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

[Bill Zebub]

As I've said many times about many things, it's a spectrum, not a binary. Your hyperbolic straw man is not what I suggested, and I find it unconvincing as a reason for NPCs and PCs to behave differently when reacting to each other.

I don't think they need to behave differently. Or, rather, I think they will all behave differently but I mean not all PCs will behave one way and all NPCs will behave another.

But I use different methods to determine what those behaviors are, for the reasons explained above.

You haven't responded to my assertion about symmetry: given that when a PC attempts to persuade/intimidate/deceive an NPC, the GM is the one who adjudicates, and can either just make a ruling or ask for a dice roll, in the inverse situation shouldn't it be the player who makes that call, and maybe asks for a dice roll but maybe doesn't? Wouldn't that be the most symmetric?

 

[Bill Zebub]

When I'm playing an NPC, I am doing so just as much in the moment as the Player is.

Then you have superpowers I don't.

 

[bsss]

Hmm....maybe. In my own experience, as a player I feel like I'm "there" in the story, making decisions as if I'm my character. When I'm GMing I feel more like a puppet master, holding strings. For me that is a totally different for decision-making.

Again, just my experience.

I mostly take "tricked" to mean that the GM can't be conned. They can be surprised, the system can give players bennies or whatever and give them narrative overrides, the GM can choose to call for a test or roll a die or flip a coin and have their string do something they didn't expect, the GM can just go "that idea rules, I'm scrapping what I had in mind". In all those situations, whatever information they had, they're allowing some kind of event to intervene --- they can't be conned. If that wasn't possible, by game mechanics or table narrative or whatever, it wouldn't be much of a game for the GM to just say "nope, that's not what happens" whenever they were going to be "tricked".

Meanwhile, the player is at the GM's mercy, so they get those tools to intervene. Giving the GM the same tools is unnecessary. That's what's behind my theory.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't think they need to behave differently. Or, rather, I think they will all behave differently but I mean not all PCs will behave one way and all NPCs will behave another.

But I use different methods to determine what those behaviors are, for the reasons explained above.

You haven't responded to my assertion about symmetry: given that when a PC attempts to persuade/intimidate/deceive an NPC, the GM is the one who adjudicates, and can either just make a ruling or ask for a dice roll, in the inverse situation shouldn't it be the player who makes that call, and maybe asks for a dice roll but maybe doesn't? Wouldn't that be the most symmetric?

I think both sides should roll when attempting things that fall under whatever social rules the game has, with the caveat that there are auto-successes and failures for both sides as well. What those things are can be determined by the person playing the character, but I feel very strongly that that decision should be made based only on the nature of the character and the circumstances of the situation, not on what the Player or GM wants or doesn't want for the character in question. Not for out of setting reasons. It's a matter of trust for both sides, and trust takes time to build and is affected by a person's history. In my history, I've seen a lot of Players go to great lengths to avoid negative affects on their PCs, even if they make sense to happen. I've seen GMs do it too, and I see it as a problem no matter where it comes from.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Then you have superpowers I don't.

I never said I don't use die rolls and other rules to help. They're just tied into the character and the setting.

 

[Maxperson]

As opposed to Charm, Fear, Suggestion and Dominate etc.

Right. I've already stated out that magic/supernatural things where I've made a saving throw are different. What's your point?

 

[Maxperson]

i very much disagree with this playstyle of 'my character will always think exactly and only what i want them to think, that i have perfect control over what they do, regardless of whatever situation and circumstances they are in' nobody has that much self control against the world, we all have a ton of involuntary responses that catch us unawares and your adventurer shouldn't be different.

You're conflating the player with the character. They are two very different things. The player has that level of control over the character, because he's the player and he has that agency. The character doesn't have that kind of control, which is why the player is the one that gets to decide if the character believes the NPC or doesn't.

 

[Maxperson]

everything that can affect them and drives their responses IMO should come from the world, not from outside of it.

Well, you've just gotten rid of the player. You should probably the news to your group before the next session to save them the trip.

 

[CreamCloud0]

You're conflating the player with the character. They are two very different things. The player has that level of control over the character, because he's the player and he has that agency. The character doesn't have that kind of control, which is why the player is the one that gets to decide if the character believes the NPC or doesn't.

if we're meant to be roleplaying, then i believe it's the character we should be focusing on.

 

[Maxperson]

And what I'm saying is that if NPCs cannot use social skills to hyperbolically "mind control" PCs, then I think the reverse should also be true. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

They don't. The DM can and does have the ability to say your persuasion does not work. If you walk into a merchant and tell me that you want to persuade him to give you everything he owns for free, I'm going to tell you that you fail. There will be no roll. Rolls only happen when the outcome of the NPCs decision is in doubt and failure has meaning. If you want to try and persuade him to give you a 10% discount, I will ask for a roll most of the time, but sometimes I know that simply asking will get you one and it will be an auto success.

There is no mind control happening against the NPCs, either. I get to decide if the outcome is in doubt for NPCs. The player gets to decide how his PC acts in response to a social skill.