Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2747855" data-attributes="member: 18280">I think that most people define railroading as the DM taking decision-making power away from the players.&nbsp; To me, removing the results of decision-making is the same as removing the ability to make decisions.&nbsp; It doesn't matter whether those results are good or bad.To me, the player has chosen to make an attempt at something, with a fair degree of knowledge of his odds of success.&nbsp; The player desires to succeed, but his choice is not to succeed; it is to make an attempt.&nbsp; If you are allowing the player to choose to succeed, then there is no reason to fudge a die roll.&nbsp; There is, in fact, no reason to roll at all.In D&amp;D, dice are rolled to determine the outcome of events where what will happen is unknown.&nbsp; If you know, prior to rolling, that the character is going to succeed, then there is no reason to roll except to pretend that you didn't know the outcome.&nbsp; What you are doing is suggesting to the player that he is allowed to choose to place his character in jeopardy while you are, in fact, denying him that opportunity behind his back. Or, perhaps, you are fooling yourself.&nbsp; Maybe you think you don't know the outcome until the die hits the table in a way that you don't like.&nbsp; Either way, once you have decided to change the results you don't like, the outcome is no longer unknown.&nbsp; It is whatever you want it to be.Which is fine, if that's what you and your players want.&nbsp; Or, as I said before, &quot;The DM reserves the right to change your roll or the target number after the fact&quot; is a valid house rule. However, I doubt that very many people are that upfront about it with their players, or would accept the corollary &quot;The players reserve the right to change your roll or the target number after the fact&quot; house rule. Yet, if the purpose is to &quot;handle those bits ad hoc&quot; why not share the fun?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 2747855, member: 18280"] I think that most people define railroading as the DM taking decision-making power away from the players. To me, removing the results of decision-making is the same as removing the ability to make decisions. It doesn't matter whether those results are good or bad. To me, the player has chosen to make an attempt at something, with a fair degree of knowledge of his odds of success. The player desires to succeed, but his choice is not to succeed; it is to make an attempt. If you are allowing the player to choose to succeed, then there is no reason to fudge a die roll. There is, in fact, no reason to roll at all. In D&D, dice are rolled to determine the outcome of events where what will happen is unknown. If you know, prior to rolling, that the character is going to succeed, then there is no reason to roll [I]except to pretend that you didn't know the outcome[/I]. What you are doing is suggesting to the player that he is allowed to choose to place his character in jeopardy while you are, in fact, denying him that opportunity behind his back. Or, perhaps, you are fooling yourself. Maybe you think you don't know the outcome until the die hits the table in a way that you don't like. Either way, once you have decided to change the results you don't like, the outcome is no longer unknown. It is whatever you want it to be. Which is fine, if that's what you and your players want. Or, as I said before, "The DM reserves the right to change your roll or the target number after the fact" is a valid house rule. However, I doubt that very many people are that upfront about it with their players, or would accept the corollary "The players reserve the right to change your roll or the target number after the fact" house rule. Yet, if the purpose is to "handle those bits ad hoc" why not share the fun? [/QUOTE]

Verification