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

[Maxperson]

They are being forced NOT in the direction of what they want to do -- save their party member's soul. It doesn't matter if there are myriad choices they don't want to take.

That's not a railroad. Force =/= railroad. Removal of all agency is, and that never happened. Nor were they even forced to stay on that plane. If any force or going against what the players want = railroad like you are implying, every attack, spell, NPC disagreement with the party, etc. would be a railroad.

 

[Umbran]

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

One spell failing to achieve their goal does not a railroad make.

 

[Blue]

That's not a railroad. Force =/= railroad. Removal of all agency is, and that never happened. Nor were they even forced to stay on that plane. If any force or going against what the players want = railroad like you are implying, every attack, spell, NPC disagreement with the party, etc. would be a railroad.

If you want to set up straw men for your rhetoric there's no reason to continue this conversation.

 

[Tigris]

They tried a weaker spell and wish is known to break rules. It is a choice that they know exists. The party has many choices.

1) Try Wish to get out.
2) It's the Feywild. Find a creature that can tell them if Wish will work.
3) Try to find some sort of portal off of the plane.
4) Try to figure out why the plane is locked down.
5) Try to find a creature with the ability to get them off of the plane.
6) Try to locate a deity that dwells in that plane and see if they can barter to get off.
7) They can plane shift, which means it's likely that they can commune, do augury to find out if wish will be a good idea, or contact other plane to ask.
7-a ton) Other things they can think of to do.

They are not bound to one line of travel. They are not bound in any direction that the DM wishes them to be going. Highly limited force like putting them on another plane is not railroading. It's set-up and nothing more.

This is not choice this is "guess what the DM wants to hear."

The choice is "we want to get out of here". And using the specific tool for this is a logical way to do this. If the logical tool does not work, then its no longer a choice, but GM powerfantasy trying to make people guess the clever thing they want to hear.

Yes "wish is known to break rules", but it also has a clear reading on what it can do: replicate other spells. And as a GM normally its not liked when players do just use wish to break campaigns, so reinforcing this behaviour is not a good idea.

One spell failing to achieve their goal does not a railroad make.

This is just an excuse from the GM on "why he was not railroading", telling them in hindsight "oh you could have always done X", which the players had absolutly no clue they could, actually the opposite.

The clues they had were showing that this would not work.


Its like if players are locked into a dungeon. They try to pick open the door, it does not work, they try to pry it open using the specific tools to break open doors, and it also just does not work. And later the GM tells the players "oh actually if you would have used your really expensive spear to break the door open, that would have worked".

 

[Umbran]

I feel like @TwoSix really captured what I know my players would have also said. Word for word, this is perfect ^


1) Compared to grand theft auto style "you are in a city what do you do?" Yeah, your scenario was "on rails". They MUST face this situation, therefore they are "on the plot train". Was there options for how to resolve? sure, but was it ANY option? such as just walking away? No. So they were forced into a situation.

I would counter that you (and possibly the player) are inaccurately conflating "situation" and "plot".

If the situation only has one possible resolution, and the players will be driven to that resolution whether they like it or not, then it is a railroad.

 

[Maxperson]

If you want to set up straw men for your rhetoric there's no reason to continue this conversation.

There was no strawman, though. Your implication of your statement, "They are being forced NOT in the direction of what they want to do -- save their party member's soul." is that any force that isn't what they want is a railroad. Maybe that isn't what you intended to imply, but it IS what you implied with that statement.

 

[Umbran]

Also, we should not rely on people who are upset, put out, or otherwise emotionally engaged to get language correct.

The player calling it a railroad does not mean it is a railroad. The player calling it a railroad is an indication to the GM that the player is unhappy. They'll use whatever words are at hand to express that unhappiness, even if they are not entirely correct for the situation.

 

[Umbran]

There was no strawman, though. Your implication of your statement, "They are being forced NOT in the direction of what they want to do -- save their party member's soul." is that any force that isn't what they want is a railroad. Maybe that isn't what you intended to imply, but it IS what you implied with that statement.

Agreed. We are (typically) playing games that include adversity, in which not all attempts to overcome that adversity will succeed. So, "I didn't get what I want on my first try," shouldn't be considered a railroad.

 

[Maxperson]

This is not choice this is "guess what the DM wants to hear."

No it's not. the DM doesn't care what they do or have any desire for any specific thing. There's no guessing at what the DM wants going on.

The choice is "we want to get out of here". And using the specific tool for this is a logical way to do this. If the logical tool does not work, then its no longer a choice, but GM powerfantasy trying to make people guess the clever thing they want to hear.

Here's the problem in a nutshell. There is no "the specific tool" or "the logical tool.) There are many logical tools and if one doesn't work, you try a different one.

Yes "wish is known to break rules", but it also has a clear reading on what it can do: replicate other spells. And as a GM normally its not liked when players do just use wish to break campaigns, so reinforcing this behaviour is not a good idea.

It also has another clear reading.

"You might be able to achieve something beyond the scope of the above examples. State your wish to the DM as precisely as possible."

I've never met a DM who didn't let wish do other things than the listed examples.

This is just an excuse from the GM on "why he was not railroading", telling them in hindsight "oh you could have always done X", which the players had absolutly no clue they could, actually the opposite.

You simply can't make a single act into a railroad, especially when there is no desired end goal or force being used to get them there.

Its like if players are locked into a dungeon. They try to pick open the door, it does not work, they try to pry it open using the specific tools to break open doors, and it also just does not work. And later the GM tells the players "oh actually if you would have used your really expensive spear to break the door open, that would have worked".

Or the knock spell they didn't try. Or... Or... It seems like you feel that anything the players try should work on the first attempt. That's not any D&D game I've ever been in. A failed attempt isn't a railroad. It's a minor setback.

 

[Reynard]

No it's not. the DM doesn't care what they do or have any desire for any specific thing. There's no guessing at what the DM wants going on.

I don't want to get too into the weeds on this specific situation, but I really did not have a solution in mind. That is usually how I frame things. there is a situation ("You are trapped in the wintery Faewild taken over by a Winter Court coup, and you cannot simply plane shift out.") and then I let them go ("What do you do?").