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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dr Simon" data-source="post: 2966704" data-attributes="member: 21938">Well, perhaps a better expression for a benevolent form of 'railroading' ought to be 'shepherding' or some such, where the DM provides choices for the players, but with no obligation for them to follow the hooks (to avoid the non/open-GM syndrome).  Some options may perhaps be more weighted than others - to give a heavy-handed version perhaps the local lord requests that the PCs go and do some dirty job for him and hints that jail might result from disobedience.#1In the game of a shepherd DM, the players could tell the local lord to stick his 'offer' and try to hack their way out of town.  Their subsequent outlaw status and the consequences of such would be an interesting route for the campaign to go in.#2A rail-road DM would stack the opposing forces, fudge dice rolls or simply not allow the players to refuse the lord - 'Obviously you all agree to take his offer'.A player such as we meet in Happyelf's argument may perceive the scenario to be rail-roading, but unless they test the situation (or know the DM well enought to guess which of #1 or #2 it will be), such a heavy-handed choice does not necessarily have to be rail-roading, per se. Sure, the DM is presenting the PCs with only a narrow range of choices, but does this mean they are rail-roading if it turns out that any of the choices are valid?  And is that not more realistic anyway, as others have pointed out?  A fantasy world where player characters have unlimited freedom and no responsibilities - for me, that lacks any sort of dramatic tension or interest, and you may as well just hack your way through the Monster Manual.</blockquote>

Verification