Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Boots" data-source="post: 7732857" data-attributes="member: 92239">Hi PemReplied to this separately with another post.&nbsp; Sure.&nbsp; I could ignore you, or I could respect you by taking the time to reply.&nbsp; My point about having to find the confluence has more to do with my thinking that the answer is obvious to experienced players of the game and I don't know why we're discussing it in the first place.&nbsp; Yes.&nbsp; So long as we keep in mind that like most things, there's &quot;good&quot; and &quot;bad&quot; railroading, railroading is a tool in the box and the difference is whether or not the use of the tool is good for the majority of the table or just good for the GM.&nbsp; I'd suggest, if we're interested in having a longer discussion about railroading as a tool it gets its own thread.&nbsp; This particular one is so far off topic at this point it's silly.&nbsp;I'd posit that &quot;bad&quot; railroading that doesn't serve the good of the majority of the table is cheating based on what Gary was getting at in the writings we have access to.&nbsp; I'd certainly feel that way as a DMI'd suggest you quote sources.&nbsp; You're interpreting Gary a certain way that fits your worldview and that's very easy to do when only looking at the rules in a paragraph to paragraph way, but it's pretty clear that Gary's intentions were &quot;Game as a Whole&quot;, &quot;Your Campaign&quot;, and &quot;Your Players&quot; in that order. (Based on the high-level direct quote I posted earlier)&nbsp; Any one paragraph needs to be interpreted first from the lens of &quot;Game as a Whole&quot; and I don't think you're doing that the way you're presenting the content.Or, alternatively, that the difficulty has less to do with the outcome and more to do with the circumstance.&nbsp; If a player is looking for something that I know isn't in the room but the clue to find it is (crumbs) then regardless of what the player thinks, I'm giving them the difficulty for finding the clue. &nbsp;Note: The clue (crumbs) may not be in my notes.&nbsp; It may not have existed before the player went into the wrong area of the home and I may be trying to conserve game time by rewarding the right actions in the wrong places.&nbsp; I don't consider that &quot;bad&quot; because most games only have a short timeframe to play in to get something done and the player does get some benefit.The only way the player knows for a fact that the DM is not following the rules is if there's significant social impact (e.g it's clear that the player is getting screwed as he or she is not able to enjoy the game due to bias OR the DM makes it a habit of players rolling well with no benefit at all, OR the DM tells the player he or she is cheating.)The only practice it depends on is having a fair, balanced and experienced or creative DM.&nbsp; I'd also add socially aware to that list as it goes a long way towards compensating for experience.Be wellKB</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kobold Boots, post: 7732857, member: 92239"] Hi Pem Replied to this separately with another post. Sure. I could ignore you, or I could respect you by taking the time to reply. My point about having to find the confluence has more to do with my thinking that the answer is obvious to experienced players of the game and I don't know why we're discussing it in the first place. Yes. So long as we keep in mind that like most things, there's "good" and "bad" railroading, railroading is a tool in the box and the difference is whether or not the use of the tool is good for the majority of the table or just good for the GM. I'd suggest, if we're interested in having a longer discussion about railroading as a tool it gets its own thread. This particular one is so far off topic at this point it's silly. I'd posit that "bad" railroading that doesn't serve the good of the majority of the table is cheating based on what Gary was getting at in the writings we have access to. I'd certainly feel that way as a DM I'd suggest you quote sources. You're interpreting Gary a certain way that fits your worldview and that's very easy to do when only looking at the rules in a paragraph to paragraph way, but it's pretty clear that Gary's intentions were "Game as a Whole", "Your Campaign", and "Your Players" in that order. (Based on the high-level direct quote I posted earlier) Any one paragraph needs to be interpreted first from the lens of "Game as a Whole" and I don't think you're doing that the way you're presenting the content. Or, alternatively, that the difficulty has less to do with the outcome and more to do with the circumstance. If a player is looking for something that I know isn't in the room but the clue to find it is (crumbs) then regardless of what the player thinks, I'm giving them the difficulty for finding the clue. Note: The clue (crumbs) may not be in my notes. It may not have existed before the player went into the wrong area of the home and I may be trying to conserve game time by rewarding the right actions in the wrong places. I don't consider that "bad" because most games only have a short timeframe to play in to get something done and the player does get some benefit. The only way the player knows for a fact that the DM is not following the rules is if there's significant social impact (e.g it's clear that the player is getting screwed as he or she is not able to enjoy the game due to bias OR the DM makes it a habit of players rolling well with no benefit at all, OR the DM tells the player he or she is cheating.) The only practice it depends on is having a fair, balanced and experienced or creative DM. I'd also add socially aware to that list as it goes a long way towards compensating for experience. Be well KB [/QUOTE]

Verification