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

[hawkeyefan]

Yes. It seems rather obvious you'd think this. Thus you won't get it.

It’s not that I don’t get it. It’s that “it” is an extreme that doesn’t exist. You don’t feel things the same as your character would. You may feel similar feelings, maybe even quite strong at times, but not to the extent as a person going through the events of play would feel them.

There is always some distance between player and character. Necessarily, and thankfully, so.

Right. And here again you are incapable of even comprehending the internal perspective. You cannot be Batman or Sherlock whilst learning who they are the first time, unless they are just slowly recovering from serious amnesia.

Not at all. I think you’re quite wrong about this. As an actual person, what I have are ideas about how I might react or behave in some proposed situation. Some of those ideas are stronger than others. Few, if any, are certain, much as I may like to consider them such.

Because it is I who have the internal model of the character.

So what?

If it’s all internal, then it’s not even certain. You could change your mind about the character and decide whatever you wanted. You could “rewrite” whatever you wanted to yourself if you wanted to, and I expect you’ve done so.

Because they admit, or it can otherwise be inferred, that they do not have an internal model of the character, and/or they practice token play. But it is not something I police. I just invite people I know to have sufficiently similar approach to mine that issues do not arise. I have no interest of using rules or any other force to play like I prefer, I just invite people who already want to do so.

How can you infer it?

And I don't feel the weight if I am not actually making the choice. There is no weight as there is no real choice, there is just random result I had no part in.

Again, this is where you are wrong. But again, I think this is because there is no specificity in what’s being discussed. What game and rules are you talking about? Most games that I know of that use methods like those we’re talking about, the player has a big part to play.

Can you provide a specific example?

 

[Maxperson]

I mean, I think the core distinction is that I don't feel the weight of that discovery if the discovery is a choice I make as a player. I much prefer it to come from a source external to me, with a real risk that what I think should happen might not happen. I've set up the conflict, the system provides the resolution, and then I narrate the consequences.

At its core, what Max is looking for and what I'm looking for are opposing preferences that can't be reconciled.

Yep.

I do very much feel the weight of the choices and discovery when I play my character the way my do. Which is why I have said, and I will say it again, it's critically important that the DM find players who have substantially similar outlooks on playing and vice versa.

 

[Maxperson]

How exactly are you "surprised" by the actions of your PC over whom you have full control at all times, with zero influence of any kind from anything outside yourself?

Because I don't know until the moment I make the decision which way it will go. There's virtually no difference between that and not knowing until the die stops rolling which way it will go. Other than not losing my agency and destroying my character.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I just want everyone to play their PCs and NPCs as characters grounded in their own personalities, knowledge, and capabilities in the setting, not basing any game decisions on information outside of that. It has nothing to do with Players making content or anyone pushing story.

Yeah, but if you were running for me you'd have to deal with the fact sometimes I'm making decisions on what I think would be interesting (i.e. author or director stance, not IC stance) not purely IC. That's just the reality of how I play; sometimes one sometimes the other. Its always grounded in understanding of the character and what's happened to them, but that's not the same as where the decision process comes from.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because I don't know until the moment I make the decision which way it will go. There's virtually no difference between that and not knowing until the die stops rolling which way it will go. Other than not losing my agency and destroying my character.

We're not going to agree. I can't see any part of this conversation as "destroying your character".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah, but if you were running for me you'd have to deal with the fact sometimes I'm making decisions on what I think would be interesting (i.e. author or director stance, not IC stance) not purely IC. That's just the reality of how I play; sometimes one sometimes the other. Its always grounded in understanding of the character and what's happened to them, but that's not the same as where the decision process comes from.

Fair enough, but every time I notice you doing that it would bug me. I really dislike basing character choices on drama, unless the actual character in-setting is dramatic.

 

[TwoSix]

Yep.

I do very much feel the weight of the choices and discovery when I play my character the way my do. Which is why I have said, and I will say it again, it's critically important that the DM find players who have substantially similar outlooks on playing and vice versa.

I'm sure I could play at your table, I'm ultimately pretty flexible. I just probably wouldn't play a character focused on social checks (or geniuses with 5 Int!), since I understand your outlook.

And since it's all internal, it's pretty hard to distinguish between "playing the character" and "playing to create story" as long as you're decent at the thespian aspects of the game.

I mean, that's ultimately why I like to discuss playstyle preferences; I try to be a playstyle "chameleon" that can play any system with almost any kind of players.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Fair enough, but every time I notice you doing that it would bug me. I really dislike basing character choices on drama, unless the actual character in-setting is dramatic.

You want slightly different things out of it than I do. That shouldn't be a surprise by now.

 

[TwoSix]

Fair enough, but every time I notice you doing that it would bug me. I really dislike basing character choices on drama, unless the actual character in-setting is dramatic.

It's pretty hard to tell the difference 99% of the time. Narrating your choices as being grounded in character concept and backstory is fairly trivial, even if your personal motivation for the choices is to drive for conflict and drama. Believe me, I've been doing it for decades with all sorts of more "traditional" tables.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It's pretty hard to tell the difference 99% of the time. Narrating your choices as being grounded in character concept and backstory is fairly trivial, even if your personal motivation for the choices is to drive for conflict and drama. Believe me, I've been doing it for decades with all sorts of more "traditional" tables.

Yeah, its largely not going to be visible from the outside; that's why I can slip from Author to IC fairly easily most of the time and vice versa. Ironically, the only time its liable to be noticable is if I realize a decision I'm leaning toward is most likely going to be disruptive to other players or the game as a whole in a bad way, in which case I'll pull back on the reigns and choose something else.