What is "railroading" to you (as a player)?

[Fenris-77]

You've got to make judgement calls and play it by ear to make that work. If they're talking in character in a situation the NPCs would overhear, why wouldn't they?

The two of you need to have a hug in and combine your perspectives. Michah, you just need to adjust yourself to the notion that most people play the game differently than you.

 

[Hriston]

This made me think that the way to express this is for the GM to give the player of the 3 Wisdom character different information than the rest of the party gets. (This is just a thought experiment and would be a pain to do...except I guess online.). I wouldn't advocate for it, but in my mind that would be a good "simulation" of the low Wisdom.

And likewise with Intelligence: if the GM thinks that 3 or 5 or 7 Intelligence represents a specific level of understanding, then give that player different information!

But that's a very different beast from giving the player full information, and then expecting them to "roleplay" that stat according to somebody else's opinion about what the number represents.

I wasn't directly attempting to answer your question because I'm not really interested in limiting the roleplaying choices of players based on ability scores, but I was interested in what you said about prohibiting "participation in some aspect of the game" and that "finding and proposing solutions to challenges is core to RPGs." @Micah Sweet's elevation of "exploring an imaginary setting through your character" as (for them) a higher priority got me thinking about how a player could be prohibited from imagining the setting due to their PC having a low score similarly to how (according to some) a player can be prohibited from making sound tactical decisions for their PC due to a low Int score.

I think one could limit players' roleplaying based on Dex and have something like this effect if, below a certain Dex score, a player was expected not to declare actions to move their PC around in the game world in order to prompt the GM to disclose more information about the setting and would be told their PC's score was too low and to roleplay their character with less mobility if they did.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The two of you need to have a hug in and combine your perspectives. Michah, you just need to adjust yourself to the notion that most people play the game differently than you.

I am aware of this, I just don't really see the relevance. I don't believe popularity has anything to with value in a non-financial sense (by which I mean more popular things are more likely to more money). We all play differently. I certainly wouldn't call anyone else's playstyle "perverse". Seems rude.

 

[bloodtide]

The fact that players talk as a group, as players and not as characters, is something that some versions of how this works simply misses. Vanishingly few tables play in character 100% of the time, and talking about this issue using that as the normative behavior set is silly. I have all the respect in the world for that kind of play but it simply isn't even common, never mind the norm.

It is very common in Old School style Games and Deep Immersion games and Real Role Play (the acting kind) type games. Or more so games of all those three types combined.

I count my game as one. Once game play starts players will only speak Out of Character during breaks. Though my game also has a 'No asking OOC questions during the game', so this also cuts down on a lot of OOC talk.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yeah, that's what my players do. If they feel they should take actions a certain way because of their stats, they just do it. Like I said, I haven't seen this be a problem for anyone.

Then why are you going on and on about it? If it’s not an issue for your game and if you’ve, quote… “never seen it be a problem for anyone”… then why are you going on and on about it for pages of discussion?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Then why are you going on and on about it? If it’s not an issue for your game and if you’ve, quote… “never seen it be a problem for anyone”… then why are you going on and on about it for pages of discussion?

I'm not. People keep calling me out.

 

[GrimCo]

True. I have never even seen a table do it! And personally, I even have a kind of hard time believing it exists or has ever existed.

It's not that uncommon. From personal experience, it was way more common in V:tM circles than in D&D. And not in "supers with fangs" VtM games, more in Anne Rice heavy inspired games. I've played sessions like that, where all convos where in character, first person. Those were games where we would have multiple sessions without ever touching dices. But beside me, everyone else in that group also loved Mind's Eye Theater and was very into Vampire LARP.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I'm not. People keep calling me out.

So just don’t reply.

If it’s never been a problem for you or any table you’ve ever seen, then describing it as a problem as you have seems to be just about judging others’ preferences, no? And we all know how you feel about that.

Sometimes it’s okay to just not respond, Micah.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So just don’t reply.

If it’s never been a problem for you or any table you’ve ever seen, then describing it as a problem as you have seems to be just about judging others’ preferences, no? And we all know how you feel about that.

Sometimes it’s okay to just not respond, Micah.

I'm not the one calling their understanding of someone else's preferences perverse.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I certainly wouldn't call anyone else's playstyle "perverse". Seems rude.

Sorry if that word seems insulting. It seemed like the right word to describe giving somebody something but expecting them not to use it, instead of just not giving it to them.