D&D General The Great Railroad Thread

[overgeeked]

I played in a Freeport-set sandbox game once where the GM told us we could do anything and go anywhere, and there would be something to do. Only one of these was true. In all of Freeport, there was apparently only one thing to do. I don't remember what it was, but I do remember the PCs having an extended conversation with a passive-aggressive mouse, who was very frustrated that we hadn't picked up on what we were supposed to be doing.

Yep. Best sign of a railroad. Being told you have agency when you have none. So much better to actually have choices that matter. What a novelty.

 

[zarionofarabel]

If the GM needs to do something to keep the players "on track" well then...there's tracks...which a train runs on...so...

 

[Maxperson]

I played in a Freeport-set sandbox game once where the GM told us we could do anything and go anywhere, and there would be something to do. Only one of these was true. In all of Freeport, there was apparently only one thing to do. I don't remember what it was, but I do remember the PCs having an extended conversation with a passive-aggressive mouse, who was very frustrated that we hadn't picked up on what we were supposed to be doing.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

One alternative I've used with some success is to have the player author the inciting incident for their PC. Details here: Repost- first session of Dark Sun campaign

Another one is to have things like beliefs/bonds/goals/etc. which can be used by the GM to put the PCs in a situation. Something like @bloodtide's riot scenario, for instance, might be engaging because the PCs have an established viewpoint on lawlessness, use of force, oppression, whatever.

 

[pemerton]

To me, "linear adventure" seems like a description of the way a pre-written scenario is presented: as a sequence of "scenes" or "events" that the GM hopes to present, more-or-less in order, to culminate in some intended climax.

Whereas "railroad" seems like a description of an episode of actual play: how it unfolded at the table.

The relationship between the two might be that one way to actually successfully play through a linear adventure is to railroad the players.

 

[Deset Gled]

Like most of these terms we spend so much time arguing about, railroading is fairly easy to define. Most of the arguments come from people not wanting their preferred style of play called railroading, not the actual definition.

Does the referee negate player agency to preserve their preferred outcome?

That’s railroading.

I think a lot of arguments arise because actual play is much less binary than this definition implies.

Agency can be manipulated without being negated. One person can have more or less agency than another without control being complete. Compromises exist. And agency can change over time.

Some people call anything approaching linear a railroad. Others don't like to be grouped in with "railroad" style play because they feel like they have lots of agency (even if they could have more). And the term being used as a pejorative certainly doesn't help.

Personally, given the decades of stigma, and the endless arguments around the adversarial nature of the term (i.e. sandbox vs railroad), and the binary implications, I'm ready to assert that "railroad" could be considered an archaic term that is best avoided by those interested in serious discussions about game design. Let it go the way of "consumption", "Spanish fever", or "wolfram"; people may know what you mean what you say those words, but it isn't a great way to communicate or promote discussion. "Openness" and "Linearity" are much better terms that describe the modalities of low restriction plots and/or more directed adventuring. But these words give a much more clear description of the full gradient of possibilities within each, and promote the idea that while they can be alternatives they are not necessarily antithetical.

 

[cbwjm]

I've always seen railroading as this is the sequence of events A-B-C. Even if you find a plausible way to bypass B and move on to C, B is going to happen to you anyway.

 

[RainOnTheSun]

So, first off here I don't see this as "railroading" all that much, the big thing here is Clumsy Dming. Definition: Clumsy Dming is when a DM takes an action in a game, with all the grace of a bull in a china shop. The action(s) are crude, rude, obnoxious and very obvious. Clumsy Dming is common with Casual DMs, Careless DMs, and most of all new, inexperienced DMs.

Honestly, this is 95% of railroading to me. Rails aren't a natural feature of the landscape, after all. They're put in place because trains are too clumsy to go anywhere else. Railroading is when the GMing is so clumsy (or uncaring) that it becomes obvious that things are only happening to compel the players to do something. Then my suspension of disbelief weakens. I'm not thinking about the landscape, anymore; I'm thinking about the rails.

(Metaphors are hard)

In every example of really egregious railroading I've seen or read about, I as a player would much prefer the GM simply breaking character for a second and going, "Hey, I really only have ___ prepared tonight. Is that okay?" And then I would either decide that __ is okay, and play along, or if it was really an absolute dealbreaker for some reason, I would excuse myself from the table.

 

[NN]

Two thoughts

1.

The problem isnt being put on the train.

The problem is not being allowed off the train.


2.
Railroads may not be fun because either failure isnt fun or failure inst allowed , so theres no real challenge.

What i mean is, desperately fleeing a sandbox near tpk is kinda fun while failing a railroad chapter is just miserable or meaningless.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I'm a big fan of sandbox play, but I sometimes make pretty linear adventures. Usually they are one-shots, but the one I'm currently working on is being introduced into a long campaign.

One thing I often do in such situations is straight up tell the players ahead of time that this one shot or next chapter is going to be pretty linear. That way they know to grab the obvious hooks and not look all around for alternative paths to their goals or activities to do, which I would normally highly encourage.