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

[TaranTheWanderer]

To your example:

My feeling the reason they haven't used Wish yet is that the description says it replicates the use of any spell. So, if Planshift already failed, using Wish to replicate it will also fail. So they've probably already ruled out its use.

Railroad, for me, isn't character actions being constrained. It's being unable to act on the things I want to do. Trying something and failing is not railroading. That's just adversity. And the game is about overcoming adversity.

 

[Maxperson]

So I had this situation last night when a player got upset because he felt the party was being "railroaded" and I take issue with his definition. I set up the adventure in which the party is stuck in the Faewild after the Winter Court stages a coup and takes over. They have locked down the plane, closing gates and using magic to steal plane shift tuning forks from those arriving. The player made some (incorrect) assumptions about why this was happening and then decided to just nope out and plane whift the party home, which is when the player discovered they were at least momentarily trapped in the Faewild and would have to find a way home.

I do not consider this to be railroading. I consider it to be setting up the adventure. There is no predetermined path to finding a way home. They can try anything they want, and they have 2 wishes on hand (and if they used those, they would work, but no one tried). This little jaunt is a side thing right before the climax of the campaign, meant to give them one last level bump as well as potentiually find allies in the Summer Court if they decide to break the Winter Court's hold.

Railroading is forcing the party down a line no matter what the players might want or try to do.

What you have done so far is create a large(infinitely large) planar sandbox where the Feywild is the sandbox. The wishes are a way out. And they could just explore the Feywild and let someone else figure out the Winter Court thing, going home when that resolved.

I don't see any railroading there.

 

[billd91]

This is one of those tricks of how normal procedures are practiced, I suppose.

If the players don't have any significant input on the framing of the situation (whether a scene/situation or start of an adventure or even being together in a tavern and being approached by an adventure hook wielding mysterious stranger), I wouldn't consider it railroading - but some people might... legitimately or not. If they normally don't have significant input into such things, then this should be considered normal, not a railroad, and a starting point for the session from which to proceed. If they normally have a lot of input into such things, then it probably is a railroad.

But my guess is it's being called a railroad as an emotional reaction because they're trapped and they can't leave by their easiest means that they normally have ready at hand. If you had framed it without them having such means in the first place, my guess is they wouldn't have complained so strenuously.

 

[Reynard]

Being honest, I bristle when players act like I am trying to screw them over instead of trusting me. We have bene playing together since the mid 90s.

Anyway. On the subject of railroads: I don't think setting up the scenario counts, even if the PCs are "forced" into the scenario by the general agreement that the GM usually has to prep something.

 

[payn]

Being honest, I bristle when players act like I am trying to screw them over instead of trusting me. We have bene playing together since the mid 90s.

Yeah thats a lot of years to know somebody. Im curious what exactly is triggering the disappointment?

Anyway. On the subject of railroads: I don't think setting up the scenario counts, even if the PCs are "forced" into the scenario by the general agreement that the GM usually has to prep something.

Thats always hard to determine. Some folks are very sensitive to GM prep and set up to the point I dont even know how their games work. The buy in is part trust and part preference. Its a recipe more than a line in the sand. To me a railroad is way over the line, but to others its simply a GM choice they dont agree with.

 

[Blue]

I did force them into the faewild as a side trek, but as with most "adventuyres" I write, it is a situation and the players are free to deal with it as they may.

...

Right before this all happened, the players drew from the Deck of Many Things and one PC got voided. They used some magic to discover that the PCs soul was not in the faewild, and have a good idea of where it is in the prime, and what is guarding it. This matters in context because now they know that the object of that self imposed quest is not in the faewild. But the doors are still locked, as such.

From the original post I didn't think it's railroading at all, but with these clarifications I've had a 180 degree turn.

So the party has something that they want to deal with, and would normally have the ability to go and do. You've instead force them into a bottle adventure they can't say no to. So player agency is to rescue a member of their party, but you've forced them to another plane and by fiat taken away their ability to do what they wanted to. Basically, there is no way to avoid the faewild, and no reasonable* way not to engage -- classic railroad right there.

* Using up a precious, very limited resource of a Wish, which they don't even know if it would work, isn't a reasonable out to not call it a railroad.

 

[billd91]

Yeah thats a lot of years to know somebody. Im curious what exactly is triggering the disappointment?

It may be one of those player kneejerk reactions that are kind of inexplicable. You can beat their PCs up, even kill them, and some players will shrug it off. But, oh man, imprison them or <shudder> destroy their stuff and they'll go ballistic.

 

[Blue]

Railroading is forcing the party down a line no matter what the players might want or try to do.

Which is exactly what happened.

The players were forced to the Faewild. They want to rescue their party member, whose soul is not in the Faewild. So it doesn't matter what's available in the Faewild, they are constrained from exercising their agency.

He's forcing the party not to do what they want and instead interact with the Faewild.

 

[Maxperson]

Which is exactly what happened.

The players were forced to the Faewild. They want to rescue their party member, whose soul is not in the Faewild. So it doesn't matter what's available in the Faewild, they are constrained from exercising their agency.

He's forcing the party not to do what they want and instead interact with the Faewild.

Which is not what happened. In fact they have a way out if they WISH to use it. They are not forced to be there. They are not forced down a line. Force isn't enough to be a railroad. It also has to remove all agency and push them down a line to what the DM wants them to achieve. That did not happen here.

 

[Tigris]

Which is not what happened. In fact they have a way out if they WISH to use it. They are not forced to be there. They are not forced down a line. Force isn't enough to be a railroad. It also has to remove all agency and push them down a line to what the DM wants them to achieve. That did not happen here.

The choice with the wish is no choice, unless they know it exists. They tried a spell and it failed. Why should now this spell, which reproduces effects of other spells, work?


Their choice was "we dont give a crap, we want to get out of here" and this choice was denied.

Wish would be a choice if the feedback of the other spell failing was "thid spell seams to be too weak only a level 9 spell can get you out".