D&D General Railroads, Illusionism, and Participationism

[prabe]

One thing I will say in regards to this whole choices / illusionism thing... is that I personally do not put nearly as much stock in having the ability to make meaningful choices as others do. Because quite frankly, meaningful choices to me are meaningless if the results of those choices end up being bland, boring, incomprehensible, or just outright bad. If a poor-quality DM just doesn't have their crap together to produce fun and interesting content... the fact that I could choose how to engage with it doesn't make it any better.

I will almost always take and play through a fantastic DM's personalized and virtually unchangeable, linear, railroady story over a DM who just doesn't do a good job, has bad stories and boring reactions but allows me to make whatever choices I want. There's a reason why 'Choose-Your-Own-Adventure' books are not seen as the highest level of literary quality, and it's not because you get to choose the direction of the story.

Eh. Neither of those sounds like a game I'd want to play in, personally. I guess the crappy DM trying to run a flexible game could be worked with to help them improve, though. A "fantastic" GM with an "unchangeable" story doesn't.

 

[Maxperson]

But this is not what the GM says. They say 'there are two doors' or 'which path you choose?' That they lead to different places might be implied, and is certainly true in fiction, but this is no different than 'where you go first' implying that timing matters, when it actually doesn't.

The DM is still lying by omission. The placement of two door and the two passages behind going to two different areas is the DM saying that choice matters. Choose one and you will reach X location in the dungeon. Choose the other and you will reach Y location. If both X and Y result in the same thing(assuming the passages don't physically reconnect prior to reaching the ogre), the choice is an illusion(lie) and is railroading.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Eh. Neither of those sounds like a game I'd want to play in, personally. I guess the crappy DM trying to run a flexible game could be worked with to help them improve, though. A "fantastic" GM with an "unchangeable" story doesn't.

I have better things to do with my time than sit at a bad game on the hopes that it eventually gets better. But I also know I have the luxury of choice, which many people don't. So I do not begrudged the people who do prefer more choice, even if the the result of the choices aren't going to be that much fun. If you're stuck playing crap, at least you get to decide which crap you play.

 

[payn]

Maybe, maybe not.

I suspect newer DMs, or those with less time to prep, might find linear adventures easier to run; and newer players might find linear adventures easier to play, at least to start with. Some tables might be quite happy to stay there while others will later move away from linear into something else, be it sandbox or some other more exploration-centric model. (I'm sure the reverse also happens, where a group starts out non-linear and moves to linear, but my guess is that'd be rare)

I think a non-linear style asks a bit more of both the DM and the players - the DM has to do more prep and the players have to get a bit more stuck in - and it's fine if not all players and-or DMs are ready and willing to answer this bell every time.

Sure, you can dial it back to the time starved or newb to explain why you think folks go linear. Just moving the goal posts on your supposition that non-linear is some superior method. It's borderline offensive, but then again I've seen this a thousand times where somebody tries to promote their favored style as definitively better. Just because you have a well trodden wheelhouse doesn't make it universal. Sorry not buying it. I actually find non-linear GM techniques to very useful in linear games, which can be just as good as any non-linear experience.

 

[prabe]

I have better things to do with my time than sit at a bad game on the hopes that it eventually gets better. But I also know I have the luxury of choice, which many people don't. So I do not begrudged the people who do prefer more choice, even if the the result of the choices aren't going to be that much fun. If you're stuck playing crap, at least you get to decide which crap you play.

Or run the games you'd love to play in.

 

[Maxperson]

One thing I will say in regards to this whole choices / illusionism thing... is that I personally do not put nearly as much stock in having the ability to make meaningful choices as others do. Because quite frankly, meaningful choices to me are meaningless if the results of those choices end up being bland, boring, incomprehensible, or just outright bad. If a poor-quality DM just doesn't have their crap together to produce fun and interesting content... the fact that I could choose how to engage with it doesn't make it any better.

I will almost always take and play through a fantastic DM's personalized and virtually unchangeable, linear, railroady story over a DM who just doesn't do a good job, has bad stories and boring reactions but allows me to make whatever choices I want. There's a reason why 'Choose-Your-Own-Adventure' books are not seen as the highest level of literary quality, and it's not because you get to choose the direction of the story.

This isn't an argument against choice or pro-illusionism. It's against boring and pro fun. It says that conversely, if the game is fun, you want choices to have meaning.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The DM is still lying by omission. The placement of two door and the two passages behind going to two different areas is the DM saying that choice matters. Choose one and you will reach X location in the dungeon. Choose the other and you will reach Y location. If both X and Y result in the same thing(assuming the passages don't physically reconnect prior to reaching the ogre), the choice is an illusion(lie) and is railroading.

And such implied 'lie' is always present. It is implied that the world is limitless and just as full of stuff than real world. But it isn't. There is actually only very limited amount of stuff the GM has prepped.

 

[DEFCON 1]

This isn't an argument against choice or pro-illusionism. It's against boring and pro fun. It says that conversely, if the game is fun, you want choices to have meaning.

True. I wasn't suggesting you should forsake choice on the face of it. But rather, that I don't find having choice to be more important than having a good DM with a good story. For me, the fun railroad will almost always be a better game than the un-fun open-world where I have free rein to make choices.

 

[Maxperson]

And such implied 'lie' is always present. It is implied that the world is limitless and just as full of stuff than real world. But it isn't. There is actually only very limited amount of stuff the GM has prepped.

Considering it isn't present in my game, "always present" is not true. The amount of prep by the way, has nothing to do with illusion of choice. Improvisation doesn't mean lies or false choice. I can improv two doors, behind one of which is an ogre, and behind the other a way to freedom. Choice can still have meaning when improvising, and illusionist lies do not have to be present.

 

[DEFCON 1]

True. I wasn't suggesting you should forsake choice on the face of it. But rather, that I don't find having choice to be more important than having a good DM with a good story. For me, the fun railroad will almost always be a better game than the un-fun open-world where I have free rein to make choices.

Case in point... I love all the Bioware RPGs and completely bounce off of the Elder Scrolls RPGs. Mass Effect was a compelling narrative that drove me forward towards completion, whereas Skyrim did little for me and I only get several hours in each time I try to play it and each time I just fizzle out because nothing in the game drives me.

And when I read stories of people spending hundreds of hours playing the game and "finding their own adventures"... my mind just boggles. I don't think they are at all wrong, mind you... but they certainly don't enjoy the same things I do when playing a game.