tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post3029223359815079825..comments2023-05-12T05:10:20.941-04:00Comments on Raven Crowking's Nest: On Theory (Re)Defined, Railroad (Part II)ravencrowkinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-39717161456121706652013-03-29T22:36:19.684-04:002013-03-29T22:36:19.684-04:00Thanks for the replies, RC. I am thinking this ov...Thanks for the replies, RC. I am thinking this over.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05348021011343140805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-55966595773023476792013-03-24T16:20:06.788-04:002013-03-24T16:20:06.788-04:00Or another way to look at it:
If the amount and t...Or another way to look at it:<br /><br />If the amount and type of food you get is dictated by me, and you are starving, you are right to take your complaints to me.<br /><br />If the amount and type of agency you get is dictated by the rules, then you are right to take your complaints about lack of agency to the rules.<br /><br />You cannot both say that rules determine what agency you get, and that the rules are not responsible for lack of expected agency. It must be one way or the other.<br /><br />That should be crystal clear to just about anyone.ravencrowkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-25802875963932831142013-03-24T09:42:25.043-04:002013-03-24T09:42:25.043-04:00Hi Dave, and thanks for your response.
You don...Hi Dave, and thanks for your response.<br /><br />You don't answer my objections, so I cannot tell where you think they are at fault. I quote: <br /><br />"If the statements given in (2), (3), and (8) are correct, it would seem to imply that anything which happens within a game, be it codified rule or uncodified ruling, is part of the structure of the game. If players cannot be railroaded by the structure of the game, and everything that happens within the game is a product of that structure, we now see that railroading cannot exist.<br /><br />Personally, I think that the claim structure in statements (2), (3), and (8) are largely correct, but that the claim made by (21) is false. Either there is no railroading, or railroading must be able to exist within the game structure. Or perhaps we can claim that (3) is false, and that there exists agency within a game that is not provided by the game structure.<br /><br />In any event, it should be crystal clear that statements (2), (3), (8), and (21) cannot all be true."<br /><br />That last statement is predicated on "Either there is no railroading, or railroading must be able to exist within the game structure." <br /><br />If you are going to argue that railroading does not exist (and even -C admits it exists overtly, while attempting to define it away in each instance), then you can indeed claim that propositions (2), (3), (8), and (21) are true, and you can do so while holding a consistent opinion.<br /><br />But when you do so, you should also be willing to admit that you don't believe that a game or a GM can railroad players. You will also, I think, find that "Railroading cannot, and therefore does not, occur" is a non-starter for anyone who has played these games on more than an extremely casual basis.<br /><br />Good luck with it!<br /><br />Even in your wandering monster example, when you say, " If you as GM don't roll for the wandering monsters unless the PCs are doing something you don't like, you're railroading - taking away agency from the players - taking away choices from the players" you are conveniently ignoring that what the GM decides IS the game in this instance. If the rpg rules do not explicitly give the GM the authority to do this as part of the rules structure, they do so implicitly. <br /><br />In a game where the GM's judgement exceeds the authority of "Wandering monsters are called for every 3 turns" as a matter of the rules, "house rule, game text, consensus-based, it doesn't matter," either railroading occurs within the framework of the rules, or this is not railroading.<br /><br />You cannot have it both ways.ravencrowkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-50692138604873452602013-03-24T00:04:25.685-04:002013-03-24T00:04:25.685-04:00I think (2), (3), (8), and (21) can all be true.
...I think (2), (3), (8), and (21) can all be true.<br /><br />(2) Whatever the game, there are very specific rules. <br /><br />(3) Even for those situations where the rules don't clearly cover a corner case, the house rule, resolution, or consensus-based solution is also a quantifiable action. (I assume this to mean that they are equivalent to rules.)<br /><br />(8) The actions you can take are proscribed by the rules of the game.<br /><br />(21) Players cannot be railroaded by the structure of the game because that defines what agency they have.<br /><br />This seems to point to railroading being when a player (including the GM) does not follow the rules of the game, whether they are text-based*, house rules, or consensus-based.<br /><br />e.g. Wandering monsters are called for every 3 turns, as a rule - house rule, game text, consensus-based, it doesn't matter. If you as GM don't roll for the wandering monsters unless the PCs are doing something you don't like, you're railroading - taking away agency from the players - taking away choices from the players.<br /><br />* - text-based meaning rules in the game text.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05348021011343140805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-34589940467541878052013-02-28T21:12:42.477-05:002013-02-28T21:12:42.477-05:00Also remember that -C posits (19) If you were bein...Also remember that -C posits (19) If you were being railroaded, you wouldn't be playing a game, because by definition your agency is being invalidated.<br /><br />IOW, it is impossible to both play a game and be railroaded.<br /><br />Let that one sink in for a while. ;)ravencrowkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-10948179163892512282013-02-28T13:06:28.668-05:002013-02-28T13:06:28.668-05:00Remember that the original article posits that bei...Remember that the original article posits that being able to choose your fighting stance prevents Final Fantasy games from being railroads. My second example is slightly more extreme, but what I arguing against here is explicit in -C's POV in the article.ravencrowkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-91006044600685440752013-02-28T12:41:24.823-05:002013-02-28T12:41:24.823-05:00I see what you are saying now, thanks for the seco...I see what you are saying now, thanks for the second example :) (though I might not call the game you are describing an RPG, though from what I have heard, there were some modules basically like that).JPKerpan@gmailcomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17909474975549041404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-48735891961478348592013-02-28T12:17:20.721-05:002013-02-28T12:17:20.721-05:00One last thought: attempting to rationalize what ...One last thought: attempting to rationalize what agency is granted by the game rules, and what agency is granted by the GM, as separate things becomes even more problematic when those rules specify (as is the case with role-playing games in general) that the GM determines what agency the players have.ravencrowkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-44819924753790226412013-02-28T12:14:11.563-05:002013-02-28T12:14:11.563-05:00It should be quite obvious that the rules of a gam...It should be quite obvious that the rules of a game themselves can throw in a 4th obstacle to force them to join with a wizard who can cast "extra jump" or something, otherwise the game does not continue. If that circumstance is something you agree would be railroading, it is not less so because the game designer, rather than the GM at the table, set it up that way.<br /><br />Indeed, if one accepts the propositions being discussed above, it makes no sense to also differentiate between what the game designer and the GM does in terms of what railroading is. In both cases, they determine the agency allowed to the player, and, if one accepts the basic premise -C is selling, then in both cases the player cannot be railroaded, because the agency of the player is determined by that which determines what agency the player has.ravencrowkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-59041530496238337932013-02-28T12:08:43.587-05:002013-02-28T12:08:43.587-05:00Obviously, I disagree.
Perhaps a clearer example:...Obviously, I disagree.<br /><br />Perhaps a clearer example: A game in which everything is narrated by the rules, except your choice at a single point, which determines HOW you reach the next section, but does not otherwise effect the following sections, which then reach a pre-scripted conclusion.<br /><br />If it is true that you are playing a game so long as you have any agency, then this is a game. If it is true that the rules cannot railroad, then this is not a railroad.<br /><br />You may claim that it is not, but then you will not be using the term "railroad" as it is commonly meant. You will be attempting to redefine the term in a way that precludes the common meaning.<br /><br />Assuming that the goal is clear communication, you would not want to do so.ravencrowkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-4366537628156151712013-02-28T11:44:30.874-05:002013-02-28T11:44:30.874-05:00So you would be saying that you throw in a 4th obs...So you would be saying that you throw in a 4th obstacle to force them to join with a wizard who can cast "extra jump" or something, otherwise the game does not continue? I agree, that would be railroading. But following the rule itself "you can only jump three times" is not railroading. Similarly, telling the players that to get over an obstacle they have to jump is not railroading. It is telling them that they need to cross the obstacle, and not letting them choose whether or not to jump that begins the onset of railroading.JPKerpan@gmailcomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17909474975549041404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-87337731606236972192013-02-28T08:19:42.401-05:002013-02-28T08:19:42.401-05:00In any event, again, it should be crystal clear th...In any event, again, it should be crystal clear that statements (2), (3), (8), and (21) cannot all be true.ravencrowkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-32754136251819906872013-02-28T08:17:47.738-05:002013-02-28T08:17:47.738-05:00That is an argument that can be made (and which wi...That is an argument that can be made (and which will be examined as this series goes on), but if that is the argument being made, then propositions (3) and (8) need to be reexamined in that light.<br /><br />I would imagine that few people would claim that forcing a wizard to sleep before he can recover his spells is "railroading", not simply because the rest to replenish spells is part of the game structure, but also because the rest to replenish spells is part of the fictional game milieu that has no correspondence to reality. <br /><br />On the other hand, I would argue that rules which limit actions that have correspondence to reality in such a way that the player is unable to make decisions based on the "stance" or expected world-view of the character played can railroad, or contribute to railroading.<br /><br />As a clear example, imagine a game system in which you are playing a human character, but for some reason the system only allows you to jump three times each day. By putting a fourth obstacle in the game, which can only be cleared by jumping, and which must be cleared or gotten around within the same game day, the rule either railroads or contributes to the railroad of whatever secondary solution is being forced upon the players.<br /><br />Imagine similarly a game in which no rule exists that allows characters to run, but a base move speed is given. Unless one goes beyond the rules system itself, and considers what Gygax calls "the spirit of the game", the movement rules automatically prevent characters from taking normal actions within the fictional milieu.<br /><br />ravencrowkinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09315630554847698555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1801483473113363785.post-88881063708297566932013-02-28T07:53:02.877-05:002013-02-28T07:53:02.877-05:00Raven, I think the idea is more that "followi...Raven, I think the idea is more that "following the rules" cannot be describes as railroading. So you cannot claim that forcing a wizard to sleep before he can recover his spells is "railroading", because the rest to replenish spells is part of the game structure. The wizard can decide to keep adventuring without spells or to stop adventuring to rest and regain them. Railroading would be forcing them to choose one of those options.JPKerpan@gmailcomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17909474975549041404noreply@blogger.com