What is "railroading" to you (as a player)?

[hawkeyefan]

What I just do not understand how people's minds work, if they can just use rules as substitutes for actual arguments and things that evoke feelings.

Like we've been arguing about this here for pages. If I suddenly say 38 will it make you agree with my stance?

If I say scary 27, will it make you feel fear?, if I say funny 32, will it make you laugh?

I just do not understand how this can work, unless you just play from some detached third person perspective, instead of trying to inhabit the viewpoint and feelings of your character.

Because most of the time, I don’t feel the events of play the way my character does. Certainly not to the extent or depth that they do, anyway. Nor do I expect that most of us do.

I had a character in The Between… Clara Norhurst. She was a pretty complicated character, and while I had sympathy for her at times, there were other times she terrified me. Things that she found acceptable or maybe necessary were, to me, absolutely horrible. It was “The Mother” playbook, which is very much like a Dr. Frankenstein, to “The Child”, an NPC that the Mother has created. I decided to go with a literal mother-child type relationship.

We learned over time that the child was very much designed to replace an actual daughter that was lost to her. At times during play, the child wound up in danger… and while I as a player may have felt some small amount of worry about this, it was only in the context of the game. I didn’t feel like a parent at risk of losing a child again…nor would I want to. Why would I want to experience actual trauma?

And at the same time as portraying Clara, I was also fascinated by the idea of what would happen if she lost the Child… a feeling the character would not have shared.

I want to inhabit the character to a point. Because while I am portraying and inhabiting the character, I’m also partly an audience member, wondering what she’ll do next. Having absolute control over everything she does? Doesn’t really appeal for the kind of game The Between is. Nor does absolute control sound like the kind of person Clara was.

 

[hawkeyefan]

No, not really. It is just used as an example as everyone is familiar with it.

Yes, really. And largely for the exact reason you site… it’s used as an example because everyone’s familiar with it rather than because it’s a good example.

But the same issues exist in one way or another in other systems too.

No. Other systems are designed with thought on how to handle this kind of stuff.

The “issues”, such as they are, boil down to you not liking this type of rule.

And one thing any social mechanics should be is definitely simple. Interrupting natural flow of in-character conversation to deal with complicated mechanics and writers' room the implications is just terrible.

Oh okay. I suppose that is the one true way. And here I thought I enjoyed the many games I’ve played and run that did these things.

Thanks for correcting me!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The “issues”, such as they are, boil down to you not liking this type of rule.

Yes, obviously. Those are the "issues" I am referring to. They ar an issue for me.

Oh okay. I suppose that is the one true way. And here I thought I enjoyed the many games I’ve played and run that did these things.

Thanks for correcting me!

You are free to enjoy it. It is terrible for me. As your previous reply indicates, you're going fro more detached author stance play, in which this probably is a less of a problem. And yes, I have hard time understanding why people would like this, but that is pretty common with all sort of preference issues.

But frankly, I think this thread has achieved something that many previous threads about similar matters have not: people actually admit that they like author stance play. Which is fine, absolutely nothing wrong with it. It just is that usually when I complain that certain mechanics push for this sort of stance people deny that this happens. Here people seem to admit that it happens and they like it. Which is progress. We agree on what is happening and why, and then whether one likes it is matter of taste. And that pretty much concludes the topic.

(Though we'll no doubt post for hundreds of more pages until a mod finally locks the thread.)

 

[Bill Zebub]

(snip) Whereas I think you might enjoy more being able to portray your mild-mannered character as NOT losing their cool, so as to demonstrate the concept of them as mild-mannered.

Yeah, I'd rather wait until a moment where it will be most dramatic and impactful to lose my cool, rather than just happen to do it when the dice land a certain way.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Again, if someone thinks they're completely immune to that sort of thing,

If there is such a person, I would love for them to chime in on this thread. Anybody?

I think they have a mistaken impression of what influence can and can't do.

....or, they think they are a better judge of what will and what will not influence their character than are the dice.

 

[Bill Zebub]

And yes, I have hard time understanding why people would like this, but that is pretty common with all sort of preference issues.

IPAs and other hoppy beers.

Q.E.F.D.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Because most of the time, I don’t feel the events of play the way my character does. Certainly not to the extent or depth that they do, anyway. Nor do I expect that most of us do.

I had a character in The Between… Clara Norhurst. She was a pretty complicated character, and while I had sympathy for her at times, there were other times she terrified me. Things that she found acceptable or maybe necessary were, to me, absolutely horrible. It was “The Mother” playbook, which is very much like a Dr. Frankenstein, to “The Child”, an NPC that the Mother has created. I decided to go with a literal mother-child type relationship.

We learned over time that the child was very much designed to replace an actual daughter that was lost to her. At times during play, the child wound up in danger… and while I as a player may have felt some small amount of worry about this, it was only in the context of the game. I didn’t feel like a parent at risk of losing a child again…nor would I want to. Why would I want to experience actual trauma?

And at the same time as portraying Clara, I was also fascinated by the idea of what would happen if she lost the Child… a feeling the character would not have shared.

I want to inhabit the character to a point. Because while I am portraying and inhabiting the character, I’m also partly an audience member, wondering what she’ll do next. Having absolute control over everything she does? Doesn’t really appeal for the kind of game The Between is. Nor does absolute control sound like the kind of person Clara was.

I'm curious...because this form of RPGing is so alien to me...if it would have the same appeal in a solo game. In other words, does the pleasure come from portraying Clara to other people at the table, or would it be as immersive if you were playing solo? Or with an AI GM?

 

[TwoSix]

I'm curious...because this form of RPGing is so alien to me...if it would have the same appeal in a solo game. In other words, does the pleasure come from portraying Clara to other people at the table, or would it be as immersive if you were playing solo? Or with an AI GM?

I can't speak for @hawkeyefan, of course, but since we seem to be fairly aligned in our preferences, I would say for me the impact of creating that narration for a group is pretty crucial to my enjoyment. I can understand where the enjoyment for a solo RPG comes from, as a way of prompting a creative flow, but it isn't something I am seeking out.

Edit: Also, it shouldn't be that alien. Coming up with narrative justifications on the fly to match a resolution result is what we're usually doing when we're GMing. You don't try to immerse yourself in every NPC you're running, right? Your perspective is outside of them, focusing on producing some kind of event in the fiction. Same deal.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Edit: Also, it shouldn't be that alien. Coming up with narrative justifications on the fly to match a resolution result is what we're usually doing when we're GMing. You don't try to immerse yourself in every NPC you're running, right? Your perspective is outside of them, focusing on producing some kind of event in the fiction. Same deal.

Yes, absolutely! And that's why I am fine with the social skills being used against NPCs. But that is when I GM; when I play a character I don't want to be doing the same thing.

 

[Maxperson]

Influence, not control. I still maintain some amount of mechanical influence is helpful in avoiding the temptation to make PC choices based on Player self-interest.

What business is it of yours or WotC's if that table over there in Wyoming is playing the game and making choices based on player self-interest? Why should the game try to force them to do it differently?

The default setting of social skills should be 100% player agency over the mundane aspects of their characters. All else can be dialed to where individual tables want to move the dial