D&D 5E What does "Railroading" actually mean!? Discount Code on Page 8

[kieran_of_the_dark_peaks]

As a massive THANK YOU for everyone who has taken part in this discussion, which has been really intelligent and insightful for me! I'm pleased to announce that people who have taken part can use this discount code to get $2.00 off the Blizzard of Axe and Sword. That changes the prices from $6.99 to $4.99 - just over the price of a coffee. It's one way for you to know if I avoided the sin of railroading!

Dungeon Masters Guild -

www.dmsguild.com

This code is limited to the first 10 people who take advantage - if it doesn't work after that, I'm afraid that someone got there first!

(And before you complain, I had no idea this thread was going to blow up like this, so I thought this was a good way of thanking people for getting involved! I can't give the books for free - the art is expensive even before my time is calculated, but I thought this is a way of saying thank you. )

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Still seems like a railroad if the GM knows what's going to happen in the end. Let's say A = read humor about a cult performing a ritual to end the world. Is D "defeat the cult"? What if the players decide to join the cult? What if they go their own any and let some other adventurers handle the problem?

J. M. Straczynski had some interesting things to say about heroic narratives. When we start reading Heroic/Epic fantasy (which Babylon 5 was) we pretty much know it will end with the heroes winning. However, the uncertainty comes from what price the heroes will have to pay in order to win.

This same wriggle room can be used to make the actions of the players more meaningful in a narrative-driven D&D adventure. Sure, the end of the world will probably be averted, but at what cost?


If you look at Game of Thrones, it leads back to the issue of subverting tropes. By setting out to subvert tropes from the start GoT made the ending uncertain. But it also made resolving the story in a satisfactory fashion far more difficult.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

J. M. Straczynski had some interesting things to say about heroic narratives. When we start reading Heroic/Epic fantasy (which Babylon 5 was) we pretty much know it will end with the heroes winning. However, the uncertainty comes from what price the heroes will have to pay in order to win.

This same wriggle room can be used to make the actions of the players more meaningful in a narrative-driven D&D adventure. Sure, the end of the world will probably be averted, but at what cost?

I agree. That was one of the key themes in my first fantasy novel.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure D&D has a lot in common with storytelling. Maybe it does for some groups. I don't know. But what I want to tell a story, I write a story.

 

[cbwjm]

Still seems like a railroad if the GM knows what's going to happen in the end. Let's say A = read humor about a cult performing a ritual to end the world. Is D "defeat the cult"? What if the players decide to join the cult? What if they go their own any and let some other adventurers handle the problem?

Hardly ever happens in my experience. Most of the time the players pick up a quest to defeat evil and that's what they do. When they're out to destroy evil they tend to do it rather than joining evil. And since that's the goal, the players can go about it however they want in non-railroad adventures.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Hardly ever happens in my experience. Most of the time the players pick up a quest to defeat evil and that's what they do. When they're out to destroy evil they tend to do it rather than joining evil. And since that's the goal, the players can go about it however they want in non-railroad adventures.

Thus the difference between can and should.

Railroad is should, sandbox is can - though the destination may be the same.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I agree. That was one of the key themes in my first fantasy novel.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure D&D has a lot in common with storytelling. Maybe it does for some groups. I don't know. But what I want to tell a story, I write a story.

Most published adventures take a storytelling approach (and that can lead to the railroading problem, and the longer the adventure the bigger the problem). Sandboxing is really a different kettle of fish all together. The narrative approach to D&D is something you don't do and therefore have no experience of (and it sounds like it wouldn't appeal to your players anyway).

Another thing to take into account is efficiency of resource allocation. You only have a certain amount of time to spend developing content, and if you are publishing, a certain number of pages to put it in. Sandboxing is very inefficient, creating a lot of content that players will simply never see. Commercially that waste cannot be afforded. Putting the players on (hopefully invisible and flexible) rails makes designing content much more efficient, and hence commercially viable. But I would say it then the responsibility of DM running the adventure to allow the players to run off the rails - a writer can never foresee all contingences.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Most published adventures take a storytelling approach (and that can lead to the railroading problem, and the longer the adventure the bigger the problem). Sandboxing is really a different kettle of fish all together. The narrative approach to D&D is something you don't do and therefore have no experience of (and it sounds like it wouldn't appeal to your players anyway).

Another thing to take into account is efficiency of resource allocation. You only have a certain amount of time to spend developing content, and if you are publishing, a certain number of pages to put it in. Sandboxing is very inefficient, creating a lot of content that players will simply never see. Commercially that waste cannot be afforded. Putting the players on (hopefully invisible and flexible) rails makes designing content much more efficient, and hence commercially viable. But I would say it then the responsibility of DM running the adventure to allow the players to run off the rails - an writer can never foresee all contingences.

I don't think I've ever read an adventure published by WotC. The only adventure's I've read at are B2: Keep on the Borderlands, X1: Isle of the Unknown, X2: Castle Amber, UK2: Beyond the Crystal Cave, and Geoffrey McKinney's Isle of the Unknown.

All of those are more or less sandbox adventures. The first three, were certainly commercially viable. I don't know about financial success of the others.

As for sandboxes being inefficient, I disagree completely. I've been running my sandbox game since 2008 and the prep-load is minuscule. I spend time world-building - perhaps 15-30 minutes per week - but I do zero adventure prep. Sometimes I write things that aren't used. I'm OK with that. My world is just maps and random tables for different locations. Once a result is rolled, I replace it. That's all the prep I do.

You use the phrase "narrative approach," but I'm not sure what you mean? My games have a narrative. The narrative is "whatever the players decide to do."

 

[Paul Farquhar]

As for sandboxes being inefficient, I disagree completely. I've been running my sandbox game since 2008

So, that is 12 years work gone into it.

and the prep-load is minuscule. I spend time world-building - perhaps 15-30 minutes per week

World building is where most of the actual work is done, no matter what type of adventure you are running.

My world is just maps and random tables for different locations. Once a result is rolled, I replace it. That's all the prep I do.

I get a couple of things from that:

1) You are doing exactly what you called fraud - creating the illusion of meaningful choice via random rolls.

2) Most of the time you wing it - make it up as you go along. If the players arrive in a village you don't know the name, age or personal history of the blacksmith or anything else about them until the players say "we visit the blacksmith" at which point you create the needed content.

You use the phrase "narrative approach," but I'm not sure what you mean? My games have a narrative. The narrative is "whatever the players decide to do."

That only works because of your players. If my players didn't get a distress call from a princess they would choose to never leave the moisture farm. They aren't motivated by gold, loot, power, or a desire to bum around the countryside causing mischief. If the world doesn't need saving they would rather stay in bed.

Castle Amber

Is a dungeon. Dungeons are prime examples or railroad adventures. In this case the rails are the actual physical walls of the rooms and passages.

 

[Hussar]

Dungeons are prime examples or railroad adventures.

That is very much not correct. Dungeons might be linear, or they might be ... I think the word in labyrinths is multicursal - but, they are by no means railroad adventures.

Again, limitations =/= railroad. It's only when choices are being limited in order to satisfy the DM's need for a particular outcome that it becomes a railroad. A murder mystery on a train is not a railroad adventure, despite the fact that the players are very, very limited in where they can go and the fact that the adventure is on literal rails.

The opposite of railroad is not more choice.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Railroad: