We don't do that here. The GM provides the model of physics the players accept and expect. If the GM just says "nah" when stuff is inconvenient, players don't know what to expect, and the world becomes inconsistent.

A big part of the GM's fun in TTRPGs is improving off that. Players always ruin my plans, but that's part of the game.

You could also just have it work and go with whatever follows from it though.

I believe you should have a plot prepared but you also shouldn't be afraid to adapt it if the players do something unexpected.
It's more work, but in my experience players can usually smell when you're just trying to block them. And they will derive fun from having found out your plans early (which is totally ok to tell them).

If you've railroaded your campaign that much you're a bad GM. It's not your story, it's your players story.

Having your complex plot get fast forwarded because of a cantrip, priceless

"You can certainly try"

Ime, players are entirely willing to accept an extremely short session just so I can prep and set back up after they throw me a massive curveball. If you're capable of doing it on the fly, that's great, but I'm not and my players usually understand.

Had a twelve minute session once because I forgot I gave the party a foldable boat like three months ago on a whim, and they used it to skip the next ~3 sessions of content. I had an entire thing setup where they'd help a dwarfhold hunt a dragon, and had started on some city-based intrigue in the next area.

I just leveled with them that I had not even slightly expected this session to go this way and had nothing prepped so we'd stop early and pick it up next time.

The crown completely disintegrates, as it was rust all the way through

Sorry, Mario, the real crown is in another dungeon.

I once fast-forwarded a complex plot through a GM-sanctioned bit of fluff.

The party had been invited by their uncle who turned out to be recently murdered when they arrived. Of course they investigated. At one point I had my character wrote a letter to the rest of the family to inform them of what was going on. I actually produced the letter as a handout. Since I had no idea about the date I asked the GM and he told me to pick anything in summer.

The GM s happy with the handout and it was deemed canonical.

A few sessions later he noticed that I had picked something ahead the end of the summer and the bad guys' plot was about to kick off at a specific date right after summer ends. So suddenly the adventure went from "careful slow-burn investigation" to "mad rush to the location of the finale".

Oops.

Couldn't they have gone the other route and made the villain's plans a year later? But sounds like it was a lot of fun the way it was run!

Rollercoaster are fun yet have rails.

Are you even a GM to allow yourself such snap judgment? But for you know, we GM/DMs are not your employees RPGs are a group collaboration.

How is this in any way railroading?

the real crown was the XP we collected along the way

Retconing things to protect muh precious twists is not compelling, though, it's just base metagaming. The unwavering plot is the GM equivalent of the 8 page main character syndrome PC backstory. If I found out my GM was doing that, they wouldn't be my GM anymore.

The DM determined that A) the players would find this crown, B) they would not clean it when they found it, and C) it would get cleaned at some point the DM decides later, whether the players wanted it to or not. Good for a book, bad for D&D.

Yes, exactly. Consistency is important, because it builds and reinforces trust. The GM just saying "nah" is the other side of the player showing up with a homebrew bullshit build.

I get a lot of pushback from the Pathfinder 2e subreddit for promoting the idea that the system is really great for character-driven, fiction-first tables, because everyone just looks at the number of rules and goes "it's so obviously a gameist system, why would you ever try to run it as anything else?", and the answer is it's a fantastic physics system. The rules provide clarity and consistency where it's really useful or important, and are easily ignorable where it doesn't matter.

IMO this is kinda one of the problems with DnD 5e, at least if you want to do certain kinds of stories.

The players just have so many tools at their disposal to do anything and everything that its hard to put them into a challenging situation that:

A) Doesn't involve combat

and

B) Isn't a completely artificial-feeling scenario that's been engineered specifically to negate all of the "I don't have to care about this" buttons that players have on their sheets.

I hate this take a lot, I'm gonna be honest. I don't care if his game is so on rails that it's set on the fucking orient express. As long as the players are having fun with the game, and the GM is having fun with the game.. that's a good GM.

I learned that best things come from the right balance between preparation and improvisation. And that balance is approximately 20-80 respectively, at best. I figured that as a DM, I'm also playing, so I roll with my fellow table partners, as the story is unexpected for me as is for them.

....

A) this makes no sense to describe as railroading, apparently finding anything plot or backstory related is railroading?

B & C) Players not doing what a dm expects isn't railroading. If the dm then turned around and said "no you don't do that" or decides to make it impervious to prestidigitation, that might fit the definition.

Railroading is removing player agency and not giving players choices. Players just doing something unexpected that throws you for a loop? That's called DMing.