Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5413112" data-attributes="member: 4937">Yes.&nbsp;&nbsp; We seem to have similar views on Forge talk.And from the definition by example of 'Railroading' I provided in another thread, any campaign where you 'make it up as you go along' is linear and often a railroad.Fortunately, I don't even much have to argue that if you accept 'No Myth' as the basis of or equivalent to how you run a game because, 'No Myth' is upfront about it:That's railroading, in this case, by The Hand Wave.&nbsp; In fact, the discussion of technique is almost entirely a discussion of generously using The Hand Wave to railroad the game, and contains a lot of - to me at least - hilarious ironies, incongruities, and contridictions most of which probably have to do with the fact that the author admits that this is all theory with no basis in practical experience.&nbsp; (Let's start with &quot;Nothing about the plot is sacred...&quot; which gets followed by a long list of things which should be sacred and a discussion of techniques for insuring that they happen.) Meanwhile, the discussion defining the technique lays out basically 'Schrodinger's Map' or 'Schrodinger's Gun'.&nbsp; It's an article on artful railroading, written from the perspective of someone who seems to think that all players want from RPG rules is to help them be cool.&nbsp; It's the 'validation and empowerment' school of RPG thought, never mind that most power gamers (for instance) would HATE this because they recognize how it cheapens their success.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5413112, member: 4937"] Yes. We seem to have similar views on Forge talk. And from the definition by example of 'Railroading' I provided in another thread, any campaign where you 'make it up as you go along' is linear and often a railroad. Fortunately, I don't even much have to argue that if you accept 'No Myth' as the basis of or equivalent to how you run a game because, 'No Myth' is upfront about it: That's railroading, in this case, by The Hand Wave. In fact, the discussion of technique is almost entirely a discussion of generously using The Hand Wave to railroad the game, and contains a lot of - to me at least - hilarious ironies, incongruities, and contridictions most of which probably have to do with the fact that the author admits that this is all theory with no basis in practical experience. (Let's start with "Nothing about the plot is sacred..." which gets followed by a long list of things which should be sacred and a discussion of techniques for insuring that they happen.) Meanwhile, the discussion defining the technique lays out basically 'Schrodinger's Map' or 'Schrodinger's Gun'. It's an article on artful railroading, written from the perspective of someone who seems to think that all players want from RPG rules is to help them be cool. It's the 'validation and empowerment' school of RPG thought, never mind that most power gamers (for instance) would HATE this because they recognize how it cheapens their success. [/QUOTE]

Verification