Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5096893" data-attributes="member: 22779">The problem is, as TheShaman and SkyOdin point out, is that we have no idea if black and white is how things are presented to the players.  If the DM is expecting "moral choice" and the players are thinking, "Well, the DM gave us the orders, we belong to this group that says X is what we're supposed to do" why should they be punished for doing what the DM told them to do?That's why I say you're railroading in this case.  You've decided what outcome you want the players to follow and punish them if they don't follow that outcome.  Isn't that pretty much a textbook definition of rail roading?Or, to put it another way, how is your way any less black and white?  You have decided that under no circumstances should they have turned over the girl.  That their actions are wrong, full stop, and they should be punished for taking them.If you want to run moral ambiguities in a game, it needs to be very strongly framed and the players have to know in no uncertain terms, that whatever choice they make will be the "right" one, but that either choice will carry consequences that are equally good or bad.If you set it up that Choice A gets you smacked like a pinata, and Choice B rewards you with flowers and candy, then the players will choose B EVERY time.  Why wouldn't they?  The problem here is that the OP and you have decided that one choice was the "right" choice and then want to punish the players for not making that choice.</blockquote>

Verification