Do Plot-Based Adventures Necessarily Involve 'Railroading'?

[Kahuna Burger]

Some people seem to have broadened the definition of "railroading" until it basicly means "having an idea of a plot" or even "being a dm". I choose to reject the overly broad definitions. Railroading to me is forcing players to have their characters pursue a specific course of action, by unrealisiticly truncating all other courses of action. A module with a plot does not require railroading if the DM is open to alternate ways of resolving the plot, on a micro or macro level.

Railroading, imo, indicates a lack of trust in your players to cooperate in creating a game. A DM who always has to have the PCs kidnapped, enslaved, blackmailed or otherwise railroaded into 'the adventure' is showing that he doesn't trust his players to take a reasonable plothook. A DM who only leaves one way to resolve a situation, arbitrarily stopping any other ideas from working, doesn't trust his players to work creativly within the rules. Sometimes this lack of trust is well founded - I see obstructionist players and railroading DMs as feeding off each other.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

By making the term railroading an all-inclusive term, you are effectively making it a useless statement.

this is an unfortunately common messageboard style of discussion, which I choose to name "obstructionist posting". Broaden the usage of a term until it's meaningless in order to claim it's a meaningless term. I'm not sure what the apeal is, but I see it a fair amount. :\

 

[ThirdWizard]

Some people seem to have broadened the definition of "railroading" until it basicly means "having an idea of a plot" or even "being a dm". I choose to reject the overly broad definitions.

Agreed. This is going to have to be a time when the answer just depends on whatever the person's definition of railroading is. I suppose one person's definition is not less valid than mine, but that doesn't mean I have to accept it. I've already given my basic definition, and I fear I'm not any more likely than Mark to change my mind.

So for me, you can have plots in games without railroading. The answer must be decided for each person individually based on what they think railroading is.

 

[S'mon]

What is everyone's opinion on using a flowchart of sorts for plot- or event- based adventures, like was suggested in the DMG and used (only) in Speaker In Dreams.

Y'know, treating decisions and events like corridors and rooms in a dungeon, for the DM's ease.

This 'Matrix' approach is one way to have a plot without railroad scenario, but it substitutes a rather limited, "gamebook" sort of approach for the railroad. Better, but not ideal. I think the best way to do this kind of thing is with lots of NPCs with motivations & agenda, and suggestions to the GM on how to use them - basically, no pre-written plot. I think pre-planned plots just aren't a very good idea in RPGs.

 

[S'mon]

Of course, there is. It's reactive but it is still a form of railroading (funneling, channeling, whatever name you use) since during any improvisation individual decisions are made what information to convey and thus, subtly or otherwise, how to guide the plot/game.

This is such a silly statement that I think you should withdraw it. Unless you were just trolling to get people riled up.

 

[Mark CMG]

this is an unfortunately common messageboard style of discussion, which I choose to name "obstructionist posting". Broaden the usage of a term until it's meaningless in order to claim it's a meaningless term. I'm not sure what the apeal is, but I see it a fair amount. :\

The fact of the matter is that there are degrees to how much influence any DM will allow in his game and it's different for each player how much influence they believe they should have. The term Railroading becomes meaningless on its own. We're saying the same thing, I'm just acknowledging that the term is useless and you're choosing to continue using while acknowledging it is essentially useless. Tagging me as "obstructionist" really just proves the point that derogetory terms like "Railroading" will often be used by some gamers who feel more secure when they can claim to be on the "correct" side of a line they know to be drawn in the sand.

 

[Mark CMG]

This is such a silly statement that I think you should withdraw it. Unless you were just trolling to get people riled up.

Oh, I wouldn't be so quick to call "troll" if I were you. It's just an observation drawn from 30+ years of interactive gameplay coupled with majoring in Speech and Performing Arts in school (with a focus in and out of school on comedy and improv), plus logging thousands of hours of post-college stage time. It is, afterall, an area in which I have some expertise and knowledge.

 

[Lobo Lurker]

Just thought I'd pipe up and say that I'm one of those players who *likes* being railroaded to a certain degree. If you stick me in an open-ended world w/out any pointers about what I should be doing, I'm lost. But at the same time, I don't like to be completely shut into a plot.

If the DM says that I'm in Dungeon X, of Country Y then that's fairly cool with me (unless I had something going on that the DM is ignoring).

 

[Steel_Wind]

basically, no pre-written plot. I think pre-planned plots just aren't a very good idea in RPGs.

Ahhhh. And there we come to it. The true divider among men when this issue arises.

Thanks for that. It helps set this debate in stark relief.

There are two basic clashes during all of the hundreds (yes, hundreds) of threads on this subject on ENWorld:

Clash #1: The Deep Divide The pre-planned and plotted adventure is The Ideal Form of Gaming vs. Improv Roleplaying is the One True Game.

This is a pretty stark fundamental divider among players and DMs alike. While most incorporate a bit of both in to their games, there are some improv players/DMs who insist that their form is the only way to game.

For this conflict - any pre-planned adventure is a Bad Way to Game.

Impact on terminology: "Railroading" is a term used in the pejorative to describe any DM style which uses a pre-planned adventure in any manner, no matter how artfully done or accomplished. I it's not about maximizing player choice - it's about the wrong thing.

Clash #2: Overt Control is Bad: This clash focuses not on pre-planned adventures are bad/ improv is good - but looks only at how the player perceives their game experience in play. Acts which resort to kidnapping or forcing the PCs to march at sword point to a location are the only acts which classify as "railroaded". Other more artful devices are excused.

This clash defines the debate not in tersm of pre-planned vs. improv, but in the nature and degree of the control device used in game.

Impact on terminology: "Railroad" in this discussion is used in the pejorative to imply an overt and highly objectionable way of controlling player choices in game.

From these two different clashes - you can see how a supporter of the artful and subtle control who is "anti-railroad" in clash #2 is "pro-railroad" when it comes to debating clash #1.

So no - it's not about defining terms to mean sily things and then calling the objection silly. It's about two discussions being carried on under one banner.

 

[ThirdWizard]

My point is that its possible to have "pointers" which I would just call adventure hooks without railroading. Railroading would be forcing you to take a plothook because that's what the DM wants to happen. I don't think its railroading to tell the players that there is a dungeon off to the west, that a local noble is paying for someone to investigate some strange occurances in the local temple of Pelor, and that there seems to be some kind of goblin threat in a small town to the south.

The PCs can take one of these hooks, or look for new ones. Limiting what is happening in the world around the PCs isn't railroading; it is simple logistics. An infinite number of things shouldn't be happening in the area. Now, if the PCs take some initiative and try to accomplish some goals, say, trying to find a rich merchant who they can gain favor with because one of the PCs wants to further some plans, then that's cool too. The DM decides if any nearby merchants (via Gather Information rolls) are hiring PCs. Then a whole new adventure can spawn off.

But, I wouldn't call it railroading because the DM didn't initially tell the PCs about the merchant from the get go. It is in fact not railroading! The DM has allowed the PCs to go off of the trail he initially had planned out. This is exactly what a railroading DM would not have done.

Now, it does get tricky. If the merchant wants the PCs to investigate the dungeion, is that railroading? I know what I think of it, but I'll leave that one unanswered for now.

EDIT: An interesting thought Steel_Wind. My excessive loading times made me miss that post just now. I definately fall into the second camp. Railroading, to me, is about taking away player choice.