Search results

A railroad is not the DM forces everything. At that point that's just solo play, which is different. A railroad is just forcing the players down a path with nothing they can do to avoid it.

Sure it was. My definition was that the major difference was that you can exit every adventure path, but not railroads.. Not being able to get off right away doesn't mean you can't exit the path. You can't get off of any railroad. So your point is not at odds with my original statement...

Most of the time it does. Unless you're literally in an area with no quick exit like Undermountain, you will be able to just stop and/or go elsewhere.

The primary difference, though, is that you can get off a a linear path, but not a railroad.

Why would you direct him to my posts? Nothing there indicates that I use absolute authority for that sort of thing. Sending him to my posts is going to be misleading. What's more, I've never in my life demanded absolute authority when I DM D&D. You can't demand something that the game rules...

That's linear, but not a railroad. When I walk through a path in the woods, I usually opt to stay on it, even though I could step off any time I want. The DM there has asked nicely for the players to stick to the adventure, but it is not required. If the players agree and stay on the path...

I don't see it. It's dishonest, but not a deception. DM: You can leave any time you want. Players: Then we go up the stairs and leave. DM: A god shows up and bars your path. Players: Okay, then we go out of the window and leave. DM: A dragon flies down and opens its mouth. If you leave that...

You and Twosix both stated it straight out. Both of you said that if the DM and players are in agreement, it isn't(absolute statement) a railroad. That statement applies to all instances where DMs and players are in agreement, including traditional play. Then what you said was flat out wrong...

I would argue that the bolded are the same thing.

Not just deception. For it not to be railroading there has to be the option to walk off the tracks and go a different direction. If they are going down an adventure path and they decide to instead strike out west to search for gold in them thar hills, if the DM doesn't let them, it's a...

That seems like an example of normal railroading. Normal railroading is the DM forcing the players down a path regardless of what they choose to do. In this case throwing up an obstacle preventing them from leaving. Illusionism isn't brute force like that. Illusionism is for example...

I've already proven that to be untrue. You can't get off of a railroad. You can get off of an adventure path. An adventure path can be a railroad, but isn't inherently one. Think of an adventure path like walking down a path in the woods. Nothing is stopping you from stepping off the path...

Replace "this" with "a bluff." The sentence is really, "Unless a bluff is totally foreign to the area." For instance, don't try to build one in a sand desert where a bluff is likely to be totally foreign to the area. Or on a flat island. And since they were hex maps, there might not be one...

Yes. The farrier was always there. I just forgot to put him into place. The players reminded me when they asked, so I added him in where he wasn't in the fiction that I had already described. We've already said repeatedly that it's different for the DM to do something like that than the...

The player isn't authoring anything in that example. Gygax said to allow it unless a bluff like that isn't in the area. He's assuming that the PCs will be scouting the area for locations like that, and that if the area has bluffs, the PCs will find them. The DM, though, has to have already...

You seem to be under the misapprehension that I am trying to connect the two things. I'm not. Your statement that traditional play isn't railroading because the DM and players are on the same page just stood out to me, so I took the time to point it out. I mean, you and Twosix both said that...

The player didn't determine anything there. Nor did the PC. The DM establishing/setting/determining the reality is not unusual in a traditional game. It happens every time he creates an NPC, adventure, or whatever.

If reality isn't set, and then it becomes set, it has changed states. Your argument there is semantical and doesn't really change anything. It's still two different states of reality. Unset and set. Sure, but what does that have to do with the price of tea in a dungeon with undetermined/unset...

Not at all. It's nothing like combat. Nothing is undermined because it's all in the present. We determine attackers. We determine attacks. We determine damage. We determine victors. It's all consecutive. First, the context I'm talking about is undetermined in the past. Those runes have...

If I did leap off a cliff, you beat me there. The DM and players are on the same page in traditional play, therefore if what you and @TwoSix say is true it cannot inherently be railroading when you play traditional play. This is at odds with what you guys have been claiming for years, which is...