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

[AnotherGuy]

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

The orc chieftain, makes a final plea to the PC's explaining that the attack on their homestead was made by his younger and ambitious brother with a group of his close friends and that he has no idea where they are now, and that his people should not have to suffer the consequences of a few. Justice would not be served if the adventurers continued down this warpath.
He locks eyes with the cleric, making a pleading gesture.

Everyone who considers themselves not convinced may provide me a DC for his Persuasion check based on 10 + Insight (Wisdom).
If you have a Trait, Bond, Flaw, Ideal that you feel challenges the orc chieftain's plea - read it out allowed - if it is decent (table decides, if DM says no) it will incur a Disadvantage on the chieftain's Persuasion roll.

You may determine how Success for the chieftain's persuasion plays out for your character.
1. Lower your shield/sheathe your weapon.
2. Take a step back and look at your fellow companions. (Gain the Hesitant Condition)
3. Offer something else you have in mind.

Many ways to skin these social encounters to make it interesting at the table.
Skills like Deception, Insight, Intimidation, Persuasion are an untapped resource on BOTH sides of the screen.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The orc chieftain, makes a final plea to the PC's explaining that the attack on their homestead was made by his younger and ambitious brother with a group of his close friends and that he has no idea where they are now, and that his people should not have to suffer the consequences of a few. Justice would not be served if the adventurers continued down this warpath.
He locks eyes with the cleric, making a pleading gesture.

Everyone who considers themselves not convinced may provide me a DC for his Persuasion check based on 10 + Insight (Wisdom).
If you have a Trait, Bond, Flaw, Ideal that you feel challenges the orc chieftain's plea - read it out allowed - if it is decent (table decides, if DM says no) it will incur a Disadvantage on the chieftain's Persuasion roll.

You may determine how Success for the chieftain's persuasion plays out for your character.
1. Lower your shield/sheathe your weapon.
2. Take a step back and look at your fellow companions. (Gain the Hesitant Condition)
3. Offer something else you have in mind.

Many ways to skin these social encounters to make it interesting at the table.
Skills like Deception, Insight, Intimidation, Persuasion are an untapped resource on BOTH sides of the screen.

Frankly, this sounds terrible to me. The plea and the conflict surrounding it is interesting, but then you just kill it by not allowing the players to make this important choice and instead just roll the dice for it.

 

[Bill Zebub]

The orc chieftain, makes a final plea to the PC's explaining that the attack on their homestead was made by his younger and ambitious brother with a group of his close friends and that he has no idea where they are now, and that his people should not have to suffer the consequences of a few. Justice would not be served if the adventurers continued down this warpath.
He locks eyes with the cleric, making a pleading gesture.

I read that and I am immediately engaged. On the one hand that's pretty persuasive. On the other hand, maybe it's a load of crap. I'm not sure which to believe! What evidence do I have? What evidence could I get? What should I do next?

Everyone who considers themselves not convinced may provide me a DC for his Persuasion check based on 10 + Insight (Wisdom).
If you have a Trait, Bond, Flaw, Ideal that you feel challenges the orc chieftain's plea - read it out allowed - if it is decent (table decides, if DM says no) it will incur a Disadvantage on the chieftain's Persuasion roll.

You may determine how Success for the chieftain's persuasion plays out for your character.
1. Lower your shield/sheathe your weapon.
2. Take a step back and look at your fellow companions. (Gain the Hesitant Condition)
3. Offer something else you have in mind.

Many ways to skin these social encounters to make it interesting at the table.
Skills like Deception, Insight, Intimidation, Persuasion are an untapped resource on BOTH sides of the screen.

Then I read that and I think, "Oh, I guess I'm not really supposed to think too hard about it. The dice will tell me what to do."

 

[Bill Zebub]

Frankly, this sounds terrible to me. The plea and the conflict surrounding it is interesting, but then you just kill it by not allowing the players to make this important choice and instead just roll the dice for it.

Yeah. I wrote my reply before reading yours, but same thing.

 

[bsss]

I agree that I don't like how this feels like "the dice decide" here, and there's also a meta-agency problem exposed there in that scenario that I think is hard to come to terms with: each member of the party individually sets a DC based on their stats, and I guess that means the orc's Persuasion check may succeed on, say, half of the party. The "Success" flow on those rolls is resolved, and... what happens next? What about the characters where the Persuasion roll failed? Are they forced into the deescalation path because half the party was Persuaded? Or do they fight the orc alone as the other characters are convicted in their deescalation? Do the still-escalated characters rush in and that convinces the deescalated to join the battle? Or do the players go back to the rest of the table with "crap, guys, what are we going to do?", negating the point of the Persuasion roll entirely?

You see what I'm getting at, right? In a group game context, how absolute was the compel in this scenario? If the half that were Persuaded can shake off the persuasion anyway, in service of effectively conducting game play, what was the point of this in the first place? Or was it meant to be group --- I'll say it --- "mind control"?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I agree that I don't like how this feels like "the dice decide" here, and there's also a meta-agency problem exposed there in that scenario that I think is hard to come to terms with: each member of the party individually sets a DC based on their stats, and I guess that means the orc's Persuasion check may succeed on, say, half of the party. The "Success" flow on those rolls is resolved, and... what happens next? What about the characters where the Persuasion roll failed? Are they forced into the deescalation path because half the party was Persuaded? Or do they fight the orc alone as the other characters are convicted in their deescalation? Do the still-escalated characters rush in and that convinces the deescalated to join the battle? Or do the players go back to the rest of the table with "crap, guys, what are we going to do?", negating the point of the Persuasion roll entirely?

You see what I'm getting at, right? In a group game context, how absolute was the compel in this scenario? If the half that were Persuaded can shake off the persuasion anyway, in service of effectively conducting game play, what was the point of this in the first place? Or was it meant to be group --- I'll say it --- "mind control"?

How is a successful Persuasion check by the PCs not "mind control"?

 

[Bill Zebub]

How is a successful Persuasion check by the PCs not "mind control"?

Limits?

The DM has to believe that the NPC(s) might be plausibly, but not definitely, persuaded by the argument.

For that matter, a successful roll doesn't even have to mean the PCs get exactly what they want. Just that they are successful in their goal. (Which is why clear "goal and approach" is important.)

"Well, the King doesn't agree to free the prisoner directly, but he does see the value of your argument. He offers you a deal..."

 

[bsss]

How is a successful Persuasion check by the PCs not "mind control"?

Like, in general (not in AnotherGuy's example above, where it's the orc rolling it)? I don't know, that's up to the GM. Maybe they're cool with one Persuasion check unraveling years of diplomacy or detente between tribes or whatever. That's not how I'd approach it, but it's their prerogative. There's a wide spectrum of success, which can be inexact, along the lines of what Bill Zebub said above.

"The DM has to believe it" also expands into the DM getting to call the shots on difficulty, so if they don't like it, they get to wave a magic wand and say this NPC is morally and ethically dedicated to their belief on the matter. (I argue that players largely have that same power, just different tools.) It's on the DM to use that power responsibly, of course.