Well, I think there's a meaningful difference. Illusionism (the Quantum Ogre) means no matter where they go they're going to have to deal with it. No?
Ish. Two doors and no matter what choice the PCs make there's an ogre behind the door they open.
Overgeeked, are all encounters in the games you run the consequences of player choice? Or are some of them simply things happening in the world that they run into regardless, but then get to deal with or avoid as they choose?
Lately, I run exclusively open-world, sandbox games mostly in the style of West Marches. I prep hooks and situations and leave it to the players to decide what to engage with. The choices they make absolutely have consequences. Good and bad. Like the town is running out of a given resource and they're offered the job to go hunt some down and restock the town. If they choose not to, the town runs out, and, depending on how vital that resource is, the attitude of the townsfolk shifts negatively in regards to the PCs. Or, if they take the job and do really well, secure a lot more of the resource than expected (or needed), the townsfolk's attitude shifts the other way. I also use wandering monsters, random locations, and various other things to "stock" the world. The PCs are absolutely free to go where ever and do whatever. The only things that are "static" and waiting for the PCs are the locations. The abandoned tower is
there, regardless of whether the PCs ever even know it exists, much less go visit it. Likewise the crashed Spelljammer ship I swapped in for the spaceship in Expedition to the Barrier Peaks. I really hope someone finds that someday. The monsters aren't static. They move. They live. They breathe. They have goals. So no, I don't have static monsters just standing around for the PCs to arrive to do whatever plot related thing the PCs are trying to stop. Like, if they know a villain has kidnapped someone and will sacrifice them at the next full moon, that's when it happens...unless the PCs stop them. So if the PCs take a few extra days goofing off and miss the full moon sacrifice, that's that. The full moon happens when the full moon happens...not whenever the PCs arrive. To me, that would be illusionism.
Railroading, as I understand it, involves tracks leading from A to B to C, from which the PCs can't remove themselves. The train goes this route. It cannot jump the tracks between A and B to go visit Z instead.
Exactly. That's the definition I use as well. Illusionism is the illusion of choice, it's railroading in that the DM gives the players fake choices. No matter what "choice" the PCs make, they will still end up exactly where the DM wanted them to be. So setting up an encounter that happens no matter what whenever the PCs enter a space is a kind of illusionism, to me.
Right. I often do this too. Write a list of possible encounters, then randomly determine which one (if any) the PCs run into.
I love me some random tables.
Yeah. I considered bringing up quantum ogre but I think the concept can fall into the long grass. The original quantum ogre was really more about illusionism in the idea that PCs could chose which door to open when in fact the thing behind the door changed depending on the door opened.
Right. I don't see it as much different than the "X happens when you arrive" form of illusionism. I don't run a game / world that's centered on the PCs. They're the protagonists, sure. They're the main characters of our shared, emergent story, absolutely. But the world doesn't literally revolve around them. Their presence doesn't trigger events. Events happen regardless of the PCs presence. NPCs have goals that they pursue. If the PCs get involved, the NPCs' plans change based on the PCs' involvement. But there are no dungeons filled with punch-clock villains on perpetual tea break waiting for the PCs to arrive.
Not rolling is fine - and gets the job done - the players progress.
But I've been leaning toward success at a cost. The players are at a door they need to open to progress to where they want to go. The rogue decides to pick it. If he rolls above a certain DC (whatever you set) he takes a few seconds, picks the lock and everyone is through, plus the lock is fine. If he JUST misses the DC, I'd give him a choice you can take several minutes to pick the lock OR you can do it quickly but the lock is ruined and it's obvious you tampered with it. Miss by more than a little - you're through the door but the lock is ruined AND it took you a while to get through it.
Obviously, the above applies if there is time pressure AND it matters that someone might notice the state of the lock. If not, boom they get through the door (but with adventures, there's often time pressure etc.).
Absolutely a great alternative. If used sparingly. I really don't like the idea of failing forward or success at cost as the default state. Sometimes people just fail. That's all part of the game (life and D&D). The idea that no matter what the PCs succeed just rubs me the wrong way. Even with a cost attached. On occasion, absolutely. But not the default.
