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

[Crimson Longinus]

What I just do not understand how people's minds work, if they can just use rules as substitutes for actual arguments and things that evoke feelings.

Like we've been arguing about this here for pages. If I suddenly say 38 will it make you agree with my stance?

If I say scary 27, will it make you feel fear?, if I say funny 32, will it make you laugh?

I just do not understand how this can work, unless you just play from some detached third person perspective, instead of trying to inhabit the viewpoint and feelings of your character.

 

[Thomas Shey]

What I just do not understand how people's minds work, if they can just use rules as substitutes for actual arguments and things that evoke feelings.

Like we've been arguing about this here for pages. If I suddenly say 38 will it make you agree with my stance?

If I say scary 27, will it make you feel fear?, if I say funny 32, will it make you laugh?

I just do not understand how this can work, unless you just play from some detached third person perspective, instead of trying to inhabit the viewpoint and feelings of your character.

Sometimes I do one, sometimes the other. Even when playing heavily IC though, in face-to-face play I'm not doing heavy immersion; I don't find it works well in that context.

So there's plenty of opportunity to go "Okay, that Persuade check had some impact on them; they're at least considering it. What does that mean about what it said to them?

(And again, remember I'm not talking a purist nothing-but-the-roll case. I just don't factor how convincing what the framing was, but take it as data about the kind of argument the NPC was making, as represented by the roll.)

But I'm perfectly capable of stepping back and viewing it from an authorial view rather than first person, too. Sometimes I do one, sometimes the other.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What I just do not understand how people's minds work, if they can just use rules as substitutes for actual arguments and things that evoke feelings.

Like we've been arguing about this here for pages. If I suddenly say 38 will it make you agree with my stance?

If I say scary 27, will it make you feel fear?, if I say funny 32, will it make you laugh?

I just do not understand how this can work, unless you just play from some detached third person perspective, instead of trying to inhabit the viewpoint and feelings of your character.

Die rolls are an abstraction of events happening in the setting of the game, representing all those little things that are difficult or impossible to simulate in real life. This IMO is just as true in the social arena as in other areas, especially since we want (I think) folks on either side of the screen to be able to portray characters with social skills that vary from our own.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Die rolls are an abstraction of events happening in the setting of the game, representing all those little things that are difficult or impossible to simulate in real life. This IMO is just as true in the social arena as in other areas, especially since we want (I think) folks on either side of the screen to be able to portray characters with social skills that vary from our own.

I am not particularly convinced everyone in this discussion does want that, at least to any degree that matters.

 

[TwoSix]

I just do not understand how this can work, unless you just play from some detached third person perspective, instead of trying to inhabit the viewpoint and feelings of your character.

Generally, yes, that’s exactly what I’m doing. I’m interested in creating compelling fiction about the character (and assisting other players’ characters to do the same), not about trying to inhabit their viewpoint.

I used to play that way, but I don’t find it very compelling anymore. Tastes change over time.

Again, it varies by game engine, but I’m generally looking in play for moments to assert my character and have something interesting happen to them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I am not particularly convinced everyone in this discussion does want that, at least to any degree that matters.

Yeah,I get that impression as well. I guess I was hoping for something else. IMO it's really important to be able to roleplay someone who isn't you, and mechanics can help with that (or even make it possible).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Generally, yes, that’s exactly what I’m doing. I’m interested in creating compelling fiction about the character (and assisting other players’ characters to do the same), not about trying to inhabit their viewpoint.

That makes more sense then. And that definitely is not how I want to play. It of course is sometimes required, but if the game intentionally and often elicits such perspective I consider that to be a flaw.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Yeah,I get that impression as well. I guess I was hoping for something else. IMO it's really important to be able to roleplay someone who isn't you, and mechanics can help with that (or even make it possible).

You can play people that are different from you. But most interesting differences are not about capability, they are about temperament, beliefs values, goals etc. And you don't need rules for those. But of course in most games the character can have different capabilities than the player too and the rules can assist in that. But they assist, they cannot supplant the player's own thinking. You still need to come up with plans, tactics, arguments etc using your own brains, and yeah, those will affect how well your character will do. And I utterly do not understand how it could not be so. As long as the players are making any decisions that have any meaning, their own decision making skills will affect the outcome.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Well, in my case it doesn't hurt that I think a lot of social skill systems are overly simpleminded in the first place. That's just as true if they're targeted at PCs or NPCs.

Sure. I mean… a lot of the conflict in this discussion seems to come from trying to do this in D&D… which is ill-suited for it and isn’t really designed to handle it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Sure. I mean… a lot of the conflict in this discussion seems to come from trying to do this in D&D… which is ill-suited for it and isn’t really designed to handle it.

No, not really. It is just used as an example as everyone is familiar with it.

But the same issues exist in one way or another in other systems too.

And one thing any social mechanics should be is definitely simple. Interrupting natural flow of in-character conversation to deal with complicated mechanics and writers' room the implications is just terrible.