How Much of a Railroader Are You?

[wayne62682]

I admit freely that I'm more towards the full railroad mentality. As a player I don't mind it - in fact, I'm usually the (only) one who makes a character that fully fits into the DM's plot, so he doesn't NEED to railroad me; it would be totally in character to go along with it.

IME though, players either don't care to know the theme/tone of the campaign so they can create appropriate characters, or they deliberately will go against the grain, so to speak, and create a character that's not appropriate. This, to me, is unacceptable. When I DM, as rare as it is, I try to give at least a hint at what my adventures will deal with so the PCs know what sort of characters would fit in and what wouldn't. If I'm going to spend my time crafting a plot, then I feel its disrespectful to deliberately try and derail it.

That being said, however, I must say in my defense that I view D&D as a story when all is said and done. I don't particularly care for open-ended campaigns that have no real storyline and are a series of random quests strung out; I prefer building on past adventures for a climax. In short, I prefer 24 (the TV series) to Law & Order; that is, related "episodes" rather than standalone episodes with the same main "cast".

 

[megamania]

Problem is, I don't consider the occasional prod, or even firm nudge, to be railroading. If the players have absolutely no choice in a matter, it's railroading. Anything else may be pressure, but it's not an RR.

Ditto.

Besides, it tests the DM's storytelling / plotting abilities.

 

[GwydapLlew]

Even though you want to tell a story, if you push the players into it, its railroading, even if it is to a less degree.

In your opinion. (you say that as if it is a bad thing.)

What you must remember, as a DM, is that the WORLD TURNS whether or not the players go along with the plot.

And as I said in my original response, in my group, that's understood. They come to play in the stories I create. Your group may play differently, but I'm not lecturing you on how to DM.

So: if you set it up that the players hear a name of a villian, and they don't got after him, that Villian is now not being stopped, and in my opinion, he's gaining levels too. Villians dont just remain the same level in which you created them. So, for every gaming day that the players dont go after him, give the bad guy the experience that he'd get if he were a player for doing what he's done. Then, obvious, once he get more powerful, make it so that the players hear more and more about this guy, then, hopefully someone will go "hey, don't we know him?" then the prob is , they partially created this monster by not handleing it earlier.

I'm quite aware of this technique and use it throughout my campaigns; how about addressing the OP instead of telling me how to run my table?

So, in short, what I'm saying is this. Let the players do what they want, and go on with your story. The only problem is, that since the players are taking themselves out of the niche, once they get back in, it might be rougher now, and people might find out that they could've stopped him earlier but forwhat ever reason, chose not to.

What part of 'my players know that they can range freely..." did you miss in my original reply? Read what was said, rather than jumping on me like a kid on a candy bar.

 

[RFisher]

I don't know. A few years ago I felt like I was heavily rail-roading the PCs & wasn't happy about that. Then I tried to stay as far away from anything that could remotely be considered rail-roading, but I don't think that worked either.

I'm still trying to figure it out.

 

[Wombat]

I tend to give 'em warnings ("in game" style) if they are taking on more than they can chew and remind them (both "in game" and "out of game") about time-sensitive issues they have chosen to take on. I also provide them with hooks for particular adventures, many of which are blithely ignored.

While I prod a bit, I don't limit their options and often have ended up improvising half or more of the night's adventure.

So be it!

 

[Goldmoon]

What my players dont realize is if they have to be somewhere to further the adventure, then they will get there. They may not know I made it that way is all. I try not to stress how importaint someplace ot thing is, I just ensure they they get there regardless of which road they choose. My players generally have very few choices, they just never know that. They believe they are free to go anywhere and do anything.

 

[Arashi Ravenblade]

I never Railroad. My sister has accussed me of being a bad DM when I let certain things happen (Instead of giving ample warning), which I happily reply that they are worse players. Take for example, I was running a game In FR where a priest from another world was trying to bring in cthulhu. He could also channel Cthulhu's Avatar. Well needless to say at level 8 they werent supposed to fight him. Instead my brother goes and attacks the guys temple in the middle of the Underdark, around thousands of people in a free Drow city I had made up. Disaster ensued and they blamed me. Hey not my fault you guys screwed up. They could have just let my brother take his whipping but no! They had to step in and all fight.

So I think not railroading walks a fine line between making you and your players happy but ticking them off too and you still being happy.

 

[Cyberhawk]

I hate RRing PCs. I'll give plenty of plot hooks and maybe nudges (politely referred to as "DM plot hammers") but in the end the players are free to do what they want.

Of course one time the PCs decided to go off in a totally different direction than I expected...causing a bit of panic on my part. :\

There is one exception: If I'm running a one-shot instead of an actual campaign then I make it very clear as to what the PCs are expected to do. In this case I don't mind as everyone knows and agrees to what's going on. I want them to assault the Pyramid of Horrible Tortures and they say "Sure!". (I try not to think about what that says about the sanity of my players)

 

[Psion]

I generally run my games very open, with multiple paths to success and tolerance for the possibility players will create their own paths.

But with one of my recent groups, I learned that they expected a bit of nudging their hand.

So I think often the group's style needs to be catered too, and a little plotting and hand-nudging isn't always a bad thing, depending on the group.

 

[Nyeshet]

If they are headed for disaster, I'll have a few signs or suggestions along the way to discourage them, but ultimately the players themselves choose their path. Should they insist upon a foolhardy stumble towards TPK . . . well, I *did* warn them.