D&D General The Great Railroad Thread

[Mort]

One of my ancient Exalted campaigns ended with the world being destroyed. And that was due one PC actually deciding to join the big bad at a crucial moment after the big bad's "join me" villain speech. I really didn't see that coming! We played Exalted after that though, albeit come think of it, I believe the next campaign was set in the past so the events of the first campaign could still have happened in the same continuum... Though I didn't think it that way, they were separate versions of the same setting, like Burton's and Nolan's Batman movies.

It's always good to have at least one time in a group where the villain wins big or even "permanently." - just so everyone sees it can happen.

Though I also applaud the DM (many years) ago - who pulled off the "yes, the villain was a horrible, evil, mean jerk.." But his plan to save the realm was working, and you stopped him congratulations! You don't have a backup strategy, and now the realm is doomed - oops.

 

[bloodtide]

From this thread and from many others before it, GMs who espouse a traditional sandbox style (at least the ones I've seen discuss it on this board) almost take pride in NEVER being influenced by the players and would consider that a heavy negative to be strenuously avoided.

Odd, I thought Sandbox Style was just doing what the players wanted. The idea is the players lead and the DM follows, right?

So then all games, no matter how sandbox or linear, are in fact just cleverly disguised railroads?

I would say yes, just by the fact they are artificial.

As I said before, functionally, railroad and linear adventure games appear identical. The difference lies in whether or not the players want to go along with the predetermined plotline. If they are, it's a linear adventure, if not, then it enters a fail state and becomes a railroad instead.

Most people split hairs here. If the PCs have a castle with a horde of undead slowly approaching, the PC (and the players) will sure want to stop the undead and protect their castle.

Linear Game- The DM steps way back and says "Okay, players what do you do?", and technically the players are free to have thier PCs "try" anything.

Railroad Game- The DM says "the ONLY way to stop the undead horde is to get the Orb of Life that was lost in The Deadly Doom Swamp an age ago." So the players have thier PCs go to the swamp to find the orb.

Though, even with the above, many would say the undead horde alone is railroading.....

See above, but my response is essentially, "Will they?" With Aragorn, Gandalf, Frodo, etc. all dead, it seems that the War of the Ring becomes a conclusive victory for either Sauron or Saruman,

Any fiction, like novels and movies breaks down with you try to apply it to an RPG.

A novel or movie is a very set in stone story plot by an author, writer and maybe a few others. But the story plot is very much set in stone...set in admamtium even. The author or writer is telling a story, so whatever story they want to tell is what happens.

This just does not work in an RPG unless your playing it in the Cinematic style....but then it's not even a game: it's a stage play.

The BIG thing that separates RPG story plots from other fictional story plots is anything can happen.

But gaming isn't or shouldn't be like that. If the party suffers a TPK/near TPK most groups just have everyone make new characters and continue. Sandbox, linear, the game goes on. Often the demise/defeat of the prior group can be incorporated into the fiction (the extent depending on what the prior group has actually done) and the new group goes forward.

One of my Famous Adventures is The Time of the Dragon. It's made special for players that are new to gaming with me. It is a simple enough "slay the dragon adventure", except most players will get their PCs killed very quickly. This does not end the adventure as after 20 years game time the players have their PCs children show up to avenge their parents and kill the dragon. Those PCs likely die too. The PCs keep their memories of each person before them, so they grow wiser "for real". Eventually, most groups will defeat the dragon, though it often takes twenty or so attempts. The record is 37....

 

[Scott Christian]

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!

I hear and agree, but what that really means is we need to eliminate the term all together. Because if that is the case, I have never ever played in a game, out of my 30+ years, that met the definition of linear or railroad according to you. In fact, no one has, unless you are playing with the worst GM ever, which is doubtful. I mean, even young GMs, like middle and high school age, allow player choices to impact the course of events.

 

[Scott Christian]

As soon as the DM says "the church wants that gem", many players will cry Railroad as the DM is forcing them to get rid of the gem.
As soon as the DM says "there is a curse", many players will cry Railroad as the DM is forcing that to happen
As soon the mummy starts killing, many players will cry Railroad as the DM is forcing that to happen
As soon as the NPC dies, many players will cry Railroad as the DM is forcing that to happen
And the whole "you must return the gem to the lost temple" sure is a linear plot, many players will cry Railroad as the DM is forcing that to happen

You obviously misread what I said. I stated all of those are decision making points by the players. Hence, they can choose to keep the gem. Now, they are the ones hunted by the mummy. They may ditch the gem then to some shady dealer. Great, the mummy still wants them dead or the GM decides something else. This can still be written as a linear adventure, yet it is still player choices.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I hear and agree, but what that really means is we need to eliminate the term all together. Because if that is the case, I have never ever played in a game, out of my 30+ years, that met the definition of linear or railroad according to you. In fact, no one has, unless you are playing with the worst GM ever, which is doubtful. I mean, even young GMs, like middle and high school age, allow player choices to impact the course of events.

It is of course unlikely that any game is 100% railroad all the time, but different games certainly will have different amounts of it. So I think it still coherent to have the definition to be the platonic idea of a railroad, and then comparing to that we can gauge how much a railroad the game as it actually happened is.

 

[Scott Christian]

Yeap, which is why ive gotten real weary of sandbox pitches. I've had too many fake outs over the years. The worst was a GM that wouldnt railroad in the traditional sense, he would let players make all kinds of decisions. However, none of them would amount to anything until they found the "right" decision which was like one of those Sierra adventure games when you had to pull the door instead of push it. We'd exhaust hours with red herrings, failed plans, false leads and the GM would just nod and inform us it was all moot until we just kicked in every door and killed every person in every adventure....

I am not saying your experience was this, but whenever I have seen something like that, it was because it was a GM that played improv style. Loved putting details in that didn't matter because it's just what they were thinking of in the moment. Used red herrings because they hadn't thought through how to actually use the made-up clues in the first place. Then, in the end, they just wrap it up.

 

[Scott Christian]

It is all about Feelings.

The Linear Game is nearly all RPGs as it has to be....you have to have a Start-->Middle--->End. That is how things work.

And no matter how much you love to stay in the Sandbox Wasteland most people will prefer to do something more

When most people cry Railroad they are talking about a Clumsy or Bad DM .

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I am not saying your experience was this, but whenever I have seen something like that, it was because it was a GM that played improv style. Loved putting details in that didn't matter because it's just what they were thinking of in the moment. Used red herrings because they hadn't thought through how to actually use the made-up clues in the first place. Then, in the end, they just wrap it up.

I rather feel that in a functional improv style the details that the players pick up should be made to matter. So if a throwaway line makes the players suspect that something shady is going on in the old abbey, then when players decide to investigate it the GM makes it so that something interesting is going on there, even though they had not initially though that.

 

[Scott Christian]

I rather feel that in a functional improv style the details that the players pick up should be made to matter. So if a throwaway line makes the players suspect that something shady is going on in the old abbey, then when players decide to investigate it the GM makes it so that something interesting is going on there, even though they had not initially though that.

I agree with you whole-heartedly. That is how it should work. But in my experience, it never is. Yes, improv is always needed for RPGs, especially the likes of D&D. And yes, sometimes it leads to fun moments. That said, it is merely happenstance that helped create that moment. It is almost never calculated. Like an action movie that has one great fight scene or one great escape or one chase, while the rest is just a hodgepodge of effects.

Your example is just an example of involved and attentive players - not a good GM.

 

[Mort]

I hear and agree, but what that really means is we need to eliminate the term all together. Because if that is the case, I have never ever played in a game, out of my 30+ years, that met the definition of linear or railroad according to you. In fact, no one has, unless you are playing with the worst GM ever, which is doubtful. I mean, even young GMs, like middle and high school age, allow player choices to impact the course of events.

Really, Never?

I once had a DM who would literally keep referring to the book (fiction book not adventure book) he was cribbing the adventure from. If we did ANYTHING that deviated from the plot of the book he would just ignore/discount it and continue with the plot of the book.

The sad thing is, this was in our mid 20s, not some grade school newbie ordeal/experiment.