So i started my first campaign and we are 2 sessions in. My players started on a ship on the way to Equindrum (capital of this area) and are still on this ship (they do a lot of rp and i love it :D).
I am planning to attack their ship with pirates and capture them. If they lose to them they will end up in the pirates camp on an island as "slaves" that need to farm ores in order to supply materials the pirtes can use to forge their armor/weapons etc and need to find a way out/a way to escape.
If they win against the pirates they will also need to set foot on the island to get materials to repair their ship and eventually get to the pirates lair.
I am unsure of how hard it should be for them to get out or how heavily the pirates camp should be guarded... Are there secret entrances inside the mine or something like that? How many other slaves are there already and are they willing to join my PCs during their brakeout?
All of my players are newbies and their group consists of a barbarian, rogue, fighter and a bard - at the moment at lvl 1 but I plan a Levelup when they reach the camp.
I hope some of you can give me tips on this matter :)
Try to avoid capturing the PC's. It takes away the sense of freedom
I agree, most groups will fight to the death instead of surrender. If it's a really big plot point, have 1 player that is in on the capture plot to help you set the scene. Their character wanders off to "do something real quick" and gets captured. If you split the party this way though, you need to make sure everyone still has plenty to do where ever they are, captured or not.
All the other questions you ask are your ideas that you just haven't put the specifics on yet. I'm sure you can answer them yourself.
Don't overlook the fact that on whatever ship they are (should) have 40-80 other folks on board, captain, bosun, mates, engineers, carpenters, crew, other passengers. Unless they are the only ones, and in a small life boat... if so disregard the following:
A Pirate attack can realistically turn chaotic.this could be a fun oportunity nonetheless; do the pirates end up capturing a few key NPC's like the captain + foreign ambassador? Instead of the party being kidnapped it could just turn into a rescue mission (a different excuse to reach the same destination of pirate island)
4 lvl 1 adventurers are hardly likely to be able to prevail against a boarding party of 20-30 pirates (which, for what my opinion is worth, ought to be an overwhelming raiding party for the scenario to make sense), they may want to be hiding the whole time, or helping to put out literal fires, coming up with creative sabotage, or helping other crew members get hidden... a totally Indirect combat session could be different and fun at the same time
I am planning to attack their ship with pirates and capture them.
As others have said -- this is very hard to pull off. Players as a rule will fight to the death, long after they should know to stop. They won't surrender willingly, and they won't run for it (not that they can run for it on a ship). Furthermore, players hate to lose. Yes, I know they must occasionally lose to keep the game interesting, and they know it deep down too, but in the moment, during any one particular battle, they do not like to lose and when they start seeing they are losing, and realize they can't win, they will only get frustrated. They will not enjoy it.
All of my players are newbies.... at the moment at lvl 1
I'm not sure if you appreciate how easy it is to kill level 1 characters by accident, but all the has to happen is someone drops to 0 hp and fails 3 death saving throws, which will happen just by luck about 1/8th of the time (1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2). You could tell the first one to go down that the pirates were fighting to subdue and no death throws are needed but... this will telegraph to the players that you are purposely trying to capture them. Once they know "the fix is in" they will grow even more frustrated.
And finally...
If they lose to them they will end up in the pirates camp on an island.... If they win against the pirates they will also need to set foot on the island
So basically, you're gonna make them go to the island no matter what they do. Which means you are just making the players follow your storyline and not giving them any agency at all. As a player, this kind of thing can be very frustrating. Players may say things like, "If the DM was gonna have us in a pirate camp no matter what, why didn't the DM just start the adventure there?" You could have said, "You were on a ship, and it got attacked and captured by pirates and now you are in their camp," and achieved the exact same thing with 99% less frustration on the part of the PCs.
If they absolutely have to be on the island and at the pirate camp for the adventure to take place, then it is much less frustrating to just "deus ex machina" it right from the off, than it is to give them what seems like a choice, only to have it turn out to be no choice at all. They will cotton onto this fairly quickly and then most of them will probably be very unhappy.
Personally I would re-think (if it is possible at this stage) the entire structure of this thing. I'd give them some sort of irresistible rumors about goings-on at the island that make them want to go there. Or maybe do a skill challenge of a storm at sea and they have to help the ship's crew. If they succeed, the boat is damaged but still afloat. Simply describing that damage and having someone say "Land ho!" will probably give the players the idea to go to the island for repairs. But at least this way they did something positive, and you are not "DM Fiat'ing" them onto the island. And if they choose to by-pass the island, that's OK. Do some water adventures on the damaged ship and then when they reach Equindrum do adventures there.
If they lose to them they will end up in the pirates camp on an island.... If they win against the pirates they will also need to set foot on the island
So basically, you're gonna make them go to the island no matter what they do. Which means you are just making the players follow your storyline and not giving them any agency at all. As a player, this kind of thing can be very frustrating. Players may say things like, "If the DM was gonna have us in a pirate camp no matter what, why didn't the DM just start the adventure there?" You could have said, "You were on a ship, and it got attacked and captured by pirates and now you are in their camp," and achieved the exact same thing with 99% less frustration on the part of the PCs.
If they absolutely have to be on the island and at the pirate camp for the adventure to take place, then it is much less frustrating to just "deus ex machina" it right from the off, than it is to give them what seems like a choice, only to have it turn out to be no choice at all. They will cotton onto this fairly quickly and then most of them will probably be very unhappy.
Personally I would re-think (if it is possible at this stage) the entire structure of this thing. I'd give them some sort of irresistible rumors about goings-on at the island that make them want to go there. Or maybe do a skill challenge of a storm at sea and they have to help the ship's crew. If they succeed, the boat is damaged but still afloat. Simply describing that damage and having someone say "Land ho!" will probably give the players the idea to go to the island for repairs. But at least this way they did something positive, and you are not "DM Fiat'ing" them onto the island. And if they choose to by-pass the island, that's OK. Do some water adventures on the damaged ship and then when they reach Equindrum do adventures there.
I'm going to go ahead and disagree here. It can take quite a while to design an encounter that is more than a random encounter pop up. It's great and all to give that sandbox feel but, most DM's have a specific scenario in mind so, regardless of how many "side quests" or how much sidetracking the party does, they are going to be directed to the main events that hold together the DM's campaign ideal.
The illusion of free will IS actually as enjoyable as free will. Being obviously railroaded is almost inevitable sometimes.
I was playing recently and we had to travel to an outpost where my half-orc was unpopular. On the way there, we saw a force of giants and goblins headed right for the outpost. We arrived and informed the Guard Captain and other powers that be, of the situation. Because of my character, the whole party was received rather poorly but, that we might gain some favor by defending the keep. I mentioned to the other characters that we really didn't need anything here and could just continue our journey and while we were discussing it, my DM comes out of character and asks: Are you really going on to the Mithral Mines then?
We were just having some fun at his expense. We knew this was "the planned encounter". Our campaign was about defending innocents against Giant led raids. We are the the hero's so, we went through the attacking force like a wrecking ball. Got in almost everyone's good graces, and they one guy who still hated me was told to step off of his personal issues or else by a superior. It was railroading and it was fun.
But your example is not the same as the OP. Nothing in your story suggests that, if you had told the DM you were going to hoof it to the mines and leave the village to rot, he would have said, "When you get to the mines you find out they're closed and you have to go back to the village first."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Well now, this is a thing! First point I'd like to make is that "non lethal damage" is a thing, so it shouldn't be hard to avoid accidently killing the PC's if the pirates are intent on getting slaves. but as everyone else has mentioned, removing your players choice is a big decision to make. What you need to do is find a way to make the players WANT to go to the island. You said they've been RPing it up on the boat and having a great old time. To me, that would suggest they have made connections with some of the crew. I'd suggest the following. They beat the pirates: Find info on the pirate ship relating to the island, making it a big old call to adventure. irresistible.
They lose to the pirates: The pirates take the crew hostage, particularly the ones the party got along with best. The party , on the other hand, get kicked off the ship into the ocean (because they'd be too much trouble as slaves) and then the ship gets scuttled (to give the PC's something to hang on to in the ocean, but logically because the pirate don't have the crew to sail 2 ships). Have a bunch of sea related survival tests and then the crew (hopefully) will want to get to the island to rescue their old crewmates and get revenge. Adventure ensues.
I'll second BioWizard's advice on this one: I'd advise against trying to have the pirates capture your party. You're just a couple sessions in with freshly-minted players. It's not a great time to risk turning them away from the game by taking away the sense of agency that D&D in particular is famous for.
It's probably time to rethink this pirate island idea from the ground up. Start with asking yourself what exactly it is you want your players to do or learn on that island. Then, consider what will make your players (and their characters) feel like they want or need to go to that island to do/learn it. Giving them a reason to want to be there will get you more buy-in from them than turning them into unwilling participants.
But your example is not the same as the OP. Nothing in your story suggests that, if you had told the DM you were going to hoof it to the mines and leave the village to rot, he would have said, "When you get to the mines you find out they're closed and you have to go back to the village first."
Out of courtesy for his time and effort spent designing said encounter, we didn't decide to put him on the spot and play and adlib session instead of what he had prepared. It's called: Not being a dick.
But your example is not the same as the OP. Nothing in your story suggests that, if you had told the DM you were going to hoof it to the mines and leave the village to rot, he would have said, "When you get to the mines you find out they're closed and you have to go back to the village first."
Out of courtesy for his time and effort spent designing said encounter, we didn't decide to put him on the spot and play and adlib session instead of what he had prepared. It's called: Not being a dick.
The issue isn't railroading; its how its done. Railroading by getting the players captured is not fun for most players. Having the first session start with the players finding themselves on a pirates island is easier to deal with than being captured in any session.
If you drop enough hints that the adventure is on that island, most players will go there. It's even OK to tell the players something along the lines of "I only prepared this island; can you please try to stay 'on story' for this session?" and maybe prep other stuff if they really want to go elsewhere. Its very understandable, especially for a newer DM, that you need the players to stay someone on the railroad. Just try to change the railroad plans between sessions if the players seem to want to go somewhere else.
Out of courtesy for his time and effort spent designing said encounter, we didn't decide to put him on the spot and play and adlib session instead of what he had prepared. It's called: Not being a dick.
I agree with what you and your friends did and I always did the same. Out of respect for how it is impossible for a DM to prepare multiple options in equal detail, you try to find a way to get your characters to do the thing the DM did work to prepare. It's also not nice to knowingly make hours and hours of work by the DM go to waste. I agree with you.
But the players saying "Hey let's do this since the DM obviously prepared it" is very different from the DM saying, "When you get to the mine you find it is blocked by an avalanche so you will have to go back to town" because he decided that the town is where he wants you to be and no matter what you do, that's what happens.
EDIT: BTW, I am guilty myself, many times in my earlier GMing days, of writing the line in my own adventure document file (on my Commodore 64!), "No matter what the players decide to do... this happens." I had the story I wanted to tell, and their decisions were about what to do in combat, not where to take the story.
But as I matured, I realized that wasn't a great idea, and now I try to provide them with story hooks and let them decide where they want to go next. Yes, it is more difficult in the sense of having to start preparing several things at once and then solidify the ones the players actually decide upon. I think it's more satisfying, in the end, both for me and for them.
And my other point is, if you are doing a "no matter what they do this happens" story, the players will know it. And many will not like it.
I agree with all that. With unlimited time to pursue D&D, that's a great angle. It isn't however, a reality for many people. You say that players know when they're being railroaded. Players also know when you are just winging it as well. You can't prepare for every eventuality as a DM and you can't expect to do "anything you want" as a player. The truth hurts, deal with it. Most people have no problem with this. I would rather play a well thought out scenario than an impromptu sandbox, especially if said sandbox was an excursion from the storyline due to a single characters personal interests(which is usually the case in my experience). If none of the players are interested in following your thought out but, obvious plot hooks, I doubt a sandbox detour off the cuff is going to WOW them.
There are indeed many red flags. However that is common among new people trying this hobby. Trying something that sounds cool, but not knowing how to let it go. Very strict and direct rail roading for the first 1-2 levels can be done. ONLY when you spoke with your players beforehand and told them that a short period they would have to follow. After that the players are free to go and do as they please. However then the question is... How important is that setup? Would it be a loss if the players would automatically start as captured miners without having to go through the trouble that precedes it?
I can tell first hand. That the current setup is going to piss the new players off and make them quit instantly. I remember back in the day where i was a player. We ended up in a back alley and got jumped by 50 bandits out of nowhere. All our stuff taken away and we were imprisoned. Everyone was pissed off even though the DM said we'd get our stuff back eventually. Beginner mistakes. Don't make these now that we've warned about it :D
As for some railroading and illusion of choice. Yes... DND is a lot of smoke and mirrors where the players don't know when they're being led or not. Even when they go off track the DM can easily include main plot hooks to get the players back on track so the speak. And even when doing improvisational sessions. As the DM you still have a few scenes in mind as red threads that you lead people towards. While having no idea about what the players do and the journey of getting to those red thread moments.
Still for pirates and such. I would alter the opening to a more Waterworld inspired setup. Traditional start of being in a cage. When the pirates attack the flotilla the party can seize a chance of hijacking a vehicle and try to escape. Followed by a cool chase scene. Which can result in their ship sinking and then appearing half drowned on some beach. Or they can get away to the safety of some docks and city. Resume from there. Either needing to obtain a new vessel entirely and thus doing quests to earn it. Repair the existing vehicle and someone wanting revenge against the pirates. Or get dragged into the Pirate problem that exists on the island. LEading to eventually attacking the Pirate Prince flotilla hidden somewhere near a cove.
Instead of standard pirates. Why not go with Kuo-Toa's, sea elves or some other nautical fluff theme to change it up a little as well.
I see many people offering up, "Just start them as being captured". How is this any less railroading than:
I am planning to attack their ship with pirates and capture them. If they lose to them they will end up in the pirates camp on an island as "slaves" that need to farm ores in order to supply materials the pirtes can use to forge their armor/weapons etc and need to find a way out/a way to escape.
If they win against the pirates they will also need to set foot on the island to get materials to repair their ship and eventually get to the pirates lair.
Railroading is OK as long as it done in the right way. Especially if you are new, you can ask the players to please find a way to go along with this plan as long as it is not done every time and there is trust. The issue is getting captured. The experience of getting captured is not fun for most players. If you want them to go to the island, have the pirates invite them, or have there be some interesting plot hook they find on one of the pirates they defeat. Maybe the leader has a map to the island, or a note that would cause the players to want to go there. You can railroad your players to the island, but having a fight where you plan for them to be defeated and captured is a great way for the players to smash your railroad. Many players might try to jump off the ship and drown to avoid capture. Perhaps once they see that they wont win, one of the players sacrifices themselves to allow another to escape. Or, if they go along with it, they probably wont be having fun.
I see many people offering up, "Just start them as being captured". How is this any less railroading than:
I am planning to attack their ship with pirates and capture them. If they lose to them they will end up in the pirates camp on an island as "slaves" that need to farm ores in order to supply materials the pirtes can use to forge their armor/weapons etc and need to find a way out/a way to escape.
If they win against the pirates they will also need to set foot on the island to get materials to repair their ship and eventually get to the pirates lair.
If you open a scenario with, "You were captured and now have to break out," this is just the opening to the story. It is not causing actions taken by the players during play to be rendered irrelevant, because they took no actions. You still need to make sure they are on board with this. But my experience is that if you come to a group of players and say, "I'd like to run an adventure on a pirate island but you guys will need to start out captured first, is that OK?" people will say yes. But if you do something like put a challenge in the game, and no matter what they do, they still end up captured -- if they figure this out, they become frustrated.
You're right, the end result is the same. But all my experience tells me to do it the first way ("just start out captured") rather than the 2nd way (win or lose a fight you end up in the same place).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
As addendum to Biowizard and my own previous post. If you really want to have a good start. Just have an uprising of prisoners already in progress. Starting in prison is an often used trope, but skip the dull stuff. Chaos everywhere already with explosions and NPC prisoners running about and shouting. skirmishes between them and pirates. Now the players are already in the middle of the escape with a more action packed opening. Even starting straight away with a combat sequence to kick it off.
Why were they in that mining colony? How did they end up there? who are these pirates? Tons of questions that they can then spend game time on to figure out.
I see many people offering up, "Just start them as being captured". How is this any less railroading than:
I am planning to attack their ship with pirates and capture them. If they lose to them they will end up in the pirates camp on an island as "slaves" that need to farm ores in order to supply materials the pirtes can use to forge their armor/weapons etc and need to find a way out/a way to escape.
If they win against the pirates they will also need to set foot on the island to get materials to repair their ship and eventually get to the pirates lair.
If you open a scenario with, "You were captured and now have to break out," this is just the opening to the story. It is not causing actions taken by the players during play to be rendered irrelevant, because they took no actions. You still need to make sure they are on board with this. But my experience is that if you come to a group of players and say, "I'd like to run an adventure on a pirate island but you guys will need to start out captured first, is that OK?" people will say yes. But if you do something like put a challenge in the game, and no matter what they do, they still end up captured -- if they figure this out, they become frustrated.
You're right, the end result is the same. But all my experience tells me to do it the first way ("just start out captured") rather than the 2nd way (win or lose a fight you end up in the same place).
I imagine many groups of players would be at least interested in starting off an adventure as captured prisoners trying to escape. It certainly beats starting yet another adventure with "You meet at an inn..."
Hey guys :)
So i started my first campaign and we are 2 sessions in. My players started on a ship on the way to Equindrum (capital of this area) and are still on this ship (they do a lot of rp and i love it :D).
I am planning to attack their ship with pirates and capture them. If they lose to them they will end up in the pirates camp on an island as "slaves" that need to farm ores in order to supply materials the pirtes can use to forge their armor/weapons etc and need to find a way out/a way to escape.
If they win against the pirates they will also need to set foot on the island to get materials to repair their ship and eventually get to the pirates lair.
I am unsure of how hard it should be for them to get out or how heavily the pirates camp should be guarded... Are there secret entrances inside the mine or something like that? How many other slaves are there already and are they willing to join my PCs during their brakeout?
All of my players are newbies and their group consists of a barbarian, rogue, fighter and a bard - at the moment at lvl 1 but I plan a Levelup when they reach the camp.
I hope some of you can give me tips on this matter :)
Try to avoid capturing the PC's. It takes away the sense of freedom
This will do miracles helping you with your encounter planning
https://kobold.club/fight/#/encounter-builder :)
I agree, most groups will fight to the death instead of surrender. If it's a really big plot point, have 1 player that is in on the capture plot to help you set the scene. Their character wanders off to "do something real quick" and gets captured. If you split the party this way though, you need to make sure everyone still has plenty to do where ever they are, captured or not.
All the other questions you ask are your ideas that you just haven't put the specifics on yet. I'm sure you can answer them yourself.
Don't overlook the fact that on whatever ship they are (should) have 40-80 other folks on board, captain, bosun, mates, engineers, carpenters, crew, other passengers. Unless they are the only ones, and in a small life boat... if so disregard the following:
A Pirate attack can realistically turn chaotic.this could be a fun oportunity nonetheless; do the pirates end up capturing a few key NPC's like the captain + foreign ambassador? Instead of the party being kidnapped it could just turn into a rescue mission (a different excuse to reach the same destination of pirate island)
4 lvl 1 adventurers are hardly likely to be able to prevail against a boarding party of 20-30 pirates (which, for what my opinion is worth, ought to be an overwhelming raiding party for the scenario to make sense), they may want to be hiding the whole time, or helping to put out literal fires, coming up with creative sabotage, or helping other crew members get hidden... a totally Indirect combat session could be different and fun at the same time
Boldly go
Some red flags pop out to me in the OP.
As others have said -- this is very hard to pull off. Players as a rule will fight to the death, long after they should know to stop. They won't surrender willingly, and they won't run for it (not that they can run for it on a ship). Furthermore, players hate to lose. Yes, I know they must occasionally lose to keep the game interesting, and they know it deep down too, but in the moment, during any one particular battle, they do not like to lose and when they start seeing they are losing, and realize they can't win, they will only get frustrated. They will not enjoy it.
I'm not sure if you appreciate how easy it is to kill level 1 characters by accident, but all the has to happen is someone drops to 0 hp and fails 3 death saving throws, which will happen just by luck about 1/8th of the time (1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2). You could tell the first one to go down that the pirates were fighting to subdue and no death throws are needed but... this will telegraph to the players that you are purposely trying to capture them. Once they know "the fix is in" they will grow even more frustrated.
And finally...
So basically, you're gonna make them go to the island no matter what they do. Which means you are just making the players follow your storyline and not giving them any agency at all. As a player, this kind of thing can be very frustrating. Players may say things like, "If the DM was gonna have us in a pirate camp no matter what, why didn't the DM just start the adventure there?" You could have said, "You were on a ship, and it got attacked and captured by pirates and now you are in their camp," and achieved the exact same thing with 99% less frustration on the part of the PCs.
If they absolutely have to be on the island and at the pirate camp for the adventure to take place, then it is much less frustrating to just "deus ex machina" it right from the off, than it is to give them what seems like a choice, only to have it turn out to be no choice at all. They will cotton onto this fairly quickly and then most of them will probably be very unhappy.
Personally I would re-think (if it is possible at this stage) the entire structure of this thing. I'd give them some sort of irresistible rumors about goings-on at the island that make them want to go there. Or maybe do a skill challenge of a storm at sea and they have to help the ship's crew. If they succeed, the boat is damaged but still afloat. Simply describing that damage and having someone say "Land ho!" will probably give the players the idea to go to the island for repairs. But at least this way they did something positive, and you are not "DM Fiat'ing" them onto the island. And if they choose to by-pass the island, that's OK. Do some water adventures on the damaged ship and then when they reach Equindrum do adventures there.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I'm going to go ahead and disagree here. It can take quite a while to design an encounter that is more than a random encounter pop up. It's great and all to give that sandbox feel but, most DM's have a specific scenario in mind so, regardless of how many "side quests" or how much sidetracking the party does, they are going to be directed to the main events that hold together the DM's campaign ideal.
The illusion of free will IS actually as enjoyable as free will. Being obviously railroaded is almost inevitable sometimes.
I was playing recently and we had to travel to an outpost where my half-orc was unpopular. On the way there, we saw a force of giants and goblins headed right for the outpost. We arrived and informed the Guard Captain and other powers that be, of the situation. Because of my character, the whole party was received rather poorly but, that we might gain some favor by defending the keep. I mentioned to the other characters that we really didn't need anything here and could just continue our journey and while we were discussing it, my DM comes out of character and asks: Are you really going on to the Mithral Mines then?
We were just having some fun at his expense. We knew this was "the planned encounter". Our campaign was about defending innocents against Giant led raids. We are the the hero's so, we went through the attacking force like a wrecking ball. Got in almost everyone's good graces, and they one guy who still hated me was told to step off of his personal issues or else by a superior. It was railroading and it was fun.
But your example is not the same as the OP. Nothing in your story suggests that, if you had told the DM you were going to hoof it to the mines and leave the village to rot, he would have said, "When you get to the mines you find out they're closed and you have to go back to the village first."
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Well now, this is a thing! First point I'd like to make is that "non lethal damage" is a thing, so it shouldn't be hard to avoid accidently killing the PC's if the pirates are intent on getting slaves. but as everyone else has mentioned, removing your players choice is a big decision to make. What you need to do is find a way to make the players WANT to go to the island. You said they've been RPing it up on the boat and having a great old time. To me, that would suggest they have made connections with some of the crew. I'd suggest the following.
They beat the pirates: Find info on the pirate ship relating to the island, making it a big old call to adventure. irresistible.
They lose to the pirates: The pirates take the crew hostage, particularly the ones the party got along with best. The party , on the other hand, get kicked off the ship into the ocean (because they'd be too much trouble as slaves) and then the ship gets scuttled (to give the PC's something to hang on to in the ocean, but logically because the pirate don't have the crew to sail 2 ships). Have a bunch of sea related survival tests and then the crew (hopefully) will want to get to the island to rescue their old crewmates and get revenge. Adventure ensues.
I'll second BioWizard's advice on this one: I'd advise against trying to have the pirates capture your party. You're just a couple sessions in with freshly-minted players. It's not a great time to risk turning them away from the game by taking away the sense of agency that D&D in particular is famous for.
It's probably time to rethink this pirate island idea from the ground up. Start with asking yourself what exactly it is you want your players to do or learn on that island. Then, consider what will make your players (and their characters) feel like they want or need to go to that island to do/learn it. Giving them a reason to want to be there will get you more buy-in from them than turning them into unwilling participants.
Out of courtesy for his time and effort spent designing said encounter, we didn't decide to put him on the spot and play and adlib session instead of what he had prepared. It's called: Not being a dick.
The issue isn't railroading; its how its done. Railroading by getting the players captured is not fun for most players. Having the first session start with the players finding themselves on a pirates island is easier to deal with than being captured in any session.
If you drop enough hints that the adventure is on that island, most players will go there. It's even OK to tell the players something along the lines of "I only prepared this island; can you please try to stay 'on story' for this session?" and maybe prep other stuff if they really want to go elsewhere. Its very understandable, especially for a newer DM, that you need the players to stay someone on the railroad. Just try to change the railroad plans between sessions if the players seem to want to go somewhere else.
I agree with what you and your friends did and I always did the same. Out of respect for how it is impossible for a DM to prepare multiple options in equal detail, you try to find a way to get your characters to do the thing the DM did work to prepare. It's also not nice to knowingly make hours and hours of work by the DM go to waste. I agree with you.
But the players saying "Hey let's do this since the DM obviously prepared it" is very different from the DM saying, "When you get to the mine you find it is blocked by an avalanche so you will have to go back to town" because he decided that the town is where he wants you to be and no matter what you do, that's what happens.
EDIT: BTW, I am guilty myself, many times in my earlier GMing days, of writing the line in my own adventure document file (on my Commodore 64!), "No matter what the players decide to do... this happens." I had the story I wanted to tell, and their decisions were about what to do in combat, not where to take the story.
But as I matured, I realized that wasn't a great idea, and now I try to provide them with story hooks and let them decide where they want to go next. Yes, it is more difficult in the sense of having to start preparing several things at once and then solidify the ones the players actually decide upon. I think it's more satisfying, in the end, both for me and for them.
And my other point is, if you are doing a "no matter what they do this happens" story, the players will know it. And many will not like it.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I agree with all that. With unlimited time to pursue D&D, that's a great angle. It isn't however, a reality for many people. You say that players know when they're being railroaded. Players also know when you are just winging it as well. You can't prepare for every eventuality as a DM and you can't expect to do "anything you want" as a player. The truth hurts, deal with it. Most people have no problem with this. I would rather play a well thought out scenario than an impromptu sandbox, especially if said sandbox was an excursion from the storyline due to a single characters personal interests(which is usually the case in my experience). If none of the players are interested in following your thought out but, obvious plot hooks, I doubt a sandbox detour off the cuff is going to WOW them.
There are indeed many red flags. However that is common among new people trying this hobby. Trying something that sounds cool, but not knowing how to let it go. Very strict and direct rail roading for the first 1-2 levels can be done. ONLY when you spoke with your players beforehand and told them that a short period they would have to follow. After that the players are free to go and do as they please. However then the question is... How important is that setup? Would it be a loss if the players would automatically start as captured miners without having to go through the trouble that precedes it?
I can tell first hand. That the current setup is going to piss the new players off and make them quit instantly. I remember back in the day where i was a player. We ended up in a back alley and got jumped by 50 bandits out of nowhere. All our stuff taken away and we were imprisoned. Everyone was pissed off even though the DM said we'd get our stuff back eventually. Beginner mistakes. Don't make these now that we've warned about it :D
As for some railroading and illusion of choice. Yes... DND is a lot of smoke and mirrors where the players don't know when they're being led or not. Even when they go off track the DM can easily include main plot hooks to get the players back on track so the speak. And even when doing improvisational sessions. As the DM you still have a few scenes in mind as red threads that you lead people towards. While having no idea about what the players do and the journey of getting to those red thread moments.
Still for pirates and such. I would alter the opening to a more Waterworld inspired setup. Traditional start of being in a cage. When the pirates attack the flotilla the party can seize a chance of hijacking a vehicle and try to escape. Followed by a cool chase scene. Which can result in their ship sinking and then appearing half drowned on some beach. Or they can get away to the safety of some docks and city. Resume from there. Either needing to obtain a new vessel entirely and thus doing quests to earn it. Repair the existing vehicle and someone wanting revenge against the pirates. Or get dragged into the Pirate problem that exists on the island. LEading to eventually attacking the Pirate Prince flotilla hidden somewhere near a cove.
Instead of standard pirates. Why not go with Kuo-Toa's, sea elves or some other nautical fluff theme to change it up a little as well.
I see many people offering up, "Just start them as being captured". How is this any less railroading than:
I am planning to attack their ship with pirates and capture them. If they lose to them they will end up in the pirates camp on an island as "slaves" that need to farm ores in order to supply materials the pirtes can use to forge their armor/weapons etc and need to find a way out/a way to escape.
If they win against the pirates they will also need to set foot on the island to get materials to repair their ship and eventually get to the pirates lair.
Railroading is OK as long as it done in the right way. Especially if you are new, you can ask the players to please find a way to go along with this plan as long as it is not done every time and there is trust. The issue is getting captured. The experience of getting captured is not fun for most players. If you want them to go to the island, have the pirates invite them, or have there be some interesting plot hook they find on one of the pirates they defeat. Maybe the leader has a map to the island, or a note that would cause the players to want to go there. You can railroad your players to the island, but having a fight where you plan for them to be defeated and captured is a great way for the players to smash your railroad. Many players might try to jump off the ship and drown to avoid capture. Perhaps once they see that they wont win, one of the players sacrifices themselves to allow another to escape. Or, if they go along with it, they probably wont be having fun.
If you open a scenario with, "You were captured and now have to break out," this is just the opening to the story. It is not causing actions taken by the players during play to be rendered irrelevant, because they took no actions. You still need to make sure they are on board with this. But my experience is that if you come to a group of players and say, "I'd like to run an adventure on a pirate island but you guys will need to start out captured first, is that OK?" people will say yes. But if you do something like put a challenge in the game, and no matter what they do, they still end up captured -- if they figure this out, they become frustrated.
You're right, the end result is the same. But all my experience tells me to do it the first way ("just start out captured") rather than the 2nd way (win or lose a fight you end up in the same place).
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
As addendum to Biowizard and my own previous post. If you really want to have a good start. Just have an uprising of prisoners already in progress. Starting in prison is an often used trope, but skip the dull stuff. Chaos everywhere already with explosions and NPC prisoners running about and shouting. skirmishes between them and pirates. Now the players are already in the middle of the escape with a more action packed opening. Even starting straight away with a combat sequence to kick it off.
Why were they in that mining colony? How did they end up there? who are these pirates? Tons of questions that they can then spend game time on to figure out.
I imagine many groups of players would be at least interested in starting off an adventure as captured prisoners trying to escape. It certainly beats starting yet another adventure with "You meet at an inn..."