What do you consider a "railroading" module?

[Psion]

The worst part of the Avatar modules is that the PCs really have very little to do with the outcome of the story. Most of everything is driven by the NPCs (Elminster, Midnight, Kelemvor, et al.) and the PCs just follow along and maybe don't get killed.

I wonder if this series is a major reason for the Realms' "bad rep" WRT NPCs directing the action.

 

[Cam Banks]

Pretty much everything Dragonlance.

It's a good thing that hasn't been true for about 20 years.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Mark Hope]

It's a good thing that hasn't been true for about 20 years.

Cheers,
Cam

QFT . I was very impressed by the "anti-railroading" advice and elements in the recent Dragons of Autumn release (hmmm, which I still need to pay reinbowarrior for actually...ahem).

I think that DL has a bad rep for railroading. It has had its moments, for sure, but nothing on the level of some of the 2e FR or Ravenloft stuff (yeah, the ending to Gryphon Hill was rather poor - my players shouted at me something harsh when I first ran that back in the day. Live and learn ...)

Curse of the Azure Bonds is a really interesting example. It is a massive railroad that manages not to feel like one (or manages to win the players over so much that they don't care). Every group I have run that for has enjoyed it immensely, often to my surprise. Which reminds me. Time for another Younger Classic discussion...

 

[crazy_cat]

(crazy_cat, if you are reading this, you may mock my continued obsession with our DM's approach to the adventure - I am clearly in need of remedial free-form gaming, preferrably involving pirates, exploding monkeys and Neal Schlessinger... )

Hey Mark, good to see you're back from Christmas in the land of no internet access. Happy new year!

I saw the thread title and I just knew you'd have posted something here.

I also have "memories" of that module - but mine, whilst being cynical in terms of how linear the plot was at times, particularly relating to how crap our patron was at keeping her plans and her meeting place with us secret, are tempered by my fond memories of the last session...

Picture the scene. Our party have realised we may be cornered in the abandoned Cannith workshop/foundry thingy, and facing odds we perhaps cannot best in a straight fight. We've rested, healed as best we can (it's the Mournlands) and come up with a reallty cunning plan - Kill the bad guys and take their stuff (and under no circumstances give them the spare schemer mcguffin thingy - 'cos its not just treasure, its our treasure)

We fight. We do quite well. We even injure (or was it kill) some of the bad guys who tortured your (Marks) PC in the glass village a few sessiosn before. Then we lose, badly.

We're left with my PC and one other still standing, everybody else is in negative HP, but stable, or capturerd - the DM is hinting that if we surrender or give up the mcguffin we may yet live...

He's really hinting quite alot actually, we have the mcguffin, they (a dozen crossbowmen) haev readied actions to shoot us and are demanding its return. Hadn't he seen The Wild Bunch, did he really think I wasn't going to draw my sword...

Anyways, one TPK later we started a new campaign, somebdoy else took the DM chair, and we played Traveller.

I loved that TPK, in all honesty just for the dawning look of disbelief and amazement on the DM's face as we all spotted the TPK on the horizon, and then just stayed in character and drove right into it head on no matter how many hints he gave us....

I also loved the Traveller near TPK and the sting in tail of that scenario, but thats probably a seperate story, that I'm ging to carry on with...

I suspect its not for everybody, as evidenced by the reaction of some of our group, but I'll happily take a story with twists and turns, characters (PC's and NPC's) who have genuine emtions and hidden agendas, and a plot that offers suprises, and opportunities for the PC's to not only make a difference to things but also to potentially go against each other - over a long linear plot with definite goodies and baddies, no matter how much detail and background it has, anyday - even if we do all die in the end.

PS - I just e-mailed everybody to try and get a beer and curry eveining organised in the next week or so, you free?

 

[Mark Hope]

Hey Mark, good to see you're back from Christmas in the land of no internet access. Happy new year!

I saw the thread title and I just knew you'd have posted something here.

Heh heh. I just can't help myself, I really can't...

And Happy New Year .

I loved that TPK, in all honesty just for the dawning look of disbelief and amazement on the DM's face as we all spotted the TPK on the horizon, and then just stayed in character and drove right into it head on no matter how many hints he gave us....

Indeed. Full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes. And the shoddy plot.

I suspect its not for everybody, as evidenced by the reaction of some of our group, but I'll happily take a story with twists and turns, characters (PC's and NPC's) who have genuine emtions and hidden agendas, and a plot that offers suprises, and opportunities for the PC's to not only make a difference to things but also to potentially go against each other - over a long linear plot with definite goodies and baddies, no matter how much detail and background it has, anyday - even if we do all die in the end.

Totally. Nellkyn's Traveller games were things of subtle beauty. And deranged humour. That's showbiz, baby ...

PS - I just e-mailed everybody to try and get a beer and curry eveining organised in the next week or so, you free?

Yeah, count me in. Looking forward to seeing you guys all again .

 

[Old Drew Id]

I have one nitpick on the definitions on railroading. I think RR-ing is not when the PC's have no choices; it's when the PC's believe that they have no choices. A good DM should be able to take a fairly railroady adventure and still give the illusion that the PC's are in the driver's seat the whole time. Part of the art of DMing is giving the players control of the plot when you can, and maintaining the illusion that they are in control when they aren’t.

For instance, if the adventure requires the PC's to steal the McGuffin, and they track down a sage who tells them that the McGuffin can only be found in the Flaming Volcano Mines of the East, that might smack of RR-ing. But, if he tells them that there are three surviving McGuffins, and one is in the Flaming Volcano Mines of the East, one is in the Palace of the Icy Winds in the North, and one is in the Poison Bog of the West, then they now believe that they have a choice. In fact, it's the same dungeon map, NPC's, etc. in each case. The only thing that gets switched out is the type of elemental damage they'll face, the color of the dragons, and the name that the evil clerics will be wailing when they die. But if it is done well, then the players will believe that they had a choice and that they are driving the plot.

Now, some modules are not quite so easy to work with, but to me as a DM, that is precisely my opportunity to creatively shine. Essentially, most DM work is creativity in advance with time to spare, and most playing as a PC is creativity on the spot, under pressure. As a DM, I look forward to those rare moments when the PC's derail the plot and I need to think on my feet. You shouldn't need to pause the game for three hours while you think. You should have at least one or two "buy some time" encounters that you can spring on the players to give you time to think, and you should use that time to figure out how to lead them back to the module plot while still maintaining the illusion of choice.

If you can't think on your feet that fast, or there doesn't seem to be any way to mesh the players' actions with the module plot, then the key rule for any DM is to let player choice take precedence. You will eventually get some time to think, even if it is after this gaming session is over and before the next one starts, and you can use that time to figure out how to get back on track, or how to alter the tracks to meet their new heading, or how to completely throw out the old module and start into a new module with some of the same NPC names.

That leads into a second illusion that is helpful to maintain: the players should not be able to tell where the module ends and the DM creativity begins. This is actually important to support the original illusion of “constant player control”. If you read the boxed text to the players for three sessions and it all goes according to plan, and then in the fourth session they decide to do something that they know is very likely to stray from the plot, and suddenly you stammer through an obviously improvised encounter, or even tell the players afterwards that they surprised you and you had to make something up, then you also just told them that everything they have done so far was easily railroaded to match the module and that they only briefly had control of the plot. Then when you return to the module, they will feel the railroading bringing them back.

If, however, you make the transition from pre-scripted module encounters to improvised encounters seamlessly, then the players will never know when they are really in control of the plot, and when they are being railroaded, and they will default to a feeling that they are always in control.

 

[Wrathamon]

The first adventure in the Witchfire Trilogy was full of railroad-ish type encounters... even the adventure itself advises the DM to do certain things. Great adventure for ideas and pacing but some of the setups were a bit forceful and the end wasn't a railroad but pretty much nothing the player's could do would change the situation since they are so low level.

 

[Lanefan]

Someone earlier mentioned "soft" and "hard" bottlenecks...points in an adventure that will be met regardless of anything else, if the adventure is to be completed. I'd add a third type: the "no return" bottleneck, an example of which comes at the start of Q1 (Queen of the Demonweb Pits) where the party have to go through the abyssal gate in order to continue, and once through they're stuck with no way back until a large part of the adventure is done.

Here's a question: is it railroading if a situation arises where the PC's have involved themselves (either by their own choice or not, intentionally or not) in something that is so far above their heads that no matter what they do they can have at best a miniscule influence on events? Where their best option is to just get out of the way and let events take the course that I as DM have already determined ahead of time?

I ask because this very thing came up in my game last weekend...a long story leads to the PC's getting *way* in over their heads almost by accident, involved in a battle between gods that they don't know is coming until mere moments before it hits; and whether they choose to let events run their course or try to insert themselves into the situation is going to make little if any difference to how things turn out - these guys have some power, but they are *not* up to taking on divinities - other than to add to the casualty count. As it played out they (wisely) got out of there; the party had already done the only useful thing possible - rescued a companion who had been taken prisoner and was being held in what would become the battle site - but if they had stayed and tried to get involved it would have amounted to an exercise in going through the motions until they either got killed as collateral damage or fled; 9-10th level characters against gods is like flies against flyswatters... But, would you consider this a railroad, and why (or not)?

Lanefan

 

[Celebrim]

But, would you consider this a railroad, and why (or not)?

I wouldn't. I would consider it a cut scene. You've given a chance for the characters to witness some important event in your campaigns history. Just at the moment they may have nothing that they can really do about it, but presumably when they latter observe the consequences of this event they can go, "I was there." Also presumably, there role as witnesses gives them some certain amount of status. They aren't nobodies any more. Gods may recognize them and take an active interest in thier lives.

All of this is too my mind, too the good. It's part of being a hero. And, as a hero they fulfilled thier role (rescue of the comrade) in the larger drama playing out around them. Later they may get to be the hero.

But the main thing I would question is, "Why?" Cut scenes should serve a purpose. They should be advancing the story toward some goal, and ideally the players should be able to step into them (if they want) and cause the scene to play out in different ways. If the cut scene is going to play no future role in the player's destiny, it might not be railroading but it could be showing off. If you put the characters through a whole series of cut scenes that they can't really influence, that would be railroading. It's worth it every once in a while to put the player's in thier place, but you don't want to do it too often. Most of the time, they should feel important and at least partly in control. And allowing the players to be observers is sometimes cool, but if you do it too often then you are assuming to large a role in the game - its all about you and not the PC's.

 

[Lanefan]

But the main thing I would question is, "Why?" Cut scenes should serve a purpose. They should be advancing the story toward some goal, and ideally the players should be able to step into them (if they want) and cause the scene to play out in different ways. If the cut scene is going to play no future role in the player's destiny, it might not be railroading but it could be showing off. If you put the characters through a whole series of cut scenes that they can't really influence, that would be railroading. It's worth it every once in a while to put the player's in thier place, but you don't want to do it too often. Most of the time, they should feel important and at least partly in control. And allowing the players to be observers is sometimes cool, but if you do it too often then you are assuming to large a role in the game - its all about you and not the PC's.

Understood. In fact, this scene was a significant act in achieving an overall goal...the parties have had all kinds of influence over time in setting wheels in motion to get to this point, including the resoration of one of the gods to divinity (via the module "For Duty and Deity" but a different deity), but finishing the task - essentially involving wiping out a civilization by tricking that civilization's deity - would be beyond them unless they got to ridiculous levels; and, as I'm in process of winding the campaign down, they're just never going to get that far.

Lanefan