New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 7 of 18 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 210 of 519
  1. - Top - End - #181
    Banned
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    So your definition of railroading is simply the DM forcing the players to do what they want them to do. Ok, that is a fine definition. Though I'd wonder if when the players force the DM to do something you'd call that railroading too.
    I suppose you would, though I don't know of any RPGs that have problems with too much player empowerment.

    How are the examples railroading? If the DM randomly creates the army and..um..has the NPC general tell the DM in some sort of delusion that he the imaginary NPC wants to invade...everyone says that is not railroading.
    Because the PCs can't solve the problem creatively. They don't know about the army till the fight the vizer. They can't go off and instead resolve succession problems among the Frost Giants, or investigate the caverns left by the Lord Ruler which contain the seven pieces of the Rod of Seven Parts, or do something else that interests them. They don't have any agency.

    It's the difference between setting up a problem (the vizer plans to unleash a demon by poisoning the king, which will allow the army to invade, which will allow their warlocks to remove the forbiddance that keeps the demon trapped) and setting up a solution (you need to kill the vizer, then defeat the army, the kill the demon).

  2. - Top - End - #182
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Knaight's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    How are the examples railroading? If the DM randomly creates the army and..um..has the NPC general tell the DM in some sort of delusion that he the imaginary NPC wants to invade...everyone says that is not railroading.
    You are literally the only person here who seems to think that anybody is convinced their NPCs are talking to them. However, since previous analogies aren't working at all, I'm going to use a dramatically different one.

    A large part of what the GM does is creating a set of interconnected systems, most of which are dynamic. The exact way in which this works varies highly, but the set of interconnected dynamic systems is pretty constant. Imagine, if you will, a network of chemical reactions*. You've got a whole bunch of different reactants, a bunch of different products, things which are a reactant in one reaction and a product in another, etc. It's a complex system, and it's not necessarily completely predictable (let alone easily predictable). It's also probably not at equilibrium, and will change on its own. The players are then put in a position to influence it somehow. They're the people who are doing process control by tweaking temperatures, adding and removing chemicals, etc. They don't know everything that's going on there, and particularly for poorly thought through plans what they think they're doing by adding a given chemical might not be anywhere near what they're doing, but they are still doing something.

    Now, in this system, nobody is saying that the GM should be doing nothing. They built the system, and while part of what they are doing is just figuring out how it responds to input (as they know what's in it), just about everyone here is saying that (to use the chemical system analogy again), they should also feel free to introduce chemicals, separate things out, change temperatures, etc. Doing any of that sort of thing isn't railroading.

    What is railroading is giving the players a bunch of access points that look like they pour their chemicals into a reactor somewhere but actually dump them in a bucket stored elsewhere, along with a dial that claims to change temperature but actually just moves thermometer fluid around a bit. There the reaction system is entirely predictable for the GM, and entirely controlled by the GM. It would also be railroading if the players just didn't have any access points and were there to watch the reaction, but maybe watch it a bit faster or slower. In that case though, it's at least open participationism, which some people legitimately enjoy.

    *I'm assuming that you at least vaguely remember high school chemistry and are familiar with the concept of side reactions here.
    I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.

    I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that.
    -- ChubbyRain

    Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.

  3. - Top - End - #183
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    PirateWench

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sweden

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by ImNotTrevor View Post
    Perhaps this borders on advertising, but whatever.
    Run Apocalypse World. Not just any way, but EXACTLY how Apocalypse World tells you to run it as an MC.
    It was the best handbook on GMing I've ever read. Seriously.
    And I've read several.

    Or don't, whatever.
    While I might, at the very least, read AW (unfortunately the time I have for roleplaying is almost 0 these days), it's not me seeking advice.

    I want to know if railroading occurs because GMs just don't know any better, and how we can make them know better.

    If AW is the way to go, how do we get the message out there?



    Quote Originally Posted by ImNotTrevor View Post
    It's a tool. It has its place and its usefulness, otherwise no one would use it. It's biggest advantage is that it is SUPER easy. Like, "I pulled it off successfully when I was 12 and running my first campaign ever" levels of easy.
    Well, of course it is super easy. It's easy to play God when the rules tell you that you are, in fact, God. That doesn't mean taking away free will is the way to go.


    Quote Originally Posted by ImNotTrevor View Post
    I know people who are pitifully uncreative in the areas TRPGs demand. They are creative in other fields, but not this one. Creativity takes many shapes, not all of which involve the capacity to be an awesome GM.
    They will still play, because they are attracted to certain aspects. But GMing isn't what they want.


    Being contrary doesn't mean he's wrong. He actually has a good point in that not everyone has the brain for every kind of creativity. Some people who are DMs do it because they are creative at setting up dungeons and their plots are there to shoestring the dungeons together. That's totally fine so long as it is what everyone wants/is okay with.
    Luckily not everyone has to be GM.

    I do believe everyone can get better at all types of creativity. It's not like skills function on a "you either know it or you never will". Practice is a thing that exist, and it works.

    If you want to make the assertion that GMing is somehow a type of creativity that can never get better with practice, I think we need to get some neuroscientists to tell us who of us is right.


    Quote Originally Posted by goto124 View Post
    I myself face Decision Paralysis when trying to choose a flavor of ice-cream, and always end up regretting whatever I choose.
    What happens when you let others choose for you? Or when there's no choice (as in, someone is offering Ice cream, but only has one flavor)?


    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    Another vote for AW.

    Also, I wrote this a while ago. While it's for Fate Core, it's pretty applicable to non-railroading games in general.

    https://plus.google.com/+RobertHanz/posts/K2E4ivswdQZ

    Ultimately, you get some advice, and you *do* it. You'll stumble a bit at first, and it'll be weird at first, but then you'll get it figured out.
    I am still at a bit of loss how we get this message out to new prospective GMs. Ideally all rulebooks sold should give advice, but it seems they don't.


    Quote Originally Posted by Frozen_Feet View Post
    "How does a GM gain experience of non-railroad games?"

    By playing them.

    Which is difficult if you have no other experienced GMs around, but fortunately, computer games can help.
    As I feared, we are back to the "you have to experience it first" problem. There has to be a better way.


    Quote Originally Posted by goto124 View Post
    I'm messed up, aren't I? For one thing, I started classifying actions into 'right' and 'wrong'. Which surely doesn't apply in a TTRPG.
    You do seem to be a bit messed up, yes. It's okay though, we're all messed up in one way or another. This seem to affect your quality of life quite a lot however, so my advice would be to read about the psychology of decision-making, and/or find a professional to talk to. Maybe one day you will be an executive decision-making monster?


    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    So a DM plans to have the characters arrested for a crime they commit and thrown in prison that is railroading. If the DM is just there and pathetically says ''Oh NPC Ton arrests your characters for the crime and throws you all in prison'', that is not railroading. .
    Railroading:

    The DM plans to have the characters commit a crime, so they can be arrested for it. Alternatively, if the players are so resilient to his "subtle" manipulation that they never commit the crime, the DM plans to have the characters arrested for a crime they didn't commit (as in, being set up).

    The DM plans to have the characters arrested for a crime so they can end up in prison. If the players somehow try to fight back the guards, they are much better than the characters, somehow being able to counter the players' every moves. If the players somehow try to get their characters killed, the guards will spare them or help/heal them.

    The DM plans to have the characters ending up in prison so they can meet NPC PlotPoint. NPC PlotPoint will tell them something very revealing about The Villain, let's say that he has been (*gasp*) the King all along!

    The DM plans to have the PlotPoint revealed so the characters will want to fight the King. Once the reveal has taken place, the "Escape from Prison" scene will take place.

    The DM plans to have NPC PlotPoint being broken out of prison by the help of his group The Rebellion. As it is clear the characters are also against the King, they will bring them along.

    The DM plans to have the characters meet with The Rebellion, so they can be part of the Assassinate the King! plan. Being very competent adventurers, the DM plans to have The Rebellion ask the characters to use a diversion created to sneak in, follow the map The Rebellion gives them to the King's chambers and kill him. If the players somehow says no and wants to go somewhere else, the DM won't really know what to do, probably have The Rebellion assume they are in league with the King and thus try to kill them until the players come to their senses and say "sorry, we were just joking", or whatever.

    The DM plans to have The Rebellion give them info on how to reach the King so the characters can kill him and thus end The Story. Hurray!

    Not railroading:

    The characters commit a crime. The DM sends city guards to try and arrest the players.

    The Villain is the King. He has learnt the characters are in the city and sends city guards to try and arrest the players for a crime they didn't commit.


    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    Now the problem with this statement is that it only works for the first couple minutes of the game.

    Ok, so the DM makes up all sorts of random, unrelated stuff. Including ''instructions'' to himself as to what will happen in the game when the characters do things in the game. And the Dm is ready to defend himself by saying he did not make up the stuff or instructions and things just happened somehow.

    So, then the game starts. The DM describes things, with no story or plan or plot. So the players just have their characters wander around and aimless and randomly do things. And this might be enough of a game for everyone.

    But lets say everyone wants a little bit more out of the game other then just random stuff. So the DM with no plan or story or plot just asks the players ''ok day, what do you guys want to do?'. The players talk it over, vote and then tell the DM they would like to kill a dragon. So the DM looks in the stack of stuff he made, and randomly picks out one that says ''dragon''.

    Ok...so now the players have picked and adventure and the near useless DM has done nothing. So as the DM has no plot or plan or story all he can really say is ''um, the dragon is to the west''. So the characters go west, at some point find and fight and slay the dragon and a good game is had by all.

    But, ok, lets say everyone wants just a tiny bit more out of the game then that. With no plot or plan or story, how does the DM advance the game at all and the only way events can happen in the game is in reaction to the player?
    First of all, you again show you have misunderstood everything. The DM can advance the game by having events happen that are not in reaction to the players. That's called "setting up a situation", or "presenting a problem". What the DM can't do, however, is decide how the players should respond to this situation, or set up a situation that shouldn't be "solved", as it is just a way to get the players to the NEXT situation, which in turn shouldn't be solved either as it should just funnel the player to the NEXT situation, which exist to bring the players to the CLIMAX, where they finally kill the villain.

    If you have things happen which the players are allowed to respond to, in whichever way they choose, then you are not railroading. The grey area, of course, is where the DM sets up a situation which is impossible to solve (unbeatable city guards for example), or can only be solved in One and only ONE way. I would say those fall under railroading (in the first case) and poor adventure design (in the second).

    Secondly, your dragon example is flawed.

    If the players say "we want to kill a dragon", the correct reply from the DM should be "so, what do you do to find a dragon?".

    The players might then say "we ask around town, everywhere from the lowly Inns, to marketplaces to the Wizard Academy and Royal library". Depending on your type of game, you can either:

    a) Roleplay a few of these encounters, perhaps with one or two interesting situations occurring (players being dragged into bar brawls at the lowly Inns, asked to participate in some magical research at the Wizard Academy or whatever).

    b) Just have them roll some appropriate skill and give them the results such as:

    - People at the lowly Inn either laugh loud in the face of you when you talk about dragons, or get excited and tell you a story from their adventuring days when they battled an epic Red Dragon in the Sun Smitten Desert.
    - A merchant at the marketplace tells you how she spotted a dragon soaring over the Cloudy Mountains when she was traveling with a caravan a year or two ago.
    - The archmage at the Wizard Academy gets excited about your dragon quest, tells you that he is certain one lives in the Swamps of Doom and asks you to bring the heart of the dragon to him, for which he will pay greatly.
    - One of the books at the library tells a legend about the Scaly Forest, which was a home of a whole family of dragons back in the age of king [something or other].

    After that you let the players decide what to do about this new information.

    Also, the game doesn't have to end with killing the dragon. Could be that the players find some information in the dragon's lair that a king has bribed the dragon to attack another country. Then you ask the players again what they want to do. If they say "we want to stop the dragon-allied king", you ask them "how do you intend to do that?" and let the game proceed from there. If they say "we don't care about this king business, we want to find another dragon!" then you ask "what do you do to find a dragon?" and the game proceeds from there!

    See how it works?


    Quote Originally Posted by ImNotTrevor View Post
    As for everyone else, remember what I said. Not worth engaging. I don't know if it's an elaborate bait scheme or just a very odd logic system, but either way it's not worth engaging. You'll get mad and he'll feel smug. No point.
    I thought people could get banned for trolling? Or maybe that was just a in my dreams.
    Last edited by Lorsa; 2016-03-21 at 06:00 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    Blue text for sarcasm is an important writing tool. Everybody should use it when they are saying something clearly false.

  4. - Top - End - #184
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2006

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Lorsa
    I want to know if railroading occurs because GMs just don't know any better, and how we can make them know better.
    The first part of your sentiment here reads as an honest inquiry. The second part of your sentiment here reads as predicated on the assumption that the first part is not a query, but a true statement in all cases. That it is not, in fact, a true statement in all cases - not all railroading occurs because GMs just don't know any better, as this thread should ably demonstrate - puts the two parts of your sentiment in conflict with each other.
    Iron Chef in the Playground veteran since Round IV. Play as me!


    Spoiler
    Show

  5. - Top - End - #185
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    PirateWench

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sweden

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Amphetryon View Post
    The first part of your sentiment here reads as an honest inquiry. The second part of your sentiment here reads as predicated on the assumption that the first part is not a query, but a true statement in all cases. That it is not, in fact, a true statement in all cases - not all railroading occurs because GMs just don't know any better, as this thread should ably demonstrate - puts the two parts of your sentiment in conflict with each other.
    Fair enough.

    I believe my phrasing should be "if that is indeed the cause, how do we them know better?".
    Last edited by Lorsa; 2016-03-21 at 06:58 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    Blue text for sarcasm is an important writing tool. Everybody should use it when they are saying something clearly false.

  6. - Top - End - #186
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Lorsa View Post
    While I might, at the very least, read AW (unfortunately the time I have for roleplaying is almost 0 these days), it's not me seeking advice.

    I want to know if railroading occurs because GMs just don't know any better, and how we can make them know better.

    If AW is the way to go, how do we get the message out there?
    I think that even Vincent Baker would strongly deny that AW is the way to go. It is however a good way to go - and it's a mix of game design, advice, and modelling good behaviours in a way that doesn't resemble quoting Monty Python to try to be unexpected. All three should be in a lot of good games. (Evil Hat games and games project managed by Cam Banks (there is some overlap) are also good at this - and don't have the obnoxiousness of Vincent Baker's writing).

    If you want to make the assertion that GMing is somehow a type of creativity that can never get better with practice, I think we need to get some neuroscientists to tell us who of us is right.
    Or at least some GMs who have got better over time. *waves hand* (That said I don't think IamNotTrevor was making that claim so much as most people attracted to GMing have some talent that way).

    I am still at a bit of loss how we get this message out to new prospective GMs. Ideally all rulebooks sold should give advice, but it seems they don't.
    And some of them give bad advice - sometimes accidentally, sometimes possibly because strong improv systems tend not to sell many books as there's little point in supplements.

    [What is the point of Ignore Lists if everyone is just going to quote Darth Ultron using his unique definitions of railroading again?]
    Currently in playtesting, now with optional rules for a cover based sci-fi shooter.
    Games for Harry Potter, the Hunger Games, and Silver Age Marvel. Skins for The Gorgon, the Deep One, the Kitsune, the Banshee, and the Mad Scientist

  7. - Top - End - #187
    Troll in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    AW and Fate may be great games, but their solutions to avoid railroading may not always be applicable to other games. Dungeon World is not simply a superior, non-railroading version of D&D. It is a completely different game with different rules and objectives. So the answer, for say, a D&D DM that feels there are a lot of railroady modules is not "play a different RPG instead".

    Railroading is not inherently baked into the rules of D&D, with no hope of redemption. It is created by an assumption that the game is about "telling stories", which admittedly even the designers now promote, and by the assumption that D&D stories should look and behave like the kinds of stories found in other media, again with designers not helping to dispell this idea.

    Taking the actual rules of the game at face-value, disregarding promotional material and published adventure paths, the objective and mechanisms of the game do not require railroading and will not create it, inherently.
    Lots of advice has been given here and found elsewhere, regarding good adventure design. If some of the designers and writers would include more of that advice in the rule books and modules it would help a lot. And start publishing material for the game that not only has standards of production and writing quality but also meets more stringent game design standards. QA for these things should include a "railroad check".

  8. - Top - End - #188
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by goto124 View Post
    That doesn't solve the "always end up regretting whatever I choose" part! At best, I regret choosing a boring mediocre flavor. At worst, I regret choosing a flavor so bad I'd rather have [insert another bad-tasting food here].
    Ah. See, I think the reason it works for me is that I have decided, once I realize I was disappointed in the result of the coin-flip, that I either a) care enough that the alternate choice is what I really wanted, or b) would not have been satisfied either way, and thus have no real reason to be disappointed in getting one of them.

    If it's b), going with the alternate choice at least guarantees that I'm not passing up something with which I MIGHT have been satisfied.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    Can you explain how ''the DM making up stuff about how an NPC will react'' is different from ''a DM just making up stuff''?
    It isn't. It also isn't what anybody has said.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    If a DM just says ''well you must go to the Iron Pit'' it's a railroad, but if the DM says ''Oh, NPC Tosk takes your characters to the Iron Pit'' it's not railroading. But the Pc's still have no choice in either.
    Indeed they do not! By having the starting point of the DM's decision-making process be, "I want the PCs to go to the Iron Pit, no matter what they do," it's a railroad.

    Note that having the Iron Pit be a place he's established in his world, and one where plot hooks exist if the PCs wind up there, doesn't mean the DM is locked into, "I want the PCs to go to the Iron Pit."

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    Saying that the DM just ''makes up how things react to the Pcs'' is just a disguise to say ''railroading''.
    Since nobody's actually said that, your straw man is not even worth discussing.

    What has been said is that the PCs actions should have impact on the world. Which also means "consequences."

    You keep starting with the assumption that "PCs get arrested" is because the DM wants to force the PCs to go to prison. You keep insisting that anything else is "randomly making stuff up."

    So, tell me, Darth Ultron: you are in New York City, New York, in the USA. You decide to mug a hot dog vendor. Nobody tells you to; you just decide you want to. Are you being railroaded when the police come to arrest you?

    Let's say it's not IRL, but you're playing in a game set in New York City, New York, in the USA. Your PC, Ulth Dartron, is a scoundrel and a thug, and mugs a hot dog vendor. Is the DM railroading you when he has the police come to arrest your character?

    Is he "randomly making stuff up" when he has the police come to arrest your character?

  9. - Top - End - #189
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrudd View Post
    Railroading is not inherently baked into the rules of D&D, with no hope of redemption. It is created by an assumption that the game is about "telling stories", which admittedly even the designers now promote,
    As they have from memory since the days of Moldvay and Mentzer. And Gygax has said so as well.

    and by the assumption that D&D stories should look and behave like the kinds of stories found in other media, again with designers not helping to dispell this idea.
    And this is the problem. D&D encourages a couple of types of story (the fight against the odds, "By this axe I rule", Remake the World) but it does nothing to promote the sort of story that the presentation seems to encourage. By that I mean Dragonlance or, to use a more modern example of something that's on TV right now, The Shannara Chronicles.

    If you look at Shannara (as in 2016 it's a good example of trash fantasy) you've three basic protagonists and possibly a DMPC or possibly a hamstrung fourth, all with strengths and weaknesses on an epic quest full of fights against monsters to save the world. One's a magic user and one's a thief (I gave up watching before I worked out what class the princess was). Should be a slam dunk? And yet no. Really not. The party splits a lot and there's quite a bit of inter-party tension as everyone has slightly different objectives. Does anyone care about the difference between a glaive and a guisarme?

    Because that's exactly the sort of fiction that D&D appears to be able to do and far from doing anything to help you with it actually gets in the way (other than 4e the magic system is actively harmful to this sort of story in addition to anything else).

    I'd also point out that none of this is remotely new. In Dragon #36 Gygax wrote up some stats for Conan the Barbarian in AD&D - and Conan was explicitly one of the inspirations for AD&D (and should be a very good match for "By this axe I rule"). And the whole thing is an utter mess - including him needing his own personal multiclassing rules to jump between two incarnations. But D&D has always generated stories from the life stories of PCs to the story of what happens when two level draining vampiric warbands meet in mid air (answer: undead monster type was by hit dice - and when you level drain a wraith it becomes a mummy and loses the ability to fly).
    Currently in playtesting, now with optional rules for a cover based sci-fi shooter.
    Games for Harry Potter, the Hunger Games, and Silver Age Marvel. Skins for The Gorgon, the Deep One, the Kitsune, the Banshee, and the Mad Scientist

  10. - Top - End - #190
    Troll in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by neonchameleon View Post
    As they have from memory since the days of Moldvay and Mentzer. And Gygax has said so as well.



    And this is the problem. D&D encourages a couple of types of story (the fight against the odds, "By this axe I rule", Remake the World) but it does nothing to promote the sort of story that the presentation seems to encourage. By that I mean Dragonlance or, to use a more modern example of something that's on TV right now, The Shannara Chronicles.

    If you look at Shannara (as in 2016 it's a good example of trash fantasy) you've three basic protagonists and possibly a DMPC or possibly a hamstrung fourth, all with strengths and weaknesses on an epic quest full of fights against monsters to save the world. One's a magic user and one's a thief (I gave up watching before I worked out what class the princess was). Should be a slam dunk? And yet no. Really not. The party splits a lot and there's quite a bit of inter-party tension as everyone has slightly different objectives. Does anyone care about the difference between a glaive and a guisarme?

    Because that's exactly the sort of fiction that D&D appears to be able to do and far from doing anything to help you with it actually gets in the way (other than 4e the magic system is actively harmful to this sort of story in addition to anything else).

    I'd also point out that none of this is remotely new. In Dragon #36 Gygax wrote up some stats for Conan the Barbarian in AD&D - and Conan was explicitly one of the inspirations for AD&D (and should be a very good match for "By this axe I rule"). And the whole thing is an utter mess - including him needing his own personal multiclassing rules to jump between two incarnations. But D&D has always generated stories from the life stories of PCs to the story of what happens when two level draining vampiric warbands meet in mid air (answer: undead monster type was by hit dice - and when you level drain a wraith it becomes a mummy and loses the ability to fly).
    Exactly, D&D generates stories. You don't go into it with the story planned out. I'm distinguishing that as story "telling" vs story "generating". D&D does appear to be a mess of mechanics not suited to what they tried to do with it. That hasn't changed, really. New games came along that do narrative better. D&D does what D&D does, and people's mistake is trying to use it for something its rules are terrible for. They should be looking at the rules and figuring out what those rules will be good for.

  11. - Top - End - #191
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Hyooz's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    I think the goal of "getting it out there" is a little misguided. Even in the OP you admit that not everyone sees this as a problem, and as long as everyone is having fun, you aren't doing it "wrong," so while I definitely am in favor of sharing ideas for avoiding it or getting around it for people who need some pointers to fix what they already perceive to be a problem, I don't think there's a necessity to "spread the word" because people, in general, tend to go looking for solutions to problems.

    This is just something that varies so much DM to DM and even group to group. I've DMed groups in the past that thrived in highly impromptu environments and loved generating their own story in the world. My current group really thrives when they get to play the characters in the story and make their own impact in it. They want me to come to the table with a plot in mind, but that doesn't mean they like to be railroaded - they just like structure. They're more interested in how their characters handle the situations the story places them in rather than making their own story 'wholesale.'

    Both styles have their own unique challenges, and are perfectly valid as long as it suits the group. I've had to do very different things to avoid railroading both groups, and a general 'how not to railroad' pamphlet or whatever would have only been so helpful. This might just be an issue that requires too much individual coaching to be really worth getting the word 'out there.'

    Current Contest Entries:

    Prestige Class Contest: In the Shadows -The Ghost Wyrm

    Base Class Contest: Altar of Naught - The Nihilist

    Monster Competition: Beings of Legend - The Omni Template

    Spoiler
    Show


  12. - Top - End - #192

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post

    Indeed they do not! By having the starting point of the DM's decision-making process be, "I want the PCs to go to the Iron Pit, no matter what they do," it's a railroad.

    Note that having the Iron Pit be a place he's established in his world, and one where plot hooks exist if the PCs wind up there, doesn't mean the DM is locked into, "I want the PCs to go to the Iron Pit."
    Right, so the normal DM creates things that they want to use in the game. And the alternative DM creates things, but does not want to use them. That makes no sense.


    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    So, tell me, Darth Ultron: you are in New York City, New York, in the USA. You decide to mug a hot dog vendor. Nobody tells you to; you just decide you want to. Are you being railroaded when the police come to arrest you?
    Well, it's a railroad if the DM ''wants'' you to be arrested, right?

    But really this is just a smokescreen as the DM gets to decide what the consequences are....and they will be whatever the DM wants. And if the DM wants anything, it's a railroad.

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    Let's say it's not IRL, but you're playing in a game set in New York City, New York, in the USA. Your PC, Ulth Dartron, is a scoundrel and a thug, and mugs a hot dog vendor. Is the DM railroading you when he has the police come to arrest your character?

    Is he "randomly making stuff up" when he has the police come to arrest your character?
    Yes, and this is the worst video game type railroading. You know them games where if you do a ''crime'' every single NPC knows about it and won't have anything to do with your character.

    And it does come back to what the DM wants to do. You sure seem to be saying that the only reaction to the hot dog crime is the police come. And lots of DM's seem to have the same idea, if you do X then Y will happen as it's ''consequences''. You can see the posts every couple of days of like ''the PC's attacked the king so they must absolutely suffer the consequence of being locked up in prsion, what can I do to save my game?

    Consequences is just a deflection tactic to hide the railroading.

  13. - Top - End - #193
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Intersex

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    Right, so the normal DM creates things that they want to use in the game. And the alternative DM creates things, but does not want to use them. That makes no sense.
    I create things I don't end up using all the time.

    Well, it's a railroad if the DM ''wants'' you to be arrested, right?
    Not necessarily. But want is irrelevant in this case. It's not railroading if the DM doesn't force it. If the players can "not get arrested" through their actions, then they haven't been railroaded into being arrested.

    Yes, and this is the worst video game type railroading. You know them games where if you do a ''crime'' every single NPC knows about it and won't have anything to do with your character.
    Except that wasn't mentioned at all, please stop making up random crap and pretending that someone else said it.

    You can see the posts every couple of days of like ''the PC's attacked the king so they must absolutely suffer the consequence of being locked up in prsion, what can I do to save my game?
    Except that consequences =! absolute. If you don't want to do railroading it shouldn't be ''the PC's attacked the king so they must absolutely suffer the consequence of being locked up in prsion" it should be ''the PC's attacked the king so they are wanted by the guards with the aim of putting them in prison."

    Those two are very very different. First is railroading, second isn't.
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  14. - Top - End - #194
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    Right, so the normal DM creates things that they want to use in the game. And the alternative DM creates things, but does not want to use them. That makes no sense.
    You...don't actually read what others write, and make up what you want to read in it, don't you. Do you think that an author uses everything he creates for his setting in one story? I can point to one who's trying, and it's ruining his book series. (George R.R. Martin) I can point to another who has a TON of stuff that he hasn't yet used in his various settings, and starts new stories to further explore those things rather than bogging down the current one. (Brandon Sanderson)

    GMs will do similarly. The beauty of establishing a setting that has stuff that may or may not get used this time around is that it's there, ready to go if the PCs make choices that take them that way in the future. Or to use in another game, later.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    Well, it's a railroad if the DM ''wants'' you to be arrested, right?
    It's a railroad if the DM forces you to be arrested no matter what choices you make or want to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    But really this is just a smokescreen as the DM gets to decide what the consequences are....and they will be whatever the DM wants. And if the DM wants anything, it's a railroad.
    Has nothing to do with the DM "wanting" it, and everything to do with whether the PCs' actions and the players choices made any difference to what happens. Is this really so hard to understand?

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    Yes, and this is the worst video game type railroading. You know them games where if you do a ''crime'' every single NPC knows about it and won't have anything to do with your character.
    Nonsense. I never said that. I asked if, when you mugged the hot dog vendor, it was railroading for the police to try to arrest you.

    But sure, let's run with this a bit.

    Railroading: You are going to jail. The DM tries to set you up to commit a crime, which, if you do, everybody will know you did it. Then the police will arrest you, and you won't be able to avoid them or stop them from doing so. If you refuse to commit a crime, the DM contrives to have you framed for one.

    Not railroading: You only get the police after you if you commit a crime and people can report it. Mug a vendor, and witnesses (or the vendor himself) call the police, who come and try to find the mugger (you). Cover up your crime, or don't commit it at all, and the police never learn about it (assuming you do a good enough job covering it up). If you're powerful or skilled enough to defeat or avoid the police, they escalate (in the face of resistance) or eventually give up (after they lose your trail entirely); if not, you get arrested and thrown in jail.

    Notice how "not railroading" involves a lot of consideration for the PCs' actions. For their choices, their successes, their failures. All of these impact the final result (including whether or not they go to jail). Nothing in that was "the DM randomly makes something up." He has a city with a police force which responds to reports of crimes. He has witnesses who will call the cops, and victims who will do likewise. He also doesn't have them randomly calling the police just because you're there; you have to make a choice which leads to them wanting to. Again: player choice and PC action leading to consequences. Not "randomly chosen" consequences, but logical ones.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    And it does come back to what the DM wants to do. You sure seem to be saying that the only reaction to the hot dog crime is the police come.
    It was a simplified scenario. What would you want to have happen? Do you do anything to prevent the police from coming? If so, what? Does the DM let your choice of action lead to activity in-game which will ultimately determine if the police come or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Ultron View Post
    And lots of DM's seem to have the same idea, if you do X then Y will happen as it's ''consequences''. You can see the posts every couple of days of like ''the PC's attacked the king so they must absolutely suffer the consequence of being locked up in prsion, what can I do to save my game?

    Consequences is just a deflection tactic to hide the railroading.
    This is a nonsensical statement full of non sequitur. If a PC says, "I let go of my sword," and the DM says, "It clatters to the ground," is that railroading? Because it sure sounds like what you just said.

    Consequences are the believable reaction of the setting and its inhabitants to others' choices and actions. They're the opposite of railroading. Railroading removes consequences entirely; the only thing a railroad will allow to happen is the next event along the rails. It doesn't matter what the PCs do. Consequences only happen because of PC action. The PCs' actions choose the consequences. The DM absolutely makes them up to a degree, but he makes them up in response to their choices. If the PCs have a highly simplified choice between mugging a hot dog vendor or not, then their choice to not do so leads to the police not being called, but their choice to do so leads to the police being called. If they choose to do it and make effort to ensure the police are not called, the game is played out to see how successful their efforts to prevent the police from being called are. IF they succeed, they get away with the mugging. If they don't, the police are called, and now they have to choose to run, hide, fight, or submit. And their success at each of the first three is determined by gameplay. If they run or hide successfully, they may still get away with it. If they fight successfully, they may wind up forcing an escalation, or terrifying the powers that be into letting them be above the law (depending on how mighty they are in their fighting). If they fail or submit, they probably get arrested.

    What in that is a railroad? It's the exact opposite: every step of the way, the consequences change based on their choices and successes/failures.

  15. - Top - End - #195
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Talakeal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Denver.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    I wonder what would happen if you had multiple DM's each with their own role.

    Say, one guy who designs the setting, one guy who decides how the NPCs will react to the PC's actions, and one guy who serves as a referee to settle arguments and interpret vague rules. You might even have someone else roll the dice or narrate the scene.

    All of the DM's have final say within their sphere of authority. For example, DM A decides there is a CE dragon in room X but not how it acts, DM B chooses how it acts but can't change its abilities, and DM C can determine what will happen if the PC decides to expose the dragon to brown mold but can't decide that there was no dragon after all.

    How would railroading work in such a game?
    Looking for feedback on Heart of Darkness, a character driven RPG of Gothic fantasy.

  16. - Top - End - #196
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    RangerGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    ... that sounds really hard to manage, to be honest. So many DMs managing different aspect of a single game. A co-DM typically manages rollling dice and adding up numbers in combat, which is quite different from what you described.

    The different aspects of a game just not meshing up could result in illogical situations. "Wait the dragon is now evil? We didn't even get any clues, no foreshadowing at all! Why are we in jail now? The act of drinking an woman's coffee is now illegal?"

    Okay, examples may be extreme here.
    Last edited by goto124; 2016-03-23 at 01:08 AM.

  17. - Top - End - #197
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Intersex

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    I wonder what would happen if you had multiple DM's each with their own role.

    Say, one guy who designs the setting, one guy who decides how the NPCs will react to the PC's actions, and one guy who serves as a referee to settle arguments and interpret vague rules. You might even have someone else roll the dice or narrate the scene.
    How deep does the "designs the setting" go? I mean, right now I am running a game using the setting of a Pathfinder Adventure Path, rules are settled by group vote, and I the DM determine how NPC's react in accordance to the setting.

    I've also played games where there is no DM, and setting/NPC reactions/rules interpretations were done by all players communally.
    Last edited by Milo v3; 2016-03-23 at 01:28 AM.
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  18. - Top - End - #198
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by goto124 View Post
    ... that sounds really hard to manage, to be honest. So many DMs managing different aspect of a single game. A co-DM typically manages rollling dice and adding up numbers in combat, which is quite different from what you described.

    The different aspects of a game just not meshing up could result in illogical situations. "Wait the dragon is now evil? We didn't even get any clues, no foreshadowing at all! Why are we in jail now? The act of drinking an woman's coffee is now illegal?"

    Okay, examples may be extreme here.
    For what it's worth, remember larps, mushes and board based rps commonly HAVE to use multiple GMs. While what you describe does come up, mostly they get around it by communicating with each other between scenes and rolling with it if someone else rules something.

  19. - Top - End - #199
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SamuraiGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    I always let the players make a short background for their characters and populate the world a bit with friends, relatives and rivals/enemies. Then I just involve their creations in plot hooks and voila they jump at the chance to get involved in a story with their own npc's.

    This is railroading at it's worst because the players don't even know they are being railroaded

    Player choice is all about illusion.

    The players walk north and get ambushed by the bandit queen
    The players walk south and get ambushed by the bandit queen
    The players walk west and get ambushed by the bandit queen
    The players walk south....oh you get it already!!!

    Your work as a GM is to disguise your devious plots and make them think they have a choice.

  20. - Top - End - #200
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorChain View Post
    This is railroading at it's worst because the players don't even know they are being railroaded

    Player choice is all about illusion.

    Your work as a GM is to disguise your devious plots and make them think they have a choice.
    I recognize that you enjoy that. Personally, I would not enjoy that as either a Player(presuming I found out about the deception*) or a DM.
    *Even without finding out, the DM who already knows, would also know my preference in the matter.

    As a Player I come expecting my PC to be able to impact some, but not all things.
    As a DM I come expecting my Players will attempt to impact the story.

    So say I had placed a Bandit Queen in my campaign world. The low level PCs made an enemy of her by attacking a couple of her camps (Queens have more than 1 camp/band right?). At this point the PCs are inside the Queen's territory and thus have hostile camps in all 4 cardinal directions (probably not straight in those direction though). In this example there are things the PCs can impact(direction and method of travel) and things they can't impact(the Bandit Queen's hostility and camps to the N,S,E,&W). At most one of those directions leads to an ambush with the Bandit Queen, the rest lead towards the other camps. Even then the PCs might be able to avoid the ambush from the camp closest to their path. However the Bandit Queen's hostility will not abate until they get satisfaction, or it becomes too costly to continue seeking satisfaction. As such I take the same plot as you wanted to include, but tailor it to my higher preference for Player Agency.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2016-03-23 at 08:33 AM.

  21. - Top - End - #201
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SamuraiGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    I recognize that you enjoy that. Personally, I would not enjoy that as either a Player(presuming I found out about the deception*) or a DM.
    *Even without finding out, the DM who already knows, would also know my preference in the matter.

    As a Player I come expecting my PC to be able to impact some, but not all things.
    As a DM I come expecting my Players will attempt to impact the story.

    So say I had placed a Bandit Queen in my campaign world. The low level PCs made an enemy of her by attacking a couple of her camps (Queens have more than 1 camp/band right?). At this point the PCs are inside the Queen's territory and thus have hostile camps in all 4 cardinal directions (probably not straight in those direction though). In this example there are things the PCs can impact(direction and method of travel) and things they can't impact(the Bandit Queen's hostility and camps to the N,S,E,&W). At most one of those directions leads to an ambush with the Bandit Queen, the rest lead towards the other camps. Even then the PCs might be able to avoid the ambush from the camp closest to their path. However the Bandit Queen's hostility will not abate until they get satisfaction, or it becomes too costly to continue seeking satisfaction. As such I take the same plot as you wanted to include, but tailor it to my higher preference for Player Agency.

    Not really what I meant about the bandit queen. I have a plot hook about the bandit queen and I'll throw it in whatever direction the players travel. Of course the players can choose how they interact with the bandit queen, that is their agency.

    Let's take another scenario. The players are solving a mystery and are missing a vital clue. I will make sure they will get that clue whatever way they go about it. I wont just say "ok the clue is in that house and if they don't go there they won't solve the mystery". I will place the clue in their way so they can resolve the mystery. The players don't know where the clue was supposed to be in the first place.

    Yet another scenario. I throw out a plot hook about a nefarious tomb and try to peak their interest, in the tomb is an evil artifact that they don't know about. The characters decide instead to build a castle. Oh wait....when they are building the foundations of the castle they unearth the entrance to an ancient temple....that contains an evil artifact of course. Now let's say the characters refuse to explore the ancient temple and decide to build their castle in another place. Then of course somebody else finds the evil artifact and will come into contact with the characters only to complicate their lives.

    Of course the players should impact the story, that is what RPG is, a collective storytelling game. The players always have a free agency in the term that the GM should never dictate their actions, they can choose to dig a hole in the ground and stay there if they want to but that would not be a fun session or a campaign.

    But some GM's are so staid simulationists that sometimes I want to pull my hair out. I remember on Call of Chtulu game where we, the characters, literally had to search every house in the village twice to find the vital clue that would progress the adventure, just because of a failed spot hidden roll. That was 8 hours badly spent.
    Last edited by RazorChain; 2016-03-23 at 11:18 PM.

  22. - Top - End - #202
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorChain View Post
    Not really what I meant about the bandit queen. I have a plot hook about the bandit queen and I'll throw it in whatever direction the players travel. Of course the players can choose how they interact with the bandit queen, that is their agency.

    Let's take another scenario. The players are solving a mystery and are missing a vital clue. I will make sure they will get that clue whatever way they go about it. I wont just say "ok the clue is in that house and if they don't go there they won't solve the mystery". I will place the clue in their way so they can resolve the mystery. The players don't know where the clue was supposed to be in the first place.

    Yet another scenario. I throw out a plot hook about a nefarious tomb and try to peak their interest, in the tomb is an evil artifact that they don't know about. The characters decide instead to build a castle. Oh wait....when they are building the foundations of the castle they unearth the entrance to an ancient temple....that contains an evil artifact of course. Now let's say the characters refuse to explore the ancient temple and decide to build their castle in another place. Then of course somebody else finds the evil artifact and will come into contact with the characters only to complicate their lives.

    Of course the players should impact the story, that is what RPG is, a collective storytelling game. The players always have a free agency in the term that the GM should never dictate their actions, they can choose to dig a hole in the ground and stay there if they want to but that would not be a fun session or a campaign.

    But some GM's are so staid simulationists that sometimes I want to pull my hair out. I remember on Call of Chtulu game where we, the characters, literally had to search every house in the village twice to find the vital clue that would progress the adventure, just because of a failed spot hidden roll. That was 8 hours badly spent.
    This is the "quantum ogre" approach, and it can work very well. It's technically a bit of a railroad, but unless the PCs were deliberately trying to AVOID your "bandit queen" or your "evil artifact," it isn't the sort to which people usually object.

  23. - Top - End - #203
    Troll in the Playground
     
    BarbarianGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorChain View Post
    Not really what I meant about the bandit queen. I have a plot hook about the bandit queen and I'll throw it in whatever direction the players travel. Of course the players can choose how they interact with the bandit queen, that is their agency.

    Let's take another scenario. The players are solving a mystery and are missing a vital clue. I will make sure they will get that clue whatever way they go about it. I wont just say "ok the clue is in that house and if they don't go there they won't solve the mystery". I will place the clue in their way so they can resolve the mystery. The players don't know where the clue was supposed to be in the first place.

    Yet another scenario. I throw out a plot hook about a nefarious tomb and try to peak their interest, in the tomb is an evil artifact that they don't know about. The characters decide instead to build a castle. Oh wait....when they are building the foundations of the castle they unearth the entrance to an ancient temple....that contains an evil artifact of course. Now let's say the characters refuse to explore the ancient temple and decide to build their castle in another place. Then of course somebody else finds the evil artifact and will come into contact with the characters only to complicate their lives.

    Of course the players should impact the story, that is what RPG is, a collective storytelling game. The players always have a free agency in the term that the GM should never dictate their actions, they can choose to dig a hole in the ground and stay there if they want to but that would not be a fun session or a campaign.

    But some GM's are so staid simulationists that sometimes I want to pull my hair out. I remember on Call of Chtulu game where we, the characters, literally had to search every house in the village twice to find the vital clue that would progress the adventure, just because of a failed spot hidden roll. That was 8 hours badly spent.
    The solution to this conundrum is simply: don't design adventures or campaigns that require specific actions or rolls to progress. Also don't design adventures that require railroading or illusionism. Then you won't need to railroad or trick the players, and players won't be stuck looking for a single clue and trying to guess the DM's mind. The problem is designing a plot which must go from A to B to C.
    If you want to run a game where the players have no choice but to engage with a specific adventure, then tell them. Get the railroading out of the way before the session and tell them where their characters are and why they are there: On the road, looking for the ancient temple where they want to recover an artifact. Don't pretend they have a choice of doing sonething else if they really don't. Just say it's an episodic campaign, with an overarching story, where they will be directed to the start of each "episode".

  24. - Top - End - #204
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    PirateWench

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sweden

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    But sure, let's run with this a bit.

    Railroading: You are going to jail. The DM tries to set you up to commit a crime, which, if you do, everybody will know you did it. Then the police will arrest you, and you won't be able to avoid them or stop them from doing so. If you refuse to commit a crime, the DM contrives to have you framed for one.

    Not railroading: You only get the police after you if you commit a crime and people can report it. Mug a vendor, and witnesses (or the vendor himself) call the police, who come and try to find the mugger (you). Cover up your crime, or don't commit it at all, and the police never learn about it (assuming you do a good enough job covering it up). If you're powerful or skilled enough to defeat or avoid the police, they escalate (in the face of resistance) or eventually give up (after they lose your trail entirely); if not, you get arrested and thrown in jail.

    Notice how "not railroading" involves a lot of consideration for the PCs' actions. For their choices, their successes, their failures. All of these impact the final result (including whether or not they go to jail). Nothing in that was "the DM randomly makes something up." He has a city with a police force which responds to reports of crimes. He has witnesses who will call the cops, and victims who will do likewise. He also doesn't have them randomly calling the police just because you're there; you have to make a choice which leads to them wanting to. Again: player choice and PC action leading to consequences. Not "randomly chosen" consequences, but logical ones.
    I think I explained this to DU a few posts up-thread. Since he didn't respond, we can assume he understood what we mean?
    Last edited by Lorsa; 2016-03-24 at 04:56 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    Blue text for sarcasm is an important writing tool. Everybody should use it when they are saying something clearly false.

  25. - Top - End - #205
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    RangerGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    This is the "quantum ogre" approach, and it can work very well. It's technically a bit of a railroad, but unless the PCs were deliberately trying to AVOID your "bandit queen" or your "evil artifact," it isn't the sort to which people usually object.
    It's often seen as a crutch - since GMs aren't perfect and can't cover every possible player action, nor make up stuff all the time for every single thing, Quantum Ogre can keep a fun game running without making the players feel invalided.

    Helps that players can't replay TTRPG campaigns to realise what the GM's doing, though I wonder if players ever caught on to the GM railschroding.

  26. - Top - End - #206
    Troll in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2014

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by goto124 View Post
    It's often seen as a crutch - since GMs aren't perfect and can't cover every possible player action, nor make up stuff all the time for every single thing, Quantum Ogre can keep a fun game running without making the players feel invalided.

    Helps that players can't replay TTRPG campaigns to realise what the GM's doing, though I wonder if players ever caught on to the GM railschroding.
    I don't really consider it railschröding, or at least not problematic railschröding, unless the players are forced into it after an attempt to do otherwise, or it's blatant, or it contradicts prior information. Dropping an encounter somewhere when the players have no idea that the encounter could take place is one thing; dropping in the encounter despite the fact that the players have made a choice to do something else is another.

    If you were planning to have the players just stumble onto a dungeon to the north and had given no hints of its existence or location, it doesn't really matter if it's north or south. The dungeon doesn't exist in the world yet, so its final location is irrelevant, and the players aren't really being forced into it.

    Once you've hinted that it exists but not given clues to its location, though, it gets more dubious--if they go looking for it, and you just put it wherever they go to look, every time something like that comes up, they'll catch on eventually and realize their agency is limited. Some false leads before they get to the dungeon (sometimes--you don't want to get into a predictable pattern) could help, perhaps. If they hear about it and decide not to investigate, and you put it wherever they go to anyway, then the rails become really obvious.

    The very worst is when you've given clues not only to the thing's existence but its location as well, and still drop it wherever the players go regardless. If the townsfolk speak in hushed whispers about the Tomb of Horrors in the frozen north, and the players go south, they should not run smack into the entrance to the Tomb of Horrors in the balmy south. If there's rumored to be a troll under the bridge, and the players ford the river a mile upstream instead, they shouldn't fight the bridge troll anyway.

    But when nothing points to the encounter existing beforehand? Say, you want to introduce the Bandit Queen and her horde for the first time in the game, prior to which they haven't been mentioned and about whom the characters don't have prior knowledge from their backgrounds or other sources? Yeah, it really doesn't matter one whit if the players get jumped while they're going north or south, so long as it's plausible for the area they're in.
    Last edited by JAL_1138; 2016-03-24 at 08:22 AM.
    Spoiler: Playground Quotes
    Show

    Quote Originally Posted by Safety Sword View Post
    JAL_1138: Founding Member of the Paranoid Adventurer's Guild.
    Quote Originally Posted by TeChameleon View Post
    - If it's something mortals were not meant to know, I've already found six different ways to blow myself and/or someone else up with it.
    Gnomish proverb


    I use blue text for silliness and/or sarcasm. Do not take anything I say in blue text seriously, except for this sentence and the one preceding it.

  27. - Top - End - #207
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorChain View Post
    Not really what I meant about the bandit queen. I have a plot hook about the bandit queen and I'll throw it in whatever direction the players travel. Of course the players can choose how they interact with the bandit queen, that is their agency.
    ^This is precisely what I thought you meant. I recognize that you enjoy these quantum modules. Personally, I would not enjoy that as either a Player or as a DM. As you can see from the replies upthread, preferences on this vary.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2016-03-24 at 08:52 AM.

  28. - Top - End - #208
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    There's a spectrum of design decisions and GM judgement calls which separate different adventure structures. It's also vital to distinquish between different elements which must happen "no matter what".

    For example: the sun moving across the sky, weather changing, day turning to night or spring turning to summer are in-universe eventualities. Traditional RPGs rarely give agency over these to players, but it would be folly to say a GM is railroading because time is passing.

    An enemy finding the player characters, or player characters finding an enemy, are in-setting probabilities. Traditional RPGs give characters, and by extension, players a lot of agency over these. Hence when these things are placed in "must happen no matter what" category, it feels like a bigger violation of player agency.

    There are games where these assumptions are toyed with. Sometimes, players are given considerable power to set the scene (time, place, weather), but what is going to happen and with who is turned into an in-game eventuality. (Even if it's not an in-setting eventuality.)

    I would be much more fine with the latter sort of game if I could avoid the feeling that in such games, when and where are considered unimportant details, while who and what are stressed to the point where deviations from a game script are frowned upon.
    "It's the fate of all things under the sky,
    to grow old and wither and die."

  29. - Top - End - #209
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by OldTrees1 View Post
    ^This is precisely what I thought you meant. I recognize that you enjoy these quantum modules. Personally, I would not enjoy that as either a Player or as a DM. As you can see from the replies upthread, preferences on this vary.
    I'm curious: would it bother you if you had no way of knowing it? Let's assume that, as another poster said, the Bandit Queen is a new element and the PCs have not heard about her or her bandits yet. The DM planned to introduce her by having the PCs run across her ambush.

    Obviously, it's irritating when it's used such that the PCs hear about The Bandit Queen, research where she is, and deliberately avoid her...only to have her relocated to where they're going anyway. That's obvious railshroeding. But when it's just a matter of, "I have this clue/hook I want the PCs to encounter; I will look for an opportunity to introduce it organically in whatever they happen to be doing," does that really bug you? Would you want to dig into your DM's notes to find out if that's what happened, or just trust that maybe you found Hook A because it was in Location B, and if you'd gone to Location C, you'd have gotten Hook Omega?

  30. - Top - End - #210
    Titan in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: The railroading problem: source & solution

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    I'm curious: would it bother you if you had no way of knowing it? Let's assume that, as another poster said, the Bandit Queen is a new element and the PCs have not heard about her or her bandits yet. The DM planned to introduce her by having the PCs run across her ambush.

    Obviously, it's irritating when it's used such that the PCs hear about The Bandit Queen, research where she is, and deliberately avoid her...only to have her relocated to where they're going anyway. That's obvious railshroeding. But when it's just a matter of, "I have this clue/hook I want the PCs to encounter; I will look for an opportunity to introduce it organically in whatever they happen to be doing," does that really bug you? Would you want to dig into your DM's notes to find out if that's what happened, or just trust that maybe you found Hook A because it was in Location B, and if you'd gone to Location C, you'd have gotten Hook Omega?
    Short answer: Technically no, effectively yes

    Long answer:
    It would be against my preferences and my DM would know my preferences. Them willingly violating my preferences in a deceptive manner is also against my preferences.

    So while ignorance might prevent me, personally, being bothered by it(solely due to my ignorance of the betrayal), my DM possesses enough theory of mind to recognize they are doing something that would bother me.

    My group is based on trust. Trust can be violated without the victim becoming aware.
    Last edited by OldTrees1; 2016-03-24 at 09:55 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •