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

[Micah Sweet]

It is rather poor list of consequences if it is so easy to choose the one which is the least trouble.

And if the point is to choose a consequence that matters, then if the situation would somehow render some of them inconsequential, then those cannot be chosen.

What you're talking about isn't rules. It's player fiat/free roleplay. That's not compromise. That's just what you said you wanted in this area all along.

 

[bsss]

It is rather poor list of consequences if it is so easy to choose the one which is the least trouble.

And if the point is to choose a consequence that matters, then if the situation would somehow render some of them inconsequential, then those cannot be chosen.

So wait, is, say, "the character handles the temptation to lust perfectly fine, and he moves on with this quest" (what seems to me to be definitely the least trouble) on the list of consequences that the character-model would pick the ideal option from, or no? When you say you "know how your character would react", is such a reaction impossible? (And is the only reason it's impossible because it's "bad DMing" and thus shouldn't have been on the list to begin with?)

 

[Crimson Longinus]

What you're talking about isn't rules. It's player fiat/free roleplay. That's not compromise. That's just what you said you wanted in this area all along.

No it is not. Because the player would have to choose some impactful consequence, and we would have a list those choose from (or at least act as suggestions.) "This has no impact" would obviously not be an option. But it seems the only thing you're satisfied is the GM getting to dictate via the rules to the player what their character thinks.

So wait, is, say, "the character handles the temptation to lust perfectly fine, and he moves on with this quest" (what seems to me to be definitely the least trouble) on the list of consequences that the character-model would pick the ideal option from, or no? When you say you "know how your character would react", is such a reaction impossible? (And is the only reason it's impossible because it's "bad DMing" and thus shouldn't have been on the list to begin with?)

I am afraid I don't quite understand the question.

 

[bsss]

I am afraid I don't quite understand the question.

The question is if an option where there are no consequences --- where the conflict is overcome --- exists when faced with a conflict.

But, actually, the implication is that you considering that to never be an option (as you just said) is at odds with your argument that there can be no limitation to what the PC does other than what the player chooses, and that is internally inconsistent. Hence it reads like "all that is acceptable is whatever I agree to".

 

[Bill Zebub]

So it's just a matter of how the rule is described, not what the rule does?

I think so....you (or somebody) may think of a way to write a rule that would seemingly trap me into a contradiction.

But a rule that dictates what my character thinks and feels, as opposed to what they are compelled to do, would erode a wall that I want to maintain.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The question is if an option where there are no consequences --- where the conflict is overcome --- exists when faced with a conflict.

But, actually, the implication is that you considering that to never be an option (as you just said) is at odds with your argument that there can be no limitation to what the PC does other than what the player chooses, and that is internally inconsistent. Hence it reads like "all that is acceptable is whatever I agree to".

Yes, it is at odds. That's why this is a compromise solution. But at least if there is several consequences to choose from , there is a higher chance that the player can find one that feels authentic to their character. But like you say, it of course is still possible that none of them are suitable.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No it is not. Because the player would have to choose some impactful consequence, and we would have a list those choose from (or at least act as suggestions.) "This has no impact" would obviously not be an option. But it seems the only thing you're satisfied is the GM getting to dictate via the rules to the player what their character thinks.



I am afraid I don't quite understand the question.

What I want is impactful consequences to meaningful social situations that can potentially be detrimental, whether the Player wants those consequences to exist or not, based on what happens in the game. I don't want what consequence occurs to be entirely under the Player's control, because that's not how it always works in real life (and you know where my gaming priorities lie). But having that stuff just be GM fiat isn't really fair either, which is where resolution mechanics come in.

 

[bsss]

Yes, it is at odds. That's why this is a compromise solution. But at least if there is several consequences to choose from , there is a higher chance that the player can find one that feels authentic to their character. But like you say, it of course is still possible that none of them are suitable.

And what happens to the game or to the people at the table if none of the options are "suitable" (and to whom)?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think so....you (or somebody) may think of a way to write a rule that would seemingly trap me into a contradiction.

But a rule that dictates what my character thinks and feels, as opposed to what they are compelled to do, would erode a wall that I want to maintain.

Again, this is about influence, not dictation or control.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, it is at odds. That's why this is a compromise solution. But at least if there is several consequences to choose from , there is a higher chance that the player can find one that feels authentic to their character. But like you say, it of course is still possible that none of them are suitable.

Exactly. What if your mental model says none of those options work for you? Do you get to pass? If you can, then there's no teeth and it's player fiat (your ideal). If you can't, then your mental model is compromised, which you have told us literally ruins the game for you. How do that thread that needle?