D&D General Why defend railroading?

[Maxperson]

Any time I as much as hinted to my players that a particular path is insta death they have invariably ignored the safe path and made a bee line for the insta death route. Even when it was traps culled from Grimtooth.

My last post to you was an attempt at humor, but it seems that we mostly(I have one like yours) have a different breed of player. The rest of the group generally keeps him in check, but things get very interesting when he's alone and encounters something risky. Most of the time if I hint that a path is death, they back off and either leave it alone, or start researching, preparing, etc. for that path so that they can survive, even sometimes coming back levels later to attempt it. No beelines into their graves.

 

[Bardic Dave]

And I thought the railroading discussion was getting weird... But I really don't even understand what the few last pages have been about...
Can we get back to arguing about ogres or something?

This is the next 160+ page thread, you heard it here first! The only relevant question now is will it eventually overtake the halfling thread?

 

[TheSword]

Just because something's on the PHB equipment list doesn't mean it's necessarily going to be available in every village the PCs ever pass through.

Also, I think there's a disconnect in what people are calling a "small town". To me a small town has a population of maybe 500-1000; several pubs, a few inns, and either has some sort of local industry (fishing, or mining, etc.) or acts as a supply and market center for such (usually farming).

Something that "struggles to have a general store and an inn", slightly paraphrasing @Maxperson from upthread, comes across in my mind as a village of maybe 50-125 people, if that.

Yeah that probably explains the different expectations.

I use the forgotten realms wiki categories. An example of which would be Bryn Shandar, Daggerford or Ashabenford.

 

[Maxperson]

And I thought the railroading discussion was getting weird... But I really don't even understand what the few last pages have been about...
Can we get back to arguing about ogres or something?

Shrek II was better than the first movie.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah that probably explains the different expectations.

I use the forgotten realms wiki categories. An example of which would be Bryn Shandar, Daggerford or Ashabenford.
View attachment 140339

Even so. I grew up in a small town with a population of around 400. It only had main street and division street. We had one gas station, one bar, one general store and right before I moved we got one small diner. Even at 4-5 times the size isn't going to bring in a jewelry store or other really pricey place.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Uhm, in terms of ones that impact the game, they absolutely do. Read any sports tell-all and you'll see all kinds of anecdotes about it. It may not be their official job, but its one of their jobs in practice.

Are you confusing "is a member of the social contract and has an adult say" with "is the supervisor of the social construct?" Because I've also seen players hailed as social and team leaders and discussions of strong team concepts where everyone is equally on board with managing the social aspects of the team. "Coach" isn't "social supervisor."

Because I've never seen it work better any other way. If that's not good enough for you, I'm afraid I see you as making a theoretical argument that seems to poorly mesh with reality. I think any attempt to manage this internally to a group is not only going to fail more often than not, its probably going to fail overwhelmingly more often than not (this last clause I'm not as wedded to, but its my genuine opinion).

Then I am truly sorry that you haven't yet gamed with adult people capable of managing their own social interactions without supervision.

Only if you consider most people in general "children that need supervision". I've had absolutely no sign in my life that people in general are good at this, and gaming groups tend to have internal stressors that make it worse.

And I'll absolutely, firmly, with no equivocation say there are enough people who either can't or won't stand up for themselves to not be trivial. If you think otherwise, I think you've either been exceedingly fortunate in what groups of people you've hit, or have been very blind to the way people will avoid conflict even at considerable cost to themselves because they find conflict even worse. Just in the extended groups I've been in personally I've seen at least half a dozen people who would rather just leave a game completely than do that, or bottle it up until it was intolerable and then explode (and run through that cycle repeatedly). And that's among only a score of people. That's not even counting stories I've heard from other groups.

Oh, I don't disagree this has happened a lot, or isn't common, my point is that it's toxic to the culture of gaming. You make this claim but don't see that such infantilization of players in favor of aggrandizing GMs as supervisors of the social contracts is one of the things that's received such negative attention in the hobby. That so many recent positive improvements have been to let people know that they can, indeed, speak up and the GM won't just slap them down and kick them out for bucking their rule. That assuming that it's the incapability of people that requires their supervision by someone that isn't at all vetted for the job (seriously, what qualifications are necessary to be a GM and, according to you, de facto supervisor of the social contract?) is part of the continuing problem.

I have little faith in people in general. As such, I definitely don't have faith in a structure that makes the assumption that because you can run a good game that you're automatically qualified to be a social mediator and supervisor for other adults. That this is the norm, and expected, is, to me, betting blindly and hoping things work out. A system where people are responsible for themselves, and share responsibility for group things, is, to me, a far better foundation for flawed people to gain better outcomes than blindly hoping Bob the GM isn't an naughty word.

I mean, let's be honest here. I'm advocating for treating people like adults and not privileging someone into a position of authority just because of their role in a game. You're arguing that people must be supervised by such a person -- someone that has shown a modicum of ability in playing a role in a game -- and that this is a better outcome because people cannot be trusted to act like adults and might not stand up to someone else. Okay, then, I'm pretty okay with my position in this argument.

 

[TheSword]

Even so. I grew up in a small town with a population of around 400. It only had main street and division street. We had one gas station, one bar, one general store and right before I moved we got one small diner. Even at 4-5 times the size isn't going to bring in a jewelry store or other really pricey place.

Sure and I lived in village with 2500 residents. You can’t equate real world settlements to fantasy ones the dynamic/economy/balance/purpose is completely different.

Put in your town what makes sense to you and what you need. I don’t need to overthink it.

 

[Maxperson]

Sure and I lived in village with 2500 residents. You can’t equate real world settlements to fantasy ones the dynamic/economy/balance/purpose is completely different.

A fantasy town will be much poorer.

 

[Greg Benage]

Indiana Jones could have just left without the Ark and let the Germans have it.

Yeah, but if he did that, the Nazis would have gotten the Ark and opened it and...oh wait.

Indy was railroaded! The DM had preordained how the story would end, and nothing Indy did ended up mattering. He could have stayed home and taught class and the Nazis would have simply had their faces melted earlier.

 

[robus]

Would you be willing to give an example of "forcing obstacles in the way of their goals"? Perhaps that will be useful.

Well I’m not trying to be clever, I was just trying to respond to Max’s assertion that moving an encounter (the infamous ogres) from one route to another in order to complicate the player’s journey was not a big concern for me. I “force” the action to where the characters are, not where they might have been, because the players want to have an adventure.

Again, I’m not going to “force“ something to happen that the players are trying to avoid unless of course they totally cock it up!