D&D General The Great Railroad Thread

Campbell said:

When I have watched Critical Role or Adventure Zone the players seem very passive by my standards and seem to be reading the GM for what they should do next. There's nothing wrong with that, but it does not appeal to me outside of convention play.

Click to expand...

It's a long time since I've been to a convention (that was also "back in the day"), but the best convention games I played allowed the players to inject a judgement or opinion about resolution at the moment of crisis.

I think there's an important distinction between that sort of set-up and a "storytime" set-up, that I don't see discussed very often.

kermit4karate said:

If we can't agree that most DMs run the game the "correct" way, the way it was intended, and that that way is through partnership and cooperation between DMs and players to make the game fun, then we aren't going to agree on anything.

Click to expand...

I know know it is in quotes, but I think there are multiple correct ways to play the game, albeit i think DnD does have a default in terms of being DM driven, and only a few incorrect.

I agree that there are few bad DMs.

Ultimately, I think there are 3 general scenarios:

1. The DM and players are in alignment on how want to play, whether DM driven or more player authored, whether sandbox or adventure path, whether middle ages or modern, whether races limited or not
When all in agreement and play goes as agreed, everyone happy, outside of potential capability shortfalls of participants.
2. DM and players arent in agreement - something has to give, and I tend to favour it being the players having to give ultimately if they want DM to run game, as DM running game. Ultimately if no compromise or giving in as such possible, then game can't continue.
3. DM and players are nominally in agreement, but in play not. E.g. DM says will be sandbox and players can choose to do what they want, but in practice DM keeps saying no. Or player says they are eager to play a pirate based game, but then keeps trying to push to go inland to set up camp near a mountain or the like. This is where I think incorrect play comes about, as a participant is not being true to what agreed to.
And ultimately I think 3 is rare, or at least I hope so

kermit4karate said:

Do you promise you're being 100% sincere right now?

Click to expand...

Mod Note:

"I will not believe you unless you pinkie swear on your mother's grave," is incredibly insulting.

And it isn't like their swearing means anything unless you trust them in the first place, which you obviously don't.

Believe them, or not. If you don't trust them to be sincere, try this thing we call disengaging - it works wonders.

kermit4karate said:

I'm fine continuing this discussion if we can move past repeating earlier points. From what I've seen, railroading in D&D is rare and doesn't constitute a systemic problem. If you have data that could move the discussion beyond anecdotes, I'd love to see it.

Click to expand...

If you have proof that it is essentially ignorable, I'd love to see it.

Otherwise, requests for "proof" are irrelevant, time-wasting, and an effort to conquer the discussion through "you didn't jump through the hurdles I invented, therefore I win".

Campbell said:

My experience from playing in other GMs games and what I hear from most people in my circles and see online are that most people play in fairly linear games. I also have experienced that a lot of players assume the GM is supposed to provide them with a story/adventure and have trouble coming up with firm motivations for their characters. This isn't really D&D specific - it's pretty much hobby wide outside of a few subcultures.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

pemerton said:

I would add to this - at least back in the day (many days ago!), I found that when players (especially new players) did try to come up with motivations for their PCs, the GMs would tend to ignore them, or run roughshod over them. At worst, those sorts of players were characterised as "problem players" because they did not just expect the GM to provide a story/adventure that they would follow.

Click to expand...

Agree with this too.

The classic player horror story here is the silly revenge background. Five players get together to play a group game, and the DM has an adventure ready. Then Problem Player says "my family was killed by orc Bob, I must go and find and kill orc Bob!". And this player will refuse to do anything else and even try disrupt or ruin the game so they can say "Ok, now can I go kill orc Bob?"

XI. I have a cool adventure prepared. There is a cave of goblins north of Fantasyville. I will try to get the players to talk to Mr. Wizard who will inform them of the caves existence and give then the hook. But the players decide to not meet Mr. Wizard. Nobody in the world will interact with them anymore until they meet Mr. Wizard. They still dont want to, so I have angels descend from the Heavens to tell them to go to Mr.Wizard or die. They do so. We follow my original outline from there on.


This is the classic. The DM has the adventure ready to go, all the players have to do is start the adventure.

Disclaimer-Our example players here have agreed to just go on "any adventure" and don't really care about the details.

Of course, the players don't know the wizard is the key to starting the adventure. And a lot of players will just aimless wander around a game world if they are given the freedom to do so. There is a reason such "video games" are popular. Some players can have fun for endless hours just doing almost nothing.

Though a lot of players don't like playing an action adventure type RPG, and then just doing effectively nothing for hours. The players might have some semblance of fun chasing a stray cat for an hour, but will really feel that hour is just wasted.

Not only does the DM get frustrated, but the worse to come is the players will unfairly blame it all on the DM. The players that outright refused to leave town or take the DMs adventure hook, will 100% point all the blame on the DM. Very few players will take any sort of responsibility for their actions. The players refused to play the game, and everyone had a boring, waste of time. And it will all be put on the DM, as the DMs fault

Any idea of "corporation" or "group storytelling" or anything "shared", will go right out the window and the players will just say the person is a "bad DM".

Not wanting this label, and wanting to have a fun game, many DMs turn to Railroading to get it done.

----
The first flaw in the above is : Don't do the Open Sandbox. It is typical for DMs to let the players "play in the samdbox", that is aimlessly wander around and do basically nothing. The PCs might drink at a bar, or go shopping or other such mundane, non adventure worthy things. Don't do it. Unless you want to DM in the sandbox, don't open it. Even for a few minutes. If you want to let the PCs do something like prepare, like going shopping, do it as a Downtime Activity. Player to DM, with no character role playing.

Second, if you do want to do a bit of pre adventure gaming: Never make the start of the adventure in any way depend on the players doing something. After all, there is always a chance they won't. In the above example, simply having the wizard come and find the PCs works. Good bait also works wonders, give the PCs a good or great reason to go visit the wizard.

Third, is just like clues, you should always have at least three hooks. You want The Wizard, The Mayor and The Goblin...at a minimum. So, no matter what the PCs do, they will encounter at least one of them and get the hook. And each hook can make a bit of a different adventure.

Fourth, in a general sense, it is better to have the PCs be part of the world. Have them join groups, organizations, religions or secret societies. A living world should be full of them. And the best thing as the PC can always meet a contact or be given the adventure as a mission for the group.

All, of the above are better then the Bad Railroading.....

bloodtide said:

XI. I have a cool adventure prepared. There is a cave of goblins north of Fantasyville. I will try to get the players to talk to Mr. Wizard who will inform them of the caves existence and give then the hook. But the players decide to not meet Mr. Wizard. Nobody in the world will interact with them anymore until they meet Mr. Wizard. They still dont want to, so I have angels descend from the Heavens to tell them to go to Mr.Wizard or die. They do so. We follow my original outline from there on.

Click to expand...

No one is doing this. I mean, maybe there is some 13-year-old new DM who is, or some cantankerous old DM who has never played another way is, but no experienced DM running a campaign right now is doing this. It is a made-up argument.

Just look at all the evidence: tens of thousands of hours of video on YouTube where the DMs do not do this. Convention halls, giant convention halls and small convention halls, with thousands of players and DMs - they don't do this. Thousands of hobby stores that play D&D weekly are not doing this. None of the books tell you to do this. None of the informative videos tell you to do this. None of the ungodly amount of forum websites tell you to do this. None of the interviews with the designers of the game tell you to do this.

It does not exist except in some isolated, small, screwed-up pocket.

The point is, there is no need to refute this demon of a scenario, because it doesn't exist.

Scott Christian said:

It does not exist except in some isolated, small, screwed-up pocket.

The point is, there is no need to refute this demon of a scenario, because it doesn't exist.

Click to expand...

Pulling out degenerate cases is a popular habit when attempting to attack some other approach or position, and its not surprising coming from that poster.

bloodtide said:

XI. I have a cool adventure prepared. There is a cave of goblins north of Fantasyville. I will try to get the players to talk to Mr. Wizard who will inform them of the caves existence and give then the hook. But the players decide to not meet Mr. Wizard. Nobody in the world will interact with them anymore until they meet Mr. Wizard. They still dont want to, so I have angels descend from the Heavens to tell them to go to Mr.Wizard or die. They do so. We follow my original outline from there on.


This is the classic. The DM has the adventure ready to go, all the players have to do is start the adventure.

Disclaimer-Our example players here have agreed to just go on "any adventure" and don't really care about the details.

Click to expand...

Why not just start the session with the PCs at the home of the wizard? Or even have them start at or near the entrance to the caves, and tell them what they've been told (perhaps by a wizard!) about what's in the caves.

bloodtide said:

Of course, the players don't know the wizard is the key to starting the adventure. And a lot of players will just aimless wander around a game world if they are given the freedom to do so. There is a reason such "video games" are popular. Some players can have fun for endless hours just doing almost nothing.

Though a lot of players don't like playing an action adventure type RPG, and then just doing effectively nothing for hours. The players might have some semblance of fun chasing a stray cat for an hour, but will really feel that hour is just wasted.

<snip>

if you do want to do a bit of pre adventure gaming: Never make the start of the adventure in any way depend on the players doing something. After all, there is always a chance they won't. In the above example, simply having the wizard come and find the PCs works.

Click to expand...

Yes, having "quest-givers" turn up and recruit the PCs as they sit in a tavern is pretty traditional!

pemerton said:

Why not just start the session with the PCs at the home of the wizard? Or even have them start at or near the entrance to the caves, and tell them what they've been told (perhaps by a wizard!) about what's in the caves.

Click to expand...

Sure, I would do that and often do. Though I would guess more then one person would say that is Railroading!

pemerton said:

Yes, having "quest-givers" turn up and recruit the PCs as they sit in a tavern is pretty traditional!

Click to expand...

Very much so!