Why I Dislike the term Railroading

[Reynard]

And, honestly, I think this is probably the most common style of play out there. Pc's get a job (quest, hook, what have you), PC's undertake to resolve the job in a number of ways that they come up with on their own, job gets resolved, and it narrows back down to the next job.

Yeah, there might be three or four jobs lined up (again, replace "job" with hook or whatever term floats your boat) but, essentially, you have another choke point so the DM can prep the next session at the very least.

As the difficulty of "winging it" and the length of prep time increase for a given system, so does the tendency for the GM to push the players onto the prescribed adventure. Frankly, it's just more fun that way. Therefore, player character freedom can often be at least partially attributed to the system itself, insofar as it supports or restricts the GM's ability to provide multiple avenues of entertainment for the players. BD&D is emminently wingable -- it's just *that* easy to run and come up with stuff for. As you move along the AD&D->3E->Pathfinder track, it becomes less easy. I combat this (running PF now) by having a few different adventures in my game bag with some party/campaign specific notes. And if I throw out a random hook (as I am wont to do0 and the PCs bite hard (and I am totally unprepared) I have a few special encounters/mini-adventures ready to go. Since we only play for 3 or so hours at a clip, that'll cover me til next week and they're none the wiser (okay, they probably know, but they seem to enjoy it anyway).

 

[Scribble]

I think if you're asking the question "is there anyone out there who actually does X..." the answer will be yes... (even if it's only one dude.)

 

[Doug McCrae]

I believe the term for this is narrow-wide-narrow or something to that effect.

Yeah, I believe it was Piratecat who coined that phrase to describe how he designed his convention scenarios.

The start is fixed. For example: PCs are asked to acquire the Eye of Argon.
The middle is open. PCs could go about finding it in many ways - ask around, cast a spell, go to the library.
The ending is fixed. The Eye of Argon is in a particular place so the PCs will have to go there to get it.

What I'm describing might be a bit closer to narrow-wide-wide, where the start of an adventure is fixed but both the methods and conclusion are more open. That said though, endings usually depend on beginnings. The resolution of a task usually depends heavily on what the task is, so maybe narrow-wide-narrow is more appropriate. Most freedom is usually in the middle.

 

[Nagol]

Heh, I should probably not disagree with your eloquent agreement.

I guess the issue I have is that, unless you happen to be playing in a "Real World" rpg, very, very few "events" occur in a game that aren't at least tangentially related to the PC's. Sure, you could mention that some city far away just had an earthquake, but, really, do people actually do this?

IME, events are almost always tied to the PC's. Anything else rarely comes up in game.

I can't speak for others, but I do this.

For the past four game years, the PCs have heard about the problems plaguing a shipping coast (piracy, privateering, the withdrawl of naval forces, drop in trade, etc.), the downfall of a free city, the kidnapping of a new princess-consort on her wedding day in a nearby nation, 2 border skirmishes between major powers, a resumption of a civil war and a continuation of that war into a war of conquest, a newly inheriting noble son turning to evil methods, the rapid expansion of a city due to shifting trade patterns from all of the above.

Were these events tied to the PCs? No. Could the PCs decide to react to these events? Yes. Have the PCs reacted? To some.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Sure, you could mention that some city far away just had an earthquake, but, really, do people actually do this?

I tried that a bit in my most recent campaign, a superhero game, with little snippets of info about what other superheroes around the world were up to, but it wasn't very successful. The players didn't really give a toss.

Players are practical, they only care about what directly affects them.

 

[Nagol]

I tried that a bit in my most recent campaign, a superhero game, with little snippets of info about what other superheroes around the world were up to, but it wasn't very successful. The players didn't really give a toss.

Players are practical, they only care about what directly affects them.

The trick is to present information that they may consider an opportunity. The players have to understand that the DM does not expect but is prepared for a player to follow up on the information.

Games where the players are highly reactive (like superheroes), I tend to present less news. The news I do present usually offers a different perspective onto the situations the group is facing/will face/just faced.

Games where the players can be more proactive (like a sanbox D&D game), I present more opportunities as snippets of news.

 

[ExploderWizard]

As the difficulty of "winging it" and the length of prep time increase for a given system, so does the tendency for the GM to push the players onto the prescribed adventure. Frankly, it's just more fun that way. Therefore, player character freedom can often be at least partially attributed to the system itself, insofar as it supports or restricts the GM's ability to provide multiple avenues of entertainment for the players. BD&D is emminently wingable -- it's just *that* easy to run and come up with stuff for. As you move along the AD&D->3E->Pathfinder track, it becomes less easy. I combat this (running PF now) by having a few different adventures in my game bag with some party/campaign specific notes. And if I throw out a random hook (as I am wont to do0 and the PCs bite hard (and I am totally unprepared) I have a few special encounters/mini-adventures ready to go. Since we only play for 3 or so hours at a clip, that'll cover me til next week and they're none the wiser (okay, they probably know, but they seem to enjoy it anyway).

While I agree with this on general principle, in practice it can be just as easy to run on the fly with heavier rulesets as long you prep efficiently.

I run an open/exploration focused 4E campaign in the same style that I ran BD&D. Monster builder software turns mountains of prep into an easy task. I have more customized NPC/ monster stats at hand than I could ever run out of in 5 sessions ready at every game. The players may wander wherever they wish and find something to do. There will be several hooks to explore sometimes being connected so that investigating one will indirectly connect to the others.

This is why it seems so out of whack to me that published adventures for this system are among the most railroady ever when the tools for the system make overprepping a piece of cake, and easier to do than anything in the 3E spectrum.

I guess it doesn't help that the rulebooks themselves go on and on about the importance of prepping combats as these elaborate pre-constructed scenes on carefully crafted soundstage terrain in order for them to be interesting/dynamic. This is directly at odds with the "violence happens where/when it happens " style that I am used to. I suppose if one were to believe the philosophy given in the rulebooks then non-linear adventures might seem overwhelming for new DMs.

 

[Raven Crowking]

The trick is to present information that they may consider an opportunity. The players have to understand that the DM does not expect but is prepared for a player to follow up on the information.

This.

Also, consider how important news can be when it demonstrates how an area has changed since the PCs saw it last. Without the Innkeeper's daughter getting married, the Mayor of the Free City dying, and the village by the woods recovering from a harsh winter, it becomes very obvious why the players think the world only exists to react to them, or to cause them to react.

Better, IMHO, to cultivate a setting where everything may be important, but not everything is.

This goes back to the Wolf-in-Sheep's-Clothing in Expedition to the Barrier Peaks. If the DM never mentions animals unless they are important, no one is going to be surprised by this encounter. A lot of the flavour, IMHO, is lost. Like cooking without salt. The better DM (again, IMHO) sprinkles the world with descriptions that include normal animals, so that it isn't always obvious that a cat, or a crow, or a toad, must be a wizard's familiar.

The same with events happening across the world. PCs hearing news of distant events, some of which may affect them some day in one way or another, is a good thing. PCs discovering that places change while they are away is a good thing.

Either the world breathes, or it does not.


RC

 

[Ariosto]

Obviously I've been running a railroad game for the past several years without realizing it because at the start of each adventure the PCs are given orders by an NPC and if they refuse the campaign will end because they'll be thrown in jail for 20 to life, at the least.

Yeah. So what?

If it's a military game, then maybe you're using Phoenix Command or Merc. News flash: Not everybody likes those game systems. In fact, not everybody likes military games.

A whole lot of "dungeon modules" and the like start with an "express line" to the start of "the adventure".

The root of it all, of course, is the prior determination for (not by) the players as to what constitutes "the adventure". This can lead to further 'railroad' behavior down the line, if the players threaten to exit the adventure.

Anyhow, the "commuter express" is something most people expect to happen on occasion, and take in stride to that extent. It's par for the course in a tournament scenario, for instance. Taking up direction of a character's career for the first time is usually a similar process, and not a cause for dismay.

How do you figure the frequency of your use is at all to the point of the name? The phenomenon is what it is regardless.

If you like emergent plot and litterbox play, fine. Stop implying or outright stating that those of us who don't and prefer something more structured and plotted are playing the game wrong.

Maybe it's suddenly appeared in the past couple of pages (I'm not caught up), but I have not seen any suggestion of an absolute right and wrong. I have seen people expressing their preferences -- just as you have done right here.

Sauce for the railroader is sauce for the off-roader, pal!

It's just a railroad the players happen to like.

Yes.

Tapioca pudding or licorice is what it is even though Alice likes it and Bob does not.

Ditto 'punk' rock and 'flea' markets and "agony aunt" columns and "soap opera" shows.

When someone who doesn't like railroad games sees a railroad game in action or in the offing, he or she is likely to call it 'railroading' because that's what it's called.

For the same reason, someone who likes the phenomenon is likely to use the same term. You are free to come up with a substitute -- but insisting that everyone else must use it would be a stretch!

 

[Scribble]

When someone who doesn't like railroad games sees a railroad game in action or in the offing, he or she is likely to call it 'railroading' because that's what it's called.

For the same reason, someone who likes the phenomenon is likely to use the same term. You are free to come up with a substitute -- but insisting that everyone else must use it would be a stretch!

But I've seen it called railroading and I've seen it called not railroading.

I've seen it used a bunch of different ways, so to me you insisting one definition is the correct one, simply because you feel it is, as you say- is a stretch.

In fact, when I was more actively going to conventions and gaming at hobby stores (and therefore interacting with a wide variety of gamers) I more commonly saw it being used in the method I mentioned earlier.

***

I wonder if part of the "problem" is that it seems to be one of those somewhat subjective terms- Like saying it's "Cold out."

When I lived in SF, people commonly said it was "cold out" to describe 60 degree weather... Here in Jersey 60 degrees isn't usually referred to as "cold out."


Some stuff that is railroady to one person might not even feel that way to another. Neither is "more correct." It is what it is to the specific player.