D&D General Why defend railroading?

[iserith]

I would say that railroading is always bad because by definition it involves force via subverting choice a player believes he or she made in good faith; however, if a player agrees to choose certain things over others (e.g. follow the plot of the module everyone agreed to play to the exclusion of choices that aren't on that plotline) or agrees the DM should, say, engage in the illusion of choice for whatever reason the group agrees is acceptable, the DM is not railroading since the DM is not forcing those outcomes.

 

[Grantypants]

DM style aside, one reason railroading persists is because it is easier for module writers. Whether that's homebrew or published, it's much easier for a DM to prepare for a flowchart, where scene A leads to scene B leads to scene C. When players get off the rails and don't take on scene C like the DM expected, all the time and expense of preparing scenes D-Z is wasted. That can be super frustrating if the DM has spent a bunch of time planning how everything is supposed to come together, or if they've spent a bunch of money buying a published campaign or the exact right minis or terrain or something.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I should have also included in my first comment, that it is generally the adversarial players who throw around the railroading accusations. They are the ones who want to just do whatever they feel like and not engage in the social contract that is playing in a cooperative game.

 

[Cadence]

I like @iserith 's answer a few above this a lot.

So, how railroady we're the Dragonlance Modules that are a topic of a different thread right now?

 

[overgeeked]

DM style aside, one reason railroading persists is because it is easier for module writers. Whether that's homebrew or published, it's much easier for a DM to prepare for a flowchart, where scene A leads to scene B leads to scene C. When players get off the rails and don't take on scene C like the DM expected, all the time and expense of preparing scenes D-Z is wasted. That can be super frustrating if the DM has spent a bunch of time planning how everything is supposed to come together, or if they've spent a bunch of money buying a published campaign or the exact right minis or terrain or something.

Node-based design is a thing. Modules don’t have to be strictly linear.

 

[overgeeked]

I should have also included in my first comment, that it is generally the adversarial players who throw around the railroading accusations. They are the ones who want to just do whatever they feel like and not engage in the social contract that is playing in a cooperative game.

Likewise, a DM not allowing the players meaningful choices in the game is breaking the social contract by removing the cooperative portion of the game.

 

[iserith]

I like @iserith 's answer a few above this a lot.

So, how railroady we're the Dragonlance Modules that are a topic of a different thread right now?

I read part of one of those modules about 30 years ago, so I honestly cannot speak meaningfully about that specific module. But I would say that modules are not in and of themselves "railroady." Even a linear adventure is not a "railroad." Railroading is something only the DM can do, though I'll leave open the possibility that a module could suggest to the DM to engage in various strategies that could amount to railroading if the players otherwise believe they are making choices in good faith. I'm sure I've seen that in old Ravenloft modules.

 

[Cadence]

Node-based design is a thing. Modules don’t have to be strictly linear.

Wanting to hit a finite list of train stations to complete most of the scavenger hunt... but the players pick the order... doesn't entirely feel like there are no tracks.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Because I can't get people to read my novel otherwise.

But seriously, DMs of a certain style have decided to reclaim the word to now mean something AFAIK it didn't mean before. More about linear gameplay than 'but thou must'.

 

[Cadence]

I read part of one of those modules about 30 years ago, so I honestly cannot speak meaningfully about that specific module. But I would say that modules are not in and of themselves "railroady." Even a linear adventure is not a "railroad." Railroading is something only the DM can do, though I'll leave open the possibility that a module could suggest to the DM to engage in various strategies that could amount to railroading if the players otherwise believe they are making choices in good faith.

It's been ages since I read the DL ones, but I thought they were trying to get the players to fill in gaps in the books or relive parts of them.

As opposed to B2 where the party has bought in to going to the caves, but they can do whatever once they get there (assuming all of the monsters don't have their alignment that firmly engraved on their souls that they have to all be killed).