|
|
Post by dmzinthos on Jul 26, 2015 16:43:47 GMT
Hey fellow dms!
Sorry I've been offline for a bit, campaign started up and had life happen.
I have a question for you all: what is the difference between railroading a story and having an npc that the characters have to meet. There is information that in reality I could give them anywhere. But it would be easier for me (and because I can't seem to think of a way that makes sense to do it without it) if the characters simply met someone that had the information they needed and could give some little background clues on what's going on.
I worry that will be too much railroading and not give the players freedom. Is it acceptable, in the sense that while I'm dm and they are my ****es, I still kind of want them to feel integrated into the story. I could try and drop hints that have them make that choice, but frankly not that creative.
So where's the line. Let me know if you want me to explain story wise what's going on if this doesn't give you enough information.
Thanks!
DM Zinthos
|
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on Jul 26, 2015 18:42:22 GMT
I know that I will never stop another DM from telling more of their story, and maybe it will make things more clear. I think that the binary idea of railroading or not railroading is difficult because no story is ever that simple. I think the real goal is to always make sure that the players don't feel like they are being railroaded regardless of what is happening on your side of the screen. Granted they can force themselves into situations with only one way out, but that's impossible to avoid sometimes, haha.
For this one though I think you could easily place that person in their way, but really it's the information that they need so if it doesn't work the first time keep dropping the clues. Maybe there is a person stuck on the side of the road with the info, but the players just pass him by. Well ok then the chatty guard at the gate? The overly excited inn keeper? Giving info is never railroading as it is still up to the players as to what they will do with that info. When you close roads and say no is when you start into true railroading. Hopefully this helps, and welcome back to the forums!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2015 19:01:22 GMT
joatmoniac has the right of it. What you're describing is not railroading.
Requiring them to find a specific piece of information is fine, and putting it right in front of them is not railroading. Requiring them to perform a narrow set of specific actions without any alternatives for success is. If the NPC just straight up tells them the info, it's a plot point. If the NPC tells them they have to go to the Baying Hills, defeat the orc champion and bring back his head before he'll share his knowledge, and if there is absolutely no other way for the party to acquire the information they seek except to do exactly as instructed, it's a railroad.
|
|
|
|
Post by LegendOfZia (formerly DM Phil) on Oct 22, 2015 21:59:31 GMT
I'm a little late to the game here but I'd like to add a couple of things. First of all, what you describe isn't railroading, as joatmoniac and nevvur have already said. Also, a good way to go about something like this is to come up with a handful of ways that the information might be found out. You could have an NPC that knows it. You could have a book somewhere that has the information. Maybe there's another NPC that knows it or it's just a rumour that's going around town. There are plenty of ways to work information into the game through planning.
However, dropping information is something that can be very tricky to prepare, but can be done through improvisation, especially in town, because the players don't know what you have planned. If the PCs walk right by the town guardsman that was supposed to give them the information, maybe a shopkeeper or innkeeper will give it. It's easy to change things like that to fit what the characters do. To you it seems like railroading because you are making sure it ends up in the player's hands. But they don't know that. For all they know, it's one of a dozen plot hooks you've put into the world for them to explore, and they just happened to talk to the one NPC that had that information.
|
|
|
|
Post by robosnake on Dec 6, 2015 4:28:06 GMT
I tend to use a few simple tricks to help in situations like this.
1. Drop players right into the action. If they need to meet with an NPC to get the adventure going, then start the adventure as they are meeting with that NPC. Lots of video games start with a brief cut-scene and then you're right into a fight or conversation, and it works really well. Even MMOs usually don't drop you into a tavern surrounded by other people RPing - you start in the action, connected to the story somehow.
2. I think of information the PCs need as sort of floating out there in the ether, and I drop it into whatever situation best fits. So they don't have to meet a specific NPC or search a specific drawer in a specific desk. The information they need comes to them as organically as I can manage. To them, it feels like they guessed right and found just the right person.
3. Break the fourth wall. This doesn't have to happen very often, but sometimes you just have to let players know that a particular scene just needs to happen. I think this is totally forgiveable, and is a trope that most people are familiar with from other media, or even other games. Something like, "OK, you guys need to meet with the king and convince him to fund your expedition. How are you going to go about convincing him?" Tag the required scene/encounter/etc. with an immediate goal or mini quest, and it gives them something to think about tactically and plan for and argue about, which players usually enjoy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tesla Ranger on Dec 7, 2015 0:31:37 GMT
If the plot never branches, then it might be a railroad.
I don't have a perfect solution to avoid that but my approach is to usually write a whole lot of information on the problem and how they'll start on it but just about nothing on how they'll solve it. I might have 2 or 3 rough notions on the over all "road to success" but I actively avoid detailing so that the players can come up with those details. This seems to be a reasonable approach for our group but your mileage may vary.
|
|
Samuel Wise
Demigod
Ready to Help...
Posts: 989
Favorite D&D Class: Warlock
Favorite D&D Race: Mousefolk
|
Post by Samuel Wise on Dec 8, 2015 6:46:10 GMT
The gameplay in Final Fantasy XIII is railroading (which I'm fine with, freedom of choice isn't why I play FF, anyway). Follow one path. Go to the left, the wall is too high, go to the right and there is a precipice. There is only one road forward, scattered with NPCs, cutscenes, and enemies.
I really like what Robosnake said about dropping PCs into a fight. Not railroading, just a push that would take a lot of justifications (or excuses) to ignore.
|
|
|
|
Post by catcharlie on Dec 8, 2015 11:50:18 GMT
The gameplay in Final Fantasy XIII is railroading at its finest (which I'm fine with, freedom of choice isn't why I play FF, anyway). I would debate that it's not 'railroading at it's finest' as that was one of the main issues people had with it. It is a good example of what railroading is (which might actually be what you meant), but a game that railroads you without you having an issue with it would be a better example, something like the oldschool games like Mario, sonic, Streets of rage, etc IMO would be a really good example of Railroading done well, you only have one path but you probably don't care. While FFXIII seams to have more RolePlay from RPG compared to something like Mario but they are both a linear game where you play out the story. |
|
Samuel Wise
Demigod
Ready to Help...
Posts: 989
Favorite D&D Class: Warlock
Favorite D&D Race: Mousefolk
|
Post by Samuel Wise on Dec 8, 2015 15:48:53 GMT
it would be a better example, something like the oldschool games like Mario, sonic, Streets of rage, etc IMO would be a really good example of Railroading done well, you only have one path but you probably don't care. While FFXIII seams to have more RolePlay from RPG compared to something like Mario but they are both a linear game where you play out the story. That is probably true, I chose FFXIII, because it had more roleplay. I never play oldschool games for their story, not even oldschool RPGs (RPGs in the NES days, of course). Sonic and Mario never felt like story focused games. Probably why I mentioned FF instead. |
|
|
|
Post by Tesla Ranger on Dec 8, 2015 17:14:41 GMT
I suppose if you wanted a neutral, old school example you could compare Final Fantasy Tactics (or really any Final Fantasy between VI and IX) and Star Ocean. They're both roughly of the same era. They both tend to be very well regarded RPGs with well told stories. In this context the relevant difference is that FFT has one plot with one ending that it drives inexorably towards (and it's a good one). Star Ocean is infamous for the bajillions of potential endings from its ever-branching plots. It would probably be difficult to play Star Ocean twice and get the same plot line all the way through.
It occurs to me that this analogy might be helpful for explaining what we mean when we say "railroading" but I'm not sure it correlates directly to DMing. There's a lot of difference between 90s-era RPGs and D&D. I guess I would conclude that if the surest way for a DM to avoid the negative side of railroading is to give the players choices and to make those choices matter. There may be a third point of making the players aware that the choice is in their hands (or at least implying it subtly).
|
|
