Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Failing Forward
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6824163" data-attributes="member: 6696971"><p>Just to for clarity's sake, my hypothesis was invoked as it relates to an advantage of low-prep (minimal pre-authorship with malleable setting and any off-screen metaplot exists solely to plug into and test the PCs' protagonism) over high-prep (maximal pre-authorship with granular setting and metaplot that exists of "its own volition" - eg GM's mental model replete with unique cognitive biases). I certainly don't think the inherent investment in a creation that you've slaved over (be it building your own world, spending significant $, time, and mental overhead in learning the geography, politics, backstory, cosmology, and relevant orgs/NPCs of FR, or purchasing an expansive module/AP) is the <em>exclusive </em><em>why </em>a GM might funnel play down the prescribed path of a metaplot. </p><p></p><p>Systems that are predicated upon significant GM latitude and/or that expressly condone the GM suspending the action resolution mechanics "to facilitate story" are telling the group that play should prioritize the GM's idea of "what's best" with respect to story and the buck stops there. That is more than tacitly advocating railroading. But the fact that it does so up front means that it isn't a violation of the social contract so players really shouldn't be claiming dysfunction because to play at all is an expression of buy-in of the prospects of a railroad!</p><p></p><p>I think the problem typically lies when a system is wishy-washy on this stuff and the social contract isn't made explicit/banged out prior to play. I mean you can have an amazing amount of granular setting material and off-screen elements in motion (hidden backstory as you like to say). Typically in those games, the GM (who has extreme or complete authority over setting) is going to be the one leveraging his/her own mental framework to parameterize and then perform the model run of the fantasy setting. Hence, his/her own cognitive biases, understanding of genre expectations, and forensic knowledge base (which may be poor, average, or quite good) are going to be the machinery that parameterizes it and then extrapolates into the future. They may be performing this parameterization and extrapolation as objectively as proficiently and objectively as they possibly can. So this evolving setting and offscreen metaplot may feel quite objective and will naturally feel quite intuitive/logical to them. However, embedded within this effort is an enormous amount of variables (at both the parameterization stage and the "model run" - extrapolation - stage). Consequently, the GM's own sense of the fidelity of their work to the principles or objectivity, intuitiveness, and logic may not mesh with the sensibilities of any or all of Becky, Sue, Sam, or Bob.</p><p></p><p>In essence, the GM isn't railroading the players (constraining decision-points inexorably such that play funnels toward an inevitable outcome or subverting the authentic outcomes of the player action declarations + the resolution mechanics and inserting their own will in its stead). However, the players don't feel that way. The model feels subjectively paramaterized and the extrapolations seem counter-intuitive or illogical. </p><p></p><p>Or they don't care about the disheveled, sullen, sailor, with four hungry mouths to feed at home, who just had his vessel foreclosed on because he couldn't meet the corrupt banking establishment's new egregious demands. He drowns his sorrows every day starting at dawn's first light in Fishmongers and Fools, the shanty tavern on the docks. </p><p></p><p>They don't care about him, his family, the corrupt banking establishment, the political structure that backs it, Fishmongers and Fools. And they don't care about the gajillion other of setting elements just like it.</p><p></p><p> [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] comes to mind as I write this. Systems with extreme degrees of GM latitude, extreme degrees of GM authority, and wishy-washiness when it comes to social contract stuff and concrete play procedures are vulnerable to players "feeling" railroaded when, in point of fact, they effectively aren't being railroaded. In those cases though, "feeling railroaded" may as well be "being railroaded."</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>+1!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6824163, member: 6696971"] Just to for clarity's sake, my hypothesis was invoked as it relates to an advantage of low-prep (minimal pre-authorship with malleable setting and any off-screen metaplot exists solely to plug into and test the PCs' protagonism) over high-prep (maximal pre-authorship with granular setting and metaplot that exists of "its own volition" - eg GM's mental model replete with unique cognitive biases). I certainly don't think the inherent investment in a creation that you've slaved over (be it building your own world, spending significant $, time, and mental overhead in learning the geography, politics, backstory, cosmology, and relevant orgs/NPCs of FR, or purchasing an expansive module/AP) is the [I]exclusive [/I][I]why [/I]a GM might funnel play down the prescribed path of a metaplot. Systems that are predicated upon significant GM latitude and/or that expressly condone the GM suspending the action resolution mechanics "to facilitate story" are telling the group that play should prioritize the GM's idea of "what's best" with respect to story and the buck stops there. That is more than tacitly advocating railroading. But the fact that it does so up front means that it isn't a violation of the social contract so players really shouldn't be claiming dysfunction because to play at all is an expression of buy-in of the prospects of a railroad! I think the problem typically lies when a system is wishy-washy on this stuff and the social contract isn't made explicit/banged out prior to play. I mean you can have an amazing amount of granular setting material and off-screen elements in motion (hidden backstory as you like to say). Typically in those games, the GM (who has extreme or complete authority over setting) is going to be the one leveraging his/her own mental framework to parameterize and then perform the model run of the fantasy setting. Hence, his/her own cognitive biases, understanding of genre expectations, and forensic knowledge base (which may be poor, average, or quite good) are going to be the machinery that parameterizes it and then extrapolates into the future. They may be performing this parameterization and extrapolation as objectively as proficiently and objectively as they possibly can. So this evolving setting and offscreen metaplot may feel quite objective and will naturally feel quite intuitive/logical to them. However, embedded within this effort is an enormous amount of variables (at both the parameterization stage and the "model run" - extrapolation - stage). Consequently, the GM's own sense of the fidelity of their work to the principles or objectivity, intuitiveness, and logic may not mesh with the sensibilities of any or all of Becky, Sue, Sam, or Bob. In essence, the GM isn't railroading the players (constraining decision-points inexorably such that play funnels toward an inevitable outcome or subverting the authentic outcomes of the player action declarations + the resolution mechanics and inserting their own will in its stead). However, the players don't feel that way. The model feels subjectively paramaterized and the extrapolations seem counter-intuitive or illogical. Or they don't care about the disheveled, sullen, sailor, with four hungry mouths to feed at home, who just had his vessel foreclosed on because he couldn't meet the corrupt banking establishment's new egregious demands. He drowns his sorrows every day starting at dawn's first light in Fishmongers and Fools, the shanty tavern on the docks. They don't care about him, his family, the corrupt banking establishment, the political structure that backs it, Fishmongers and Fools. And they don't care about the gajillion other of setting elements just like it. [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] comes to mind as I write this. Systems with extreme degrees of GM latitude, extreme degrees of GM authority, and wishy-washiness when it comes to social contract stuff and concrete play procedures are vulnerable to players "feeling" railroaded when, in point of fact, they effectively aren't being railroaded. In those cases though, "feeling railroaded" may as well be "being railroaded." +1! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Failing Forward
Top