced to at first until she learned something about her past and how it tied into her captor. And this I came up with through years of play and world building. So, I made what may have been at first an insignificant scenario blossom into a key concern for the region. And still I leave even that open ended because no one knows what direction even her life will take with or without the player characters' involvement. Oh, and on a side note: dice rolls. I created what was to be a one session situation based on the movie the Hangover. You guessed it, the party wakes from a drunken stupor in a tavern/inn trying to piece together the events from the night before. I had each roll the dice to determine where they found themselves. The cleric of the gods Frey and Freya found himself in a compromising position that built on his reputation of being a cleric of fertility gods. (He forgot his ancient mythology! LOL) Wisely, the player played the roll like that of a loving guru of relationships and because of that his religion has grown exponentially. Which has in turn caused envy in the established clerical organizations in the region. So there too is ample situations to happen for future game play. One never knows what the dice and player imagination can do for a living, unending, enduring series of campaigns. Chris out!

[@SusCalvin]

One of my mates likes the race-as-class dwarfs above anything. It's not necessary to be the dude who hits others better or harder. It's about being the dude who can stand their and take what they can dish out far longer than them. And a fellow with heavy armour, a lot of hp and pretty good saves is that kind of dude. Growing a faith is one thing PCs can do at mid-level. One of the domain mechanics in Birthright was temples. Everyone thinks of BR as the game of kings and barons, but you can play dudes like the bishop. Then you are contesting other faiths for who can establish themselves in a region and jostle with eachother for spots and who the baron will favor. One of the changes we tried to make on the Moon in a game was to introduce the lutheran-evangelical church. My cleric was always trying to be a good example of lutheran faith and do something about the enemies of the Lord. It was one of the reasons we really hated the weird dark cults that sprung up.

[@SusCalvin]

Something I liked in original Delta Green was that Pagan had put thought into PC organizations. They believed that in practice, CoC players will make PCs from some sort of formal or informal organization instead of assembling a random Mystery Gang. A university expedition, a detective agency, an antiquarian society, the Boston mob who are either actively pursuing mythos stuff or happens to get pulled into that world. When PCs can be put down easily or saddled with long recovery in downtime there was a need to have replacements ready. Instead of inducting a random busboy into the Mystery Gang you had a group of reinforcements handy. Two thirds of the active PCs could be replaced and the organization will still offer a continuity. Before Delta Green was a fully formed thing, they suggested it as a way to structure modern era play. You are part of a government conspiracy, because that was the cool thing to do at the time. Delta Green introduces your PCs to the next threat, you get an introduction to contacts and allies on the scene and what DG knows (and wants to share) at that point. It's small enough that you can't constantly rely on its support and can't call them for instructions at all hours. Most of all, it opens doors. You are not some shady Mystery Gang with one prize boxer, one dilettante, one doctor in egyptology and one private detective showing up from nowhere, you are given a cover investigation. You can legally investigate stuff, cuff people, access records etc.

[@BanditsKeep]

That’s awesome, my campaigns often blossom from a single adventure that opens many paths for player exploration

[@archersfriend5900]

You are totally bang on!

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank You!

[@buckaroobonzai9847]

Most of the players I've played with, about 125-130 have wanted a story, a grand quest, or at least a few plotlines. They want to feel they are doing something not only impactful and epic, but also with meaning in the world. Sandboxes built only on character backgrounds don't realize those aspects. A hybrid sandbox on rails combining the character driven plot arcs with an umbrella plot arc weaving the threads together is what works best I've found, as do some other sharp veteran DMs. Of course some players are basically actors to who want there character to be the story, but that's only a fraction. It's like the fans of Lord of the Rings/Silmarillion vs. Game of Thrones, and somewhere in between lies the sweet spot. DMs would do well to combine both for most parties, unless they know for certain the whole party prefers one play style over the other.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@FHangya]

great perspective, thanks for this video!

[@BanditsKeep]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@michaelfleischer5921]

I run my campaigns fairly sandboxy. For my GM style adventures don't work. In the beginning I have 1-3 "evil forces" and introduce them to my players. They get stronger when ignored and change the world, often to the worst, so my players inevitably fight them. In the meantime there are often smaller adventures, and after every adventure i ask them what they want to do. They can go on whatever adventure they want and work towards the goal they want, they only have to decide as a group that they want to do it.

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool

[@nosaurian]

These things have been on my Mind recently because the situation is that I started running my first sandbox, actually my first time hosting a game in years, and I used to be a very rail-roadey kinda guy (indeed I could give advice on how to get your players to follow your storyline) but I really wanted to make a sandbox and I got this clear to the players since session 0. But after the first couple of sessions several players voiced their dislikes or concerns; these were the only experienced or semi-experienced players and they both specifically requested for a more railroad type of game. they were getting a little frustrated that some players either went out of their way with grandiose plans they don't even know how to get going yet or would kinda wander aimlessly, without purpose or initiative. One said that yes, he got it clear from the start when I told them there would be things and NPCs lying around for them to interact with and find "quests", but that maybe they as a party weren't being inquisitive enough to find them or else I wasn't making them clear enough. well the last couple of sessions went much better and they said they enjoyed it. Its funny because probably the only thing I did different the following session is having some NPCs (who were already there since the session before) that were unfriendly toward the party, instead of Just being there shadowing the party (to be bargained with or fought if interacted with), I had them actually confront the party and tell them they didn't like them. there was some partially successful diplomacy but then it was the players who decided to tell them to screw off and intimidate them with potential violence. after some coming and going a fight ensued, a PC got almost killed and they fled town, they ended up with so much to solve for that and the next session (and got into still more trouble for the next) which is what I guess got them interested again.

[@nosaurian]

didn't even talk about the sandbox vs. open world thing... the thing is that them having fought and killed some of those half-orcs is going to make the minuscule town change their attitude towards goblinoids: they were suspicious of the new-comers but these were helping the economy with their gold and silver coins, and the half-orcs may be now seen as rabble-rousers who block potential sources of income. They also wounded a big bovine monstrous creature which the goblin-friends used to protect their farm animals from predators, so that opens other possibilities for change (there is a nearby human tribe called the "dog-people" which I might integrate into this)

[@BanditsKeep]

Sounds like the momentum is starting to build

[@dreddbolt]

I tend to forget how tired I am while DM'ing, to the point I think I actually railroad too much when it's time for bed. I'll give the players different "popcorn flavors" ...and they'll put in their individual "cooking oil" mixtures to "pop" different outcomes. I also do a bit of a "transit map" ...like one or two of the commenters in this video's comment section mentioned, with the majority of the main adventuring style of play varying depending on the player's actions. To be fair, I went NUTS with my homebrew world, cramming loads of backstory into how my world works. If I could hammer out some details, I could probably get a setting rolling.

[@SusCalvin]

That can happen when we notice time is running out, and our megadungeon adventure depends on the PCs returning to base camp after each patrol. It's a lot more hassle to end on a cliffhanger in the dungeon and have to unscrew the situation on the next session when some of the players might not even be present.

[@ludareestcredere]

Great video, Daniel! Much to think about for the next time I want to run a game

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank You!

[@Sichuanbeef]

I've kind of railroaded it. It's been 1 shot Mork Borg games, where I try to tie each of the 1 shots together. I plan on running more like a sandbox though. Have a few adventure options open at a time, and keep building more options up. Hopefully faster than they can complete them

[@BanditsKeep]

That’s always the fun challenge

[@Drudenfusz]

I would say I do neither sandbox nor linear adventure, and I would not describe my style as something in between either, but as something else entirely. I agree with you however that the players are the campaign (even though not D&D in my case). I would say I run my games more like Impromptu theatre, with a theme I provide (basically as prompt) for which I ask the players to make their characters fitting that theme, and then we explore where that theme leads the characters. Which is more a journey inwards as out into the world, thus again there is no plot to follow nor a sandbox to explore, but it is all about the character arcs and how they change by interacting with the theme.

[@BanditsKeep]

That sounds very cool, is this a game system you’re created or something I can look into online or otherwise?

[@Drudenfusz]

@@BanditsKeep It is my own system, but I plan to release it eventually, I will let you know when the time comes.

[@danielrowan4716]

I run my campaign as a Sand Box with some planned encounters. I’ve done a significant amount of work to flesh out the game world but not overly detailed. I prepare notes on major cities, areas of interest and key NPCs with a paragraph or two of description to provide a framework for the PCs to go with without overly burdening. It allows for them to fill in the blanks, as it were, and provide their own pieces to the narrative.

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool

[@ReustersPlace]

I listened to that Casting Shadows last week… great episode

[@BanditsKeep]

Yes!

[@MrShdutchy]

"Open world". That's a great point, people should start thinking differently about it, I already am just after hearing those two words

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool

[@artistpoet5253]

I pretty much just drop them into a scene then use oracles to react to their prompts. It's pretty cool. Virtually zero prep except for the general location and politics.

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@CatMunroe71]

We derail our GM's plans all the time, but still accomplish the mission.

[@BanditsKeep]

Perhaps that was the plan all along

[@bigpicklerick]

This is my mindset with being a GM. I give my players true freedom and then I place things in the world and I intersect them with the player characters motivations. With running Traveller 2e I am given a whole story to work with and it isn't a brain buster for new people making a background and it isn't a make believe creation dump for off the wall veteran and newish players to go over board. I find that you can creat hooks in your sand box but it's not guaranteed that you will catch the players so know your players and make sure they have motivations that fit either with the theme or with the setting or aren't so vague it's truly not reachable.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@twi3031]

personally I get excited when the world changes because of player actions and choices. the bad guy achieves apotheosis and is now an epic level threat or new deity, with evil cults popping up aroun dthem. the kingdom gets destroyed or conquered. a land overrun by evil is liberated. the players become landed nobility and can raise armies. an ancient artifact was destroyed. all these things have consequences and that makes it dynamic.

[@BanditsKeep]

Yes!

[@existinginaspace8347]

I'll settle for being able to slog my way through all these different rulebooks to try and find one I think I can run but isn't too limiting for my players.

[@BanditsKeep]

When you say limiting, what do you mean?

[@Candyapplebone]

I started my campaign with the idea that the Lord of a local town would build a sawmill with the adventurers help and then from there he would use the word to make a lot of fortifications, and eventually establish a fortress. Well, the players helped establish the sawmill. But then they just ran off into the woods, and they’ve been off in the woods hunting down, cultists in dungeons ever cents. I never planned for that from the start. It’s been so many months in real life now that the players practically forgot about that town. They’ve just been in his woods the whole time. I decided way back that I was just going to design the sessions around whatever the players do. So yeah, basically like what’s going on in your video. An actual sandbox.

[@jeremymullens7167]

Well obviously the players would return to a fortress. It could be run by the mayor and give them shelter or it can be overrun by orcs who have the town’s people enslaved. I say just brainstorm when the players start heading back. Things just the illusion of action. Unless you want to start dropping hints of things which I think is a better way to do it if you know where you’d want an area to go. Sounds like you had a plan of action for the mayor and if nothing stops him he should accomplish it. Not accomplishing it is interesting though.

[@SusCalvin]

I assume that whatever the PCs don't look at doesn't stand still. Not like I need an elaborate mechanic for it where I play Settlers of Catan with myself, but that new sawmill would start clearing up land at the forest edges. And more wood fortifications and wood structures would be there when they showed back up.

[@Penfold497]

Since I’m an agreeable fellow who just lays out a hex crawl, my players change the world early and often. I also have one war every year and the PCs will know about it at some point before it happens. They can decide to participate or not, but the map is sometimes redrawn or important NPCs killed off.

[@BanditsKeep]

Nice

[@satturnine7320]

Somewhere between railroads and sandboxes… With many layers and time sensitive shifting of events that prod players along Puzzles within puzzles and combat gambits that always lead to uncertainty Always keep them guessing while rewards are merely breadcrumbs

[@BanditsKeep]

Sounds awesome

[@SusCalvin]

A lot of adventures will have a timeline of events to come. Usually with a waiver that this is how things will unfold if the PCs are not present. On day 1 the PCs arrive. Day -10, ten days before they did so, the first murder on the island happened. On day 22 the inquisition will arrive in a ship and start setting off events like questioning peasants and try to bring in the PCs for an unfriendly interview. If the PCs have avoided most farmsteads at this point, the inquisition won't be able to get much from the peasants. If the PCs have been very obvious, an inquisitorial hit squad can be on them in a few days. After 15+2d8 days a team of cultist killers on giant wolves will track down and attack the PCs unless diverted to harass the inquisition.

[@satturnine7320]

@@SusCalvin yes things like that work well especially if you’re trying to have a definitive ending to an adventure And you can also go indefinitely with timers if you want to keep adding to the campaign or have a so many goals that it is impossible for the party to achieve them all so when it is over there’s always loose ends That way you can add in more adventuring later if you want You never know when players really like something so you want to keep the door open a crack for a sequel

[@ishmiel21]

Hey, I am a FANTASTIC drunk player 🤣

[@SusCalvin]

There are some beer and pretzels games that are made to be run when drunk. Og is one. The dumber and worse at forming a sentence you are the better it works.

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool 🍺

[@erho2967]

Good. Luck!

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks!

[@FrostSpike]

I've run groups that like the "Adventure Path" sort of thing, starting with Dragonlance, A0-A4 Slave Lords, etc. back in the day, and now the PF/D&D 5e "Adventure Path"-like long campaigns (Paizo's Rise of the Runelords and Curse of the Crimson Throne are great). Some of the 5e ones are quite "Open World" with some flex as to how events can be impacted by party actions. As you say, as part of the social contract, the players just have to agree to follow the rails where presented with them. How they achieve the objectives is fairly "open" but they still have to hit the major beats - especially if the adventure is using milestone levelling. I have tried to run pure sandbox in the past but found that the campaigns only last for a few months - a lot of my groups just didn't like it, too much disagreement as to how to proceed - need to have something to bind the player characters together. I'm currently running a 5e online group in a campaign, just about 3 years old now, that's more "sandbox" in nature, but there's a number (2-3) of major long-term storylines that the characters can interact with. When one is resolved (they've done 2 thus far!) another "front" opens, and some other (5-8) less major ones that come and go i.e. have a shorter natural resolution, plus a whole bunch of short-term one-off elements. So not entirely "sandbox" - I like to make sure that the players have 3-5 choices (largely based on their past actions) to pick from at various junctures, then run that choice for 3-5 weeks (though it might cross over with others if it makes sense to do so). Some of those storylines might simply be an off-the-shelf 3rd party module that gets woven in, others might be related to PC backstories, or just local patron quests. A variety of things. I find that the concept of DungeonWorld "Fronts" and the Faction rules in Stars Without Number are really good at keeping the world alive for the players.

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool!

[@RoDaGrier]

I never liked adventure paths until I started playing solo. Still it feels like a high action choose your own adventure book. I enjoy it but it isn't my cup of tea as a gm

[@BanditsKeep]

Do you find the adventure paths help you stay organized when running solo?

[@josephwilliams5732]

I use knave for my system. I let my player create a feat a lvl to make their own classes.

[@BanditsKeep]

Nice

[@Marcus-ki1en]

A grand campaign that is a linear path can be run in a sandbox style game. In that case, failure to follow the path has consequences as well as completing steps on the path. The players ARE the campaign, and the World continues to turn regardless of what the players do. Things turn out better when the players make good choices, but the most important thing is that they get to make the choice.

[@BanditsKeep]

What happens when you get to book 4 of the campaign and nothing in the book is correct because of previous player action?

[@Marcus-ki1en]

@@BanditsKeep Adapt the campaign to where they are. I never cared for most canned campaigns because they are so linear and programed. Few have the freedom to anticipate players will deviate. Let them know they need to stay on track and see if they are agreeable to getting back on the rail road.

[@L337P1R4735]

The only spell I get irritated with is silvery barbs because I think it should be a slightly higher level spell for how good it is but that's a pretty minor gripe.

[@BanditsKeep]

What level is it? And why is it too good?

[@L337P1R4735]

@@BanditsKeep it's a level 1 spell. It just too much for level 1 it is easily one of the best in the game.

[@theeyewizard8288]

As players can also drive a collaborative storytelling game, I would have used "characters" instead of "players". Character builds and backstories are player agency as well. Total Character Agency VS Total Player Agency. Other than that 100% agree.

[@BanditsKeep]

Not sure I get the distinction here - are you saying you dictate what “builds” players have as options?

[@theeyewizard8288]

@@BanditsKeep Player Agency is what Players "decide". It can be "in" or "out" their characters' range of actions. A PBTA with narrative tools, the Player "decides" what story element he wants to alter. It's Player Agency too but it's anti-immersive, he's "out" of his character range of action like a Deus Ex Machina. It's meta gaming. I prefer using the term "Character Agency" to define what the Player is doing within the imaginary world in first person view mode.

[@MrRourk]

Daniel spitting game truths here.

[@BanditsKeep]

😊

[@trevorclapham5571]

As a DM you need to read your players. Not all and especially new players require of prefer a more structured adventure. In our campaign the players killed a young necromancer and his brother a fighter. They are children of a very rich and powerful Lord and their older sister is a powerful wizard. This Lord has sent henchmen to look for who killed his sons. Once the players kill the henchmen the Lord will hire an assassin who's reputation is feared. This Lord is also jealous of the king and is plotting to take over and murder the king. I have even more twists with this powerful family that the players have made an enemy of. Is this considered sandbox? Never considered it to be,but sounds similar to what I had heard in the video.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed, I would say that sounds fun. If you keep attaching the PCs with a singular (boss) villain till they finally confront them, not sure that would be a sandbox IMO unless that was one of many threads

[@liamcage7208]

I let the players do what they want but if we are doing a themed campaign they still have to work within that frame work or it will break the game. Its not a railroad in this case but a freeway with lane changes, on and off ramps but the flow of traffic goes in a certain direction. Currently I'm running a sandbox where the players literally go where they want and do what they want. Sometimes they get stalled and when that happens I drop a short adventure in their lap customized to fit them.

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool

[@ronniabati]

In my humble opinion… The best GMs give the players options and choices that are actually just different paths to the same thing, but the players still think they have agency in the campaign.

[@BanditsKeep]

I’d say just the opposite, but I’m not playing at your table, so it doesn’t matter to me

[@noxiousbones]

Did you forget to link to Casting Shadows? 2:10

[@BanditsKeep]

Yes I did! I will add it, but here you go podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/casting-shadows/id1534977084?i=1000619974423

[@SteveBonario]

Yes! Giving a like (would sub if I wasn't already subbed) based on just the title of your video!

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks!

[@mackdmara]

All adventures are funnels. The players make a choice down a path. Once upon it, that slowly will lessen the choices that work, ya know, as they approach the goal. So it started open world, do whatever; But if you want to win, you kinda have to make winning moves, once you chose your adventure path. I still think on boarding is more of the players responsibility. As the DM/GM, I can't make you want the adventure that is unfolding. That is on you & unreasonable to expect from me as the DM/GM. If you want to enjoy the ride and get great loot, you need to manage your own buy in. Think of it this way. If the NPCs are all just paper cutouts to you, you won't care if they all get slaughtered. A real PC wouldn't act like that. Well... maybe an evil PC. Take responsibility for your own enjoyment.

[@BanditsKeep]

No funnels in my world, you want to step off the “path” go for it. That just becomes the story

[@ismirdochegal4804]

I can hardly understand Gamemasters, that want to banish certain spells from their players, because that nullified one of their BBEG. You are then just noch flexible enough. The players used the tools at their disposal to deal with a situation. Well done. You should cheer for them.

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@SusCalvin]

Chaosium got good at investigative games in some of their early adventures. There shouldn't be a single path forward. The players themselves should work up player skill in where and how to find information using period methods. From how expensive a telegram was to how a newspaper clipping service worked. The adventures could be slower, and play out over weeks of inveestigation instead of a quick race of events. If the players lose or miss one thread it's not a big deal when several other threads can lead them to something fun. And each failiure is not the end of the world, most of the time a failiure only means great personal or local disaster. PCs can pick themselves up after a family got eaten and try to do better next time.

[@BanditsKeep]

Exactly

[@SusCalvin]

@@BanditsKeep One of the first hurdles of Delta Green was to make the players pick up a gun. They kept thinking they could not fight mythos stuff with guns, I guess they thought every mythos thing would be like a city-wrecking kaiju. But a mi-go is and has always been a fungal nerd with a ray-gun. You can wrestle down a mi-go to the ground or blow them away with an M16A2. In a lot of old DG adventures there is no climactic spell at the end that solves the problem. You are the federal government, your most powerful spell is Summon SWAT. Your adversaries will be slinging a lot more spells at you. One of three adventures end with a federal raid where the PCs big wrapup after weeks of investigation is to throw the weight of the federal government on some hapless cultists.

[@TheDevicer]

I think many GMs aspire to run campaigns like this, but I've found player buy-in lacking. Lots and lots of players will laud TTRPGs as a medium where they can 'go anywhere and do anything' but then fail to act on that freedom. When faced with no obvious path ahead, they get uncomfortable and their enjoyment of the game drops hard. Furthermore, the ability to make changes in the world requires a lot of desire on the player side to invest in the world and treat it as a real place. These players must want to try and remember worldbuilding details. Otherwise, how could they make informed decisions? But lots of players aren't interested in remembering even surface level details about the world like NPC or place names. My biggest defense for railroads is that lots and lots of players want that experience. I hate this style myself, but it's still a common among players.

[@BanditsKeep]

This has not been my experience. Sure, if you say “you are in a town, what do you do?” They will likely find it hard to engage. If you describe 10 things immediately around them, they will act and keep on moving as longs as the world you create (with them) is interesting

[@TheDevicer]

@@BanditsKeep Maybe there's a bit of misunderstanding here. What I described in my first post isn't dropping players into a world without an inciting incident to help ground their characters and establish motives, pointing them at ten different blips on the radar, and telling them to go wild. I would totally understand PCs feeling lost and directionless in those instances. What I wrote about was players intentionally opting into an observer role. They're not interested in your world being made of sand. Sand is scary. They'd much rather play in the concrete. They come to the game with different expectations and desires. The kind of play you're talking about is antithetical to their idea of fun.

[@everthingtotal8798]

PC's MUST be able to change some circumstances (the whole world seems unrealistic.) A man is redeemed, an ancient treasure is discovered, a village is saved. PC's should also fail time to time and get their a$$ kicked.

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@Jon71992]

I disagree that a module is a railroad. As you said, everyone has to understand that this is the game we're playing and you can't travel across the world cause you feel like it, but I think railroad is a bit unfair. Forn me, I have a Main problem in my game that my PCs r trying to deal with, and then each of my PCs have some type of interested or back storry issue that allows me to create side/adjacent quests to break up from the main quest.

[@BanditsKeep]

Why are they dealing with the main problem?

[@Jon71992]

@BanditsKeep without explaining my entire game 🤣 when I first started the campaign they had 4 first level quests I presented them with and they chose which one they wanted to do. And as they explored d the dungeon (I ran them through B1) I built out a story within the dungeon that I decided extanded beyond the dungeon and they've been following it ever since, that's why I call it a "main" problem. My players are level 9 now

[@TheArcturusProject]

Well said. And God bless you for preaching this important message

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank You!

[@sungeziefer7421]

I do agree with you, but also have to disagree. To take responsibility even in a RPG world takes a mature mind. In my 40+ years dm'ing I had often see the complete astonished players when the actions the had done had retribution from the world they played in. And than they were offended. I wish I could say that happened only with younger or inexperienced players, but it did not.

[@BanditsKeep]

This has not been my experience

[@sungeziefer7421]

@@BanditsKeep The term "Murder Hobos" is not a coincidence. When you have such a group and you have repeatedly warned them that the environment will react to them, I have seen that they were quite surprised when the TPK came through NPC. Or that one plays in an explicit medieval background. And the caught thief then loses his hand to the executioner. And the player then insulted announces that the character commits suicide, because this charcter would not be playable anymore.

[@isjami21]

can the players derail the story by messing with *each other*? e.g. player 1 kills player 2's familiar.... or kills player 2.

[@isjami21]

can they derail the story by splitting up and pursuing 2 or 3 or 4 different quests entirely?

[@BanditsKeep]

No, that would be the story - and a quick way to be kicked out of my group, you don’t attack other PCs unless that was agreed upon in session 0

[@scottmarsh2991]

Unexpectedly, my King Arthur Pendragon campaign writes itself more easily than my DCC campaign. Haven’t quite figured that out. I think perhaps the characters’ relatively well defined social roles as British knights allows players a quicker and fuller immersion, whereas the “anything goes” culture of DCC presents players with the awkward opportunity to “wreck the world” by making creative decisions that are inconsistent with the Judge’s vision of the setting. This seems to make my players await a lot more “railroading” in DCC than I would like to commit. I guess I need to add a lot of social encounters to my DCC campaign in order to provide my game world some more definition. The social roles of the dungeon delving classes is fertile ground for creativity, because we get mostly mechanical explanations about these dungeon delving classes and practically no descriptions of how these “adventurers” fit in to society.

[@colelong8896]

deeply depressing that you're using a i images for almost all your videos now

[@BanditsKeep]

Sorry to hear that, I love messing with new technology, especially in the arts as my “real world job” is in that area