What is "railroading" to you (as a player)?

[Celebrim]

For me it's pretty simple. If there are predetermined scenes, plotlines, story beats, encounters, or solutions to problems, that the PCs cannot change and must engage with the way the GM has decided they will, it's a railroad. Functionally, I don't see any difference between a "linear" game and a railroad, other than whether or not the players are okay with it. If the players are happy to jump through the GMs hoops exactly as the GM intended, then it's a "linear" game. If the players aren't happy about it, it's a railroad. I don't think there is anything wrong with running/playing a railroad game. I do think it completely fails to embrace the one and only thing that makes TTRPGs unique, which is the ability to wholly customize the experience for the people playing the game. Basically, in a railroad game you could swap out any player or PC for any other player or PC and not much about the main events would change. Whereas in a game where everything is tailored specifically to the particular players and PCs, then swapping anyone out would drastically change the game via the butterfly effect.

How many players are normally at your tables?

 

[TheSword]

For me it's pretty simple. If there are predetermined scenes, plotlines, story beats, encounters, or solutions to problems, that the PCs cannot change and must engage with the way the GM has decided they will, it's a railroad. Functionally, I don't see any difference between a "linear" game and a railroad, other than whether or not the players are okay with it. If the players are happy to jump through the GMs hoops exactly as the GM intended, then it's a "linear" game. If the players aren't happy about it, it's a railroad. I don't think there is anything wrong with running/playing a railroad game. I do think it completely fails to embrace the one and only thing that makes TTRPGs unique, which is the ability to wholly customize the experience for the people playing the game. Basically, in a railroad game you could swap out any player or PC for any other player or PC and not much about the main events would change. Whereas in a game where everything is tailored specifically to the particular players and PCs, then swapping anyone out would drastically change the game via the butterfly effect.

So there can be predetermined scenes, plot lines, story beats, encounters, or solutions to problems and it not be a railroad? Providing that players can engage with them as they like and aren’t forced to interact with them one way?

This sounds about right to me. It’s the forcing element that makes it into a railroad not the preparation.

So for instance my last session involved a parcel being delivered to one of the players by mistake. The name on the parcel is very similar to one of the players names. Something they would only spot if they look really carefully. However the messenger is in a rush so is quite cavalier about the thing and it’s unlikely they would stop to check. If the players are allowed not to accept the parcel - because their character is particularly honest for instance or a stickler for the rules - then that’s not a railroad. But if nevertheless the parcel is forced on them, then that becomes a railroad right?

In the OP’s example, the railroad element is having their tuning forks taken away from them magically with no chance to prevent that. For instance if I kept my spell components in Leomunds Magic Chest to keep it safe and it still gets taken then that would make this more of a railroad?

 

[zarionofarabel]

How many players are normally at your tables?

3 or 4.