Quote from: gleichman;627628In purest form, this is a modified railroad- for Middle Earth is a railroad ("This task was appointed to you, and if you do not find a way, no one will."). But the method is up to the players, as is their success (although the dice will have their say).

Sounds like the character are acting as they truly existed in the setting. Being who they are and the player being honest about roleplaying their character's background of course they are going to pursue those clues. It not a railroad because nobody forced them to pick those characters. They are not pre-gens. Everybody decided what they wanted to do play and designed their character accordingly in full knowledge of they are middle-earth characters in middle-earth with all it long history and culture standing behind them.

Quote from: gleichman;627628Along the way they will encounter all sorts of unrelated things and react to them as they well. This part actually resembles a sandbox and has the virtual of being as result unable to detract from the main quest line for more than limited time.

Whether it is railroad or sandbox depends solely on whether the referee directs the course of the campaign or lets the players direct the course for him. For example would the referee get bent out of shape if the party decided to start on the path of the black numenoreans, become kings of lesser men, and so far and so on?

Quote from: estar;627750I envy you, something about the way I referee my campaigns makes the player want to play each and every damn day. In my current campaign, I just now got them to consent, after 16 sessions, to fast forward six days while they waited for somebody armor to get finished.

And it is not the first campaign that this happened. Although the present campaign is notable that at several point that between five characters there was stuff happening throughout all 24 hours of the game day. I could not say no because none of it unreasonable. Their collective actions meant we were lucky to get one or two game day out of a single session.

Right now I am in day 45 of the campaign after 20 sessions.

Oh, no.  If I give the idea that we move through time quickly, please...I could laugh.

My igbarians, based on the particular time sensitive nature of the second  chapter, played 4 years of game time (66 sessions) when they finished it and had gone through less than 3 hawaak (8 day weeks, so about 22 days).  So, yeahh, I feel your pain.  
I just play uber long campaigns.  Those Igbarians are now in chapter 4 of their camapign.  They are my newer live campaign in Celtricia, started in 2002.
I dig that sentiment.

Quote from: estar;627753Sounds like the character are acting as they truly existed in the setting. Being who they are and the player being honest about roleplaying their character's background of course they are going to pursue those clues.

Really? You believe that?

Good thing my players don't. It would result in a bunch of clones marching in step.

Quote from: estar;627753For example would the referee get bent out of shape if the party decided to start on the path of the black numenoreans, become kings of lesser men, and so far and so on?

Players desiring to run evil characters are shown the door and not allowed to return.

Quote from: gleichman;627634If those plot were meaningful, i.e. if the players ignore them the campaign would end (to pick the most extreme but clearest example, i.e. the one from Lord of the Rings)- you're not running a sandbox. The world hasn't granted them the interdependence a Sandbox requires.

The campaign wouldn't end, the life of the setting would continue on and the life of the characters would reflect the consequences of their choices.

Even in a situation as clearly defined as Middle Earth at the end of the Third Age. Would have Sauron's dominion truly been without end if he regained the ring? Or that was just the point of view of those participating in the War of the Ring?

The life of Middle Earth would have continue and its story unfold even in the new Black years of Sauron's dominion. And it is Eru Iluvatar not Sauron that is the true Lord of Middle Earth.

Quote from: estar;627759Even in a situation as clearly defined as Middle Earth at the end of the Third Age. Would have Sauron's dominion truly been without end if he regained the ring?

It was what all the character's said. That's sort of the meaning of the choices put before them. Not all worlds give you the option of a do over later.

Quote from: gleichman;627683If you punish your PCs for turning down your plot hooks, I don't see how you can in any meaningful call your campaign a sandbox.

A field of tar babies perhaps. Sandbox, no.

I  never said I punish the PCs if they ignore hooks--but the setting changes. Whether or not they want that change depends on who's there that day and what mood they're in.

Quote from: estar;627759The campaign wouldn't end, the life of the setting would continue on and the life of the characters would reflect the consequences of their choices.

Even in a situation as clearly defined as Middle Earth at the end of the Third Age. Would have Sauron's dominion truly been without end if he regained the ring? Or that was just the point of view of those participating in the War of the Ring?

The life of Middle Earth would have continue and its story unfold even in the new Black years of Sauron's dominion. And it is Eru Iluvatar not Sauron that is the true Lord of Middle Earth.

Midnight was pretty much built on this premise.

Quote from: gleichman;627756Really? You believe that? Good thing my players don't. It would result in a bunch of clones marching in step.

Now why would that be? You read my posts here on this forum. Since when I ever said that all character sharing the same cultural background act the same?

However I will clarify, that if a referee wants to contrive a grand destiny as part of the campaign, that he can take advantage of the fact the players are Numenorians with full knowledge of their past. Of course he will realizethat  the characters will have their own personalities and/or motivations and each will respond differently to the unfolding events.

Quote from: gleichman;627756Players desiring to run evil characters are shown the door and not allowed to return.

There your railroad. You are taking out of game actions in response to what they do in-game. And understand this, what I am NOT talking about is the creepy and explicit stuff like the unexpurgated rituals of Carcosa.

What I am talking about is being greedy in-game, taking little heed of the consequences of one's actions, killing characters (NPC or PC) for gain. You show those players out the door? Never had a thief or an assassin type in your campaigns? Never practiced genocide on another sentient races like say orcs?

How about a group of players who launch a Chevauchée on the orders of their king against the vikings invading their homeland? To the viking survivors they are evil spawn from hell. But from the players point of view they are talking all measures to bring the war to a victory.

Now there is nothing wrong with a group who don't like that kind of situation. Nothing wrong not asking players who play greedy,etc character not to come back despite not having  any other out-of-game issue.  But when you do that you are railroading your game.

What I learned is that I play the situation out naturally with consequences I find that players who are not otherwise obnoxious twits start being cooperative with in the game world. Mainly because they find it easier to get ahead if they play nice with the inhabitants of the setting.

Quote from: gleichman;627761It was what all the character's said. That's sort of the meaning of the choices put before them. Not all worlds give you the option of a do over later.

They are right in a sense. Given the background Tolkien written Iluvatar would have redeemed Middle Earth. But it would be what the War of Wrath did to Beleriand with all the world completely changed. Note I am not saying Iluvatar would do anything as dramatic for the overthrow of Sauron. But even  if Iluvatar manipulations result in that after an age a rebellion occurs that overthrow Sauron and finally destroys the ring. The world that would have emerge would have been a far poorer place both physically and spiritually than the world where the Ringbearer successfully achieved his quest.

So it was truly a situation where their world would end if the Ring wasn't destroyed and Sauron defeated.  So Gandalf and the rest were not lying about the consequences of Sauron getting the ring.

Middle Earth was never the same after Spring of Arda and the overthrow of the Two Lamp, Middle Earth was never the same after the War of the Wrath and the downing of Beleriand. But the life of the world continued perhaps poorer for it but it continued and so it would after Sauron's victory.

There can be true evil, true good, and epic battles between two with huge consequences for the fate of the world in a sandbox. And if the players choose side with evil, well then the campaign become the same as life in Middle Earth after Sauron's victory.

And what I find rather than bring out the worst in gamers it tends to bring out the best. So while gamers may play petty, greedy little asshole characters from time. Deep down they don't want to live in a shitty world at the mercy of a lord dark and terrible.

Especially when we are talking about Sauron level or Morgoth level of bad guy they know they will never be on top and always at the mercy of the boss. So in my campaigns even the densest gamers get a clue that helping the bad guys, like demons, isn't a smart move.

I don't have to impose any arbitrary rule about what is good or evil because it takes care of itself during the course of play. You are in the Keep on the Borderlands and you just cheated the General Store manager well guess what! He remembers you and you just realized that he is only general store within a 100 miles.

Quote from: Zak S;627763I  never said I punish the PCs if they ignore hooks--but the setting changes. Whether or not they want that change depends on who's there that day and what mood they're in.

Exactly, in my current campaign the players decided to stop being mercenaries and going to build an inn. And yet the war they were a part of continues except now without them. I need to wait a session or two before I am sure that the Inn business truly becomes their focus and they don't plan on going back to fight.

But once that happens I will break out GURPS Mass Combat, the rules I use for large scale conflicts, and figure out the new timeline of the war without the players involvement.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;627764Midnight was pretty much built on this premise.

It is a pretty cool setting. I will never run it but I got some of the PDFs as part of one of those charity bundles and it was a good read.

Quote from: estar;627765Now why would that be?

Because that's how you defined it for me your post. All characters would... etc. etc.

Quote from: estar;627765There your railroad. You are taking out of game actions in response to what they do in-game.

I'm taking an out of game action in response to someone breaking the group's social contract. It has nothing to do with the game itself for they didn't belong in it in the first place.

Quote from: estar;627767They are right in a sense. Given the background Tolkien written Iluvatar would have redeemed Middle Earth.

When Iluvatar redeems Middle Earth, he destroys it. It's covered in some broken detail in "Morgoth's Ring".

Even then, there is nothing to say he would have acted if the people didn't earn his action, there is a bunch of stuff that has to happen first including the slaying of Morgoth.

Quote from: Zak S;627763I  never said I punish the PCs if they ignore hooks--but the setting changes. Whether or not they want that change depends on who's there that day and what mood they're in.

If they don't want the change, it's a punishment.

If they want the change, it's a reward.

If they don't care, it's insignificant.

Quote from: gleichman;627776If they don't want the change, it's a punishment.

If they want the change, it's a reward.

If they don't care, it's insignificant.

Because the universe is daddy, and when bad things happen it's because he's punishing us?

All makes sense, now.