Forced Railroading - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Forced Railroading

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
randyrabbit
Oct 19, 2010 9:13:49 Hi,

So I started playing my very first D&D game. Now, I've been a nerd most my life playing video games, I've played some old game called gorps (or something like that), mechwarrior, magic, and some vampire (which was when I was a kid so we didn't evne roll dice lol) Anyway, I was invited to the game by a friend of mine who is the DM. I've since started DMing my own game, that he's also a part in. It's been a lot of fun, learning the rules in the middle of the DMing is great. It forces me to think about what the player wants to do and get in the know if he can do that, or I guess if their is game mechanics for it. They ask, hey can I do blah. So I roll out the DM guide or search the compendium and find it. Oh, I guess you can. SO I didn't think about that aspect and have to improvise. I do this time and time again, but the players like it. It's not my story line that I had planned. Infact, I have stopped planning a story line, I just create a world with characters that have their own agenda. The players interact with it as they want. I never plan for them to do it in a certain way anymore. The end result, I feel like the characters really enjoy the game. It's their game afterall.

So the heart of my problem, I was playing with in my Friends game and we were investigating a priest that had known ties with an evil wizard that we have "slain" I use it loosely because I think he'll return from the grave. Anyway, we found the priest and were following him. He was in a carriage, with 2 beggars who just sold his potions for some small fee. I want in and ask it was "name of priest"? He said how do you know my name? I told him I wanted him to tell his carriage to drive out of town. He refused at which I drew my sword. Then all of a sudden, the DM rolls a d20 (rolls a 7) and looks at my paper and says 24 vs AC. (were level 8 and that was an exact match) then rolls 5d6 damage and says this much damage. Tries to do it again, at which point I see he's being a piss off dick because I didn't use diplomatic methods like he thought we would (Our bard was gone that day, he was playing our character with good skills in that regard. I was Roleplaying what my striker would do. I'm not a talker, I'm a killer) and called him out and said if that's how it is, and I used yield ground and told him since we have no battlemat or init order or know anything about the terrain, I shift my 4 squares into the darkest corner and made a 28 stealth check.  Long story short, some guards came and kept me away while another character in our story did it the diplomatic way.

Does this seem Okay? Fine, he had a story. Fine, I should have probably had to roll some bluff or intimidate check. But He should have said to make these checks nad let me know if it fails. Then what happens after that.  Next time I will roll natures on all NPCs and make him tellm etheir stats so I don't get surprised by a level 24 made up beggar hitting me with an empty basket that does 5d6 damage.

In short, was I in the wrong to get mad (I didn't storm off, I shut down playing. I just rolled with the flow and played along, but didn't attempt to do anything. Which is not fun, I have no more say in what my character can do anymore)?
Or should the DM do this in a different way?
How should I bring up this idea to my DM? Maybe I should just leave the campaign if he's going to DM in this fasion? He's a friend outside the game, could I do this without hurting his feelings?

Thanks
#2
zmortis
Oct 19, 2010 11:49:22 Ok first things first. Relax. It is just a game.

Now that you have managed to relax you need to understand that the game of D&D is a cooperative effort between the players and the DM. Both you and your DM reached a point of disagreement about how that particular encounter should play out, and you learned the hard way that the DM is the final arbitrator of how their NPCs and the world will respond to the characters actions. Conversely the DM does not get to dictate the actions of your character. It doesn't seem like the DM did this from your description, but simply had the world respond in a hostile manner to your character's hostile approach to the situation.

In this case I don't see the DM as having run the game "on rails" as it would be a reasonable response for a dangerous cleric to smite your character if threatened by them with physical violence. If this figure is a respected figure in town relatively speaking, then it is also likely/reasonable they could summon up help in the form of town guard to pursue an attacker. If someone tried to hijack your car with a knife, you could certainly shoot a firearm in your possession at them, and call the police if you had the capability. So why do you think it strange that this cleric did so?

You have already noted that both you and this DM have been playing fast and loose with the rules in your campaign. Since this is the "house rule" you are campaigning under, it is not the player's perogative to determine when and how the rules will be used or not. That is the function of the DM once again. Could this DM have handled your unexpected in-game action better? The answer is yes. Were you behaving in an immature manner afterwards because it wasn't handled the way you thought it should? The answer is also yes.

The solution is that you need to accept that for good or bad the DM is in control of the mechanics, the NPCs, and the world. You are in control of your character's actions. This DM is probably still a bit green in handling unexpected situations.  In these instances it is best if the players go along with the call at the moment in the game, and constructively help the DM after the game with feedback about both what they liked and what they didn't like.  It is never a good idea to fight with the DM while playing, or to sulk like a small child who has been told no.

I understand that in the excitement of play it can be hard to emotionally distance yourself from the actions of the other participants. The trick is focusing on the point of the game being to have fun together. If you don't always get "your way" on something, then just let it go for the moment, and bring it up in a constructive calm discussion after the game. That is certainly the fair way to handle it from the player's perspective.

I hope this helps.
#3
randyrabbit
Oct 19, 2010 16:04:56 I wouldn't say I acted immature. I guess I didn't call him out and argue with him. I just knew what he was doing and pulled my character away from the situation. I just felt, at this point, that my ability to roleplay was stifled. I just didn't take any aggressive role in the game after that (and by aggressive, I mean I basically didn't say anything and rolled dice when I was needed. I did not mean I never drew my sword again). I feel that if I am going to be punished for playing my unaligned character who is a deadly ranger as he is, then why play him?  I should give him a bow of friendship and try to talk the priest into submission.

It does help, but how do I say to someone, who is so uptight about his things going his way, that what I think he did was some of the worst dming I've seen. Since I am DMing my own campaign, I have read a bunch of tips and what not, as well as reading the DM guide. Should I just ask him to read it? Should I say, hey, I think that was bogus to handle it that way, maybe you should let the role playing work itself out. Maybe I roll an intimidate check or bluff. ANd I pass it, then we take him out of town and the same result happens, we get the information, but now he likes me less. Or let's say I fail, and he looks me stone cold in the face and threatens me, or asks me to remove it that it doesn't scare him. Or he calls guards and I end up dead or in jail. It's fine.

My point is that he didn't let teh game mechanics resolve it. He shot me down with a bullshit roll (because I know everyone has seen gamers: dorkness rising, that was a nameless NPC) and was angry that I tried to do it. He was visibly mad at me for not being a displomat with my fricken 9 Charisma.. I just feel like he could have handled it better and want to bring it up to him. But I feel like he's the type of person that will A) be personally offended. B) become defensive and tell me I was wrong (which I don't feel like I was). and either way he will not change.

Part of me wants to spank him in the campaign I run that he plays in. Oh, you want to use diplomacy on this rogue? Oh, you rolled a 39? Oh, not high enough, actually, now he's mad and he rolls a 50 vs. fortitude, you take 60 dmg, are knocked prone save ends, second effect, dazed save ends, immobilized save ends, 3rd effect slowed save ends. Yep, I think that will get my point across.
#4
zmortis
Oct 19, 2010 17:27:30
I wouldn't say I acted immature. . . .

Part of me wants to spank him in the campaign I run that he plays in. Oh, you want to use diplomacy on this rogue? Oh, you rolled a 39? Oh, not high enough, actually, now he's mad and he rolls a 50 vs. fortitude, you take 60 dmg, are knocked prone save ends, second effect, dazed save ends, immobilized save ends, 3rd effect slowed save ends. Yep, I think that will get my point across.

As someone who is 43 years old, trust me when I say this commentary above is practically the definition for immature behavior if you are at all serious about doing this. Quid pro quo vengence? Does that really strike you as a truly mature way to handle this issue?

As someone who is not just mature, but practically ancient these are not the actions I would take to resolve a disagreement with someone regarding their DMing style. I would (like I am doing now with you) have a discussion with your DM about how you think he could manage a similar event in a better manner in the future, and listen for his constructive reply regarding what I could improve in how I play in his game.

I can understand you are upset, and it sounds like this DM is also immature in their behavior if they are letting anger against a player direct their use of the game world to "punish" them. If the two of you are incapable of handling this in a civil adult manner, then I would highly recommend you drop out of his game as a player. That will likely be the only way to salvage your friendship.

If you can't have an open honest discussion without using unnecessary inflamatory language such as "worst DM ever", "bogus" and "bullshit", then I really think quiting his game honestly is your best choice. If you can be mature enough to have a reasonable dispassionate discussion, listening for how to improve your own "flawed" behavior as well, then I think you can improve this situation and prevent future occurances.

Coincidentally, lest you think I am throwing stones at your glass house, even us grumpy curmudgeon 43 year olds still have "flaws" which could stand improvement. It's part of human nature to have these flaws, and to resist correcting them. None of us are perfect.
I hope this helps.
#5
Pashalik_Mons
Oct 19, 2010 17:38:10
Part of me wants to spank him in the campaign I run that he plays in. Oh, you want to use diplomacy on this rogue? Oh, you rolled a 39? Oh, not high enough, actually, now he's mad and he rolls a 50 vs. fortitude, you take 60 dmg, are knocked prone save ends, second effect, dazed save ends, immobilized save ends, 3rd effect slowed save ends. Yep, I think that will get my point across.

The problem with this approach is that when you kick around his character, his response isn't going to be, "Oh! I see now that that is a jerky move, and I should stop it!" It'll be, "You are such a jerk."

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 randyrabbit Oct 19, 2010 9:13:49	Hi, So I started playing my very first D&D game. Now, I've been a nerd most my life playing video games, I've played some old game called gorps (or something like that), mechwarrior, magic, and some vampire (which was when I was a kid so we didn't evne roll dice lol) Anyway, I was invited to the game by a friend of mine who is the DM. I've since started DMing my own game, that he's also a part in. It's been a lot of fun, learning the rules in the middle of the DMing is great. It forces me to think about what the player wants to do and get in the know if he can do that, or I guess if their is game mechanics for it. They ask, hey can I do blah. So I roll out the DM guide or search the compendium and find it. Oh, I guess you can. SO I didn't think about that aspect and have to improvise. I do this time and time again, but the players like it. It's not my story line that I had planned. Infact, I have stopped planning a story line, I just create a world with characters that have their own agenda. The players interact with it as they want. I never plan for them to do it in a certain way anymore. The end result, I feel like the characters really enjoy the game. It's their game afterall. So the heart of my problem, I was playing with in my Friends game and we were investigating a priest that had known ties with an evil wizard that we have "slain" I use it loosely because I think he'll return from the grave. Anyway, we found the priest and were following him. He was in a carriage, with 2 beggars who just sold his potions for some small fee. I want in and ask it was "name of priest"? He said how do you know my name? I told him I wanted him to tell his carriage to drive out of town. He refused at which I drew my sword. Then all of a sudden, the DM rolls a d20 (rolls a 7) and looks at my paper and says 24 vs AC. (were level 8 and that was an exact match) then rolls 5d6 damage and says this much damage. Tries to do it again, at which point I see he's being a piss off dick because I didn't use diplomatic methods like he thought we would (Our bard was gone that day, he was playing our character with good skills in that regard. I was Roleplaying what my striker would do. I'm not a talker, I'm a killer) and called him out and said if that's how it is, and I used yield ground and told him since we have no battlemat or init order or know anything about the terrain, I shift my 4 squares into the darkest corner and made a 28 stealth check. Long story short, some guards came and kept me away while another character in our story did it the diplomatic way. Does this seem Okay? Fine, he had a story. Fine, I should have probably had to roll some bluff or intimidate check. But He should have said to make these checks nad let me know if it fails. Then what happens after that. Next time I will roll natures on all NPCs and make him tellm etheir stats so I don't get surprised by a level 24 made up beggar hitting me with an empty basket that does 5d6 damage. In short, was I in the wrong to get mad (I didn't storm off, I shut down playing. I just rolled with the flow and played along, but didn't attempt to do anything. Which is not fun, I have no more say in what my character can do anymore)? Or should the DM do this in a different way? How should I bring up this idea to my DM? Maybe I should just leave the campaign if he's going to DM in this fasion? He's a friend outside the game, could I do this without hurting his feelings? Thanks
#2 zmortis Oct 19, 2010 11:49:22	Ok first things first. Relax. It is just a game. Now that you have managed to relax you need to understand that the game of D&D is a cooperative effort between the players and the DM. Both you and your DM reached a point of disagreement about how that particular encounter should play out, and you learned the hard way that the DM is the final arbitrator of how their NPCs and the world will respond to the characters actions. Conversely the DM does not get to dictate the actions of your character. It doesn't seem like the DM did this from your description, but simply had the world respond in a hostile manner to your character's hostile approach to the situation. In this case I don't see the DM as having run the game "on rails" as it would be a reasonable response for a dangerous cleric to smite your character if threatened by them with physical violence. If this figure is a respected figure in town relatively speaking, then it is also likely/reasonable they could summon up help in the form of town guard to pursue an attacker. If someone tried to hijack your car with a knife, you could certainly shoot a firearm in your possession at them, and call the police if you had the capability. So why do you think it strange that this cleric did so? You have already noted that both you and this DM have been playing fast and loose with the rules in your campaign. Since this is the "house rule" you are campaigning under, it is not the player's perogative to determine when and how the rules will be used or not. That is the function of the DM once again. Could this DM have handled your unexpected in-game action better? The answer is yes. Were you behaving in an immature manner afterwards because it wasn't handled the way you thought it should? The answer is also yes. The solution is that you need to accept that for good or bad the DM is in control of the mechanics, the NPCs, and the world. You are in control of your character's actions. This DM is probably still a bit green in handling unexpected situations. In these instances it is best if the players go along with the call at the moment in the game, and constructively help the DM after the game with feedback about both what they liked and what they didn't like. It is never a good idea to fight with the DM while playing, or to sulk like a small child who has been told no. I understand that in the excitement of play it can be hard to emotionally distance yourself from the actions of the other participants. The trick is focusing on the point of the game being to have fun together. If you don't always get "your way" on something, then just let it go for the moment, and bring it up in a constructive calm discussion after the game. That is certainly the fair way to handle it from the player's perspective. I hope this helps.
#3 randyrabbit Oct 19, 2010 16:04:56	I wouldn't say I acted immature. I guess I didn't call him out and argue with him. I just knew what he was doing and pulled my character away from the situation. I just felt, at this point, that my ability to roleplay was stifled. I just didn't take any aggressive role in the game after that (and by aggressive, I mean I basically didn't say anything and rolled dice when I was needed. I did not mean I never drew my sword again). I feel that if I am going to be punished for playing my unaligned character who is a deadly ranger as he is, then why play him? I should give him a bow of friendship and try to talk the priest into submission. It does help, but how do I say to someone, who is so uptight about his things going his way, that what I think he did was some of the worst dming I've seen. Since I am DMing my own campaign, I have read a bunch of tips and what not, as well as reading the DM guide. Should I just ask him to read it? Should I say, hey, I think that was bogus to handle it that way, maybe you should let the role playing work itself out. Maybe I roll an intimidate check or bluff. ANd I pass it, then we take him out of town and the same result happens, we get the information, but now he likes me less. Or let's say I fail, and he looks me stone cold in the face and threatens me, or asks me to remove it that it doesn't scare him. Or he calls guards and I end up dead or in jail. It's fine. My point is that he didn't let teh game mechanics resolve it. He shot me down with a bullshit roll (because I know everyone has seen gamers: dorkness rising, that was a nameless NPC) and was angry that I tried to do it. He was visibly mad at me for not being a displomat with my fricken 9 Charisma.. I just feel like he could have handled it better and want to bring it up to him. But I feel like he's the type of person that will A) be personally offended. B) become defensive and tell me I was wrong (which I don't feel like I was). and either way he will not change. Part of me wants to spank him in the campaign I run that he plays in. Oh, you want to use diplomacy on this rogue? Oh, you rolled a 39? Oh, not high enough, actually, now he's mad and he rolls a 50 vs. fortitude, you take 60 dmg, are knocked prone save ends, second effect, dazed save ends, immobilized save ends, 3rd effect slowed save ends. Yep, I think that will get my point across.
#4 zmortis Oct 19, 2010 17:27:30	I wouldn't say I acted immature. . . . Part of me wants to spank him in the campaign I run that he plays in. Oh, you want to use diplomacy on this rogue? Oh, you rolled a 39? Oh, not high enough, actually, now he's mad and he rolls a 50 vs. fortitude, you take 60 dmg, are knocked prone save ends, second effect, dazed save ends, immobilized save ends, 3rd effect slowed save ends. Yep, I think that will get my point across. As someone who is 43 years old, trust me when I say this commentary above is practically the definition for immature behavior if you are at all serious about doing this. Quid pro quo vengence? Does that really strike you as a truly mature way to handle this issue? As someone who is not just mature, but practically ancient these are not the actions I would take to resolve a disagreement with someone regarding their DMing style. I would (like I am doing now with you) have a discussion with your DM about how you think he could manage a similar event in a better manner in the future, and listen for his constructive reply regarding what I could improve in how I play in his game. I can understand you are upset, and it sounds like this DM is also immature in their behavior if they are letting anger against a player direct their use of the game world to "punish" them. If the two of you are incapable of handling this in a civil adult manner, then I would highly recommend you drop out of his game as a player. That will likely be the only way to salvage your friendship. If you can't have an open honest discussion without using unnecessary inflamatory language such as "worst DM ever", "bogus" and "bullshit", then I really think quiting his game honestly is your best choice. If you can be mature enough to have a reasonable dispassionate discussion, listening for how to improve your own "flawed" behavior as well, then I think you can improve this situation and prevent future occurances. Coincidentally, lest you think I am throwing stones at your glass house, even us grumpy curmudgeon 43 year olds still have "flaws" which could stand improvement. It's part of human nature to have these flaws, and to resist correcting them. None of us are perfect. I hope this helps.
#5 Pashalik_Mons Oct 19, 2010 17:38:10	Part of me wants to spank him in the campaign I run that he plays in. Oh, you want to use diplomacy on this rogue? Oh, you rolled a 39? Oh, not high enough, actually, now he's mad and he rolls a 50 vs. fortitude, you take 60 dmg, are knocked prone save ends, second effect, dazed save ends, immobilized save ends, 3rd effect slowed save ends. Yep, I think that will get my point across. The problem with this approach is that when you kick around his character, his response isn't going to be, "Oh! I see now that that is a jerky move, and I should stop it!" It'll be, "You are such a jerk."