Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9080426" data-attributes="member: 6790260">And, as I have shown above, none of the actual games that people talk about on here do that. Literally, actually none of them. Zero. If you can name one that does, I welcome it!Every single example people have brought up, it is either the GM who actually determines what (if anything) results, or the player must actually expend precious resources and then actually play through the process of acquiring any possible benefit, including the possibility that they simply fail--as is the case with any other stuff people play.Again, noting that when most folks use the term "railroading," what they mean is, "The GM permits no real choice, and any 'choices' that appear are either outrightly false [read: every choice actually results in the same exact ending], or are actively stymied by the GM until the 'correct' option is chosen." The stereotypical example being that the players need to take a ship to get somewhere, so every land route is blocked or too expensive or barred, and the town teleport circle is broken, and plane shift doesn't work in this city, and, and, and, and, until the party finally does choose the correct option of taking a ship.I fear I have forgotten, but I believe you have said you mean something rather different when you use the term "railroading."That would be why people keep telling you to ask them. Because that's the only way you can actually learn much of anything about them.So...you're willing to "make" players (and drive away the many who refuse) within the scope of 5e, but you're not willing to just say, "I'm going to run <other system,> if you want to join, awesome, come have some fun." Just seems very weird that you do stuff completely without regard for what the players want in one context and yet only adhere to what players want in the other.You're answering the wrong question.What RPG has rules where the rules specifically ask for the player to do this? As opposed, for example, to telling the player to not behave that way. Because what you're talking about there is in-character actions, which as you say can be supported by a variety of things. But that is not the same thing as talking about player actions and what the game actually supports. D&D does not support players using it to write a symphony; that doesn't mean the players cannot do so, but doing so is completely irrelevant to playing D&D.Further, you have yourself asserted that this IS a thing, actually IN the rules: The player simply CAN, officially, declare that they get an advantage, whenever they want, with no cost or difficulty, and that advantage just HAPPENS, no ifs, ands, buts, whatever.I am telling you that that does not actually happen. Not one of the games people have mentioned here works that way. Not even Blades in the Dark and its Flashbacks!So I ask again: What game actually works this way, as in, the rules actually do tell players to do this? Anyone can choose to be a crappy player. That's not the fault of the game. The thing you're taking umbrage with is the allegation that the rules themselves tell players to behave in such a way. So: Which rules? What games? When does this actually happen?Or is it just a boogeyman people keep raising up, a false specter designed to shut down conversation despite being unreal?</blockquote>

Verification