Yeah, didn't plot centric railroads start becoming the norm during the 1E era following the lead of the Dragonlance modules?

I can't speak for others, and I can't speak for those who like exploration/setting based play, but I can speak for myself. Listening to people talk about setting based play, it just strikes me as taking things way too seriously. I just don't play that way, and never have. I also don't really care for how setting based play seems to begin. The story tends to evolve over time, and the game gets good when the story takes on a life of its own. That takes a while, and I don't really enjoy what comes before that. With story/railroad, to me its about skipping to the good parts. I also find story/railroad does epic storylines like Dragonlance or LotR better, while setting based play tends to be mundane to me, or at least tends to mundane for a long time before becoming epic, and I don't really enjoy mundane. I've also tended to game with players who aren't into taking charge of the story personally as opposed to sitting back and letting it happen(I myself tend to do this), and with a setting based game this sort of play group tends to result in the game going nowhere fast.

Quote from: Benoist;688511To me, whether you have pre-Forge storytelling railroading, or post-Forge non-railroady story-building, I am EQUALLY unsatisfied by the act of play, because what I want is to NOT construe the game as a fiction or narrative, I do NOT want to be reminded all the time that I am supposed to be the co-author of a story. I want to experience the world from the point of view of my characters and make decisions in the game AS my character. I want the world to feel real, and to have organic, coherent developments based on the world's logic and point of view, not because of a meta-narrative layer dictating what would be dramatically convenient at any given point of the game. It's about immersion, let's pretend, being in the world and the world responding to my actions through my character, to me. It's not about building a story. At all.

Yep. I don't get why this is such a peculiar attitude towards RPGs that designers and writers for major publishers behave as though they don't even know it exists.

Quote from: Benoist;688511There are two sides to the narrative coin in RPGs...
 I am EQUALLY unsatisfied by the act of play, because what I want is to NOT construe the game as a fiction or narrative, I do NOT want to be reminded all the time that I am supposed to be the co-author of a story.

I agree with all this but the problem is that most people using the term narrative aren't clear which meaning they intend.  I also find a big mismatch between the theory and many games derived form the theory - they tend to be so hyperfocused that, though they are not a railroad, there are not many choices in play.  It's like you can use your imagination to do whatever you want, as long as you choose from the menu of options.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;688515Yeah, didn't plot centric railroads start becoming the norm during the 1E era following the lead of the Dragonlance modules?

I can't speak for others, and I can't speak for those who like exploration/setting based play, but I can speak for myself. Listening to people talk about setting based play, it just strikes me as taking things way too seriously. I just don't play that way, and never have. I also don't really care for how setting based play seems to begin. The story tends to evolve over time, and the game gets good when the story takes on a life of its own. That takes a while, and I don't really enjoy what comes before that. With story/railroad, to me its about skipping to the good parts. I also find story/railroad does epic storylines like Dragonlance or LotR better, while setting based play tends to be mundane to me, or at least tends to mundane for a long time before becoming epic, and I don't really enjoy mundane.

Setting based play is mundane because YOU can't find a way to make it cool?

Quote from: mcbobbo;688508Yeah, I hate to tell you this, but plot-having adventures have been at least 50% of the non-rules content published (and sold) by the big players since the 80s.

I don't think you're so much endangered, as maybe you are only now coming around to notice it.

There's a difference between a "plot-having" adventure, which a lot of the time is really a "situation" PCs walk into, a true literary-style railroad (like DL modules) and what we're talking about, which is a paradigm shift in game designers.

Now maybe you're arguing that it isn't a paradigm shift at all, but I would disagree.  More and more games are being released with rules that assume as a default a narrative layer, where "we roleplay characters within the fiction or story we're creating".

Quote from: Haffrung;688517Yep. I don't get why this is such a peculiar attitude towards RPGs that designers and writers for major publishers behave as though they don't even know it exists.

I don't get it either. It boggles the mind.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;688514Who is objecting to adventures with plots? One of my all time favorite published modules is L2 The Assassins Knot.

It is filled with plotting npcs, thier motivations, resources, and timeline of what could happen barring PC action.

Its the handholding of players, leading them from scene to scene, presupposing what they choose to do that sucks donkey cock, not the existence of plot elements.

Exactly. Motivations, schemes, ambitions, rivalries - awesome stuff. Deciding at the outset how it will turn out? Bollocks.

And I should give credit where it's due - the 4E Neverwinter Nights Campaign Settings is an outstanding sandbox. It has everything I cited above, plus evocative and cool locations, and it doesn't presume anything on the part of the players. They can ally with any faction, oppose any faction, play any role in the setting that they want. No scripted events, no railroaded connections.

But that is a regional campaign setting. I don't understand what the problem is with applying the same principles to a much smaller location.

A sandbox is more work for the DM, and for the players as well. Maybe people are lazy.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;688529A sandbox is more work for the DM, and for the players as well. Maybe people are lazy.

For the DM, I agree, although creating lots of fun stuff for a game hardly counts as "work" if you actually enjoy doing it.

For players, if asking them to choose between multiple adventure opportunities is too taxing on the brain perhaps a game of Monopoly would be more suitable for their capabilities.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;688530For the DM, I agree, although creating lots of fun stuff for a game hardly counts as "work" if you actually enjoy doing it.

For players, if asking them to choose between multiple adventure opportunities is too taxing on the brain perhaps a game of Monopoly would be more suitable for their capabilities.

It's weird, but it sounds as though a lot of modern players are inclined to do shitloads of thinking away from the table designing their characters, but very little at the table making decisions about that those characters do in the game world. But that's a Magic thing isn't it - design your deck, and then it pretty much plays itself?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;688530For the DM, I agree, although creating lots of fun stuff for a game hardly counts as "work" if you actually enjoy doing it.

For players, if asking them to choose between multiple adventure opportunities is too taxing on the brain perhaps a game of Monopoly would be more suitable for their capabilities.

Its not work so much as effort from the players. A lot of players just don't want to try that hard, to take charge of the game and make it their own. A lot of players just want to sit back and let the game happen to them.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;688529A sandbox is more work for the DM

It isn't. It's just like creating a character before the game begins with a few lines of background, enough for you to visualize and interpret your character in the game. The World is no different.

The problem is that DMs haven't been told how to do it in any official capacity and core materials for ages now, in favor of railroading in the late 80s and 90s, and now of play pieces being a function of "gamist" or "narrivist" creative agenda.

I can prove it to you. I'll come up with a new thread when I get the time and build a ready for play D&D sandbox not anywhere near the excruciating detail I go to in my advice to build the mega-dungeon (which includes this level of detail for the sake of being complete). When you actually sit down to come up with your own stuff, search the web or draw a few things at your table, and use your imagination while doing so, up to the point you can take it from there because you can "see" the environment in your head and role play it live at the game table, it's easy.

I'll prove it.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;688534Its not work so much as effort from the players. A lot of players just don't want to try that hard, to take charge of the game and make it their own. A lot of players just want to sit back and let the game happen to them.

Having played while exhausted from work on many occasions, I can relate to not wanting to do much thinking.

Thats why D&D comes with a mode of play called hack & slash!  Enter dungeons as a murderhobo, kill things and take stuff. Perfect for the lazy, and you don't need to be led around by the nose to do it.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;688539Having played while exhausted from work on many occasions, I can relate to not wanting to do much thinking.

Thats why D&D comes with a mode of play called hack & slash!  Enter dungeons as a murderhobo, kill things and take stuff. Perfect for the lazy, and you don't need to be led around by the nose to do it.

Yeah, a couple of the options open to the players should always be something straightforward, like root out the lizardman lair in the marshes, or explore the abandoned tower.

Quote from: Benoist;688537It isn't. It's just like creating a character before the game begins with a few lines of background, enough for you to visualize and interpret your character in the game. The World is no different.

The problem is that DMs haven't been told how to do it in any official capacity and core materials for ages now, in favor of railroading in the late 80s and 90s, and now of play pieces being a function of "gamist" or "narrivist" creative agenda.

I can prove it to you. I'll come up with a new thread when I get the time and build a ready for play D&D sandbox not anywhere near the excruciating detail I go to in my advice to build the mega-dungeon (which includes this level of detail for the sake of being complete). When you actually sit down to come up with your own stuff, search the web or draw a few things at your table, and use your imagination while doing so, up to the point you can take it from there because you can "see" the environment in your head and role play it live at the game table, it's easy.

I'll prove it.

Maybe for a rules light system, but for something heavy like 3E/4E, GURPS or Rolemaster I doubt it.