Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5409295" data-attributes="member: 4937">Not only that, but you've railroaded badly.&nbsp; The essense of being able to get away with Shrodinger's Map is that the PC's are making what is actually a random choice.&nbsp; And the legitimate excuse for Shrodinger's Map is that in a random choice, the players haven't really any agency to lose.&nbsp; Once however the players obtain some information about the consequences of their actions, they have become empowered and the choice is really meaningful.&nbsp; This suggests for us how we should use Shrodinger's Map in a way that is inoffensive.&nbsp; We should feel ourselves somewhat justified as a DM to use Shrodinger's Map when doing so provides players with the information that they need to make informed choices.&nbsp; For myself, I only use Shrodinger's Map to escape the rowboat.&nbsp; If the players find themselves in a situation where they don't have enough information to make an informed choice, then they will find a floating encounter that gives them the information.&nbsp;&nbsp; Choosing to go north or south isn't really that meaningful.&nbsp; In your case, I find it reasonable practice to give the players an encounter that provides the information, &quot;Dangerous goblins to the north&quot; so that players can make a truly meaningful choice, &quot;Face goblins or not?&quot;, rather than the meaningless choice, &quot;North or south?&quot;&nbsp; That isn't to say that random choices should be completely elimenated or that players always need some foreknowledge of the results of their choices, but that introducing an encounter always found no matter which way the party chooses to go can be an effective remedy to a rowboat scenario.&nbsp; In this case, we are actually using a railroading technique with the end goal of empowering the players!&nbsp; We are violating the normal rules we build our simulation by in order to avoid potential pitfalls with a pure simulation approach.Many of the best designed games mix extreme techniques to remedy the failures in one approach.&nbsp; One of the best designed adventure games of all time is 'Grim Fandango'.&nbsp;&nbsp; Much of the story plays out in a linear manner, which would feel very 'railroady', except for the fact that it employs a narrow-broad-narrow structure to alleviate the linear flow of the story.&nbsp; Particularly in the second act, the player encounters a rather large number of problems which do not have to be resolved in any particular order.&nbsp; Only after all the problems are resolved does the character get back on the rails.&nbsp; These periods of comparitive freedom help immerse the player and make them more accepting of the sections of the game that are only slightly interactive cut scenes.A technique like that is used to make a linear dungeon appear to be non-linear to the player.&nbsp;&nbsp; While I probably wouldn't do it, the appearance of non-linearity can be important to some players enjoyment of the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5409295, member: 4937"] Not only that, but you've railroaded badly. The essense of being able to get away with Shrodinger's Map is that the PC's are making what is actually a random choice. And the legitimate excuse for Shrodinger's Map is that in a random choice, the players haven't really any agency to lose. Once however the players obtain some information about the consequences of their actions, they have become empowered and the choice is really meaningful. This suggests for us how we should use Shrodinger's Map in a way that is inoffensive. We should feel ourselves somewhat justified as a DM to use Shrodinger's Map when doing so provides players with the information that they need to make informed choices. For myself, I only use Shrodinger's Map to escape the rowboat. If the players find themselves in a situation where they don't have enough information to make an informed choice, then they will find a floating encounter that gives them the information. Choosing to go north or south isn't really that meaningful. In your case, I find it reasonable practice to give the players an encounter that provides the information, "Dangerous goblins to the north" so that players can make a truly meaningful choice, "Face goblins or not?", rather than the meaningless choice, "North or south?" That isn't to say that random choices should be completely elimenated or that players always need some foreknowledge of the results of their choices, but that introducing an encounter always found no matter which way the party chooses to go can be an effective remedy to a rowboat scenario. In this case, we are actually using a railroading technique with the end goal of empowering the players! We are violating the normal rules we build our simulation by in order to avoid potential pitfalls with a pure simulation approach. Many of the best designed games mix extreme techniques to remedy the failures in one approach. One of the best designed adventure games of all time is 'Grim Fandango'. Much of the story plays out in a linear manner, which would feel very 'railroady', except for the fact that it employs a narrow-broad-narrow structure to alleviate the linear flow of the story. Particularly in the second act, the player encounters a rather large number of problems which do not have to be resolved in any particular order. Only after all the problems are resolved does the character get back on the rails. These periods of comparitive freedom help immerse the player and make them more accepting of the sections of the game that are only slightly interactive cut scenes. A technique like that is used to make a linear dungeon appear to be non-linear to the player. While I probably wouldn't do it, the appearance of non-linearity can be important to some players enjoyment of the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification