Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8335517" data-attributes="member: 22779">See, I don't really bother with trying to make the distinction here.Linear is a plausible set of scenarios where progression is A to B to C.&nbsp; If you are traveling from New York to Boston, it is EXTREMELY unlikely you will pass through Rome.&nbsp; And, frankly, a player who decides that he wants to go to Rome and is prevented from doing so is a different issue from railroading. That's a complete failure of player buy in.&nbsp; Now, if we add a time limit to the scenario, and you must travel from New York to Boston in under 4 hours to stop the assassination of the very important NPC, then, well, you have to fly.&nbsp; You cannot take a train, boat or walk from New York to Boston in under 4 hours.&nbsp; So, we have a linear scenario where choices are constrained.&nbsp; Is it a railroad?&nbsp; No.&nbsp; It's entirely plausible and no meaningful player choices have been removed.&nbsp; There is only one way to travel that distance in that amount of time.&nbsp; You aren't &quot;forcing&quot; the PC's to fly as opposed to any other choice because, well, there is no other choice.Railroading, OTOH, removes meaningful player choice.&nbsp; As in choices that the players can plausible make in the scenario are being constrained, not because of the facts of the scenario, but because the DM/GM has determined a specific outcome that cannot occur if the choice is allowed.&nbsp; That's the difference between linear and railroad.&nbsp; In a linear adventure, the PC's could still fail.&nbsp; They could, for whatever reason, miss their flight and fail the mission.&nbsp; The scenario does not have a fixed ending, despite the facts of the scenario limiting choices that the player might make.&nbsp; A railroad will have a fixed result, regardless of any decision the players try to make and any action the players take that conflicts with this DM determined outcome (not scenario determined) will be blocked by the DM.Does that make better sense?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8335517, member: 22779"] See, I don't really bother with trying to make the distinction here. Linear is a plausible set of scenarios where progression is A to B to C. If you are traveling from New York to Boston, it is EXTREMELY unlikely you will pass through Rome. And, frankly, a player who decides that he wants to go to Rome and is prevented from doing so is a different issue from railroading. That's a complete failure of player buy in. Now, if we add a time limit to the scenario, and you must travel from New York to Boston in under 4 hours to stop the assassination of the very important NPC, then, well, you have to fly. You cannot take a train, boat or walk from New York to Boston in under 4 hours. So, we have a linear scenario where choices are constrained. Is it a railroad? No. It's entirely plausible and no meaningful player choices have been removed. There is only one way to travel that distance in that amount of time. You aren't "forcing" the PC's to fly as opposed to any other choice because, well, there is no other choice. Railroading, OTOH, removes meaningful player choice. As in choices that the players can plausible make in the scenario are being constrained, not because of the facts of the scenario, but because the DM/GM has determined a specific outcome that cannot occur if the choice is allowed. That's the difference between linear and railroad. In a linear adventure, the PC's could still fail. They could, for whatever reason, miss their flight and fail the mission. The scenario does not have a fixed ending, despite the facts of the scenario limiting choices that the player might make. A railroad will have a fixed result, regardless of any decision the players try to make and any action the players take that conflicts with this DM determined outcome (not scenario determined) will be blocked by the DM. Does that make better sense? [/QUOTE]

Verification