This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Author Topic: (when) Improv is railroading  (Read 8641 times)

Steven Mitchell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 3770
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #75 on: January 26, 2022, 07:47:35 AM »
Storygames are anti-illusionist. They're designed to be wholly transparent. Illusionism is a 'trad' (ie 1985-1990s) game method.

Illusionism is also a natural technique for a trad GM to use, in that it is easy and obvious for a GM working out methods for themselves.  That's why I once used it heavily.  It's also a seductive technique, in that all of the benefits seem to manifest right away, while the drawbacks take some time to be felt--especially with inexperienced players. 

In that's, it's like a tennis grip or swing or footwork.  What feels natural at first is a bad idea that will only show up in bad shot placement later.

Itachi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • I
  • Posts: 1299
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #76 on: January 26, 2022, 08:21:04 AM »
It seems the point of contention in this conversation is calling improv-style illusionism. I posit that..

1. there's no such thing in story/narrative-games because everybody enters play knowing everybody else (GM included) is actively seeking to enhance the story by riffing off each other.

2. Illusionism can only be called as such when it's detrimental to the game, aka when it takes away player agency, and is done in a veiled manner/the players don't know it.

Well, that's my particular view anyway.

David Johansen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • D
  • Posts: 6222
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #77 on: January 26, 2022, 08:32:23 AM »
There are times when it's all the DM can do to handle players going off at random.  I'm all for planned sand boxes but if I put my prep time into a dungeon or a ship or something and the players decide they want to play superheroes this week and make new characters, well, sometimes the chef just has to say, "You'll Eat It and You'll Like IT!"  Which would also be a fun cooking show.
Fantasy Adventure Comic, games, and more http://www.uncouthsavage.com

Itachi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • I
  • Posts: 1299
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #78 on: January 26, 2022, 11:19:53 AM »
There are times when it's all the DM can do to handle players going off at random.  I'm all for planned sand boxes but if I put my prep time into a dungeon or a ship or something and the players decide they want to play superheroes this week and make new characters, well, sometimes the chef just has to say, "You'll Eat It and You'll Like IT!"  Which would also be a fun cooking show.
Yeah, it would be weird if everybody wanted to drop the current theme for another one at the start of a session, specially after thr GM took time to prep it. After the session would be fine. "Hey folks, how about we take a break from this X and play Y?" Sure.

Steven Mitchell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 3770
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #79 on: January 26, 2022, 11:57:13 AM »
There are times when it's all the DM can do to handle players going off at random.  I'm all for planned sand boxes but if I put my prep time into a dungeon or a ship or something and the players decide they want to play superheroes this week and make new characters, well, sometimes the chef just has to say, "You'll Eat It and You'll Like IT!"  Which would also be a fun cooking show.
Yeah, it would be weird if everybody wanted to drop the current theme for another one at the start of a session, specially after thr GM took time to prep it. After the session would be fine. "Hey folks, how about we take a break from this X and play Y?" Sure.

It's right on that fault line that the "train" analogy breaks down.  They are all steps on the line:

Pre-designed - players pick the ticket, players pick the car, players voluntarily get on the train (e.g. go on the quest) and can change their minds within the confines of the journey.  You can't get off the train anywhere you please, but you can exit at certain stations and certainly move around freely on the train.

Improv - If there is something that could have been in the pre-designed train ahead of time but the GM didn't add (for whatever reason), the GM adds it as it is needed, as much as possible to be consistent with the pre-designed adventure/world.  Is there a lantern in the caboose?  Probably.  Is there a doctor in the dining car?  Maybe.  Is there a vampire on the roof?  In most cases, probably not. 

Gaming term "railroad" - you do what the GM has prepared.  Could be handled well or not.  Could be reasonable or not in the case of the player or GM.  You don't get to pick the train or whether or not to buy a ticket, but you should have the standard pre-designed and/or improv options within those confines.  Scope matters a lot here.  Staying within the theme of the campaign is so tiny of a "railroad" that it doesn't deserve the term.  Choosing to run away down one specific corridor instead of interacting with it certainly does if the GM tries to force it. 

Illusionism - doesn't matter what ticket you bought or what train you got on, they all go to the same place.  Doesn't matter what you do on the train in a lot of important ways, the outcomes are the same.  Again, there are degrees, but the slippery slope on this one might as well have a grease spell cast on it.

That's all the trad side.  The narrative structure has a different line, to the point that the railroad doesn't really apply.  Closest I could come is that the group buys the tickets, the group gets on the train, they then proceed to chew scenery.  It's more about the journey than the destination.


Eric Diaz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1115
    • http://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com.br/
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #80 on: January 26, 2022, 01:55:00 PM »
There are times when it's all the DM can do to handle players going off at random.  I'm all for planned sand boxes but if I put my prep time into a dungeon or a ship or something and the players decide they want to play superheroes this week and make new characters, well, sometimes the chef just has to say, "You'll Eat It and You'll Like IT!"  Which would also be a fun cooking show.

That's a fair caveat, and eventually included in the final version of the post:

---
"It is okay to talk to your PCs before the game about a specific premise or even adventure. I recommend GMs that dislike improvising too much do exactly that.

This is NOT exactly railroading, because the players are aware of their choices (or lack of choices) - although the PCs will have no choice in the matter. For example, "hey folks, I have this cool dungeon we can play, what about we run that on Thursday?"."
[...]
Of course, if you give them just one choice, the players can respond with "why would my PC go into this dangerous place", etc. But after the thing has been settled, it would be rude for the players to just go off-grid without a reason, forcing the GM to improvise on the spot (unless, I guess, the GM is cool with that too!)."
---


(BTW, first line should say "talk to your players", LOL.)
« Last Edit: January 26, 2022, 02:00:00 PM by Eric Diaz »
Chaos Factory Books  - Dark fantasy RPGs and more!

Methods & Madness - my  D&D 5e / Old School / Game design blog.

Omega

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • O
  • Posts: 17093
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #81 on: January 26, 2022, 02:30:36 PM »
Narrative games I know don't put success or failure in the hands of the GM, but on the roll of the dice.

Storygames are anti-illusionist. They're designed to be wholly transparent. Illusionism is a 'trad' (ie 1985-1990s) game method.

Very Forgey of you. Bravo.

Shrieking Banshee

  • Narcissist Undead
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2507
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #82 on: January 26, 2022, 02:38:21 PM »
Very Forgey of you. Bravo.

I know the forge literally killed your parents, and so thats why it remains a boogeyman around these parts, but Im pretty sure he meant in the sense that storygames minimize gm input, ergo no illusion when the pcs are also in charge of the plot.

tenbones

  • Poobah of the D.O.N.G.
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6164
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #83 on: January 26, 2022, 02:47:09 PM »
It's funny, I don't ever tell my players what I'm "prepping". I'm prepping every possible thing that is reasonable to where their PC's interests have already guided them. So it's an incredibly rare day when any player of mine simply stops what they're pursuing and goes towards something else thematically that I haven't already considered or seeded into the game.

I do get with my newer players "Is it okay if I do this?" and it makes my veteran players laugh their ass off, because they all know, my answer is *always* going to be "Go for it, if that's what you wanna do."

There are no boxes that can't be opened, no rocks, that can't be upturned. No doors that can't be kicked down - you'll just own the reactions of the world to that act. When my party, that are squires decide to become Privateers - it never happens "out of the blue", there always a lead up to the possibility.

Whether it's players discussing among themselves "We need to get a ship and catch <X> - while we're at it, we're going to need to make it legal, so we'll need Letter of Marque from the Duke... dude, we're gonna be Privateers???" and that becomes a note for me to jot down, obviously. And the "prep" for me is nothing more than making sure my NPC's and locations of note are ready either next session (or whether or not I use them EVER) in the chance that they execute. Or it might be something they spend the rest of the session setting up - finding a ship, getting the paperwork in order, blah blah blah - and I'll have to come up with those NPC's on the spot.

Name/Appearance/Skills/Class competency and any fun facts I can think of. <---- that's it. I'll backfill stats later between sessions.

I'm really good at doing it on the spot. So these kinds of transitions go seamlessly, the world continues. Even if they DON'T go that route, I have a bunch of notes I can use if/when they do decide to go down the wharf, or interact with anyone in that vein.

Good improvisation happens with the PC's in play, filling in the details as you go. Anything you can do to bolster what you lay down you commit to it. There is no need to "change it" - you lay it down and play the ball where it is. If that means you made a mistake and your PC's capitalize on it - great! Let'em have it. Do better next time.

I have nothing to reveal about what *I* want the PC's to do mainly because I don't have any intentions other than feeding their PC concepts back to them. if a PC makes a Knight, I feed "knight content" for that PC to engage with. Same with the thief, mercenary, cleric or mage. And I feed the group content based on what the party does as a group.

That's how the machine keeps rolling

"Illusionism" to me is where people think they're doing "prep" by creating a situation they force their players to engage with regardless of their choices. That's weak GMing to me. Improvisation used to force those kinds of situations is merely the tool used to enforce the railroad. That's Improv used for Evil.

S'mon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13315
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #84 on: January 26, 2022, 02:56:20 PM »
Very Forgey of you. Bravo.

You have outed me. I am literally Ron Edwards.

Itachi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • I
  • Posts: 1299
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #85 on: January 26, 2022, 03:00:00 PM »
Very Forgey of you. Bravo.

I know the forge literally killed your parents, and so thats why it remains a boogeyman around these parts, but Im pretty sure he meant in the sense that storygames minimize gm input, ergo no illusion when the pcs are also in charge of the plot.
Not storygames per se, but the more narrative games the Forge inspired also follow that philosophy. Stuff like Blades in the Dark, for eg.

Omega

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • O
  • Posts: 17093
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #86 on: January 28, 2022, 05:17:55 PM »
Very Forgey of you. Bravo.

You have outed me. I am literally Ron Edwards.

You Monster!  8)

Hzilong

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #87 on: January 28, 2022, 05:26:32 PM »
The funny thing about the illusionism argument to me is that I have had a couple players straight up say that they like that style of game in the player surveys I give to my groups. Obviously, not a style that works for every GM or group, but it is not entirely useless nor should it be verboten. Just another tool to apply judiciously.
Resident lurking Chinaman

Wrath of God

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 895
  • Fearful Symmetry
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #88 on: February 09, 2022, 06:42:38 AM »
Quote
Very Forgey of you. Bravo.

But rightly so. I mean this is precisely vast chasm between what Six Cultures listed as Nordic Larp and Storygame.
In one all is about illusion and immersion, that's why it barely birthed any specific game of it's own. It was mostly parasitic on other games.
The second is all about structure and distribution of power. It's all blatantly in your face. Opposite of illusion.

Quote
but Im pretty sure he meant in the sense that storygames minimize gm input, ergo no illusion when the pcs are also in charge of the plot.

Yes. I'd say it's not even about minimising GM input (in many SG still GM holds relatively traditional role) but about how rolls and choices openly twist narrative and not simulative structure.

Quote
The funny thing about the illusionism argument to me is that I have had a couple players straight up say that they like that style of game in the player surveys I give to my groups. Obviously, not a style that works for every GM or group, but it is not entirely useless nor should it be verboten. Just another tool to apply judiciously.

I think Edwards called concious participation in railroady illusionism - participationism. That however does not solve problems of players who wants to be lied to... ;)
"Never compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon.”

"And I will strike down upon thee
With great vengeance and furious anger"


"Molti Nemici, Molto Onore"

AtomicPope

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • For a Brighter tomorrow...
Re: (when) Improv is railroading
« Reply #89 on: March 06, 2022, 03:55:49 AM »
Since someone brought up mysteries I have to comment.  I've run several mystery campaigns that lasted many years (Mage the Awakening was a long one, nearly 4 years of playing 5 to 6 hours every week).  Mystery games have a very different pacing, and much of the game's enjoyment comes from reveals.  As a DM, you need to have a clear event in your mind: something happened.  That's different from the traditional dungeon where the event is often a part of history (tombs, abandoned castles, this one time in bandit camp, etc).  The mystery game involves an unfolding of history.  When I'm crafting an adventure I try to "layer" my clues and witnesses, and obviously I employ Chekhov's Gun.  What I mean by "layering" is there are clues that are immediately found and others that are discovered along the way.  To maintain a thematic structure I try to have one or more clues that gain meaning as the game progresses.  This new information leads to another location, clue, witness etc.  Think of it like a Theater of the Mind Dungeon, where the PCs are moving down paths, getting keys to doors, getting ambushed, etc.  Just like in a dungeon you don't get to teleport directly to "The End" because no one knows where that is just yet.  You might know there's a dragon at the end, just like the PCs might know there's a murderer or a thief.  In order to avoid skipping ahead it's good to have a series of events in mind (an outline works great here) that take place over several different locations.  That doesn't lend itself to just making shit up as the game moves along.

So, I'm currently running a detective game and I just ran into a snag I explicitly planned on avoiding.  Not kidding.  When I typed up the outline I specifically had these two different witnesses and three different clues revealing locations, events, history, and information to build on the story, but then I screwed up.  Last week I was under immense stress during the game because just before the game, as I was sitting in traffic, I learned my father died.  When I arrived wasn't focused at all but decided not to say anything and just run the game anyway.  I accidentally mixed up a vital clue with a witness testimony and it rearranged the order of what took place.  When it came to the overall narrative things the PCs jumped way ahead, skipped a vital witness and location, both of which added context to the story and revealed the shady past of the dead man they were investigating.  This meant that the PCs met with a dangerous witness way too soon (they didn't know he was dangerous because the original clues were mixed up) which immediately caused a fight they weren't expecting, like a really, REALLY dangerous fight that almost ended in a TPK.  I had to improvise the entire situation and introduce new clues because they skipped ahead do to my screw up.  In the end it worked out but for a while there the players were like "WTF is happening?!"

That's the danger of improvising with mystery games: information gets left out and it can quickly become inconsistent or incoherent.

In this same detective game there were times when the players accurately read the clues, listened to the witnesses, and guessed what happened way ahead of time.  There was an adventure where the PCs were looking for two things: a missing person and his missing box he had with him.  That was actually a fun game because as a DM I knew they were overlooking one key detail.  When the PCs laid a trap for their suspect he avoided it, not because he knew it was a trap but because they forgot one very important detail and that "trap" wasn't a trap at all.  That was a lot of fun for everyone.  Here's what happened:

The PCs were looking for two things:
1) A missing box containing a McGuffin.
2) A missing person  was an old disabled vet who was carrying the box, got robbed and shot several times in the chest.  Then he jumped from the train and disappeared.

Because it's D&D and takes place in Eberron I was playing within the bounds of known mechanics, lore, and established places.  The missing person was a disabled veteran of the Last War.  He had a Dragonmark (a magical birthmark) on his left hand.  His left hand was blown off and now he has a mechanical replacement, a magical prosthetic.  The PCs figured out that he was seen in two places at the same time based on witness testimony they pieced together, which is impossible for a low-level Artificer who specializes in prosthetics (no Simulacrum or Clones).  One of the places he frequented was a run by Changlings, basically dopplegangers.  They figured out that there's a Changling impersonating him.  Then all of a sudden the missing person appears on their doorstep looking for his box.  Very suspicious.  What the players didn't piece together was the place the missing person would frequent was a "living theater of memories" called Velvet's in Sharn.  The Changlings used a telepathic link to gain memories of the clients, change into the person or people they desired, wear the appropriate clothes using Garbs of Many Fashions, and then using those memories reenact the events the clients paid for.  That was the detail they overlooked (they knew what Velvet's did).  They didn't realize the Changling discovered something while digging around in the old vet's memories, something that could make him rich (he owed money which is why they cut off his hand to identify him because a Changling can't simply grow a new hand), and that's why the ambush was successful.

The trap the players laid out was a simple memory trap they called "where's the spoons?"  If he was the real person he would know where the spoons were in his own house.  Of course the Changling did know because he had access to the client's basic memories, and people never rearrange their kitchen.  What they overlooked was the fact that the Changling had two right hands.  The missing person was wearing the only prosthetic right hand he had left in the house, which was a tinkered model the old vet built for a friend but didn't give it to him.  The other left hand, his spare, was inside his suitcase that was part of the clues (this was a red herring to get the idea in the player's heads that the missing person would show up without a left hand and it worked).  There was another prosthetic but it wasn't a left hand.  The Changling wouldn't know what happened after the last time he plundered the old vet's mind for secrets, that both hands were taken.  So the Changling, who was double-crossing the gang that stole the box, led the PCs into a trap where he stole the box while the PCs were fighting with the gang and ran off in the middle of combat.  Then when they were returning to tell their client they found the box but a Changling stole it, the real missing person appeared and he had a hunch where the Changling was going to sell the box and why.  So now the PC detectives must venture into the seedy underbelly of the city looking for a person with two right hands.  Clues and layers.


The Mysterious Box adventure seems convoluted because I designed like that.  Lots of little clues that reveal more and more along the way.   Compare this to the previous adventure where the PCs skip ahead and it's very different.  I can say first hand that mysteries are best DMed with an outline in hand and a clear idea of the events that took place in mind.  That doesn't mean there is a railroad (ironically the Mystery Box started on a rail car because one of the PCs was a railway engineer who was down-sized out of a job so I wove that into the story) or an illusion of choice.  Just like a dungeon there are only so many rooms and hallways, traps and monsters, and we have a particular boss fight in mind.