Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6883704" data-attributes="member: 4937">I'm going to break in right the because what you are trying to argue here is, "Because some DM in another situation was a bad DM that used inappropriate railroading techniques that weren't fun, then I'm justified in using railroading techniques in another situation."And I can fully agree with you that what you describe is poor DMing, and fully agree with you that Adamantium Wall techniques can be misused to force PC's into that one scene or one solution that you want them to find at the expense of creativity and fun, without agreeing with the conclusion that your story in anyway justifies the sort of campaign defining Schrodinger's Map/Plot techniques you are describing.  One doesn't follow from the other.All your story proves is that if the players come up with a plan that has a reasonable chance of succeeding, you should let them try it and give them a reasonable chance of success.No, what the DM is doing is called Illusionism.  That is to say, the predicate for this technique is almost always deceiving the players.  If the DM says, "You know what.  You guys are searching in all the wrong areas.  But that outrageous speculation sounds like a great idea and it will get the game back on track, so lets just go with that as being the right answer.", then what you describe as "seeing an expression on the players' faces when they guess something so outrageous that it couldn't be true and then actually having that be true is amazing" probably won't happen.   That expression on the players' faces is pretty much dependent on the players believing that the creative thought that they've had about what is true was in fact true all along, and that they've figured it out.  If they know that regardless of how they putz around, sooner or later the DM will take up one of their creative ideas and make it true, then this creates a completely different experience. There faces will more like be expressing things like, "I guess the DM thinks I'm too stupid to solve this problem with my own resources.", or "I guess my DM is unable to think of an interesting mystery to solve.", or "Boy wasn't this last six hours a waste of time. All that frustration and there never was a real answer in the first place.", or "All aboard!! Choo! Choo!", or, "You know. If I'm the one with the good ideas and doing all the work here, maybe I should be the DM?"  Which is why DMs generally aren't up front with the players about how they plan to run the campaign.  As you said, "I know my group didn't even realize that their "guess" was something I just went along with."The predicate of this technique is deceiving your players.  That's a really dangerous thing to get addicted to, and in the case of players that don't deceive easily, that can be a campaign wrecker.   I'd never advise deceiving the players, fudging, and illusionism as a first order solution to a DMing or story telling problem.   You can occasionally use it in small doses for very specific purposes, but I think it is a very bad idea to get in the habit of your game relying on those techniques in order to work.Yeah, you are bloody well right its not the same.  But it would probably be better to actually tell them than to lie to them and have them find out later.That's not even remotely equivalent.  The technique you are talking about is equivalent to other acts of illusionism, fudging, and deceiving the players.   They are very powerful techniques that can be used to solve all sorts of problems.   But if your whole game or you whole plot or your whole combat depends on some act of illusionism, "The monsters hit points run out always just before the PC's do.", "The solution to the plot is the most creative solution that the players have come up with before the players get bored trying to solve the problem.", "The treasure is always in the last room the players search.", and so forth, then IMO you are misusing your tool chest as a GM.   Illusionism should usually be limited to things like, "I'm going to select a magic item the party needs rather than roll randomly for one, because otherwise the puzzle might be unsolvable." or "I'm going to select a wandering monster/choose not to have a wandering monster, to avoid redundant results or keep up the pace of play."   In general, if you ever feel uncomfortable sharing with your players that you used Illusionism then you probably should have second thoughts about it.</blockquote>

Verification