Need DM Advice

I've been DMing for a while and I feel that I have been doing pretty good with it in a couple different campaigns I have run. But there is an aspect that I haven't been that great with. I seem to always push my players onto a train track and when they try to switch lanes, I always tell them no and it gets irritating for the players and myself. I have a story that I want to tell with my campaigns, so I get worried when they try to turn away from it. I know players always make crazy ideas that send the game in a different direction. But I don't know how to let them go their way without it getting away from the main aspect of the campaign. I could really use some advice that would help me through this mess. Thanks

Moved to Off-Topic - Gauss

Hey. I'd love to help. More details to start, but I think I could help you come up with reasonable solutions to keep then on the path you have chosen while they feel like they have made all the decisions. 

Some reading for you: Don't Prep the Plot Structure First, Story Last If after reading that you still want to prepare plots for your campaign, then your best bet is to bring your players in on it. No, I'm not suggesting you share all your planned secrets and Big Reveals. I'm saying you should tell them that you have an idea for a plot and you'd like for the campaign to focus on that plot specifically. Give them some of your broad stroke ideas as to what it will be about, then ask for them for their buy-in. If they agree to that premise, then they can actually help the flow of the game by sticking to the agreement, perhaps even offering up solid reasons to want to bite the plot hooks you toss at them. Come to an understanding as to their level of agency in the game. Make sure you're all on the same page before play. If you do not tell them you have a plot, then there is no guarantee they won't go immediately off that plot, accidentally or not, forcing you to improvise* and possibly abandon your prep or use increasingly heavy-handed tactics to get them back on track. A little transparency and agreement with your players ahead of time will make sure you don't have problems like this. Worse still is offering "illusion of choice" where you present what looks like a choice, but really it isn't. This is a colossal waste of time and is likely to backfire when the players start bumping into the rails of your illusion... then start testing your limits by trying to break your rail on purpose. Instead, say what honesty demands and ask your players directly for their help in making it work. They're there to have fun, too. Many players will accept railroading if it goes somewhere cool. * In any event improvisation is an important skill for GMs to learn. Better sooner than later!

As a DM that has massive plots going on constantly, I understand the desire to railroad players to deal with the problem. Its never good to actually railroad them though. The question is, in my mind, what kind of plot is it?  I find that creating a plot around a character in your campaign is far more satisfying that creatig a plot then trying to make it interesting to your players after the fact. 

Have the world keep turning. If the players don't want to follow your plot then let them go where they want. The consequences might turn out more interesting than the plot you had in mind. They head off to do their own things despite the cries from the villagers/king/whatever to investigate the strangeness at the old ruined tower? Well there goes that plot! Oh well, salvage it and think a little - what happens? Does another group of adventurers rise to the challenge while the PCs are off doing something else? Maybe they can be interesting rivals later. Does the big bad now succeed in their plot? He'll be more powerful now and expand out some more, providing a bigger challenge to the PCs later. Of course that's likely just a personal bias of style. I happen to like a style of game in which the world keeps turning under the PCs and the PCs can pick and choose how they'll try and influence events. And I particularly like hard choices - do they head West to rescue the villagers who have been kidnapped by mysterious beasts as the remaining villagers are begging them to do, or do they head East to the capital having just received a message from the crown prince summoning them urgently (or do they ignore them all an investigate that old temple to the South)? I'm sure other people love a game that tells a meticulously planned story. I don't think either is the one true way.

Do not be afraid of improvising beyond your main storyline.&nbsp; The dear-departed SHADIS magazine had a column which was HOOK, LINE &amp; SINKER, a set of genericized mini-adventures on the fly that could be added as&nbsp;a side-car to the main campaign. HOOK:&nbsp; The reason for your characters to switch tracks and get involved in the new plot. LINE:&nbsp; The purpose or goal of this plot. SINKER:&nbsp; The plot-twist or obstacles that need to be overcome to succeed. The details were sufficiently generic that they could be dropped into any existing campaign without harming the main campaign. One guy reminisces about "Hook, Line &amp; Sinker" here and suggests that you can either push the characters, pull them in, or throw them in a tank of piranhas (!) <a href="http://coldsteelindiaink.blogspot.ca/" rel="nofollow">http://coldsteelindiaink.blogspot.ca/</a> Try a few mini-write-ups like Hook, Line and&nbsp;Sinker and it will mean all the difference between creating a storyline (choo, choo!) and creating a living, breathing WORLD where much more goes on than your PCs can ever accomplish.

The best advice I can give for this is to create your world before you create your campaign. One of the worst habits I have seen with DM's is their desire to "tell their story" while having put no thought into their world outside of their direct story line.&nbsp; I have been DM'ing for about fifteen years now. I always create my world, and then I create my story line within that world. It almost never turns out the way I planned.&nbsp; I have a saying, "No campaign survives contact with the players." That is the fun part for me. After they have ran a campaign for a while half of the fun is going back and saying, "Hey guys, you were supposed to do this, but this happened because you didn't. Also, when you did this, I didn't expect that, so it caused this to happen instead and the story took a huge turn and went this direction instead." If all you are going to do is make them run on a "rail" as you say, you might as well just write them a book, hand it to them and say, "Here, enjoy reading this." Because fundamentally that is what you are doing when you tell them, "You can't go and do that because....just because." Think of it like writing a book for them, but not writing the stories for any of the main characters. They are doing that. Give them one big "world", and then let them write the book in it themselves while giving them only a few "background" characters to interact with.&nbsp; Hope that helps.&nbsp;

I have one a tip you might find particularly useful. While having a world to pull out is good (very good) something that helps you keep up when things run away from you (read: the players decide to ignore the lich invasion for now and instead runs off to steal the chalice of the god of death so they can later on extort the liches into joining forces with them on Their quest to conquer the world) is to have a list of pre-made "generic" characters, names and all. For example, npc "roles" that are likely to come up might be beggars, inn-keepers, local wizard, thief, fence, a lord, cleric, high-priest of x religion and something else. So, for each of these you pick two names, that is two NPCs per role, then you write down one or two words to describe their voices (even if you don't use voice-com), and one or two words to describe their general (likely) behaviour towards the player, one or two notes on their personality (flamboyant and spoiled, extravagantly generous &amp; manipulative) and then leave the fields for power level, location, faction etc blank. Why? Because those things are decided when you need them. Players go looking for a beggar to pump for info? Well, the beggar they find points them towards another, an older man named Jonathan Keppler (raspy voice, uncooperative &amp; requiring remuneration of threats, gruff and cynical) who is a poor and sick former tailor (write that down under power-level) who lives under the Windbarrow Street bridge in Whitefort (write that down!). What makes him worth visiting is that he has lots of gossip from other beggars who visit him to trade scraps of food in exchange for him mending what clothes they have. (also noted under PL) If he never comes up again, alright, then who cares, but it won't be difficult to remember him, and noting him down won't take that long. Basically your "index" of placed characters will grow, and your players and develop a sense of continuity in the world, because they people they get to know are still there when they return, still played in roughly the same way (or not, if things change). Furthermore you will never be "stumped" when put on the spot to come up with a name, voice and personality of a random, nor will you tend towards the same group of names when deciding on "random", because you did it all before, when you had time to be creative.

I agree with what Iserith said. The best way to avoid this problem is to not have a plot in the first place. I have to disagree with those that say to "bury the rail" or to give the players the "illusion of choice" or to have things continue on in the background without telling your players what's going on. Instead, collaborate with your players in terms of building the world and let them contribute to story ideas. That way they won't "switch tracks' since it will partly be their story, one they are invested in. Or at least let the players know you have a plot and a story that you want to get through. and get their buy in from the beginning. This is all done out of character, before you begin playing with complete metagame knowledge.&nbsp; They are going off script because you have not given them the script beforehand and/or because they are just not that interested in the plot you created. Bring them into the creative process. There really should be no such thing as a DM-created world/campaign. Most of the problems you hear about from DM's is because DM's hold on too tight and try to control the game. Let go. Say yes more often. That 10 page background you just wrote up on the various religions in the East...forget about it. Ask your players what they think the religions are like in the East. This makes prep work easier on you and promotes collaboration.&nbsp; Really, just try this once...and you'll notice the difference.

Dave said: I agree with what Iserith said. The best way to avoid this problem is to not have a plot in the first place. I have to disagree with those that say to "bury the rail" or to give the players the "illusion of choice" or to have things continue on in the background without telling your players what's going on. If you do it *right*, you can have an amazing game with a strong planned plot construct, especially if you're looking for a story of epic scope that spreads across a large number of levels. Done poorly, you'll just railroad the players (which not all players have a problem with; some players like watching the story than deciding it). I wouldn't create a game on rails, but rather have a plan about major events that you want to happen. There should be *some* events that the players have no control over. The players are important and powerful, but, unless your players *want* a game where the entire universe revolves around them, they shouldn't be in control of everything. When I'm designing tier spanning campaigns (from 1-10, 11-20, and 21-30; essentially, planned out the story for an entire years worth of games), I only have the major events/synopsis of events planned and make sure I don't plan too far ahead (1-2 levels ahead at most). Even then, all I do is plan the specific conflicts (encounters/skill challenges) and leave it up to the players to figure out how to get through them. I leave at least a few "fights" per level open (i.e. unattached to any specific story events) to cover my bets for when the players don't do what I think they'll do (one of my groups I've dealt with for a nice long time, so I've got a strong grasp on how they'll get through stuff). It's a good idea to bring your players into the fold, regardless of what kind of game you want to run, to at least figure out what *they* want out of the game. Some players enjoy getting into the back end for a more cooperative game, but there are a healthy population of players that prefer the surprise of events happening *to* their characters and running through a story in a more collectively designed approach. Even if you have the players that prefer to *not* know what's planned or that prefer you to have a well thought out and developed story for the players to progress through, you'll still be well served by not planning in such detail that your players are railroaded as well as changing the story to include specific aspects and subplots that the players want out of it.

I was clicking through the site linked above and found this article below. It's about some modules with a plot. Here's the link to it, too. It's funny and I thought you might enjoy. ------------------------------------------------ So against all common sense, you find yourself hankering to write up a railroad for your roleplaying group. You dream of a land where the rails are straight, the wheels are locked, and the players submissive. Well, you’re in luck, because today we’re bringing you — courtesy of the Serpent Amphora trilogy — an educational primer in the Art of the Railroad with a step-by-step breakdown of the track-laying process. STEP 1: MAKE SURE ALL OTHER FORMS OF&nbsp;TRANSPORTATION&nbsp;ARE FAILBOATS Remember: Your goal is not to design a robust scenario which will ensure that the adventure remains enjoyable and usable despite the players trying to make decisions for themselves. Your goal is to design a Disneyland ride to carry them past all the Exciting and Interesting Things you've designed for them to see. If the players try to tamper with their teacup, your adventure should throw up its hands in exasperation, take its ball, and go home. The PCs decide to quickly check out another lead before abandoning it on the say-so of an NPC? They fail the entire mission. The PCs decide to attack a group of elves preparing to ambush them? They fail the entire mission. The PCs decide not to hire a guide and trust to their own Survival skill? They die. You can earn bonus points by issuing Failboat boarding passes on the basis of die rolls that the players have no control over! They fail a Diplomacy check to convince someone to help them? They fail the entire mission. They fail an Intelligence check to remember a key piece of information? They fail the entire mission. No trip by rail is complete unless the train has a casino car where the only game is craps and the penalty for a bad roll is a bullet to the back of the brain. STEP 2: ALL TICKETS GO TO ALBUQUERQUE It costs a lot of money to offer train service to all the major metropolitan areas. On the other hand, if you don’t offer that kind of service a lot of people won’t ride your trains. Fortunately, the solution is easy enough: You can advertise that your trains will take people to many different places, but the reality is that there’s only one train and it only goes to one place. This is particularly effective if you replace the “WELCOME TO ALBUQUERQUE” sign with a welcoming message from whatever town the PCs thought they were going to. For example, the PCs fail the skill check to convince the boat captain to sail through the night so that they can get to their destination faster. When they finally get there, they discover that the villains got there just before them! Now they've had time to set ambushes! Oh no! If only they’d made that check or found a faster way! … what? They made that skill check? Well, it’s a good thing they did, because this way the villains only managed to get there just before them! They've had time to set ambushes! Oh no! It’s a good thing they made that (meaningless) check! STEP 3: HIRE CONDUCTORS TO TELL THEM WHERE THEY’RE GOING Remember that both the train and the railroad tracks are invisible. This will occasionally confuse the PCs, who may forget that they’re on a train and will try to head off in their own direction. The quickest and easiest solution is to hire sock pupp– Err… Conductors. Why bother making it possible for the PCs to figure things out for themselves when you can just speak through your “conductors” and tell them what they should be doing? It’s important to remember that “providing meaningful assistance” is not in the conductors’ job descriptions. Their job is to make the passengers jump through hoops, not listen to reasonable requests. To make sure that the PCs understand who’s boss, try to make the conductor’s failure to supply necessary support completely irrational. For example, when a conductor shows up and tells them that the Gods Themselves(TM) have conjured up a coastal tsunami so that the local river will reverse its flow and speed their boat journey, then by god they are going to turn around, get back on their boat, and head upstream. If the PCs ask why the 16th-level spellcaster telling them this divine messenger couldn't just cast a teleport spell and instantly send the entire party to their destination, you might think that the correct answer is, “Shut up! That’s why!” You would be wrong. The correct answer is, “Think you I am sitting by idly? I and many others labor even as you do against the machinations of the Serpent Mother, assisting you in ways you cannot see, on battlefields other than this one.” If the PCs point out that casting a teleport is surely easier than summoning hurricanes and reversing the flow of entire rivers, then they clearly haven’t learnt their lesson. And since they haven’t learned their lesson… STEP 4: IF THE PASSENGERS GET OFF BEFORE THEIR SCHEDULED STOP, PUNISH THEM The PCs respond to the encounter you've carefully crafted to show that they’re completely outmatched by your NPCs to conclude that they’re completely outmatched and go for help (despite the fact they aren't supposed to go for help)? Then you should feel “no guilt” for killing them. Arrest them, cripple them, or kill them — doesn't really matter. They've been naughty, naughty children and they deserved to be punished for their willful ways. STEP 5: IF THE TRAIN IS RUNNING OUT OF STEAM, ADD MORE ENGINES Okay, you've done everything right: You've created an overwhelming combat encounter that the PCs can’t possibly defeat so that they’ll have no chance of stopping the NPCs from stealing the artifact and kidnapping their friend. But the passengers have thwarted you by either (a) clever planning or (b) lucky rolling, and now the monsters who were supposed to stealing the artifact and/or kidnapping their friend have been killed with their mission unfulfilled. Don’t panic. The solution is simple: Add more monsters. Should the dragon somehow be stopped from reaching [their friend], don’t worry — the PCs will still have to recover the [artifact]. The results, ultimately, are the same. If it didn't get the [artifact], though, [their friend] should be captured instead, so that the PCs still have reason to go to the Hornsaw. If the dragon can’t take him, for some reason, and also didn't get the [artifact], then simply have two more storm hags bear [their friend] away instead. That didn't work? Don’t worry. You can just keep adding monsters until it does! STEP 6: PUT A BRICK WALL ON YOUR TRACKS Everybody knows that the best railroad tracks are built with brick walls, right? Trains never run better than when they run into a wall. To achieve this all-important effect you can make really poor assumptions about what the PCs are likely to do. For example, if you design an adventure in which they need to make a copy of a powerful magical ritual from the walls of an ancient tomb and then return that magical ritual to their employer, it’s probably a safe bet that they won’t spend a few extra hours to make a copy for themselves. That way you can assume that the bad guys will be able to steal the “only copy” of the ritual by kidnapping an NPC and “force them” to pursue the bad guys to get back the “only copy”. You can score bonus points by making the assumption ludicrously easy for the PCs to overcome. For example, there’s no logical reason for PCs preparing to engage in a long overland journey to buy horses; therefore it’s perfectly reasonable to make the timing of events depend on them definitely not buying horses. And since that’s not ridiculous enough, you should make sure to plan for encounters (mandatory ones, of course) in which the PCs will fight mounted opponents… and still continue to assume that they won’t have any horses to ride. REMEMBER… The important thing is that it doesn't matter what the PCs do. You've got a schedule to meet and a story to write, and no one is going to get in your way.