Scott Christian
Hero
Note: We are using the term "railroading" to mean limiting or denying player choice.
I am not here to discuss whether railroading is good or bad. I believe some tables enjoy the train ride and others don't. A group has one option to get to the volcano, two options, infinite options, or none. Some players prefer none until their characters are high enough level. Other players prefer one option, so they know they are doing the right thing. Other players prefer two options, that old illusion of choice, because it makes the setting and strategy part more interesting. Other players prefer the infinite options story, wanting to feel they are the ones steering the cart. All of these options are viable to some table out there. And that is a good thing.
My claim is a bit more abstract than those concrete examples. I believe that the impromptu DM increases the rate of railroading, as opposed to the DM who preps and preps and preps.
Let's start with the preparation style DM. The old stereotype of the railroading DM has bled into "It's the DM's world. They have been working on it for years. They are God!" And the two couldn't be further apart. Here are two examples: A DM that has spent five years making a detailed setting. They have hundreds of NPCs, detailed settings, designed political and trade institutions, created a magic system that works within their setting, etc. Or a DM that has spent time reading pre-made lore, reading the adventure path, doing a lot of work on the adventure path to expand it to better suit their players, etc. These DMs often feel bound by the rules and structures they put into place because it acts as a bridge to their setting and the logic that binds it together. This frees the DM to allow the players to make their own decisions. If the DM knows the setting and NPCs well enough, they can keep their internal logic of setting as the players move about freely. In effect, these DMs are reacting to player choices using pre-made options that already align with their setting's logic. This means the players have freedom of choice because the DM is forced to give them choice based on their own setting's logic.
Compare this to the DM that is almost all impromptu. They are making a large majority of it up on the spot. They are reacting to player choices by whatever they make up in their head at that given moment. For the impromptu DM, most reactions are being manufactured in real-time. Because they are inventing the reality as it happens, they are the ultimate choke point of choice. In a philosophical world, that means the DM is arbitrating more control over the player choices than someone using a design that already includes choices - choices forced to be given because of a setting's pre-established logic.
And again, I say this for clarity. This is not to diminish one person's fun, nor is it to say one side plays right, the other side plays wrong. I think I was very clear that all styles are great, it just depends on the players at the table.
Summary: My claim is: extensive preparation minimizes railroading because pre-established setting logic forces the DM to naturally accommodate and react to player choices. Conversely, purely impromptu DMing inherently increases railroading because the DM must rely on the immediate, singular ideas in their head to react to the players, subconsciously exerting more control over the narrative path.
I am not here to discuss whether railroading is good or bad. I believe some tables enjoy the train ride and others don't. A group has one option to get to the volcano, two options, infinite options, or none. Some players prefer none until their characters are high enough level. Other players prefer one option, so they know they are doing the right thing. Other players prefer two options, that old illusion of choice, because it makes the setting and strategy part more interesting. Other players prefer the infinite options story, wanting to feel they are the ones steering the cart. All of these options are viable to some table out there. And that is a good thing.
My claim is a bit more abstract than those concrete examples. I believe that the impromptu DM increases the rate of railroading, as opposed to the DM who preps and preps and preps.
Let's start with the preparation style DM. The old stereotype of the railroading DM has bled into "It's the DM's world. They have been working on it for years. They are God!" And the two couldn't be further apart. Here are two examples: A DM that has spent five years making a detailed setting. They have hundreds of NPCs, detailed settings, designed political and trade institutions, created a magic system that works within their setting, etc. Or a DM that has spent time reading pre-made lore, reading the adventure path, doing a lot of work on the adventure path to expand it to better suit their players, etc. These DMs often feel bound by the rules and structures they put into place because it acts as a bridge to their setting and the logic that binds it together. This frees the DM to allow the players to make their own decisions. If the DM knows the setting and NPCs well enough, they can keep their internal logic of setting as the players move about freely. In effect, these DMs are reacting to player choices using pre-made options that already align with their setting's logic. This means the players have freedom of choice because the DM is forced to give them choice based on their own setting's logic.
Compare this to the DM that is almost all impromptu. They are making a large majority of it up on the spot. They are reacting to player choices by whatever they make up in their head at that given moment. For the impromptu DM, most reactions are being manufactured in real-time. Because they are inventing the reality as it happens, they are the ultimate choke point of choice. In a philosophical world, that means the DM is arbitrating more control over the player choices than someone using a design that already includes choices - choices forced to be given because of a setting's pre-established logic.
And again, I say this for clarity. This is not to diminish one person's fun, nor is it to say one side plays right, the other side plays wrong. I think I was very clear that all styles are great, it just depends on the players at the table.
Summary: My claim is: extensive preparation minimizes railroading because pre-established setting logic forces the DM to naturally accommodate and react to player choices. Conversely, purely impromptu DMing inherently increases railroading because the DM must rely on the immediate, singular ideas in their head to react to the players, subconsciously exerting more control over the narrative path.
