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

[Micah Sweet]

Pretty sure they're ok with defined mechanics (e.g., charm and fear spells) breaking the general rule.

We've been talking about non-supernatural influence this whole time.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't need mechanics to assign negative mental consequences. Faithfully roleplaying a character to whom all sort of horrible things happen to already creates negative mental consequences.



Then I choose something that makes sense and fits the character.

And yes, sometimes such choices might be motivated by what is beneficial, but as long as that is the character making the choice, that makes sense. People often (though not always) choose to do things that are beneficial to them.

But it's not the character making the choice, it's you. And people make non-beneficial choices all the time when they have other options. Why should your PC be exempt from that?

 

[Bill Zebub]

We've been talking about non-supernatural influence this whole time.

I know, but this doesn't account for that:

Absolute control of their character’s mental state and decisions. To never have to suffer any unwanted negative consequences of that sort.

Also, I won't speak for @Crimson Longinus but I have also explicitly said I'm ok with non-supernatural effects, as long as it's defined as an ability/effect in the game, with specific mechanics describing how it works, and not just a GM arbitrarily applying social "skill" and thinking I should play along with their idea of what my character "would do".

 

[Crimson Longinus]

But it's not the character making the choice, it's you. And people make non-beneficial choices all the time when they have other options. Why should your PC be exempt from that?

First, ideally it is the character making a choice, i.e I'm properly immersed. And second, my characters make bad choices all the time. In fact, if anything, they do so implausibly often. And third, "bad choices" that were just forced by rules have no weight, they are just the dice screwing you over. And fourth, if your game constantly has situations where it is clear what the right choice is, instead of having more ambiguous situations where it is not clear, then that is just bad GMing.

Create more nuanced situations and let the players play their characters. Good grief, between this and the metacurrency thread I am so tired with all the demands for mechanical bloat that obscures and distracts from actual roleplay. Folks, sometimes less is more!

 

[TwoSix]

Huh. I wouldn't describe my own stated desires that way. I don't know if this is a hypothetical person, or if somebody else in this thread has expressed themselves that way.

No, it’s you. That’s what having absolute agency over your character’s mental state means. Your character never feels or acts in a way that you don’t desire them to.

 

[TwoSix]

Create more nuanced situations and let the players play their characters. Good grief, between this and the metacurrency thread I am so tired with all the demands for mechanical bloat that obscures and distracts from actual roleplay. Folks, sometimes less is more!

I apologize for having gaming desires different than yours. I’ll strive to do better.

“Actual roleplay” lol.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I apologize for having gaming desires different than yours. I’ll strive to do better.

“Actual roleplay” lol.

"Actual rolepay" as in playing the role. But sorry if it came across as judgemental. It just feels to me that roleplaying games have so much other stuff that obscures that core. And that definitely goes for the D&D too. I thinks I crave some "back to basics" simplicity. I'm getting tired of the crunch.

 

[TwoSix]

"Actual rolepay" as in playing the role. But sorry if it came across as judgemental. It just feels to me that roleplaying games have so much other stuff that obscures that core. And that definitely goes for the D&D too. I thinks I crave some "back to basics" simplicity. I'm getting tired of the crunch.

You don't need immersion to play a role; that's the core distinction between a lot of our perspectives. Fitting a mechanical prompt seamlessly into my character's next statements and actions is just as much roleplaying.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I know, but this doesn't account for that:


Also, I won't speak for @Crimson Longinus but I have also explicitly said I'm ok with non-supernatural effects, as long as it's defined as an ability/effect in the game, with specific mechanics describing how it works, and not just a GM arbitrarily applying social "skill" and thinking I should play along with their idea of what my character "would do".

I did riff off of @soviet 's concept of mechanical effects by suggesting a list of possible consequences and influence based on how the social situation could affect the PC.

 

[Micah Sweet]

First, ideally it is the character making a choice, i.e I'm properly immersed. And second, my characters make bad choices all the time. In fact, if anything, they do so implausibly often. And third, "bad choices" that were just forced by rules have no weight, they are just the dice screwing you over. And fourth, if your game constantly has situations where it is clear what the right choice is, instead of having more ambiguous situations where it is not clear, then that is just bad GMing.

Create more nuanced situations and let the players play their characters. Good grief, between this and the metacurrency thread I am so tired with all the demands for mechanical bloat that obscures and distracts from actual roleplay. Folks, sometimes less is more!

There's a lot of subjective opinion and personal preference here. A specific definition of "proper" immersion. The dice "screwing you over" pointlessly when you are affected socially in a way you don't want. And not enough character choices = bad GMing. Also, describing all these things non-subjectively as "mechanical bloat".

Just wanted to make clear this is a list of opinions and preferences, not facts.