D&D General The Great Railroad Thread

[EzekielRaiden]

Well that would be the essence of the "life goes on" story. The PC has lost everything they care about, what new things can they find to care about? Which are often some of the most powerful and uplifting stories you can encounter.

Only if you're actually ready for that kind of story.

As someone currently right now in real life struggling with making sure life does, in fact, go on? Yeah I really, really, really do not need that kind of thing in my life right now. But I get quite a bit of value out of playing TTRPGs anyway. Cutting that out of my life would in fact make improvement more difficult, not less.

Which is a long-form personal way of saying, you left out a critical part: "The PC has lost everything they care about, what new things can they find to care about? Which are often some of the most powerful and uplifting stories for me". For you, these are powerful and uplifitng. For me, they're a constant neverending reminder of the personal, familial, medical, economic, and social stuff I'm dealing with.

The analogy I've heard that I quite like (from Overly Sarcastic Productions) is that grimdark narratives like this are like an ice bath: shocking, even refreshing, especially if you've been going through sweltering heat. But for folks who spend their days in the frozen tundra, not at all productive or enjoyable or uplifting.

I guess, like someone else said previously, it's whether or not people see their PCs as disposable. I never do, even if it is a game with high lethality. Sure, the PC faces the possibility of death, but that doesn't mean they don't value being alive. They may even sacrifice themselves for a cause, but it better be something that is truly worthy of that sacrifice. Perhaps that is why I don't feel tension in a combat encounter unless my PCs life is in danger. An immortal PC doesn't need to value their life, as it is never in danger. That is too much of a disconnect from reality for me, as IRL, life is valuable because it can end at any time, so time is precious.

Whereas to me, a high-lethality game is specifically going out of its way to tell me that PCs are disposable and life doesn't matter.

For me, life is valuable because of...everything else. People, places, experiences, principles. These are the things that, as mentioned above, give value to survival. Survival itself? Mostly pretty freakin' miserable. My late father mostly survived for the decade prior to his cancer diagnosis. I know what "survival" looks like, and it sucks. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

 

[zarionofarabel]

Only if you're actually ready for that kind of story.

As someone currently right now in real life struggling with making sure life does, in fact, go on? Yeah I really, really, really do not need that kind of thing in my life right now. But I get quite a bit of value out of playing TTRPGs anyway. Cutting that out of my life would in fact make improvement more difficult, not less.

Which is a long-form personal way of saying, you left out a critical part: "The PC has lost everything they care about, what new things can they find to care about? Which are often some of the most powerful and uplifting stories for me". For you, these are powerful and uplifitng. For me, they're a constant neverending reminder of the personal, familial, medical, economic, and social stuff I'm dealing with.

For me, who's life has been that way for the better part of two decades, those stories are reminders of why I need to value my survival so I can at least have the chance that things might get better. Everything effects people differently. I do understand that avoiding those themes in a game can be helpful for some folks. You also have my sympathies, as I fully understand how crappy life can be, and what it feels like to wonder if being alive is actually worth it.

The analogy I've heard that I quite like (from Overly Sarcastic Productions) is that grimdark narratives like this are like an ice bath: shocking, even refreshing, especially if you've been going through sweltering heat. But for folks who spend their days in the frozen tundra, not at all productive or enjoyable or uplifting.

I don't think lethal combat makes a setting or game grimdark by default. That's why it is it's own genre after all. Very few of the games I run would be considered grimdark in any real way, but they still feature lethal combat.

Whereas to me, a high-lethality game is specifically going out of its way to tell me that PCs are disposable and life doesn't matter.

For me, life is valuable because of...everything else. People, places, experiences, principles. These are the things that, as mentioned above, give value to survival. Survival itself? Mostly pretty freakin' miserable. My late father mostly survived for the decade prior to his cancer diagnosis. I know what "survival" looks like, and it sucks. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

I don't see any reason why a game featuring lethal combat can't include things other than pure survival. That seems to be the real issue with people who have a problem with having lethal combat, they seem to think that it means that is the only thing it is about. That simply isn't the case. The survival aspect is simply one more thing on top of all the others.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

For me, who's life has been that way for the better part of two decades, those stories are reminders of why I need to value my survival so I can at least have the chance that things might get better. Everything effects people differently. I do understand that avoiding those themes in a game can be helpful for some folks. You also have my sympathies, as I fully understand how crappy life can be, and what it feels like to wonder if being alive is actually worth it.

I don't think lethal combat makes a setting or game grimdark by default. That's why it is it's own genre after all. Very few of the games I run would be considered grimdark in any real way, but they still feature lethal combat.

I don't see any reason why a game featuring lethal combat can't include things other than pure survival. That seems to be the real issue with people who have a problem with having lethal combat, they seem to think that it means that is the only thing it is about. That simply isn't the case. The survival aspect is simply one more thing on top of all the others.

Every single game I have ever played, or heard spoken about, where the game goes out of its way to remind you how dangerously lethal it is, survival becomes the only consideration. Everything else is swept off the table because death stalks your every move.

Note the poster above who specifically reiterated that players should be paranoid. That's not an accident. It's the point.

When a game goes out of its way to emphasize lethality, rather than using it judiciously as one (small) part of this balanced breakfast, survival pushes everything else off the table. It might not be instant, but it'll happen. I've never seen it fail to do so, given enough time. Losing character after character after character because you showed curiosity or creativity or compassion deadens that which would care about things other than survival.

 

[Maxperson]

No, it's not far beyond railroading. It's just bad railroading. Time skips are one of the most important railroading techniques. All time skips are in fact railroading. But how would you have felt if the GM had time skipped you forward to the point you are now somewhat established in the town, have the base of operations you desire and some relationships with the townsfolk, and then set up some scene whatever is going on in the woods now threatens your base and allies? That's also controlling and changing things, but would you have objected as strongly?

No, not all time skips are railroading. In fact, the overwhelming majority of them are not. How many games have you been in where you've played out every minute of every game day in real time? Not many I'm sure. Hours get skipped. When travelling days and even weeks get skipped. Those are non-railroading time skips.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Well that would be the essence of the "life goes on" story. The PC has lost everything they care about, what new things can they find to care about? Which are often some of the most powerful and uplifting stories you can encounter.

Or the most thoroughly depressing.

But in any case, that'st he point: losing those matters.

I guess, like someone else said previously, it's whether or not people see their PCs as disposable. I never do, even if it is a game with high lethality. Sure, the PC faces the possibility of death, but that doesn't mean they don't value being alive. They may even sacrifice themselves for a cause, but it better be something that is truly worthy of that sacrifice. Perhaps that is why I don't feel tension in a combat encounter unless my PCs life is in danger. An immortal PC doesn't need to value their life, as it is never in danger. That is too much of a disconnect from reality for me, as IRL, life is valuable because it can end at any time, so time is precious.

But again, this is only an issue if the only value--or at least the biggest one--is the character's life.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Every single game I have ever played, or heard spoken about, where the game goes out of its way to remind you how dangerously lethal it is, survival becomes the only consideration. Everything else is swept off the table because death stalks your every move.

Eh, to be fair, that's only true if combat or other high-risk activities are a focus of the game. That's common, but not universal. For a few its just a way of saying "You don't want to get in combat more often than events force you to."

Note the poster above who specifically reiterated that players should be paranoid. That's not an accident. It's the point.

Are you still taking that poster at all seriously?