Search results

Unfavorable interpretations that make things weaker than they really should be are very common in the 5e community. The community overall is hypersensitive to anything that might be potentially overpowered, except for Wizard options, which may or may not get a pass.

I mean, I think there's a very clear reason why.

I would not, personally, call that a form of railroading--if the GM is open about their actions. "Guys, I understand you'd like to do that, but <explanation>". For example, let's say they want to destroy the Red Wizards of Thay. That's...a really, really big task. Even if the players fail...

Wait wait wait wait wait. So, now it's not, even remotely, about any form of agency at all--even though that's pretty consistently what everyone else uses the term for--and is instead solely and exclusively about GM caring about the content being undertaken or skipped? Absolutely the heck not...

"Railroading is the word for when a GM, through coercion or manipulation, enforces an inflexibly linear experience as part of GMing, that the players would not accept if they were aware of it, or do not accept if they are already aware of it." Also, if I may, a secondary point I've been trying...

Further, there is a critical difference between GM points being used, and the techniques (or lack thereof...) in D&D. That is, the manipulation is done openly. You openly spend your Doom Pool on things. You openly, without any pretense or concealment, draw on GM metacurrencies to achieve a...

Then let me ask simply: Why does "railroading", this single specific word, NEED to be both positive and negative? Why can't it just be negative, and we use the other, widely-used, widely-available, inherently neutral term "linear"? Why do you NEED this one specific word to be positive?

If it is a singular isolated case, perhaps it might not be railroading--but I see it as reflecting a general pattern of pretense. The GM is pretending that they allow the players to act with meaningful freedom, but in practice, they're functionally forbidding anything that doesn't suit their...

Some people like linear adventures. Not all linear adventures are railroads. The first group of people would be people who want a linear adventure and are not even attempting to exert their own choices, yes. The bolded part makes all the difference, imagine that. Except that that's not what...

Unfortunately, no, I do not. I fully agree with your examples and frequently bring that up in conversations about this. My usual, similar "this is obviously extreme" example is saying that a player "can" do something, and then forcing the player to make three nat-20 rolls in a row before it can...

It does not "very rarely" do that. At all. Because the evidence for that is already present in general. M:tG is not an RPG of any kind, nor does it have a GM. It's not a relevant point of comparison; railroading isn't possible because there simply isn't the type of structure required for...

Exactly. If @Celebrim would prefer it, think of "railroad" as meaning an on-rail public transit system, such as Chicago's "L" trains. Passengers do not get a choice about: when trains arrive. They appear when they appear. where a given train goes. It follows a planned route. where they...

And if those manipulations were seen or called out?

Is the threat not implicit? The railroading GM, sooner or later, applies the threat of being ejected from the game. I strongly suspect you're taking the piss, but just so we're clear, that's pretty much the definition of a qualitative standard.

What is the unit of measurement for quantity of railroading? For freedom possessed or denied? Because I was given to understand that unless you have a measurable unit, it isn't quantitative. Is that not the case?

If you have still lost your freedom, even if you don't realize it, is that not itself still a form of coercion? It's just coercion you don't know is happening.

I wouldn't say I'm quite at that level of improvisation. But I've done enough background prep that I can usually improvise at least a couple hours' worth of stuff. And then I can whip up a combat relatively quickly--perhaps a five, ten minute break--so that's not a huge burden. I do use fantasy...

I mean, the "con" in "con artist" means confidence trickster, as in, someone who abuses the confidence (=full trust) of another person. So, yes, by definition I would say such a person is being coercive. And, to put my cards on the table, I have an extremely negative view of the vast majority...

@Celebrim Is railroading always coercive?

It just seems to me like a very obvious elective choice, rather than an enforced one. Some rangers use magic. Others don't. There are plenty of woodsman-type characters in the fiction that inspires D&D who would look painfully silly being forced to do their thing through chanting words and...