Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8699322" data-attributes="member: 42582">In the OP, the player is allowed to choose which door their PC opens. The GM doesn't stop them doing that; they just decide what will happen next independently of which door the player chose for their PC. Yet many people think that can be railroading.And in your example, what the player wants to do is not climb a tree. What they want to do is find a clue. And you've already decided that the are not going to succeed at that. Hence you've decided they can't do what they want to do. That's the railroading.When you say &quot;I know what really happened&quot; all that means is I wrote this story where things went this way and not that other way. The game's fiction isn't some sort of independent object of knowledge. It's stuff that people make up - in this case, you've made it up, and on the basis of what you've made up you're telling the player that their declared action (&quot;I search the tree for a clue&quot;) fails.By this measure, opening the red door and having the GM tell you there is an ogre there; even though they would have said the same thing if you had your PC open the green door instead; is meaningful, because &quot;You see an ogre&quot; is an answer to &quot;What's behind the door&quot;.Here is the illusion: the GM allows the player to declare the action, with the intention of finding a clue, while already knowing that nothing will be found.Here is how the illusion could be avoided: the player says &quot;I wonder if there is a clue in the tree&quot; and the GM replies &quot;No, there's not.&quot;As per my reply just above to Maxperson, that last sentence is where the illusion is found.More generally, what you have just described seems to me to be a railroad: you have decided in advance what play will be about (this sick elf, the claimants to the throne, the possibility of mustard poisoning, etc). As you present it, the players' role is to learn this stuff that you as GM have made up in advance.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8699322, member: 42582"] In the OP, the player is allowed to choose which door their PC opens. The GM doesn't stop them doing that; they just decide what will happen next independently of which door the player chose for their PC. Yet many people think that can be railroading. And in your example, what the player wants to do is not [i]climb a tree[/i]. What they want to do is [i]find a clue[/i]. And you've already decided that the are not going to succeed at that. Hence you've decided they can't do what they want to do. That's the railroading. When you say "I know what really happened" all that means is [i]I wrote this story where things went this way and not that other way[/i]. The game's fiction isn't some sort of independent object of knowledge. It's stuff that people make up - in this case, you've made it up, and on the basis of what you've made up you're telling the player that their declared action ("I search the tree for a clue") fails. By this measure, opening the red door and having the GM tell you there is an ogre there; even though they would have said the same thing if you had your PC open the green door instead; is meaningful, because "You see an ogre" is an answer to "What's behind the door". Here is the illusion: the GM allows the player to declare the action, with the intention of finding a clue, while [i]already knowing that nothing will be found[/i]. Here is how the illusion could be avoided: the player says "I wonder if there is a clue in the tree" and the GM replies "No, there's not." As per my reply just above to Maxperson, that last sentence is where the illusion is found. More generally, what you have just described seems to me to be a railroad: you have decided in advance what play will be about (this sick elf, the claimants to the throne, the possibility of mustard poisoning, etc). As you present it, the players' role is to learn this stuff that you as GM have made up in advance. [/QUOTE]

Verification