Should I discuss the type of campaign with my players? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Time to retire the [rules-as-written] tag?How do I help my players not get caught up on smaller plot points?How can I effectively run a sandbox campaign playing 2 hours every week?The World Will End, But Not Tomorrow (or How to Manage Unwarranted Urgency in Players)How much detail needs to go into my campaign before it starts?How can I keep my players interested in the main plot during an open world campaign?How many (loosely linked) layers of story are managable for the players?How to reverse the Balance card from a Deck of Many Things?How can I avoid metagaming and conflicting narratives when presenting parallel stories to the same players?How to make sure the players escape but feel like it was because of their wit?Temporarily retiring character

If Jon Snow became King of the Seven Kingdoms what would his regnal number be?

Why is "Captain Marvel" translated as male in Portugal?

How to assign captions for two tables in LaTeX?

When -s is used with third person singular. What's its use in this context?

The logistics of corpse disposal

Sorting numerically

Do I really need recursive chmod to restrict access to a folder?

What does '1 unit of lemon juice' mean in a grandma's drink recipe?

Is there a way in Ruby to make just any one out of many keyword arguments required?

macOS-like app switching in Plasma 5

Why was the term "discrete" used in discrete logarithm?

Why don't the Weasley twins use magic outside of school if the Trace can only find the location of spells cast?

Is above average number of years spent on PhD considered a red flag in future academia or industry positions?

Is 1 ppb equal to 1 μg/kg?

Is there a documented rationale why the House Ways and Means chairman can demand tax info?

Gastric acid as a weapon

How do I keep my slimes from escaping their pens?

IndentationError when pasting code in Python 3 interpreter mode

Can a non-EU citizen traveling with me come with me through the EU passport line?

Withdrew £2800, but only £2000 shows as withdrawn on online banking; what are my obligations?

How can whole tone melodies sound more interesting?

Is a manifold-with-boundary with given interior and non-empty boundary essentially unique?

How to deal with a team lead who never gives me credit?

How to recreate this effect in Photoshop?



Should I discuss the type of campaign with my players?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
Time to retire the [rules-as-written] tag?How do I help my players not get caught up on smaller plot points?How can I effectively run a sandbox campaign playing 2 hours every week?The World Will End, But Not Tomorrow (or How to Manage Unwarranted Urgency in Players)How much detail needs to go into my campaign before it starts?How can I keep my players interested in the main plot during an open world campaign?How many (loosely linked) layers of story are managable for the players?How to reverse the Balance card from a Deck of Many Things?How can I avoid metagaming and conflicting narratives when presenting parallel stories to the same players?How to make sure the players escape but feel like it was because of their wit?Temporarily retiring character



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








4












$begingroup$


The campaign I’m preparing is designed to give the illusion of choice via side quests and an open world (not really open), but with a main story line that will be pushed into them sooner or later. The campaign is structured in acts and areas, with each area acting as a sandbox space you can’t really leave, but with an expectation the players will move on to the main plot.



Now, on one side, the campaign will be a lot more fun if the players are not completely aware of this fact and they feel they are free to do whatever they want until certain “events” just push them to go in a given direction. On the other hand, if they behave randomly or fight against the main story line it will ruin the campaign as it is not supposed to be really Sandbox play.



Should I explicitly state to them the type of campaign I’m designing or should I “demonstrate” the type of campaign and hope they’re on board with it?



It’s not a question of etiquette but more trying to decide if I’ll break the suspense by letting them know the general story arc is already on my mind... even if they intuitively already know or suspect it.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    What RPG/edition are you playing? It may not be necessary to answer the question, but it also may influence the sort of tone that players will expect (or should expect) going into the campaign, so it might be useful to know.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    This specific one is dnd 5e, epic fantasy.
    $endgroup$
    – Jorge Córdoba
    59 mins ago

















4












$begingroup$


The campaign I’m preparing is designed to give the illusion of choice via side quests and an open world (not really open), but with a main story line that will be pushed into them sooner or later. The campaign is structured in acts and areas, with each area acting as a sandbox space you can’t really leave, but with an expectation the players will move on to the main plot.



Now, on one side, the campaign will be a lot more fun if the players are not completely aware of this fact and they feel they are free to do whatever they want until certain “events” just push them to go in a given direction. On the other hand, if they behave randomly or fight against the main story line it will ruin the campaign as it is not supposed to be really Sandbox play.



Should I explicitly state to them the type of campaign I’m designing or should I “demonstrate” the type of campaign and hope they’re on board with it?



It’s not a question of etiquette but more trying to decide if I’ll break the suspense by letting them know the general story arc is already on my mind... even if they intuitively already know or suspect it.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    What RPG/edition are you playing? It may not be necessary to answer the question, but it also may influence the sort of tone that players will expect (or should expect) going into the campaign, so it might be useful to know.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    This specific one is dnd 5e, epic fantasy.
    $endgroup$
    – Jorge Córdoba
    59 mins ago













4












4








4





$begingroup$


The campaign I’m preparing is designed to give the illusion of choice via side quests and an open world (not really open), but with a main story line that will be pushed into them sooner or later. The campaign is structured in acts and areas, with each area acting as a sandbox space you can’t really leave, but with an expectation the players will move on to the main plot.



Now, on one side, the campaign will be a lot more fun if the players are not completely aware of this fact and they feel they are free to do whatever they want until certain “events” just push them to go in a given direction. On the other hand, if they behave randomly or fight against the main story line it will ruin the campaign as it is not supposed to be really Sandbox play.



Should I explicitly state to them the type of campaign I’m designing or should I “demonstrate” the type of campaign and hope they’re on board with it?



It’s not a question of etiquette but more trying to decide if I’ll break the suspense by letting them know the general story arc is already on my mind... even if they intuitively already know or suspect it.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




The campaign I’m preparing is designed to give the illusion of choice via side quests and an open world (not really open), but with a main story line that will be pushed into them sooner or later. The campaign is structured in acts and areas, with each area acting as a sandbox space you can’t really leave, but with an expectation the players will move on to the main plot.



Now, on one side, the campaign will be a lot more fun if the players are not completely aware of this fact and they feel they are free to do whatever they want until certain “events” just push them to go in a given direction. On the other hand, if they behave randomly or fight against the main story line it will ruin the campaign as it is not supposed to be really Sandbox play.



Should I explicitly state to them the type of campaign I’m designing or should I “demonstrate” the type of campaign and hope they’re on board with it?



It’s not a question of etiquette but more trying to decide if I’ll break the suspense by letting them know the general story arc is already on my mind... even if they intuitively already know or suspect it.







gm-techniques campaign-development player-communication






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 1 hour ago









V2Blast

27.2k595165




27.2k595165










asked 1 hour ago









Jorge CórdobaJorge Córdoba

23718




23718











  • $begingroup$
    What RPG/edition are you playing? It may not be necessary to answer the question, but it also may influence the sort of tone that players will expect (or should expect) going into the campaign, so it might be useful to know.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    This specific one is dnd 5e, epic fantasy.
    $endgroup$
    – Jorge Córdoba
    59 mins ago
















  • $begingroup$
    What RPG/edition are you playing? It may not be necessary to answer the question, but it also may influence the sort of tone that players will expect (or should expect) going into the campaign, so it might be useful to know.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    This specific one is dnd 5e, epic fantasy.
    $endgroup$
    – Jorge Córdoba
    59 mins ago















$begingroup$
What RPG/edition are you playing? It may not be necessary to answer the question, but it also may influence the sort of tone that players will expect (or should expect) going into the campaign, so it might be useful to know.
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
What RPG/edition are you playing? It may not be necessary to answer the question, but it also may influence the sort of tone that players will expect (or should expect) going into the campaign, so it might be useful to know.
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
1 hour ago












$begingroup$
This specific one is dnd 5e, epic fantasy.
$endgroup$
– Jorge Córdoba
59 mins ago




$begingroup$
This specific one is dnd 5e, epic fantasy.
$endgroup$
– Jorge Córdoba
59 mins ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















7












$begingroup$

Yes, you should discuss it with them.



First, it is important to note that "Sandbox" and "railroad" are more of a spectrum than an either-or proposition. As I understand it, you want to put at least some major events on a railroad and allow a bit more of a sandbox during the temporary stops along the rails.



This is a perfectly valid style of play. When I am a gm, I tend to do something similar with certain major plot points preplanned and enforced. This makes it easier for me to have a deep plot and do planning while still allowing some freedom that goes beyond just shuffling from one combat to the next. When I play, I am willing to accept a certain amount of railroading if it makes my gm's job easier and makes them more inclined to develop a deep plot.



However, I explain ahead of time to my players that certain aspects are pre-ordained and I generally appreciate the same courtesy when I am a player. This is especially pertinent right now because games that are much further towards the sandbox side seem to be the default expectation in many communities of gamers right now.



If your players expect a certain amount of railroading then I expect most will accept it quite nicely or at least have a polite discussion about why they don't like that style. If they run into rails or walls they didn't expect though, it can breed feelings of resentment and helplessness. This is especially true if we are talking about significantly negative events that are pre-ordained.



You haven't provided the details of your campaign, but you can probably have a detailed discussion about where on the sandbox-railroad spectrum your game will fall without spoilers. Even if you find light spoilers are necessary, I think that will still be a worthwhile tradeoff for having the discussion. Your players are likely to be much happier if they go into the game with clear expectations.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "122"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f145272%2fshould-i-discuss-the-type-of-campaign-with-my-players%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    7












    $begingroup$

    Yes, you should discuss it with them.



    First, it is important to note that "Sandbox" and "railroad" are more of a spectrum than an either-or proposition. As I understand it, you want to put at least some major events on a railroad and allow a bit more of a sandbox during the temporary stops along the rails.



    This is a perfectly valid style of play. When I am a gm, I tend to do something similar with certain major plot points preplanned and enforced. This makes it easier for me to have a deep plot and do planning while still allowing some freedom that goes beyond just shuffling from one combat to the next. When I play, I am willing to accept a certain amount of railroading if it makes my gm's job easier and makes them more inclined to develop a deep plot.



    However, I explain ahead of time to my players that certain aspects are pre-ordained and I generally appreciate the same courtesy when I am a player. This is especially pertinent right now because games that are much further towards the sandbox side seem to be the default expectation in many communities of gamers right now.



    If your players expect a certain amount of railroading then I expect most will accept it quite nicely or at least have a polite discussion about why they don't like that style. If they run into rails or walls they didn't expect though, it can breed feelings of resentment and helplessness. This is especially true if we are talking about significantly negative events that are pre-ordained.



    You haven't provided the details of your campaign, but you can probably have a detailed discussion about where on the sandbox-railroad spectrum your game will fall without spoilers. Even if you find light spoilers are necessary, I think that will still be a worthwhile tradeoff for having the discussion. Your players are likely to be much happier if they go into the game with clear expectations.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      7












      $begingroup$

      Yes, you should discuss it with them.



      First, it is important to note that "Sandbox" and "railroad" are more of a spectrum than an either-or proposition. As I understand it, you want to put at least some major events on a railroad and allow a bit more of a sandbox during the temporary stops along the rails.



      This is a perfectly valid style of play. When I am a gm, I tend to do something similar with certain major plot points preplanned and enforced. This makes it easier for me to have a deep plot and do planning while still allowing some freedom that goes beyond just shuffling from one combat to the next. When I play, I am willing to accept a certain amount of railroading if it makes my gm's job easier and makes them more inclined to develop a deep plot.



      However, I explain ahead of time to my players that certain aspects are pre-ordained and I generally appreciate the same courtesy when I am a player. This is especially pertinent right now because games that are much further towards the sandbox side seem to be the default expectation in many communities of gamers right now.



      If your players expect a certain amount of railroading then I expect most will accept it quite nicely or at least have a polite discussion about why they don't like that style. If they run into rails or walls they didn't expect though, it can breed feelings of resentment and helplessness. This is especially true if we are talking about significantly negative events that are pre-ordained.



      You haven't provided the details of your campaign, but you can probably have a detailed discussion about where on the sandbox-railroad spectrum your game will fall without spoilers. Even if you find light spoilers are necessary, I think that will still be a worthwhile tradeoff for having the discussion. Your players are likely to be much happier if they go into the game with clear expectations.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$















        7












        7








        7





        $begingroup$

        Yes, you should discuss it with them.



        First, it is important to note that "Sandbox" and "railroad" are more of a spectrum than an either-or proposition. As I understand it, you want to put at least some major events on a railroad and allow a bit more of a sandbox during the temporary stops along the rails.



        This is a perfectly valid style of play. When I am a gm, I tend to do something similar with certain major plot points preplanned and enforced. This makes it easier for me to have a deep plot and do planning while still allowing some freedom that goes beyond just shuffling from one combat to the next. When I play, I am willing to accept a certain amount of railroading if it makes my gm's job easier and makes them more inclined to develop a deep plot.



        However, I explain ahead of time to my players that certain aspects are pre-ordained and I generally appreciate the same courtesy when I am a player. This is especially pertinent right now because games that are much further towards the sandbox side seem to be the default expectation in many communities of gamers right now.



        If your players expect a certain amount of railroading then I expect most will accept it quite nicely or at least have a polite discussion about why they don't like that style. If they run into rails or walls they didn't expect though, it can breed feelings of resentment and helplessness. This is especially true if we are talking about significantly negative events that are pre-ordained.



        You haven't provided the details of your campaign, but you can probably have a detailed discussion about where on the sandbox-railroad spectrum your game will fall without spoilers. Even if you find light spoilers are necessary, I think that will still be a worthwhile tradeoff for having the discussion. Your players are likely to be much happier if they go into the game with clear expectations.






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Yes, you should discuss it with them.



        First, it is important to note that "Sandbox" and "railroad" are more of a spectrum than an either-or proposition. As I understand it, you want to put at least some major events on a railroad and allow a bit more of a sandbox during the temporary stops along the rails.



        This is a perfectly valid style of play. When I am a gm, I tend to do something similar with certain major plot points preplanned and enforced. This makes it easier for me to have a deep plot and do planning while still allowing some freedom that goes beyond just shuffling from one combat to the next. When I play, I am willing to accept a certain amount of railroading if it makes my gm's job easier and makes them more inclined to develop a deep plot.



        However, I explain ahead of time to my players that certain aspects are pre-ordained and I generally appreciate the same courtesy when I am a player. This is especially pertinent right now because games that are much further towards the sandbox side seem to be the default expectation in many communities of gamers right now.



        If your players expect a certain amount of railroading then I expect most will accept it quite nicely or at least have a polite discussion about why they don't like that style. If they run into rails or walls they didn't expect though, it can breed feelings of resentment and helplessness. This is especially true if we are talking about significantly negative events that are pre-ordained.



        You haven't provided the details of your campaign, but you can probably have a detailed discussion about where on the sandbox-railroad spectrum your game will fall without spoilers. Even if you find light spoilers are necessary, I think that will still be a worthwhile tradeoff for having the discussion. Your players are likely to be much happier if they go into the game with clear expectations.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 1 hour ago









        TimothyAWisemanTimothyAWiseman

        19.4k24095




        19.4k24095



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f145272%2fshould-i-discuss-the-type-of-campaign-with-my-players%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Isabella Eugénie Boyer Biographie | Références | Menu de navigationmodifiermodifier le codeComparator to Compute the Relative Value of a U.S. Dollar Amount – 1774 to Present.

            Mpande kaSenzangakhona Biographie | Références | Menu de navigationmodifierMpande kaSenzangakhonavoir la liste des auteursm

            Hornos de Moncalvillo Voir aussi | Menu de navigationmodifierm