Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mort" data-source="post: 5587117" data-attributes="member: 762">So anything the DM initiates that will negatively impact the PCs is a railroad? really? I'm not even sure what to say to that.DM: the dragon is attacking the town your staying in! what do you do?Player: Oh my god! A dragon? How can you do that, my character might die - I'm being railroaded into action - can't I just sit here and drink my ale?Or let's pull that back.DM: the dragon breathes on the wagon - you can save the gold (enough to set you up for life) or the peasant - which is it?Doing either has negative consequences for the player (staying poor vs. passively letting someone die) it's mean but it's not railroading.Can they joing the dragon armies? Can they move continents? Do they have multiple options ind dealing with the invading armies (rally the nobles, rally the peasants, confront the threat directly, sneak behind enemy lines etc.) If the players have choices and options, if the end result is not set - it's not railroading.How they deal with the threat is a choice, or if the PCs have the option of ignoring the threat -that is a choice. If the PCs have meaningful options and meaningful choices - it's not a railroad. If the DM has set up a world shattering event, as long as the PCs have meaningful options it's not a railroad. If the players are just simply not enthused with the "world shattering event" and dislike the whole concept - well they need to talk to the DM.Are we back to negative impact/consequence = railroading? Sometimes the player making a choice that negatively impacts their character is the most fun/rewarding choice for the player! Not all choices should be reward or bigger reward, sometimes character growth is initiated by choices that the player knows are suboptimal but feels it's the choice the character would make.</blockquote>

Verification