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

[Fenris-77]

I know, right? Clearly my arguments are irrefutable, "and yet they persist..."

Clearly.

 

[TwoSix]

So about surprises and playing against your best interests.

A while ago in our Blades game our characters were negotiating with an antagonist but not actively hostile powerful NPC and their gang. We needed to get certain information from this NPC. My character had as part of his backstory that his parents were killed in a fire. It was just distant background, and I had not been thinking about it in a while. But then in midst of this discussion, this NPC accidentally reveals that they were one who was responsible for that fire (they did not know how it related to my character.) And they were very callous about it. They had not had anything personal against my character's parents, they were just a sacrifice, some insignificant trash to the NPC. And at that moment I knew my character would try to kill that smug bastard there and then. My internal model of the character said that this is what they do, no question about it. It was not so much a choice than a revelation. So a fight ensued, I killed the SOB, my character got trauma, people got hurt, and we did not get the information we needed from the NPC. It was surprising, and it was not tactically smart. But it was very cool moment.

This is the sort of stuff I want to be happening.

Honestly, this is exactly the kind of example I spoke about a few days ago, when I talked about maintaining agency when your character is presented with two distinct paths. In this case, the choice to attack or not should remain with the player.

It would be different if this case was presented as a test of composure, and the NPC revealed the information specifically to goad the PC into violence. If the PC wants to attack anyway, then there's no stakes, and thus no need to roll.

 

[Bill Zebub]

So about surprises and playing against your best interests.

A while ago in our Blades game our characters were negotiating with an antagonist but not actively hostile powerful NPC and their gang. We needed to get certain information from this NPC. My character had as part of his backstory that his parents were killed in a fire. It was just distant background, and I had not been thinking about it in a while. But then in midst of this discussion, this NPC accidentally reveals that they were one who was responsible for that fire (they did not know how it related to my character.) And they were very callous about it. They had not had anything personal against my character's parents, they were just a sacrifice, some insignificant trash to the NPC. And at that moment I knew my character would try to kill that smug bastard there and then. My internal model of the character said that this is what they do, no question about it. It was not so much a choice than a revelation. So a fight ensued, I killed the SOB, my character got trauma, people got hurt, and we did not get the information we needed from the NPC. It was surprising, and it was not tactically smart. But it was very cool moment.

This is the sort of stuff I want to be happening.

You forgot to tell us what the NPC rolled for their social skills. How can I understand/appreciate this story without that key fact?

 

[Bill Zebub]

Because they enjoy other kinds of immersion, or immersion isn't a priority for them at all?

Yes, I understand that intellectually. I just can't really relate to what that feels like. It's like when people don't appreciate mathematical elegance. I understand that they don't, but I don't truly understand how one can't.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So about surprises and playing against your best interests.

A while ago in our Blades game our characters were negotiating with an antagonist but not actively hostile powerful NPC and their gang. We needed to get certain information from this NPC. My character had as part of his backstory that his parents were killed in a fire. It was just distant background, and I had not been thinking about it in a while. But then in midst of this discussion, this NPC accidentally reveals that they were one who was responsible for that fire (they did not know how it related to my character.) And they were very callous about it. They had not had anything personal against my character's parents, they were just a sacrifice, some insignificant trash to the NPC. And at that moment I knew my character would try to kill that smug bastard there and then. My internal model of the character said that this is what they do, no question about it. It was not so much a choice than a revelation. So a fight ensued, I killed the SOB, my character got trauma, people got hurt, and we did not get the information we needed from the NPC. It was surprising, and it was not tactically smart. But it was very cool moment.

This is the sort of stuff I want to be happening.

That's a pretty extreme example, but I can still think of many Players I've gamed with who would ignore their PC's desire for vengeance in favor of a more game-positive result for their PC and the party. That's what the kind of rules I favor are for: to help encourage people to act the way you did.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

That's a pretty extreme example, but I can still think of many Players I've gamed with who would ignore their PC's desire for vengeance in favor of a more game-positive result for their PC and the party. That's what the kind of rules I favor are for: to help encourage people to act the way you did.

But I don't believe rules can do that.

 

[Bill Zebub]

But I don't believe rules can do that.

As I said upthread, to me it feels like forcing a kid to apologize to his brother when he's not actually sorry.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yes, like watching a horror movie about people being chased by axe murderer will make you scared, but probably not quite as scared than actually being chased by an axe murderer would!

But that the core feeling is real, and that is the tether that guides the character.

Sure. But there’s a distance there, which is my point. The severity or depth of the feeling is different. The way we feel it is different.

And the same uncertainly exist with the mental model of the character interacting with unexpected fictional situations! The fictional person is real in this sense, thus they will have "real" unexpected reactions! This is what me and Max have been trying to tell you. But it simply seems that you do not have such internal model of your characters that would make this possible, so you need the rules to tell you how the character reacts.

“Need”? No, I understand what you’re saying and I’ve played that way plenty of times. I don’t “need” dice. You’re the one claiming that you need to only do it a certain way.

No not really. You cannot rewrite the model whist inhabiting it. It is like trying to rebuild a car whilst driving it. IN any case, the model exist in my head, not in the GM's, thus only I can truly know what sort of reactions the model produces.

Of course you can change your mind while inhabiting the character. There’s a huge difference from rebuilding a car while driving in that it’s all imaginary. You can decide whatever you like!

You cannot tell a token player and Nordic LARPer apart?

Let’s say no. How would I tell the difference?

I am not wrong. I am telling you how it feels to me, I am not wrong about that, and it is pretty disrespect for you to imply otherwise.

You clipped that out of context. You’re wrong that the player has no say in it. I'm not talking about your feelings. I’m refuting your claim that players have no say in this.

This is why I asked you about a specific game… because what you're talking about… what you’re describing as your concern that the player has no say in how this works or comes up in play… is not how these things work in my experience.

When I'm properly immersed in the persona and perspective of the character, they can surprise me, just the same way than I can surprise myself in the real life. Which is not to say that I play in deeply immersed state always and 100%; I unfortunately don't. But that's the goal. However, the way you talk about these things simply implies to me that you just do not get the whole internal perspective thing. I am sure my approach is moulded by my LARP background, which focuses sort of method-actor-like inhabitation of the character.



Not sure I can, as I try to avoid games and practices that do this. Latest I can think of is how I am rather anxious about managing the stress in Blades because I don't want to trigger trauma in a moment that would seem inappropriate by my internal model of the character. And overall, that game has things that pushes things to the author stance which I'm not the biggest fan of.

This is sometimes why these discussions can become really circular. You don’t actually have examples of what you’re complaining about? You don’t play such games… so you don’t see the mechanics in play… but you have concerns about them?

As for what you say about Blades, I’m not sure what you mean by not triggering a trauma at a “moment that would seem inappropriate by your internal mode of the character”… can you elaborate on that?

 

[hawkeyefan]

But why artificially increase the distance?

I enjoy thinking, "Oh my god, why can't we kill this thing? We already tried fire and that didn't work. Do we need acid? I hope not, we don't have any. Freezing it? Pouring alcohol on it?!?!?" I'm not actually in danger for my life, unlike my character, so I'm not that close, but there's still some authentic tension there. I am certainly feeling closer to my character than if I know we need to use fire but I'm just pretending to be a character who doesn't know that.

How is the distance artificially increased? What do you mean by that?

If you mean something like why would I want there to be distance between me and the character… or perhaps in some cases, more distance… again, I’ll lean on Clara from The Between.

Sometimes, a character is in some given way not like me. At all. So sometimes, taking a step back and make the distinction between myself and my character, I actually get a clearer picture of what the character would do rather than what I would do. We often get so caught up in the first person aspect of playing a character that it’s easy to respond less as the character and more as myself. For a character like Clara, who’s so different from myself, than doesn’t suit.

Also, there’s a matter of comfort. As Clara’s backstory slowly took shape in play and we learned more about her, she kind of became worse and worse. The context of what we knew changed how I and the other players looked at her. Being able to distance myself from that was probably a good thing.

Not sure if either of those address what you had in mind… let me know.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Sure. But there’s a distance there, which is my point. The severity or depth of the feeling is different. The way we feel it is different.

Yes. It doesn't mean the feeling is not there or that it being there is immaterial. Again, that the player and character experiences never perfectly match doesn't mean we would not aim for it or intentionally create more disconnect.

Of course you can change your mind while inhabiting the character. There’s a huge difference from rebuilding a car while driving in that it’s all imaginary. You can decide whatever you like!

No, I don't believe I can.

Let’s say no. How would I tell the difference?

I hope you figure it out one day.

You clipped that out of context. You’re wrong that the player has no say in it. I'm not talking about your feelings. I’m refuting your claim that players have no say in this.

This is why I asked you about a specific game… because what you're talking about… what you’re describing as your concern that the player has no say in how this works or comes up in play… is not how these things work in my experience.

I mean, ideally they'd have a say, but I don't think this works in all games. I believe in Pendragon the virtues just compel certain sort of emotion on the character for example.

This is sometimes why these discussions can become really circular. You don’t actually have examples of what you’re complaining about? You don’t play such games… so you don’t see the mechanics in play… but you have concerns about them?

I mean I have played such games. But given that I know what I dislike, I try to avoid it now, and I cannot recall specifics from some ancient WW game I played back in the stone age.

Why don't you tell some example of situations where you flet such mechnic worked well?

As for what you say about Blades, I’m not sure what you mean by not triggering a trauma at a “moment that would seem inappropriate by your internal mode of the character”… can you elaborate on that?

What more elaboration can there be? The mechanics say that the situation is such that my character gets traumatised, and my internal model says it is not.