D&D General Why defend railroading?

[Cadence]

No. Nobody can think of everything. If they go off-road I'll think of some other choices. It's not about thinking of everything or even lots of things. It's about staying a few steps ahead of them and presenting a few real choices, not illusory ones.

So if it's one you hadn't thought of, you can tell them they see a big footprint and hear some grumbling ahead?

 

[Maxperson]

So if it's one you hadn't thought of, you can tell them they see a big footprint and hear some grumbling ahead?

That would still be forcing the ogre onto their path no matter what choice they make. If it's one that I haven't thought out in advance, I'd rather just come up with a few new possibilities

 

[TheSword]

No. Nobody can think of everything. If they go off-road I'll think of some other choices. It's not about thinking of everything or even lots of things. It's about staying a few steps ahead of them and presenting a few real choices, not illusory ones.

What is the fundamental difference between the following approaches...

1. Moving a predefined encounter that isn’t linked to a specific into the PCs path (like our ogre)

vs

2. Rolling a random encounter from a list of predefined encounters and putting one of those in the PCs path.

vs

3. Making it up as you go along and deciding because a PC decides to climb a tree that a tree dwelling creature will be encountered.

Do you think these methods are equally useful and equally valid?

 

[Cadence]

That would still be forcing the ogre onto their path no matter what choice they make. If it's one that I haven't thought out in advance, I'd rather just come up with a few new possibilities

Why do you need a few different possibilities for that one path they chose, you just need one, right?

So, you would avoid picking any monsters you had consciously thought of as being possibilities for other places, and pick something you hadn't previously thought of?

 

[Umbran]

If all roads lead to ogre, no choice has any real meaning. A meaningless choice is an invalidated one.

We all make choices in this world. Some of them turn out to be meaningful, others not.

There is also a difference between "We chose this road to specifically avoid the ogre," and "We chose a road, not knowing where the ogre was (or even that an ogre existed)."

"Meaningful choice" gets bandied around a lot, without discussion of the more general agency which choice is supposed to support. And having agency does not mean "every choice is meaningful".

 

[Maxperson]

What is the fundamental difference between the following approaches...

1. Moving a predefined encounter that isn’t linked to a specific into the PCs path (like our ogre)

and

2. Rolling a random encounter from a list of predefined encounters and putting one of those in the PCs path.

and

3. Making it up as you go along and deciding because a PC decides to climb a tree that a tree dwelling creature will be encountered.

Do you think these methods are equally useful and equally valid?

#1 is a railroad. You're moving the encounter into their path no matter what they choose.

#2 is not a railroad. Random chance is random chance. It might happen or it might not.

#3 isn't something that I would ever do. The vast majority of trees don't have tree dwelling creatures outside of things like squirrels and birds, and I assume you don't mean something like that. That's fluff, not an encounter. Forcing an encounter against long odds like that also smacks of railroading to me, but since it wouldn't be there if they had say climbed the big rock over there, it's not really. It's just too close for my comfort.

 

[Asisreo]

Eh. Levelling is part of the game, you don't need to tediously count some meaningless points for it to happen. Of course doing seriously dangerous things should count towards milestones.

There's no granularity, though. Its either "The DM has decided it was difficult enough to level up" or "it provided no numerical growth to your character." No in-betweens, especially on the player's side.

For example, if a player quits halfway through the quest they started, they may think they deserve at least partial exp to level up but if they get nothing, it will feel like a waste of time that they even pursued it in the first place.

Essentially, the players get to pick what they choose but they get punished for finding it uninteresting later on.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

There's no granularity, though. Its either "The DM has decided it was difficult enough to level up" or "it provided no numerical growth to your character." No in-betweens, especially on the player's side.

For example, if a player quits halfway through the quest they started, they may think they deserve at least partial exp to level up but if they get nothing, it will feel like a waste of time that they even pursued it in the first place.

Essentially, the players get to pick what they choose but they get punished for finding it uninteresting later on.

The XP really doesn't help you here. Sure, the fights have fixed XP rewards, but everything else really doesn't. So if the player want to focus something else than fighting, it is still completely up to the GM if and how much they get rewarded for that.

All this is way too mechanistic for me. The characters level up once they do a bunch of interesting stuff, the end. That's really all I need.

 

[Maxperson]

Why do you need a few different possibilities for that one path they chose, you just need one, right?

So, you would avoid picking any monsters you had consciously thought of as being possibilities for other places, and pick something you hadn't previously thought of?

I don't consider other places. When I'm improvising, I'm just thinking about possibilities where the PC's are. If the PCs had encountered an ogre 5 sessions ago, that's not going to stop me from making an ogre one of the current possibilities if an ogre fits the area.

 

[Maxperson]

We all make choices in this world. Some of them turn out to be meaningful, others not.

There is also a difference between "We chose this road to specifically avoid the ogre," and "We chose a road, not knowing where the ogre was (or even that an ogre existed)."

Sure, but if I make a choice to go to the mall and see Janet Jackson, she is not also going to have been at the movies if I had made that choice instead.

"Meaningful choice" gets bandied around a lot, without discussion of the more general agency which choice is supposed to support. And having agency does not mean "every choice is meaningful".

It doesn't have to have a lot of meaning, but different choices should result in something different happening. If choosing the left fork, the right fork, going off road, turning back and teleporting 3000 miles all result in an encounter with an ogre, your agency is gone and you've been railroaded into an encounter with an ogre. Even if you didn't realize it and never find out.