Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7757287" data-attributes="member: 42582">I agree with all three points - about resource tradition; about the view concerning railroading; and that there should be a "maybe", because the whole issue of "story" in standard/traditional D&D play is pretty vexed.One of the guys who has worked with Luke Crane on Burning Wheel wrote a PDF supplement called <a href="https://www.burningwheel.com/wiki/images/BurningTHAC0.pdf" target="_blank">Burning THACO</a> which talked about adapting classic D&D modules for BW play. It includes the following comment (on pp 12-13, under the headings "Pushing Conflict Early" and "Ignore Filler"):t seems that every module I pick up has the structural integrity of mushy peas. You'll have to take it into your own hands. Front load conflict. The first module I ran . . . had the players join up with a caravan in a town and described days of journey before it got to the point that something happened (other than random encounters, natch). We're talking potentially hours of play before something significant happens. Don't let that happen. As a Burning Wheel GM, you have a ton of information at your disposal that D&D DMs don't. You have your players' characters' Beliefs, Instincts and Traits. You know what they got excited about when you gave them the briefing on the module. And in addition, like a DM, you have module itself. Use those tools to create conflicts and issues the players will have to address. If your module starts with pages of journey and exposition before anything happens, give the players a few sentences of synopsis and fast forward to the good stuff. . . . A lot of obstacles and opposition in modules is filler. It's there to take up time, to provide a reason for the niche skills of one type of character, or to make the experience seem "real." It's ok to leave a few of these in for old time's sake, but mostly, unless it's something your players will really get a kick out of, just go ahead and invoke the Say Yes or Roll Dice rule. Give maybe a sentence describing how the characters overcame the obstacle and move on.The last time I posted that on these boards it provoked outrage! And more-or-less for the reasons you've indicated - creating conflict, and fast forwarding to the good stuff, is seen as railroading. In another current thread, about what is hard about GMing a RPG session, there is more than one post saying that it's hard to get the players to do what they are "supposed" to do (eg they spend time interrogating NPCs who have no information) - but why don't those GMs either just tell the players what they're supposed to do? or cut straight to it (eg don't introduce NPCs into the situation who are nothing but window dressing)? or else adapt to what the players are having their PCs do (eg if the PCs are very interested in NPC X, and succeed on an Intimidation roll or otherwise successfully convey their threateningness, then have X tell them something interesting)?I think in most cases the answer will be something about railroading, or metagaming, or both.</blockquote>

Verification