I have used the out of game explaination, so the players can see that there is mehtod in my madness. In my last campaign I wanted to take the PCs to a battle where they would have some sort of involvement in the outcome, I explained this on the outset to them and said there was a certain series of events that needed to take place in order for them to be in the right sort of position with certain influential NPCs.

Problem is, I was a little too clever, I let the subplot get too out of hand to the extent I had to railroad them back in. But I did explain this, that they had to cooperate with NPCs X and Y in order to get to the battle.

Of course, when it goes too off the rails you can always load Schondringer’s Gun (the gun is not loaded unless the Gm says it is) or invoke Chandler’s Law (have a guy walking around the corner holding a gun) to give them a gentle prod back to where you want them to be.

Great article! A lot of people see railroading as a big no-no, but that doesn’t mean the game has to lack direction.

the story happen a certain way. I can’t foresee everything, and you guys, being ever-so-clever, have a knack for derailing my plans.”

Why does the story have to happen a certain way? Why does there have to be a specific path?

Why can’t the story be flexible enough to allow the players to derail the plans, even permanently?

Overpreparing is usually a sign that the GM either doesn’t trust their storytelling abilities enough to improvise or hasn’t seen the benefits from simply saying “Yeah, we’ll go with that.”

Yet, there is a difference between not talking to the NPC Barkeep to get the information about the Dungeon of Doom than say…killing the King of the Kingdom of Light and Justice just for the hell of it.

I recall Rich Burlew saying in Start of Darkness that the campaign world goes a lot smoother before the PCs show up.

But I think sometimes, if you have to railroad too much, it’s giving you a subtle signal: the players are not interested in this style of campaign and you need to revise. There are no plans so precious that they cannot be thrown away, maybe it’s time for an out-of-game convo with the group.

Thanks everyone for sharing.

There are three types of game adventures.

1. A railroading outline, where everyone is forced down a certain path for a certain story or effect.
2. A completely free-form approach, where the GM starts the game and introduces bad guys, and the players create most of the story.
3. A bit of both, where everyone contributes by adding plot hooks, taking the story on side roads, etc.

All three have their uses, and the GM Fiat can be used in all of them.

The GM Fiatness Greatness is just a tool – it’s a little something that can help you from time to time, should you need it. Now, I’m not the greatest GM, but I’ve had a lot of experience, and experience tells me that sometimes it’s easier to simply grab the train, and put it back on the tracks. Sometimes the players even thank you for it. However, that’s not really what the post was about.

I think it’s important to remember that GM Fiat does not take away the players’ ability to make decisions. – That’s really what is important. There may come a time when you have to say, “Stop. We need to get back on the tracks,” but again, that’s not what I’m talking about. If you have to do that every adventure, then something is wrong.

If you look over the examples in the post, I think you’ll see that my railroading either brings forth a cool story moment, or is a benefit for the players. The players have never really said anything to me about railroading, so I think that I’ve done it correctly (I’m speculating). Actually, I don’t think that railroading is entirely the right word for it. It boils down to two types:

1. Give an automatic win to the player when it seems cool and/or dice are just a formality. Some minions can be killed in the right situation, regardless of what a die says.
2. Use it to introduce a cool story moment. I really think the succubus spell and the PC auction were received well – so I say go for it.

The GM Fiat is a tool. Put it in your toolbox and pull it out once in a while. See how you can carve your story with it so that your players appreciate it. just remember to not use it too often, and without screwing the player characters.

My next post will be: PLAYER FIAT – How to Railroad the GM. Remember, it’s all so that everyone can have the most fun!

Thanks again everyone,

-Chris

Ahem. The following is “IMO” as well.

“OLD GM’ing” was about being a referee, not a ’story teller’ or ‘opponent’. “OLD GM’ing” was about taking a toolkit of rules and working towards having a fun, open, uninhibited game. “OLD GM’ing” was about providing an arena for the players to determine their own futures, whether they wanted to do some “steroetyped” hack/slash that supposedly everyone started in, or if they wanted to get involved in political intrigue (which, interestingly enough, the very first D&D campaign – Blackmoor – was more about). “OLD GM’ing” was not about railroading, but about consensus. “OLD GM’ing” was about improv and allowing for, as the previous poster put it: “possibilities and timelines for your own characters (NPC Baddies).”

I’ve learned more about “OLD GM’ing” from reading the Q&A and writings and imaginative stories from the oldsters than the stereotypes that get pushed around.

Hi, I’ve been running Northern Journey for 6 years now. It’s a railroad campaign from module 2 to module 8 (level 4 to level 30).
And the players accepted the railroading and embrace it .
They have sigils in the arms (like tatoos), and when they are not moving the right way, well, they light up and make them so. They have come to depend so much on the tatoos, that now, when they are lost, the depend on them to tell them the way .