NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 6819473" data-attributes="member: 23751">Seriously?  You're claiming that that there are no bad DMs out there that railroad in those systems?  Somehow only other systems have those sorts of DMs?How would it work?  Well, it doesn't have to happen on every check, so player successes are irrelevant.  If the DM inserts his desires into failed checks to drive the game down paths he wants them down, railroading has occurred.  If you seriously can't see that railroading can happen in those systems, then you're too blind to continue having this conversation with.Are you that blind, or are you just being disingenuous with those questions?This is a lot of nothing.  Pre-authored content doesn't constrain the DM any more than a PC being an elf constrains him.  Such light "constraint" is irrelevant and meaningless.  It's still easier to railroad with your system.  Unless the players can't fail rolls anyway.  If they can, the DM can push them wherever he wants, however he wants with nothing and no one to say otherwise, except of course for you guys have pre-authored already through prior game play.  Pre-authorship helps prevent railroading.Your system allows that and makes it easier due to lack of pre-authored content.  Funny.  I run sandbox games and story is reliably generated all the time.  People claiming otherwise just can't run a proper sandbox game and/or don't have players that are up to playing in a sandbox game.  It's not a playstyle for everyone and those that are hyper critical of it are very likely incapable of playing it properly.  They're trying to drive a stick shift without knowing how and blaming failure on the car.Neither "implication" is true.  That's just another of your False Dichotomies.  Just because the PCs can go in any direction, does not mean that exploration and discovery rule out over story, or story is lacking.  I run a sandbox.  Story is huge.  Railroading is non-existent.  I am proof of the falseness of that claim.More likely, they were incapable of running a sandbox properly and the failure of story without railroad was their personal problem.Have you changed the definition of Fail Forward again?  Last I heard, it was 1) not allowing failure to stop the PCs dead in their tracks by having other options, and 2) Success with a cost when they roll a failure.  Neither of those definitions has anything to do with railroading, and neither of them don't work very well in a pre-authored setting.So railroading is good?  Or are you saying that DM forcing his idea on the player and moving towards that goal at every opportunity isn't railroading?The possibility or the fact?  My example wasn't of a possibility, it was of a fact that the DM pre-authored and forced to happen.Then you guys are for pre-authorship, because that's what you are doing when you do that.  The DM knows.  That's the point.  He knew from the beginning before any actions were declared and resolved and then deliberately forced the resolution to that goal.  That's railroading.Unless you decided that you knew from the beginning and forced the issue.  That's the point.  I'm not saying that YOU railroad.  I'm saying that without pre-authorship, it's exceedingly easy to railroad in your system.  Easier even than in a pre-authored world.Unilateral?  Players and DMs pick campaign worlds together all the time.  Even if the DM picked it unilaterally, the players consent merely by agreeing to play in that world.  No consent = no play.  That makes the pre-authored content consensual.Actually, I do.  I just don't use it for everything.  There are times when it's appropriate.  That is also what I aid in the Mt. Pudding discussion.  Now, if I wanted, I could use it for everything and still pre-author without railroading.  How?  Because fail forward has nothing to do with those two things.  There is no connection between those ideas.You aren't understanding.  Unless everything you guys do has no bearing on the future, or it does.  If it does, then everything you author in the moment becomes pre-authored content a few seconds later as it was authored pre-that time.  You use that pre-authored content for your games.But it DOES exist in advance.  It exists in advance of everything that comes after it.  There is zero difference between my pre-authoring a dark elf antagonist at the beginning to appear at the water hole, and you authoring it in the moment of the water hole.  Both are a dark elf antagonist, and both are pre-authored for every single second after it appears at the water hole.  That you didn't know before hand is irrelevant to game play.  Game play is going to act on the dark elf being a pre-authored antagonist for both playstyles.You say that, but you really haven't given any real reason for it other than you like it that way, and incorrect perceptions of pre-authorship and sandbox play.Since I can use fail forward in a sandbox, pre-authored setting with 0 difficulties and to great effect and with no railroad and with great story, you're going to have to prove that statement with something other than just claims.And this just illustrates your ignorance of pre-authoring.  If the game pre-authors angel feathers by saying that, "Angel feathers have great holy power.", that isn't an exhaustive list.  Nor does it prevent exceptions from happening.  I am fully capable, without changing anything, of deciding an angel feather is cursed.  Nothing about that pre-authorship keeps that from happening.  Pre-authored settings don't give exhaustive lists of every possible property of things.</blockquote>

Verification