D&D General The Great Railroad Thread

[TwoSix]

It is not pure binary, but to be a player you really have to stay on the player side. Doing even a little "gming" changes the game and you can't play in a game your a co-gm of at all.

You really don't. Being a passive, receptive player compared to being a player with stronger authorial control (note: this is not a binary, it's a spectrum) are two different experiences; both are worth experiencing if you haven't tried one or the other.

 

[TwoSix]

Come on. Extrapolate that out to changing a preplanned encounter.

Player (the same rogue): "Instead of fighting through the dukes guards, I'm sneaking into the palace kitchen, bribing a servant and planting forged papers to frame the duke's advisor. I want to trigger a power struggle and get the guards called away."

DM: grins, flips through notes. "Alright, bit complicated, and I had a big battle prepped...but it looks like we're going full intrigue so we'll pivot. Roll Stealth and Persuasion against CR 12. If you succeed on both, the guards disperse." DM makes political fallout the new focus.

Yes. That's the way I'm generally advocating for.

And as soon as you do that, you've gone from "playing the module" to "using the module as a campaign seed." I'm much more positively inclined towards the latter.

Now, if the "political fallout" is just a detour, and the module goes right back to Chapter 2 after the fallout is handled, then I'm less happy again.

 

[kermit4karate]

Yes. That's the way I'm generally advocating for.

And as soon as you do that, you've gone from "playing the module" to "using the module as a campaign seed." I'm much more positively inclined towards the latter.

Now, if the "political fallout" is just a detour, and the module goes right back to Chapter 2 after the fallout is handled, then I'm less happy again.

I don't think things like this are uncommon. I do them every session whenever a player's good ideas prompt me to abandon my plans. Yes...I realize that "good ideas" are subjective, but that is just the way it goes. There's no way to eliminate subjectivity in these games. My job is to facilitate good drama because boredom means the death of fun, but if the players don't really need my help that's great. If a player is on a creative roll and people are jazzed about it I don't even hesitate to follow their lead. I also really, really think most DMs do it too.

 

[TwoSix]

I don't think things like this are uncommon. I do them every session whenever a player's good ideas prompt me to abandon my plans. Yes...I realize that "good ideas" are subjective, but that is just the way it goes. There's no way to eliminate subjectivity in these games. My job is to facilitate good drama because boredom means the death of fun, but if the players don't really need my help that's great. If a player is on a creative roll and people are jazzed about it I don't even hesitate to follow their lead. I also really, really think most DMs do it too.

Just to be clear, if you think I’m having a discussion around “most people don’t play good”, you’re misreading my posts.

My interest is purely in how we categorize and talk around different play styles. I have no interest in normative talk around “the right way to play”.

 

[kermit4karate]

In general, this is what the average RPG gamer thinks of when they hear "Railroading", the worst of the worst. Like where the players say "we head south" and the DM says "Nope, you head north, because I say so".


So what will you accept as proof? If you are given just one bit of evidence, will you change your mind completely?


It is not pure binary, but to be a player you really have to stay on the player side. Doing even a little "gming" changes the game and you can't play in a game your a co-gm of at all.

"co-gm" is a loaded term. "Colleague" and "partner" far more accurately reflect the GM-player relationship in a good game, IMO, which applies to most D&D games. We should stop entertaining edge case extremes that are fueling cyclical arguments. If we can't agree that most DMs run the game the "correct" way, the way it was intended, and that that way is through partnership and cooperation between DMs and players to make the game fun, then we aren't going to agree on anything.

And for proof? I think you know what that would be, but I don't think you'd be willing to provide it. A true random sampling of the userbase, not a convenience sampling like a poll here. Capture all of the major demos like new players, vets, tabletop, VTT, different regions. Ensure each group is proportionally representad and you aren't oversampling any one group. Use neutral wording. Don’t only survey users who want to give feedback but make sure you're also capturing less engaged users. Basic survey things.

If you do that with 500 or more people and it shows that most players feel like they're regularly railroaded by DMs in D&D, I promise I'll believe it.

 

[kermit4karate]

Just to be clear, if you think I’m having a discussion around “most people don’t play good”, you’re misreading my posts.

My interest is purely in how we categorize and talk around different play styles. I have no interest in normative talk around “the right way to play”.

Fair enough. Understood.

 

[bloodtide]

"co-gm" is a loaded term. "Colleague" and "partner" far more accurately reflect the GM-player relationship in a good game, IMO, which applies to most D&D games. We should stop entertaining edge case extremes that are fueling cyclical arguments. If we can't agree that most DMs run the game the "correct" way, the way it was intended, and that that way is through partnership and cooperation between DMs and players to make the game fun, then we aren't going to agree on anything.

If Partner DM makes people happy, that is fine. It does not change the actions.

And for proof? I think you know what that would be, but I don't think you'd be willing to provide it. A true random sampling of the userbase, not a convenience sampling like a poll here. Capture all of the major demos like new players, vets, tabletop, VTT, different regions. Ensure each group is proportionally representad and you aren't oversampling any one group. Use neutral wording. Don’t only survey users who want to give feedback but make sure you're also capturing less engaged users. Basic survey things.

If you do that with 500 or more people and it shows that most players feel like they're regularly railroaded by DMs in D&D, I promise I'll believe it.

Sounds like an impossible bar......oh well.

I don't think things like this are uncommon.

I don't think it is uncommon, can you post your evidence?

 

[kermit4karate]

If Partner DM makes people happy, that is fine. It does not change the actions.

Gee, thanks.

Sounds like an impossible bar......oh well.

Not impossible. But how much do you want to actually prove your point?

I don't think it is uncommon, can you post your evidence?

I'd rather not. That's why I said "I don't think it is uncommon" instead of "it is not."

 

[bloodtide]

Not impossible. But how much do you want to actually prove your point?

I'm not big on evidence and switching my thoughts every-time someone has evidence.

 

[TwoSix]

I'm not big on evidence and switching my thoughts every-time someone has evidence.

“I believe what I want, damn the evidence” doesn’t make one a very good debate partner.