As a gm how do I get players to choose there own path?

[Duncan888]

I'm running a campaign. It has many avenues players can take that lead twards the same end. But I often feel like I'm railroading because I'm like what do u want to do. Then there nothing from them. So after a bit I start reminding them of clues or things there characters have uncovered. I mean there characters have decent INT scores and I feel wouldn't have forgotten about a ancient tome that is related to there quest or similar. I often like to use dreams since one player his family was touched by divinity and it is calling him to awaken a goddess but I try to emphasize the calling is not urgent so they know they don't have to pursue that path if they would rather do something else first.

[kestral287]

There's a concept called the rule of three: whenever you want players to do something or figure something out, you should tell them about it three times. They'll miss the first clue and misinterpret the second, but hopefully catch the third.

Sometimes, however, a push is not bad. If the players don't know what to do, then there's nothing wrong with having them do something.

[Eltacolibre]

if you want a player to follow or do anything but use it sparingly would only recommend once per campaign: steal something from your players. You will be surprised by how many ridiculous lengths your players will go to get back their possession, following any clues or quests.

[Joynt Jezebel]

It is the group you have.

If I was in your campaign, chances are that where the party has no obvious thing to do, I will come up with more than enough schemes and plans to fill up several sessions.

Other players will get bored and start of fight with... someone or something. Others likely playing rogues will start stealing things. But others are just passive.

You likely should run sessions with more or less obvious courses of action with your group unless they change.

[Nearyn]

Both Kestral287 and Eltacolibre make good suggestions.

If you want the players to pick a path, of several paths provided, then you need to make sure that these paths are clear to the players. You have been reminding them of stuff, and feel like that is the same as railroading them, but it really isn't, so do not fear - you are not forcing your players by reminding them of established hooks.

You could try the opposite approach. If your players don't take any initiative then ask them how long they plan to stay and do nothing in the same location. As long as you have made it perfectly clear that there is stuff to do, I'd assume the players will then want to go "Oh! Right! We're not supposed to just sit here for 3 months, umm guys, what did we know about pressing matters we could deal with, right here and now?"

Hope it helps

-Nearyn

[Renegadeshepherd]

It may also be a miscommunication. In communication terms you might be encoding a message, sending it to them, and they are decoding and the sending it back for you to decode them. In all those steps it's possible that something got lost in translation. So I would try to look at a situation as objectively as you can and see if its simply communication rather than a group or game issue. Talk casually with the group about "yeah I thought two sessions ago you were going to pull the left lever because....". Listen to what they say and evaluate as appropriate.

If it is a group or game issue I don't have much to offer there. Good luck.

[Brother Fen]

It sounds like they aren't proactive enough to sandbox on their own. Perhaps just sticking to the standard "so and so asks you to do this for them" adventure is what they need.

[pickin_grinnin]

I agree with Brother Fen. Though I prefer sandbox campaigns (GMing and playing), there are some people who simply don't do well in that environment.

[Ckorik]

Well if you really want them to do their own thing - first get a goal that has urgency (If we don't find the mystical foozle within a week the green dragon is going to crush the town).

Second setup 3 clues that point towards foozle - and make only one of them correct.

When they sit there staring at you blankly remind them of all three clues and if they pick the wrong one - let them do it and possibly fail.

First this is not an MMO and they should be able to fail based on their (in)action. Second if they realize that not all clues are valid they should start to think about paying attention to what they have and try a bit to find the correct one.

Nothing is wrong about reminding the players what info they have, but they should have a bit of initiative on their own. It is very handy to have a 'start this quest' type NPC giving a task - but with just a bit of a jump start they should be able to pickup and run.

[Lastoth]

I think this is where having NPCs really helps, where you can sum up the situation the players face and give them their options without going outside of the game too much. As you help them along they'll begin to think more for themselves, but the story elements can be difficult to tie together for players sometimes.

[Brother Fen]

I agree with the NPCs. I find that the more I GM, that the more important it is to have a couple NPCs that have ties to the players so they can wander in and out when needed and offer suggestions or inspiration to the PCs.

[Tormsskull]

I find that often times players (myself included) forget a lot of what we learned the previous session due to the amount of downtime in-between sessions (in my case, 2-4 weeks is typical.)

As such, always start each session with a short recap. Ask one of the player's to give the recap, if they're willing, and then fill in any gaps that player misses with your own information.

Beyond that, encourage the players to think of their characters as more than a collection of mechanics. Each character should have their own unique goals, desires, etc. Use these to encourage the players to follow-up on certain tips or simply interest them in various elements of the game.

If the players are hesitant to create their own backgrounds, have them use the character background generator in the PRD to assist them.

[Otherwhere]

I try to flesh out a full world, with tons of side-quests and subplots - many of which never even get started because the players miss the cues or are simply more focused on what, to them, is more important. But it becomes clear that the Players have a ton of choices, and it is up to them to prioritize. Players may (often) feel or assume something is a higher priority than YOU intended. And that's because they DON'T know all the other stuff that YOU know because you know the whole story.

If you design modularly, then you can pretty much throw whatever you want at them when it suits the story. Sure, you might need to relocate WHERE you intended a certain encounter to happen, but the group still runs across the evil necro and his minions menacing a the nearby town, and find the main story artifact that you had originally meant to be found elsewhere.

If they're not doing anything, ask them what they intend to do. Or, more pointedly, what they intend to do about 'X'. "Uh, just wondering - that evil necromancer you guys have heard about. Any plans on seeking him out and bringing back order and justice?"

[Joynt Jezebel]

Lastoth wrote:

I think this is where having NPCs really helps, where you can sum up the situation the players face and give them their options without going outside of the game too much. As you help them along they'll begin to think more for themselves, but the story elements can be difficult to tie together for players sometimes.

While what you say may be a good idea, I find myself overdoing it as a GM at times.

I try to stop myself offering suggestions as to how to solve problems and the like. So I don't wind up playing in my own campaign.