Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MonkeyDragon" data-source="post: 4733885" data-attributes="member: 23929">I define railroading as one or both of the following:The players have no choices in their actions or how they deal with a situation.&nbsp; There is only one way to go, only one way to solve a situation, and only one plot to follow.&nbsp; Example: the one listed above with the forest on fire, etc.&nbsp; orThe players' actions have no impact on their surroundings.&nbsp; The same things are going to happen no matter what the characters do.&nbsp; The outcome of certain events are predetermined.&nbsp; There is no way to get an advantage in a situation by thinking creatively, or otherwise influence the environment.&nbsp; You can roll an outstanding diplomacy check, or say &quot;your mother!&quot; to the NPC, and they are going to react exactly the same way.The way I define railroading is universally negetive.&nbsp; Certain DMing techniques with moving encounters or keeping a plot moving by changing a roleplaying encounter to fit with the decisions players have made CAN turn into railroading, or be just plain clunky.&nbsp; They can also be done skillfully and seamlessly.&nbsp; I would say that it's not impossible to railroad someone unknowingly, but it's unlikely, because it hinges on the characters' ability to affect their environment.&nbsp; I do not think it's railroading to have an adventure and expect the PCs to go on said adventure.&nbsp; That's part of the social contract.&nbsp; If I write an adventure and there are hooks presented, and the party chooses not to take them, well, you're gonna be pretty bored sitting in town until I can come up with something you'll take the hook for.&nbsp; I'm not going to force you to take it, but I expect you to recognize that this is where the story is, it would behoove you to go there, unless you actually have a reason not to do so.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MonkeyDragon, post: 4733885, member: 23929"] I define railroading as one or both of the following: The players have no choices in their actions or how they deal with a situation. There is only one way to go, only one way to solve a situation, and only one plot to follow. Example: the one listed above with the forest on fire, etc. or The players' actions have no impact on their surroundings. The same things are going to happen no matter what the characters do. The outcome of certain events are predetermined. There is no way to get an advantage in a situation by thinking creatively, or otherwise influence the environment. You can roll an outstanding diplomacy check, or say "your mother!" to the NPC, and they are going to react exactly the same way. The way I define railroading is universally negetive. Certain DMing techniques with moving encounters or keeping a plot moving by changing a roleplaying encounter to fit with the decisions players have made CAN turn into railroading, or be just plain clunky. They can also be done skillfully and seamlessly. I would say that it's not impossible to railroad someone unknowingly, but it's unlikely, because it hinges on the characters' ability to affect their environment. I do not think it's railroading to have an adventure and expect the PCs to go on said adventure. That's part of the social contract. If I write an adventure and there are hooks presented, and the party chooses not to take them, well, you're gonna be pretty bored sitting in town until I can come up with something you'll take the hook for. I'm not going to force you to take it, but I expect you to recognize that this is where the story is, it would behoove you to go there, unless you actually have a reason not to do so. [/QUOTE]

Verification