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

[Micah Sweet]

As discussed earlier, it can happen because of a misalignment of how much reward-to-risk the GM and players have. They keep looking for one that lands in their comfort, the GM keeps not supplying it because it seems pointlessly easy or doesn't fit their idea of how it'd work in the setting.

Ok. Those people really needed to have a session zero.

 

[Bill Zebub]

it's not that i think actions should be outright banned but the main issue i think happens with mental scores is bleedover from player observations and thoughts, if they figure something out it tends to get beamed directly into their character's head, you get statements like 'of course my character would know XYZ information' because they've read the lorebook/monster manual/ect, 'i'm suspicious of this guy' 'but you rolled a 4 on insight' 'my character's still suspicious of them though, because reasons' and the player speaking 'for' their character in conversations without rolling CHA.

i think more 'mental actions' just ought to need to be backed up by a dice roll. edit: and if they fail the check for something the GM ought to not be seen as in the wrong for enforcing the player to adhere to the consequences of that roll's results.

If I have a 3 Strength I wouldn't expect the GM to challenge me every time I got out of a chair, picked up a backpack, or tried to climb stairs. Rather, I would expect to roll dice with a -5 penalty if I declared an action that would require a roll for any character, not just mine.

So, yeah, if the table rule was "any time a player proposes an idea, they must make an Int check for their character" then that's fair. Not that I would want to play at a table with a dumb rule like that, but at least it's consistent and fair.

But if it's an arbitrary, "That idea is too good for your dumb character, but Tony would get a pass because his Int is 11" then....No Thank You, Evil.

 

[Reynard]

Its a legitimate position, just not one I can entirely share. To be honest, its one that surprises me a bit from a one-time Hero System fan.

Why? I don't think Hero was any more adamant about forcing players to make choices that the GM arbitrarily deems correct for a given intelligence score.

Stats have mechanical effects. Those are what they do.

If they inform the player in how to role play, that's great! Role playing is fun. But the GM should not be able to veto any player action that is possible in the fiction of the moment.

Also, where do we draw the line. Is it just for solving puzzles? Setting up tactics? Planning a heist? What are the thresholds for various actions that are out of bounds based on stat values? How do background and class interact with it? Is a fighter "smarter" than their Int with regards to battle plans? If so, how much so?

My point is that it is a way of running the game that runs counter to player agency and is completely unsupported by the actual rules, so no one should do that. A PLAYER can decide their character is not smart enough to come up with a thing, but no one else can.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If the GM required an Intelligence check would that satisfy you?

As stated above, if that's required of any PC any time they have an idea, then yes.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Do you want to show me in the rule books where it says that the GM can deny you your action because you are playing your attributes wrong?

Gosh the username escapes me now, but there is a prolific poster on Enworld who plays 5e and PbtA games and mentioned that if a character rolls well on a non-proficient skill (and possibly succeeds) the GM may ask the player to elaborate on why the character succeeded, which the player can then take on the opportunity to expand on the character's background/experience to justify the good roll.
i.e. character succeeds on a boating check (which he had no business succeeding on) and player explains in his character's youth his beloved grandfather would take him out fishing quite often for several years before one day he passed away rather mysteriously when he never returned from a fishing weekend he had gone off alone.

Now I love the implementation of that idea and you can apply in this INT discussion too.

If say player Jeff comes up with a brilliant idea that his character thinks off, the GM can ask the player if he could justify how his character with an 8 INT came up with that idea by expanding on his background/experience or TIBF's.

Now yes you can argue this isn't in the rules but it makes for a pretty good compromise and the table wins as a result. Hell let the whole table offer input to make sense of the idea.
1. Player does not feel restricted;
2. Character lore expanded on; and
3. GM has more to draw on to challenge and surprise the players.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Your character sheet informs your PC's capabilities, and to a degree your stats should IMO inform how you play your character, not just your die rolls.

How you play your character. Not how the DM thinks you should play your character.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Gosh the username escapes me now, but there is a prolific poster on Enworld who plays 5e and PbtA games and mentioned that if a character rolls well on a non-proficient skill (and possibly succeeds) the GM may ask the player to elaborate on why the character succeeded, which the player can then take on the opportunity to expand on the character's background/experience to justify the good roll.
i.e. character succeeds on a boating check (which he had no business succeeding on) and player explains in his character's youth his beloved grandfather would take him out fishing quite often for several years before one day he passed away rather mysteriously when he never returned from a fishing weekend he had gone off alone.

Now I love the implementation of that idea and you can apply in this INT discussion too.

If say player Jeff comes up with a brilliant idea that his character thinks off, the GM can ask the player if he could justify how his character with an 8 INT came up with that idea by expanding on his background/experience or TIBF's.

Now yes you can argue this isn't in the rules but it makes for a pretty good compromise and the table wins as a result.
1. Player does not feel restricted;
2. Character lore expanded on; and
3. GM has more to draw on to challenge and surprise the players.

...and when the player of the Wizard with 18 Int comes up with an idea, and makes the same roll but with +4 instead of -1, and still fails...that means the party can't use the idea?

 

[Bill Zebub]

Your character sheet informs your PC's capabilities, and to a degree your stats should IMO inform how you play your character, not just your die rolls.

So if I've got say a 6 Intelligence, and I choose to play my character as highly articulate and well educated/knowledgable, but prone to being forgetful and absentminded at key moments ("I HAVE TROUBLE MAKING DECISIONS UNDER STRESS!!!!"), are you good with that?

 

[Reynard]

If say player Jeff comes up with a brilliant idea that his character thinks off, the GM can ask the player if he could justify how his character with an 8 INT came up with that idea by expanding on his background/experience or TIBF's.

Now yes you can argue this isn't in the rules but it makes for a pretty good compromise and the table wins as a result.
1. Player does not feel restricted;
2. Character lore expanded on; and
3. GM has more to draw on to challenge and surprise the players.

That's a great, fun idea -- unless jeff says "not really" and then the GM decides to punish them telling them they couldn't then.

If a player has a PC with a low dex and no proficiency grab a bow and try and hit an enemy, we don't ask the player to justify it. We just have them roll with the mechanical, system based penalties for taking such an action.

 

[AnotherGuy]

...and when the player of the Wizard with 18 Int comes up with an idea, and makes the same roll but with +4 instead of -1, and still fails...that means the party can't use the idea?

I think you're confusing situations.
The argument is, character 8 INT comes up with a good idea (no roll needed). Player needs to expand on character lore.
If you have a character with 18 INT and they come up with a good idea (again no roll needed), it just happens.