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

[Fenris-77]

Give me an example of what you're talking about. I don't get it.

I know you don't, which I didn't really get until now. Your posts about your own opinions usually read as you dispensing fact about how to play RPGs, not you offering an opinion (regardless of your occasional use of IMO). I'll try to read you in a more charitable light in this regard.

 

[Fenris-77]

What makes you think "a lot" of people feel the way you do about me? How are you not just attacking right now?

Because there are always a variety pf people responding to you in more or less the same way I do about the same set of issues. It's not an attack at all, just an observation.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because there are always a variety pf people responding to you in more or less the same way I do about the same set of issues. It's not an attack at all, just an observation.

To be fair, I get likes too. I'm not alone out here.

 

[Fenris-77]

To be fair, I get likes too. I'm not alone out here.

Oh dude, I'm not talking about all your posts at all. Just a specific kind of post.. Like I said, this isn't an attack, I'm just trying to get a better grip on why what I read is so different from what you say you are writing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I know you don't, which I didn't really get until now. Your posts about your own opinions usually read as you dispensing fact about how to play RPGs, not you offering an opinion (regardless of your occasional use of IMO). I'll try to read you in a more charitable light in this regard.

I don't understand what you're saying. There are certain words and phrases one uses to indicate they are presenting an opinion. I use them regularly. How could you possibly think despite that I'm presenting my opinion as fact?

 

[Fenris-77]

I don't understand what you're saying. There are certain words and phrases one uses to indicate they are presenting an opinion. I use them regularly. How could you possibly think despite that I'm presenting my opinion as fact?

Yikes, let's just pretend for a moment that I'm not wasting my time trying to gaslight you here, K?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yikes, let's just pretend for a moment that I'm not wasting my time trying to gaslight you here, K?

Ok, I believe you, I just don't understand how you can come to that conclusion, given my language. It doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Fenris-77]

Ok, I believe you, I just don't understand how you can come to that conclusion, given my language. It doesn't make sense to me.

Yup, I get it. Probably quite frustrating. I'm not here to critique your prose style or call you out in public. I'm just pointing out that is sometimes a disconnect between what you describe above and what I read in some of your posts. Do with that what you will. I feel like we've burdened the thread with the topic long enough though. I'll try to read your posts based on what you've said and we'll see how it goes. I don't think I can be any fairer than that.

 

[FrozenNorth]

I think it's unlikely this would ever be an issue unless there was a pretty big, obvious gap between the behavior and the stat on the page. Fancy speech from the Player on behalf of their low-Charisma character, for example.

This is focussing on the wrong part of the issue.

« People should play their stats » is uncontroversial. There may be some argument about what playing your stats means, but this is ultimately subjective and not really disputed.

• Some people view Intelligence as principally either magic aptitude and/or book learning. Telling them to play a low Int character as basically unable to get by in society may be taken as insulting to people they know who have not had a formal education.
• Some people view Intelligence 8 (the lowest you can get in standard D&D of the last 15 years) as slightly slow, but would take issue with being treated as if there character is unable to come up with plans. Particularly since someone who is a little slow might even be smarter than the other characters in defined niches. Like a fighter who knows a lot more about tactics than the sheltered wizard.

The part of the issue that is controversial is « if there is a dispute between a player and the DM about how to play their character, the DM can substitute their opinion for that of the player ».

 

[Gradine]

Ok, I believe you, I just don't understand how you can come to that conclusion, given my language. It doesn't make sense to me.

As a passive observer, I can definitely say that some of your posts read as strongly dismissive of other people's opinions that you disagree with. You may not be intending offense, but your words can be offensive. For instance:

How depressingly abstract. I prefer more world modeling in my RPGs then you do, apparently.

This is a remarkably rude and condescending thing to say, and adding in "I prefer" doesn't take away from how demeaning it is to call someone else's preferences "depressing", and the phrasing of "I prefer [x] more than you, apparently" (emphasis mine) is insultingly condescending, again, whether you intended it to be or not.

It's perfectly natural to have strong likes and dislikes but maybe try to treat others who have different approaches to gaming a little more charitably?