Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 5407436" data-attributes="member: 8835">a good thread idea.  Though i do think a few are rather broadly defined.  I suspect its because i'd like to see more specific break-downs.  The hand-wave in particular.Taking the core concept, though, without judging it seems a fair way to break down the techniques.  I tend to look at is as "don't do this in your game" and give an example.False Choices is what I consider related to predicted/assumed paths.  For a party of good PCs, if I present them with a damsel in distress, they will probably save her.  Or if I threaten your PCs land holdings,you will probably act to intervene.You PC's character probably won't ignore these things.  Thus, almost any other choice is a non-choice.  A False Choice as the OP might say.A DM can certainly use this propensity to get the PCs going on the quest.  I don't like seeing it over-used as a direct threat to the PCs, as there is very little choice for them.  A threat to something of concern (the damsel) could still be a choice if there's something else needing saving.The OP's false choice is more direct, do X, or very bad Y happens.  It's no choice, as you don't want Y to happen.I would prefer to limit threats to do X, or Y happens which will change the game world but it will still remain playable (odds are good the PCs will retain their gear, but lose social standing).Scene FramingIn Hand-Waving, one aspect the OP describes is what I call Scene Framing.The start of a scene, is where the GM describes the starting state of all the PCs and the game world (perhaps describing the start of the game session, or a specific encounter at the campsite with a goblin attack).Personally, I think it's fair to describe the scene in a way that the players would accepted.  "Time passes in the village, as you all becoome a part of the village and your business ventures are successful." or "You all settle in for sleep, with your standard rotation of watch."  Then you introduce the new element that would attempt (key word, attempt) to disrupt this accepted situation.  "you hear noise in the brush to the east of camp." or "your business dealings with the north have turned sour, as your rival has been spreadiing bad rumors about your product"What abuses the Scene Framing is when you dramatically change the status quo, moving past events the PCs would have wanted to make choices. "Being blamed for the deaths of children by your product, you are all rounded up and put in jail, awaiting your execution tomorrow."The PCs likely would have wanted to take action long before children were dying, and probably would have resisted arrest and had a chance of getting away.  Which brings us to my next railroad trick.The powerful NPC who kidnaps the party and starts them in his dungeon is a classic example of Abusive Screen Framing to start an adventure (usually a mad wizard and his chaotic dungeon).Scripted OutcomesA classic scripted outcome is an encounter designed to capture the PCs so you can have the next scene be based on them starting as captured.It's one thing, to assume that if you present a BBEG at the beginning of the session, that they'll want to fight him when they meet him at the end of the session.  Combat as a resolution is so predictable as a choice, that when confronted with a bad guy who needs killing, the players will gladly oblige.What I see as a  bad railroading technique (and most often in this exact scenario), is the notes say the guards will capture the PCs and bring them in.  On starting the encounter, the GM finds the PCs don't want to be captured, and NPCs start dying, and the PCs are going to get away.  So the GM brings in reinforcements, tougher troops etc.  Anything he can to thwart the PCs.  Just so he can get them captured and start the next scene.The problem comes from writing down a specific outcome.  Instead of writing that the guards will attempt to capture the PCs.Telling PCs what they do/feelIf a GM had a specific story to tell, a master of it would instill the fellings in his player that he hopes to invoke and through that subtly manipulate them to moving through his story.  A crappy DM just tells you what your PC does and how he feels.It's pretty much a GM crime to say how a PC feels or make him take an action that the player didn't ask for.  It's probably safe to say "your PC tumbles to the ground safely when he fell off his horse" or "you raise your shield defensively to block the surprise attack".  It sounds like an action, but its mostly fluff to explain why the PC took no falling damage or got missed by the attack.But this leads to the other side, things your PC can't do...Your PC wouldn't do thatThere are some blatant acts that a PC probably wouldn't do.  He probably wouldn't for no reason, stab himself to death in the middle of the street.  The paladin wouldn't start killing the kids at the orphanage.  If you have a PC about to do these "out of character" things, you've got a problem with the player.  Dealing with it in game, just isn't going to work.If you've got a PC wanting to do something that he thinks is OK, and you don't.  That's a bit trickier.  You don't have to say "No", but you do have control over the consequences, which you can make pretty severe.  For a player, its pretty dumb to do things your DM objects to, knowing that he can do that....Before things get to a pissing match, its probably best to ask why the player wants to do it, and the explain why you're concerned.  Once again, best solved out of character.</blockquote>

Verification