Do Plot-Based Adventures Necessarily Involve 'Railroading'?

[Akrasia]

I know, I know, we're never going to get a good definition for railroading.

I'm still sticking with "Making decisions for the player that they wanted to make themselves." So it's not railroading if they wanted to do it (or went along with it), nor if it's just putting them in a situation then letting them decide how to deal with it.

I like that definition.

The most planning that I can do for a long-term campaign is come up with a general series of events that will unfold in the world, and a set of organizations (cabals, churches, nobles, etc.) that will interact in various ways.

Beyond that, though, the actual progress of the campaign is determined by the players' actions. I suppose individual sessions will be 'linear' -- but that is because I've planned them on the basis of what the players decided during the previous session.

 

[Akrasia]

... DM: "You pump the bartender for information and he tells you about a red dragon's lair to the west."
Player: "Too risky. We go to hear rumors somewhere else."
DM: "A man offers to hire you to clean out a red dragon's lair for him."
Player: "We say `no, thank you' and leave for the next village."
DM: "On the way to the village you stumble onto a red dragon's lair..."

I think I had a DM like that for one session about 20 years ago. If I recall correctly, the PCs all decided to commit suicide in order to thwart the DM's goals. We were so immature ...

 

[CarlZog]

I railroad pretty hardcore, but the players desire it. They want to be told a story about the characters they create, they want to have a chain of events happen in the world, they don't just want to explore a site. They want to be motivated, and it's my job as DM to motivate them.

Not unlike people in real life. Lots of people crave being part of "something bigger", and take great pleasure and enjoyment from being swept in worldly events. I think, in many ways, that's the very heart of adventure.

It's perfectly possible to run a plot based game without railroading. The "plot" consists of what will happen without the PCs doing anything. The actual gameplay consists of what the PCs do to change this "plot" into something else. The DM has to know the NPCs extremely well and he has to have good improvational skills.

I strongly agree with this. And to me the peak of good DMing in this vein is when the world really is continuing to evolve around the characters regardless of their involvement. If the Princess has been kidnapped by the Dragon, and the characters instead choose to go fight the pirates raiding the coast, the princess may die. If she does, the distraught king may end up focusing all his resources on destroying the beast that killed his daughter, and as a result the pirates are running wild.

In a truly dynamic game world, even choosing not to pursue some particular adventure can end up being a very significant choice. This takes a lot of work on the part of the DM, but if you're up to it, your players will become deeply invested in their characters' world, and as the DM you'll come to see your world as a fluid pool whose tides and currents eventually seem to occur on their own -- with you merely observing and taking notes. When you reach the point where you're that in touch with all the grand and petty events happening each day in your world, it's pretty awesome.

More to the point most of the best GMs I know railroad, but are really good at disguising the linearity of their games. Running a completely free campaign is very difficult and I know only couple of GMs that can do it.

I'm a DM who has ALWAYS aspired to be in the latter group, and I think there's been a couple times where I've really gotten there. However, all my experience has been in running long campaigns suited to that style.

Recently, I've started learning how to run one-shots and convention games -- an entirely different beast from running long-term campaigns, I'm discovering. A certain degree of railroading, linearity, and fairly set plotlines are mandatory for success in this tightly timed style of play. Here creating excitement within the story is more important than how much the players influence where the story ends up going -- but the players need to feel as though the conclusion could not have been reached without them. In this arena, I think Coyote's right about disguising the linearity of the game. By the way, I have to say that adjusting to this style of play has been a huge challenge for me, but I'm enjoying learning it.

Carl