Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 8338465" data-attributes="member: 97077"><a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/why-defend-railroading.681253/post-8335315" target="_blank">Here, here</a>. It's probably worth saying that all railroading isn't malicious either and a DM isn't necessarily a bad person for doing it. Often it comes from inexperience and/or a mismatch in expectations at the table as to how the group will play the game. But it is dysfunctional in my view. It's what railroading in any other context means.I also think partly the issue is one of prep. A fairly linear plot-based adventure can be thrown together really quickly. That makes it attractive to DMs who are, like many people, pressed for time. Contrast that with a fully prepped adventure location with no plot - this can require a greater investment in time. However, whereas the plot-based adventure can be less prep, it's also a great deal harder to run at the table. Even if the players are bought into staying on the plot, the DM feels the need to obscure it in order to preserve mysteries or reveals to make the most of the planned experience. This can be difficult to manage at the table.On the other hand, a hex crawl or a dungeon where there is no plot to follow, is just a matter of resolving where the characters go and what they run into there in whatever order and pace they see fit. So it's very easy by comparison to run at the table - but again, usually more to prep. And if you don't use some of that prep for whatever reason, no big deal, it can be repurposed in some other game. While neither approach is immune from railroading DMs, there is in my view more pressure on the plot-based DM to engage in railroading because there often is no adventure outside of the plot. (If the players agree to stick to the plot or that the DM should engage in illusion of choice to keep them on it, then it's not railroading, of course. But it's still a harder than running a dungeon!)</blockquote>

Verification