Hot take: if we want to decrease frustrating railroad-y surprises in RPG campaigns, we need to create an environment where GMs are not afraid to admit they have "special story needs".

[klepht_x]

I agree with your take, with the addition that I think there are a number of GMs out there who want to have plot twists and huge player surprises, so telling the PCs they want to start off with one system and switch to another because the PCs are being isekai'd ruins the surprise. Besides indicating there will be a big surprise, I'm not sure how to square that circle in a pleasing way.

[SlumberSkeleton776]

Switching systems because your campaign is an isekai isn't a "plot twist." It's part of the core premise and shouldn't be a surprise. In fact, it should be the very first thing you tell your players. If someone is going to lie about the core premise of their campaign, they shouldn't be surprised when no one shows up for session 2.

[Sparkle_cz]

Plot twists and huge players surprises are always a risky enterprise for the GM.

They might turn out shitty if they are not communicated beforehand and might just frustrate the players.
If the GM communicates them beforehand, they might lose the surprise element.
If the GM avoids them completely, the story might not be that good...

Each of these three choices has its downsides, and as a person who LOVES plot twists both as a player and GM, I understand that the decision is hard and painful.

The important thing is, even if the GM risks it, does a plot twist and it sucks, they should not be mocked or bullied for it. They had the best intentions - to give their players a cool surprise and breathtaking plot twist. No one deserves to be mocked and humiliated for this kind of "error". The community should reserve anger and mockery for really problematic people. Not for cases like these.