Good idea or bad idea? - Page 4 - OG Myth-Weavers

Notices


Gaming Discussion

For all things gaming related.


Good idea or bad idea?

   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magrus View Post
Indeed, I've seen as many games fall apart due to railroading as I have due to players bickering over what to do or a DM just not being able to cope with the frantic "I wanna go here! No over there! Wait, way over there now!" kind of prep work nightmare that can occur when players have complete freedom. There's no One True Way to run a game.
I must have amazing luck with players. Almost all my players are completely willing to follow the plot. Even in my sandbox games they'll usually follow what I planned out.

Of course it also helps that I always hint that following the plot will result in epic loot that is often above their WBL via planning threads. (How many games have a genie as a reward?)

I find often getting the players involved in writing the plots also helps. If you make planning threads and get them involved and telling you what they want they often are more willing to follow it.

"Hey my guy is a pirate who wants to meet up with an old flame, and such."
"Awesome, let's do a pirate themed expansion quest where she's a key player. It'll also let me play out a few other plots I want at the same time."
"Great let's do it."

The only thing he asked me to do was not killing the old flame, which I wasn't planning on doing anyway.

The only time I had to railroad them is when they forgot about a a prior NPC they ran into that I planned on them asking for help, and even then I've managed to switch that to my advantage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Silverbane View Post
demonstrably false ... one-true-wayism
Can't be demonstrated, isn't a "way" - railroading is an exclusively negative term. There aren't games where players are forced to do things they would never do without being forced who later agree that being forced to do those things was great. What there are, and what's confusing the conversation, is games where the players are forced to do things they wouldn't mind doing anyway.

This creates the illusion of "positive" railroading, but to be blunt, railroading is just fanfic other people have to sit down and listen to you read out about their characters. It's not even really gameplay, and it's definitely not a tool - at best, it's a momentary faltering of a GM's ability ("Crap, I want this to happen but I don't know how to introduce it!"), at worst it's a fundamental incapacity to take the existence of players into account ("Crap, they're about to ruin my story by telling their own!").

That is also incorrect. You should maybe look at some more different types of games before you go making sweeping judgments like that.

For instance, in the game Pendragon, characters have a group of "Personality Traits", which define the way that your character feels and acts. These personality traits will sometimes force a character to act one way or another. Many times, this is awesome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viatos View Post
There aren't games where players are forced to do things they would never do without being forced who later agree that being forced to do those things was great.
Apologies for doing this but...

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...SadisticChoice
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...geForMacGuffin
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MoralDilemma
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...OrIdolDecision

It's all in how you write the story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Silverbane View Post
That is also incorrect. You should maybe look at some more different types of games before you go making sweeping judgments like that.

For instance, in the game Pendragon, characters have a group of "Personality Traits", which define the way that your character feels and acts. These personality traits will sometimes force a character to act one way or another. Many times, this is awesome.
Ah, this is an easy mistake to make.
The difference is that personality traits can force your character to act in one way or another, but this doesn't mean they're forced to follow the GM's railroad. In fact, it could make your character act in a way neither the GM nor the players ever expected.
Railroads happen when the GM negates a player’s choice in order to enforce a preconceived outcome. In the case of Pendragon it's not the GM negating player choice, it's the game mechanics.

It should be noted that if handled poorly mechanical incentives like Pendragon's personality traits of Fate's compels can easily be seen as an attempt to railroad players towards a certain outcome. The GM is the one who presents the situation where those mechanics come into play after all, and creating a do or die choice can end poorly if not well executed.

Naturally the best results arrive when situations evolve organically and the player isn't pressured into taking action through external metagame influences like mechanics or GM insistence but instead act because they're so immersed in their character. However, those situations tend to be a lot less common and far more difficult to do well, and as such mechanical incentives are an excellent way to encourage players to act a certain way.

I was under the impression that you rolled against Pendragon traits because you're a ridiculous Arthurian knight? Because you're not a thinking human being ruled by your thoughts you're an ARTHURIAN KNIGHT ruled by your MORALS AND DRIVES and rationality is for peasants.
It's simulating Arthurian romance, not just D&D in an Arthurian setting.

I can totally see how a bad GM could use that power for evil though.

I'm of the opinion that "making decisions as though you are your character" is all you need for it to count as roleplay. If you get there by immersing yourself in a character that's great, but if you get there by just imagining what you'd personally do in an imaginary situation that's great too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jammers View Post
I'm of the opinion that "making decisions as though you are your character" is all you need for it to count as roleplay. If you get there by immersing yourself in a character that's great, but if you get there by just imagining what you'd personally do in an imaginary situation that's great too.
I agree absolutely. I was talking about the ideal and perfect situation for choices. It all comes down to players can be extremely genre savvy and detached from their characters, very often opting for "ideal" solutions that their characters might not see because they're only human (or elven or dwarven or squid-thingie). It's very easy to be rational and make good choices when you're not faced with the threat directly - hence the full immersion aspect.

It's also possible that players just like causing trouble by their own decisions. And while fantastic (if they know what they're doing and more importantly when to choose badly), it's still often a conscious decision to take the bad choice. Having the players, not just the characters, make decisions based on emotion, not rational thought, is something truly great.

Bad idea. It smacks of railroading.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Last Database Backup 2024-03-28 02:17:53pm local time
Myth-Weavers Status