Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 3357752" data-attributes="member: 177">Well, that depends.&nbsp; The exact where and when of events may not really be important, so much as the &quot;what happens&quot;.&nbsp; If the player choices make absolutely no difference in how events unfurl, or if there is only one way for them to unfurl, then you are on the railroad, and the players eventually will notice, as things they expect to make a difference won't.If exactly what they do in encounter A impacts how encounter B turns out, or if they can get through encounter A in any darn way they please, then you aren't on the railroad.&nbsp; Let me give you an example.&nbsp; I played in a game of Mage: The Ascension, in which the GM was usually great.&nbsp; But at one point, he put the PCs in a tight spot, from which he had only one solution.&nbsp; We players did not like the repercussions of that solution, so we started trying to come up with others.&nbsp; The GM disallowed every single one of them.&nbsp; Even when, given teh metaphysics involved, we could clearly show that our solutiosn were, in fact, better than his, he did not allow ours.The consequences of the given solution were so dire, we refused to take that solution.&nbsp; We said, &quot;If that's the only way out, then our characters don't get out. Let's start talking about a new campaign, okay?&quot;&nbsp; And only when he realized we were dead serious, he relented.That is railroading.&nbsp; Disallowing alternate solutions or paths, and not allowing them to have consequences.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 3357752, member: 177"] Well, that depends. The exact where and when of events may not really be important, so much as the "what happens". If the player choices make absolutely no difference in how events unfurl, or if there is only one way for them to unfurl, then you are on the railroad, and the players eventually will notice, as things they expect to make a difference won't. If exactly what they do in encounter A impacts how encounter B turns out, or if they can get through encounter A in any darn way they please, then you aren't on the railroad. Let me give you an example. I played in a game of Mage: The Ascension, in which the GM was usually great. But at one point, he put the PCs in a tight spot, from which he had only one solution. We players did not like the repercussions of that solution, so we started trying to come up with others. The GM disallowed every single one of them. Even when, given teh metaphysics involved, we could clearly show that our solutiosn were, in fact, better than his, he did not allow ours. The consequences of the given solution were so dire, we refused to take that solution. We said, "If that's the only way out, then our characters don't get out. Let's start talking about a new campaign, okay?" And only when he realized we were dead serious, he relented. That is railroading. Disallowing alternate solutions or paths, and not allowing them to have consequences. [/QUOTE]

Verification