Would you consider this railroading?

[jester47]

You present the characters with a situaiton, and they go off on their adventure. You run the evenings fun and you are then done. Rather than pick up where you left off the next session, you start them off half a continenent away and 1/2 a year later in a new "start the adventure" scenario. They go off in whatever direction they choose and you put whatever you want to use in thier way. The adventure ends and you do the somthing similar the next session...

would that be railroading?

Aaron.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

It depends. If you let the players know before-hand that the campaign is going to consist of a series of single-shot scenarios (like television episodes), then it isn't really railroading.

Railroading is more like if you decided how each episode was going to end, and then fudged rolls, browbeat your players, etc., to force them to arrive at your pre-determined outcome.

 

[caudor]

I don't know if I would call it railroading, but from a player's perspective it might be a little disconcerting to learn of such a gap in space/time, provided there is not an adequate summary of what exactly transpired during the gap. Of course, it depends on your players as well. Some may want to skip the 'boring travel parts'.

I've found that my players do not like to have long gaps in time (or if there is a gap, they will want to fill the time with magical research, stronghold construction, etc.). But's that a planned gap.

Talk it over with your players...I'm sure they'll let you know how they feel about it.

 

[jester47]

The gap in time would be planned and accounted for. They can do stuff in that time, but their next adventure is what is detailed.

Aaron.

 

[Harmon]

No, not railroading- just poor planning.

Ashamed to say I have done it.

 

[shilsen]

I second caudor's suggestion. It's not railroading, but it is an approach which will suit some players and not others. Be very clear beforehand that this is what you plan to do, and make sure that the bulk of the players (and ideally, all of them) are onboard with the concept.

 

[coyote6]

It's just running an episodic campaign.

Heck, it's probably more "realistic" than having one hair-raising adventure after another.

At least this way, if your PCs start at 1st level & the typical starting ages, you won't find yourself 200 appropriate-CR encounters into the game, thinking, "Wow, 16th level, and the human rogue isn't out of his teens yet!"

 

[Greylock]

Sounds like one of many CRPGs out there.

Part of the reason I've retreated to PnP.

Vote: Yes, it's railroading.

 

[Vigwyn the Unruly]

No, not railroading- just poor planning.

Ashamed to say I have done it.

What's to be ashamed of? Are the players having fun? Are you? If the answers are yes, then you should be proud of what you have accomplished. There is no rule in D&D saying that you have to play it campaign-style.

 

[Rel]

I don't think THIS:

You present the characters with a situaiton, and they go off on their adventure. You run the evenings fun and you are then done. Rather than pick up where you left off the next session, you start them off half a continenent away and 1/2 a year later in a new "start the adventure" scenario.

is railroading. But THIS:

They go off in whatever direction they choose and you put whatever you want to use in thier way.

might be.

If you start the evening saying, "You are in a small village. Tales abound of a dangerous band of outlaws in the forests to the west!"

And then a player says, "Screw the outlaws. I've got to destroy this evil artifact. I'm headed toward the volcano that lies to the east!"

And then you say, "Ok...you head east...and run into a dangerous band of outlaws!" then that's railroading.