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

[Crimson Longinus]

This statement sticks out to me. All that we have heard of this situation is that the character has a conflict --- get information vital to his quest vs. avoid triggering his lust, and that he decided (however he decided) to go into the brothel. That sounds like "a choice, a hard one" to me. There is no randomized action or lack of choice to speak of here that I can see. I believe that is why your point seems unclear to some and the claim of no choice/ownership/weight seems stray.

Whether they break their chastity and indulge is randomised.

But yes, there is choice to risk it in the first place, which makes this situation better.

But I don't think every Pendragon virtue/passion test is such. The test can be prompted by situations in which the player did not knowingly risk it.

 

[bsss]

The test can be prompted by situations in which the player did not knowingly risk it.

Not to get overly philosophical, but is that not part of the nature of living? I definitely do not reconcile each of my virtues and vices only willingly.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Whether they break their chastity and indulge is randomised.

But yes, there is choice to risk it in the first place, which makes this situation better.

But I don't think every Pendragon virtue/passion test is such. The test can be prompted by situations in which the player did not knowingly risk it.

Yeah, because sometimes you find yourself facing an unexpected temptation. Happens to me in real life every time I peruse Kickstarter.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Ok! Genuinely great! Then please understand that I really, really hate when this sort of a thing happens, so I am very cautious about mechanics that make such thing even potentially possible.

Yes… this is very clear!

So, I feel that I can maintain inhabitation if the dice at least sorta agree with what my internal model of the character was saying. But in such instance the input from the dice is rather pointless. I was going that way anyway. And when they disagree, then I have an issue. So from my perspective there is nothing to be gained from such a system, but it can potentially end up being very detrimental.

But do you think that everyone is equally as perturbed by this as you are?

So I have played with more complex social mechanic, such as Exalted 2. It is just terrible. It interrupts the natural flow of social situations and it will all become detached and gamey. And with enough effort, you can just brainwash people to think basically anything. I hate it.

Now I'm sure there can be better complex systems than that (this is a very low bar,) but again I see no benefits, only negatives. I don't need system for this, it doesn't add anything that of value to me and it can add quite a lot of negatives

I can’t comment in Exalted 2… but sure, some games may try for this kind of thing and fail. And yes, others will be better.

As to why you might consider such systems… maybe because they offer a different playing experience? I play different games to have different experiences. I expect many others do the same.

Because the actions of his character are randomised. I can't explain this better. There was no real choice so there is no ownerships thus there is no weight.

No, that’s inaccurate. Or incomplete. One action is randomized. The result of the roll to resist his Lustful nature. But the player still chose to have the character face that weakness… to test the character’s strength to resist his vice.

A vice that was assigned or chosen by the player, who then likely expected it to come up in play.

Taken as a whole, this is simply not a situation in which the player lacks all agency. Yes, there is the potential for loss of agency as a consequence of the player’s choices… but that is a very different thing to the player lacking all agency or all their choice being randomized.

This is why I’ve pushed back on your phrasing. I think perhaps your strong feelings on this topic… feelings that are perfectly valid… may influence how you describe what’s happening.

Perhaps. If we are looking this from more from perspective of creating a surprising and interesting story with the aid of mechanics, it makes sense for me. I just do not care for this perspective as a player.

Now perhaps some people can integrate this better with being immersed int the PoV of the character. Perfectly possible. It still doesn't change how it feels for me.

I’m not disagreeing with how it feels for you.

Yeah, I'm sure people do that. But it is unfortunate that they have to. It is sorta a fail state if they need to sacrifice being true to their character for the game to keep working. So why would I want to introduce mechanics that potentially require further such sacrifices?

Because they don’t need to require such sacrifices? Games that have rules systems for these kinds of things are often a lot more character focused than games without them. In each of the games I’ve talked about in this thread… Spire, The Between, and Stonetop, causing complications for the group was never the issue that it could often be in D&D for the same players. Because the expectations are just a bit different.

And as for team games, I think people should endeavour to create characters that will get along at least begrudgingly, to lessen the likelihood of a party splitting conflict. But in a situation where such a conflict arises, I would rather have my character to leave the party and being written out of the campaign than to mutilate what I believe them to be in order to fit in. I can always make an another character who is a better fit.

It’s not so much about PvP or the party breaking up as it is about the players being less focused on resource management and risk mitigation. It’s something I’ve observed with my longstanding group… no matter how many new games we play, no matter how well they adjust to the given expectations of play… once we go back to D&D, they slip into old habits. It’s kind of amazing sometimes.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Not to get overly philosophical, but is that not part of the nature of living? I definitely do not reconcile each of my virtues and vices only willingly.

Well, what is willingly, what is free will? I think it goes pretty philosophical.

But at least to me, the dice erode the responsibility.

In my campaign, the characters ambushed some goblins and killed them. Then later the goblins tried to avenge their dead, and attacked the characters in large numbers. But it soon turned out the that the goblins were no match for the characters, but nevertheless the characters massacred almost all of them; they nearly killed the whole tribe.

And one of the characters feels quite bad about it, and it has been brought up several times since those events. But I don't think this guilt would have similar weight, if it had not been genuine choice on the player's part; if there would have been just some "bloodlust" passion check that compelled them to genocide the goblins.

A choice means ownership of the decision, and the randomisation destroys that. And perhaps other people feel differently about this, but this is how it definitely is for me.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

But do you think that everyone is equally as perturbed by this as you are?

Of course not.

I can’t comment in Exalted 2… but sure, some games may try for this kind of thing and fail. And yes, others will be better.

As to why you might consider such systems… maybe because they offer a different playing experience? I play different games to have different experiences. I expect many others do the same.

Sure. I'm willing to experiment, but there are also some things I just know I hate.

No, that’s inaccurate. Or incomplete. One action is randomized. The result of the roll to resist his Lustful nature. But the player still chose to have the character face that weakness… to test the character’s strength to resist his vice.

See my two last responses to @bsss for more detail on this.

Because they don’t need to require such sacrifices? Games that have rules systems for these kinds of things are often a lot more character focused than games without them. In each of the games I’ve talked about in this thread… Spire, The Between, and Stonetop, causing complications for the group was never the issue that it could often be in D&D for the same players. Because the expectations are just a bit different.

So these games do not ever tell the player how their character feels, how they react etc? What do these mechanics do then?

It’s not so much about PvP or the party breaking up as it is about the players being less focused on resource management and risk mitigation. It’s something I’ve observed with my longstanding group… no matter how many new games we play, no matter how well they adjust to the given expectations of play… once we go back to D&D, they slip into old habits. It’s kind of amazing sometimes.

I think our Blades group is more focused on risk mitigation and resource management than players in my D&D group. In 5e D&D the characters are very powerful and hard to kill. They can afford to act more like superheroes, whereas Blades characters are fragile and the system is quite punishing.

 

[soviet]

So, aside from Pendragon, and the very specific role of bloodlust/rage in Vampire and Werewolf, what are all these games that apparently have dice rolls that control how PCs think and act?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

So, aside from Pendragon, and the very specific role of bloodlust/rage in Vampire and Werewolf, what are all these games that apparently have dice rolls that control how PCs think and act?

At least some versions of Exalted. I'm sure there are others. But it thankfully is not very common.

But this discussion was not any specific games, it was about some people wanting personality/social mechanics with more teeth and some others explaining why they would not want that.

 

[soviet]

At least some versions of Exalted. I'm sure there are others. But it thankfully is not very common.

But this discussion was not any specific games, it was about some people wanting personality/social mechanics with more teeth and some others explaining why they would not want that.

'with more teeth' and 'the game takes control of your character' are not remotely the same thing though.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

'with more teeth' and 'the game takes control of your character' are not remotely the same thing though.

No, and I think you had plenty of good ideas for teeth that do not do that. But some people specifically wished for compels or at least incentives in form of sticks rather than carrots.