TheSword
Legend
That is where we disagree fundamentally.
D&D General Why defend railroading?
- Thread starter overgeeked
- Start date
Thomas Shey
Legend
Some people don't find minor combats interesting. They'd rather just skip them and get to the main event (which is presumably not the ogre or it wouldn't be put together as a generic encounter).
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
The idea of generic encounters and main events implies a particular sort of play, where there’s Main Content and Side Content instead of just Content.
TheSword
Legend
The location of the ogre has no bearing on it’s importance, difficulty or relevence. The ogre could have a useful item or be a lieutenant of a major foe. It might have captured a useful NPC ally, or have information to impart of its own accord. Defeating the ogre might mean not fighting it at its home base with its mate or in support of a BBEG. It might also be a potential ally of its own in games where ogres are not monolithically evil.
I don’t understand why the fact that the encounter is not tied to a specific place means it should be avoided.
Last edited:
Asisreo
Patron Badass
Its not opening stiff jam jars, its rescuing a village from destruction. Just because its not a threat to your character doesn't mean it isn't a threat to somebody. Sure, superman fights intergalactic threats like Darkseid, but he also rescues people from burning buildings. He could decimate the joker with a single punch, but he doesn't consider his threats any less serious.
You don't need to make fully comprehensive encounters before they go to waterdeep (at least, not from the start). But there should be something there if it isn't meant to be an empty settlement.
I'm not a fan of the whole "lazy DM" model of DMing. Naturally, stealing encounters, hooks, or even an entire reskinned adventure is fine but just saying "Waterdeep exists" and not putting in the effort when there was a chance the players would want to go there is a bit negligent in my eyes.
One of the hallmarks of sandbox play is that the world reacts to the PCs choices. So it's not just that they can choose options A, B, and C, but that if they choose A something still happens at B and C, and this is communicated to the players. For example, maybe there is a timer, and if they choose A, B is not longer available. Or clearing out section of megadungeon A means that the creatures from C move into location A. etc.
I consider this to be great fun, and makes the world feel real more so than any illusion of dm preparedness would. Does this happen in linear, adventure path style play? Is this sort of world reactivity fun for people who enjoy linear adventures? Genuinely curious as I don't run those modules, though I have flipped through some of them. wotc's idea of a sandbox (starter kit, etc) seems to be that the players have the choice of which content to engage with first, but it's more or less just sitting out there waiting for the players to arrive. Pathfinder APs that I've read assume that particular events will have happened by the end of chapter 1, and assuming all that happened tell the dm how the 'bad guys' react (which stretches plausibility, imo, when you have a world-destroying threat that the PCs are messing with from level 1).
Thoughts?
I consider this to be great fun, and makes the world feel real more so than any illusion of dm preparedness would. Does this happen in linear, adventure path style play? Is this sort of world reactivity fun for people who enjoy linear adventures? Genuinely curious as I don't run those modules, though I have flipped through some of them. wotc's idea of a sandbox (starter kit, etc) seems to be that the players have the choice of which content to engage with first, but it's more or less just sitting out there waiting for the players to arrive. Pathfinder APs that I've read assume that particular events will have happened by the end of chapter 1, and assuming all that happened tell the dm how the 'bad guys' react (which stretches plausibility, imo, when you have a world-destroying threat that the PCs are messing with from level 1).
Thoughts?
They aren't really forced to do anything, it's just that the world doesn't revolve around them. If there is a threat, and they choose not to engage with it, then there are consequences. It's allowing the players to choose what scenarios they want to engage with, e.g. a sandbox not a railroad.So basically you force them back on the railroad!
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
I just showed that the fun happens with or without your deceptive railroading, but if you want to cut that portion out in order to win some sort of point...
TheSword
Legend
Adventure Path play absolutely can result in a changing world. For instance I’m currently
DMing Rise of the Runelords for a group.
The players infiltrated the lair of the skin-saw cult. They didn’t defeat the cult and their leader as the book presumed they would. Instead they followed one of the cultists to the cults true leader at a different location.
Later the rank and file cultists attacked the PCs in their base of operations later on in retaliation. The leader of the cult also disguised themself on the same vessel that the players later travelled on and bribed the captain to betray the characters. At that point the characters defeated the cult leader, several levels and about two months later than originally intended.
Later the rank and file cultists attacked the PCs in their base of operations later on in retaliation. The leader of the cult also disguised themself on the same vessel that the players later travelled on and bribed the captain to betray the characters. At that point the characters defeated the cult leader, several levels and about two months later than originally intended.
Adventure paths are generally gated between key events or locations that act as way points. How you get to each gate is entirely up to you and what you do inbetween is entirely up to you. That doesn’t sound like any railroad I’ve been on.
...Wait this 24 page thread was started yesterday? Huh
Anyhoo, I only checked first and last page and wow people definitely have super wide definitions of railroad.
Like "players find clue and as result of clue they find themselves into next place" isn't railroad to me, its just linear adventure. To me railroad isn't even "well gm wants you to go to a tower, so gm placed tower into whatever direction players went" (like yeah it gets close, but thing is that if gm has designed entire dungeon/has cool adventure idea, as long idea hasn't been presented it doesn't exist yet. Plus its kinda unreasonable to be like "okay gm has to design twenty different dungeons in case players don't go to one of them"), its more like "gm is absolutely forcing players go to tower even if they explicitly say they don't want to go to tower".
Something else I consider to be railroad is "Players search their house in case of listening devices? Well too bad, they will miss some. Why? Because I said so, not because they failed roll or anything."
Pathfinder APs don't most of the time have genuine railroad to me, closest thing they have is "plot structure". Most of APs don't really break down completely if players do something story doesn't expect.
Anyhoo, I only checked first and last page and wow people definitely have super wide definitions of railroad.
Like "players find clue and as result of clue they find themselves into next place" isn't railroad to me, its just linear adventure. To me railroad isn't even "well gm wants you to go to a tower, so gm placed tower into whatever direction players went" (like yeah it gets close, but thing is that if gm has designed entire dungeon/has cool adventure idea, as long idea hasn't been presented it doesn't exist yet. Plus its kinda unreasonable to be like "okay gm has to design twenty different dungeons in case players don't go to one of them"), its more like "gm is absolutely forcing players go to tower even if they explicitly say they don't want to go to tower".
Something else I consider to be railroad is "Players search their house in case of listening devices? Well too bad, they will miss some. Why? Because I said so, not because they failed roll or anything."
Pathfinder APs don't most of the time have genuine railroad to me, closest thing they have is "plot structure". Most of APs don't really break down completely if players do something story doesn't expect.
