D&D General The Great Railroad Thread
- Thread starter bloodtide
- Start date
“The Halls Of Tizun Thane”
It's actually pretty straightforward.
Linear means One(ish) direction to go. An adventure is linear when the PCs only have 1 specific path from start to completion (there may be branches on the path, even some divergent options but it still goes to the same place). So as has been said A-B-C-D.
But this fact is made clear to the players. They understand that they need to go to place A then B then C all the way to Z to complete the adventure. The players understand they can go a different way, but that will lead them to a different adventure or even something improvised or even the DM saying "hey guys, you asked me to run this adventure - it's what I have prepared today."
The players choices are certainly constrained, but they are making meaningful choices based on those constraints - even if the meaningful choice is to follow along rather than to abandon the advenutre.
Put another way, the players are following along the path because they want to, they have bought in.
Railroading (to me, and the negative connotation I and others have always attached to it) is when the players are denied meaningful choice, even when the only meaningful choice is to buy in to the linear plot. The players are told they have options 1, 2 and 3 but when they try 2 or 3 their path is blocked or the DM substitutes 1 without telling them (illusionism). This generally involves force or deception, and the players have NOT bought in, they do not want to be on this path - but the DM is pushing them along anyway.
Or put another way, Railroading is a linear path where the DM is hiding (by whatever method) that the path is linear. Linear (IMO) is ok. Hiding that the path is linear, is not.
Effort, taste, interest, capabilities of the DM, capabilities of the players, variation of degree, any number of things.
Complicated and nuanced situations are great if you can get them on occasion, but most situations in most adventures do not require them and would be out of place or not bothered with even if they were there.
I mean let's take a look at Lost Mines of Phandelver, one of the most popular D&D adventures ever as per most metrics:
- Party gets hired by a dwarf to escort a wagon from Neverwinter to the town of Phandalin, following behind the horse-drawn wagon that holds the dwarf and another friend.
- Party comes upon the horses and wagon in the middle of the road, the horses dead, shot through by arrows.
Now what are players going to doin this situation? Yes, they are "free" to do whatever they want-- they can turn around and go back to Neverwinter; they can drive on past and continue on to Phandalin; they can stop and open up a lemonade stand on the side of the road. Anything they want. But what are they most likely to do? 99% of all parties will do the exact same thing-- examine the ambush spot, figure out that their dwarf patron and all the supplies were probably taken, and find the trail that will eventually lead to the goblin caves. And then the party will make the obvious and likely decision to go after the kidnapped dwarf.
There's no complicated or nuanced situation here. The adventure was set before the party, and the party takes it. An obvious path and a smart decision on the player's part to go rescue the guy who is paying them and will quite possibly reward them as well for rescue. And there's nothing wrong with that. And the fact that the module writer knows that this the most likely decision and thus gives the DM the goblin caves encounter as next up on the agenda is nothing to look down upon or be seen as something lesser. It's entirely standard roleplaying.
Are they being "railroaded" to go to the goblin caves? No. But it's just entirely logical why they would choose to do so. So what exactly would be the issue with this?
TwoSix
Everyone's literal second-favorite poster
The main issues?
1) "Follow the story hook to the next encounter site" was dishwater-dull 25 years ago. It's just overdone. It's generic MMO-style play at this point.
2) It has nothing to do specifically with the PCs. It prioritizes the crafted situation over the interests of the PCs.
If your table is still interested in that style of play, and wants to emphasize a group storyline over the individual characters, then these issues aren't actually issues, of course. But that's definitely not all tables.
Desdichado
Legend
Explain to me the complicated and nuanced situation inherent in: the players found a map that tells them where both great treasure and a major villain are located.
I think it's pretty much a given that except for the really ornery cusses, they're going to go check that location out.
Scott Christian
Hero
I feel like the reason no one can agree on the definition is because playing an RPG is not A to B to C. If it were, then there would be a lot more agreement.
For example, a group found a long-lost ancient tomb through the aid of a church. Thet recovered a rare gem. They return to the city and the church wants the gem since it was symbolic of their deity. You return it. There is a curse, and a mummy starts killing everyone who touched the gem. One of the major NPCs died. You attend the funeral. You gather clues as to how the NPC died. You do research at the library and find out about the curse. You go to get the gem. Rather than fight the priests, you decide to break in at night and steal it. You go back to the long-lost temple. You return the gem.
There are so many decision points in this it is ridiculous. This can be written as a linear adventure. Yet, it clearly could have differences in part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, etc. - not just the ending. And that is just four or five or six sessions of gaming, let alone a year! And that is why no one can agree. Because railroad, linear, etc. still allow a lot of choice. And the only thing differentiating it from the sandbox is, in the sandbox, you might not have the story arc.
For example, a group found a long-lost ancient tomb through the aid of a church. Thet recovered a rare gem. They return to the city and the church wants the gem since it was symbolic of their deity. You return it. There is a curse, and a mummy starts killing everyone who touched the gem. One of the major NPCs died. You attend the funeral. You gather clues as to how the NPC died. You do research at the library and find out about the curse. You go to get the gem. Rather than fight the priests, you decide to break in at night and steal it. You go back to the long-lost temple. You return the gem.
There are so many decision points in this it is ridiculous. This can be written as a linear adventure. Yet, it clearly could have differences in part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, etc. - not just the ending. And that is just four or five or six sessions of gaming, let alone a year! And that is why no one can agree. Because railroad, linear, etc. still allow a lot of choice. And the only thing differentiating it from the sandbox is, in the sandbox, you might not have the story arc.
Crimson Longinus
Legend
Yes, thus it is not a complicated or nuanced situation. Hell, it is barely a situation at all, it is more of an exposition, a setup.
Indeed. And I think it is fine to have some of this sort of structure in game, but it is there just to be scaffolding to get to more complicated situations where the players can actually make decisions that direct the course of the story. Like if the broken chariot and dwarf being kidnapped by goblins leads to revelation of of a feud between the goblins and the dwarves with no side being obviously correct. If not resolved, the situation threatens to escalate and destabilise the region. Or if the characters decide to rescue the dwarf, there is no one obvious way to do so. Will the characters, attempt infiltration, persuasion, or outright assault? How exactly they go accomplishing this?
Desdichado
Legend
And yet variations on equally simple situations are exactly what most of the RPG hobby is based on. If everything is complicated, then that's tedious after a while. Not everything is complicated. Most things aren't. I like complicated scenarios too, but the are more like the spice or maybe the dessert, not the main ingredient.
This thread is really going to town with the cooking metaphors, isn't it?
Crimson Longinus
Legend
Yes.
I just think people are using words weirdly. If there are many meaningful decisions that impact what course the events take, then it is not linear or a railroad!
