Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 8336213" data-attributes="member: 1465">Well said.My favourite GMing style is &quot;sandbox-y&quot;, so I can't be said to be a railroading GM really...Still, I will totally defend a GM who goes railroading out of frustration (or sheer panic!) because her players aren't following the story at all, either by mistake or because they decide to be antagonistic to it.Think about it: you agreed to play, your DM has spent time or money into an adventure, trying to make it the most interesting and vibrant with details... then you decide you don't buy into saving the prince(ss) and prefer to go doing something else.Now, if you play with ME you'll be fine, because I have like a hundred other things up my sleeve, or I can just make something up (with a sandbox approach, the idea is that the PCs seeks adventures rather the other way around). But a less prepared/experienced GM can feel pretty insulted. Imagine how YOU would feel if you'd invited guests for dinner, spent time and money to prepare a great meal with care, and then your guests look at your work and decide they're rather have a beer?A good GM eventually learns not to have specific bottlenecks, like the proverbial hidden door you MUST find to continue, and be ready to allow many (even unexpected) paths towards victory, as well as paths to failure, or different outcomes in general. But that takes years to learn! Certainly I would not blame a GM who bought a 50$ adventure to actually want to play out at least a good chunk of it, and if a bit of railroading is needed to keep going, so be it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 8336213, member: 1465"] Well said. My favourite GMing style is "sandbox-y", so I can't be said to be a railroading GM really... Still, I will totally defend a GM who goes railroading out of frustration (or sheer panic!) because her players aren't following the story at all, either by mistake or because they decide to be antagonistic to it. Think about it: you agreed to play, your DM has spent time or money into an adventure, trying to make it the most interesting and vibrant with details... then you decide you don't buy into saving the prince(ss) and prefer to go doing something else. Now, if you play with ME you'll be fine, because I have like a hundred other things up my sleeve, or I can just make something up (with a sandbox approach, the idea is that the PCs seeks adventures rather the other way around). But a less prepared/experienced GM can feel pretty insulted. Imagine how YOU would feel if you'd invited guests for dinner, spent time and money to prepare a great meal with care, and then your guests look at your work and decide they're rather have a beer? A good GM eventually learns not to have specific bottlenecks, like the proverbial hidden door you MUST find to continue, and be ready to allow many (even unexpected) paths towards victory, as well as paths to failure, or different outcomes in general. But that takes years to learn! Certainly I would not blame a GM who bought a 50$ adventure to actually want to play out at least a good chunk of it, and if a bit of railroading is needed to keep going, so be it. [/QUOTE]

Verification