Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Beginning of the End" data-source="post: 5413982" data-attributes="member: 55271">A couple quick points here:(1) If the players really want to go hat-shopping for four hours of playing time, I don't see any particular reason to stop them. Presumably they're intelligent enough to only do something if they actually want to be doing it.Of course, if they make a habit of spending all their time doing stuff that I, as a GM, have no interest in participating in, then it's probably time to have a frank conversation about what sort of game (a) I'm willing to run and (b) they're willing to play and see if we can find some sort of common ground.But in 20+ years of gaming, I've never had that happen. So worrying about it is a pretty low priority for me.(2) If the players are spending four hours of playing time hat-shopping and they really don't want to be doing that, then either (a) they think they're "supposed" to be doing that or (b) they're trying to accomplish something but they're going about it in the wrong way (or in a way which is incomprehensible to the GM).In the case of the former, the easiest solution is to remove the concept of "supposed to" from the equation. If they're not looking for railroad tracks to follow, then they won't waste time trying to figure out what they're "supposed" to be doing.In the case of the latter, the GM can either (a) resolve his incomprehension by asking "What are you trying to do?"; (b) use pacing to quickly resolve boring activities; or (c) both.For example, if the PCs are hat-shopping because they want to be seen in public so that the assassins can target them again and the DM doesn't understand why they're hat-shopping, the hat-shopping can drag on and on and on (for everybody involved). But if the GM asks, "What are you trying to do?" and they explain it to him, then the GM can:- Ask them how long they plan to keep at it.- Figure out how likely their plan is to succeed (if it is at all).- Rapidly resolve the situation.This use of pacing means that the table rarely/never gets bogged down in the boring stuff, because you can rapidly skip it.I had a good example of this at the game table last night: At one point we spent 20 minutes of playing time with the PCs carefully probing a door that they thought might be trapped. (Why? Because they were enjoying themselves.) At another point we spent literally 30 seconds speeding through two days of rest. (Why? Because nothing interesting happened.)When in doubt, ask them what they're trying to do and then resolve it in the most enjoyable way possible for the players involved (including yourself). "Most enjoyable" might be two hours of intense roleplaying; or it might be 15 seconds of saying "you poke around the bars at the waterfront, but nobody's heard anything about Fitzpatrick". (And both of those are potential resolutions for the same action.)Reread my post. That's not what I said. (In fact, I explicitly said exactly the opposite.)Here you seem to be saying "there is no railroading if any choice or variation possible". This is not useful, IMO.While there is value in understanding that there are degrees of railroading -- with the lightest degree being scenario selection ("you're going to the Caves of Chaos tonight") and the strictest being the GM essentially taking control of the PCs and playing them for the characters -- restricting "railroading" to only apply to the most extreme cases is to attempt to redefine the term in a way which is neither (a) useful, nor (b) reflective of actual usage.And here you're making the definition of "linear" so loose that you could accurately describe the West Marches sandbox as linear:The PCs are going to explore.The PCs are going to find something interesting.The PCs are going to explore it until they go back to town or die.Also not useful, IMO.</blockquote>

Verification