D&D General The Great Railroad Thread

[bloodtide]

My observation is that there is a widespread preference (though not universal - see eg @TwoSix above!) to start play in a low stakes environment - like a tavern or the city gates in D&D, or a starport in Traveller - and then have a situation with actual stakes emerge "organically" from there, by way of player action declarations for the PCs.

I agree. As it is common in modern fiction, people see it and focus on it.

I'm not 100% sure of the origins of this preference within RPGing, given that it is not what Moldvay recommends (he recommends starting at the dungeon entrance) nor what Gygax describes in his DMG (which, again, has the PCs starting at the dungeon site). To me it seems connected to literary tropes, where the author starts the character in a low-stakes situation and then has the action rise as the situation is established/revealed - REH's Tower of the Elephant, LotR, Star Wars (for Luke), I think Dragonlance (starting in the tavern), all work like this.

The Lord of the Rings is the Ur Classic here....

It has also been the TV Formula for action, adventure and drama shows for nearly 100 years: show your main characters relaxing and having fun. Then do a sharp 'Hook' for the episode, and fade to the opening credits and commercials.

For RPG's, I'm not sure where it was first said, but by 2E that idea was sure firm of "start your game in a tavern and let the players role play their characters a bit to 'warm up' ".

I think a GM has pretty wide latitude to start a game by framing the players into a specific situation, as long as the players are aware of this. None of that power is railroading.

I almost always start my games in medias res, with a group of PCs who already know each other and are comfortable working together.

I agree, though there is no limit on how I would start a game and I don't think the players need to be "aware" of anything.

 

[TwoSix]

Does "thespian" play require...well, for lack of a better term, "theatrical" acting? Because I don't see these benefits as confined solely to folks I would consider engaging in "thespian" play. E.g. I can see pawn-stance groups still preferring this approach over the immediate "you are at the dungeon" start, because it's a lower-stakes environment, yet it encourages the kind of question-asking that the rest of the game will warrant, because the player can directly imagine a person they're asking questions of.

I generally think of "thespian play" as play that prioritizes participant dialogue (both players and GMs), both inter-PC and PC to NPC. There's generally an expectation that relatively little stakes will be established or consequences endured, as the bulk of play isn't mediated by any resolution system (maybe an occasional skill check or weak spell use).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Even if the the likely outcome of the roleplayed scenes is that the characters pick up the quest and head to the dungeon/haunted castle/etc, I think that it is usually worth playing it rather than just skipping directly to the "adventure location." The roleplaying is important for establishing the context of the quest, creating emotional connection to the NPCs involved, and generally getting the players invented beyond "lets kill some monsters for XP." And yes, here some thespian skills on the GM's part certainly help a lot.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I generally think of "thespian play" as play that prioritizes participant dialogue (both players and GMs), both inter-PC and PC to NPC. There's generally an expectation that relatively little stakes will be established or consequences endured, as the bulk of play isn't mediated by any resolution system (maybe an occasional skill check or weak spell use).

I think this is really weird thing to say. I think this sort of roleplay is the best way to establish the stakes so that they have actual emotional weight. And of course it can have consequences too, you do not need rules for that.