We have just released Episode 8 of The Gauntlet Podcast, “Railroads: Putting the Hobo in Murderhobo.” For this one, David LaFreniere joins us to talk about hot dogs. We also discuss Ribbon Drive, Shadow Hunters, and several other games, as well as engage in another rhetorical sortie with the FATE Defense Force.
If you have any substantive comments, post them here.
http://gauntletpodcast.libsyn.com/episode-8-railroads-putting-the-hobo-in-murderhobo/size/2
Rejoice! Thanks for bringing me life this week.
Rejoice! Thanks for bringing me life this week.
(Oh gee, I sound so contentious when my comment’s read aloud, hahahaha.)
You should totally call the listener feedback system “fanmail”!
Also, love that Resistance and Shadow Hunters got a shoutout; I enjoy both of those for really different reasons. (Resistance is great with the right group–you can get into some really intense analysis.)
This week was a really interesting topic: I’ve actually grappled with it myself, because I’m working on a short-run game (designed for single-session play) that’s incredibly scripted in its narrative flow. Think Mythender level of scripting. I think I’ve made peace with it because I know that it’s a particular style designed to make the game turn out the way it does.
(Oh gee, I sound so contentious when my comment’s read aloud, hahahaha.)
You should totally call the listener feedback system “fanmail”!
Also, love that Resistance and Shadow Hunters got a shoutout; I enjoy both of those for really different reasons. (Resistance is great with the right group–you can get into some really intense analysis.)
This week was a really interesting topic: I’ve actually grappled with it myself, because I’m working on a short-run game (designed for single-session play) that’s incredibly scripted in its narrative flow. Think Mythender level of scripting. I think I’ve made peace with it because I know that it’s a particular style designed to make the game turn out the way it does.
Russell Benner “Harboring” sounds like some weird sex thing.
Russell Benner “Harboring” sounds like some weird sex thing.
Jason Cordova And “railroading” doesn’t?
Jason Cordova And “railroading” doesn’t?
Great episode. A few things:
First, about Ribbon Drive. So one weird thing that belatedly occurred to me is how the abrupt endgame can affect things. You mentioned that our PCs were fairly contentious, and that’s true. However, I was seeing this as the way we were at the start of our journey, the likelihood being that we would grow closer and change by the end of the road trip. But the fairly abrupt and somewhat unpredictable endgame triggering means that while I was sort of predicting another three or four scenes in which to mellow/learn/grow–drug muling, getting paid, making it to Mexico, etc.–our game was over much earlier than seemed fictionally appropriate. So while maybe most of our characters were off on a beach growing closer and learning the true value of friendship or whatever, on-screen our new-found protagonist is saying fuck it and heading back home. The end. It was weird.
Also, I’m not sure I like obstacles, or at least the way they played out in our game. I believe we had three (or was my character’s overdose an obstacle?). Getting arrested seemed to fit, but between the other two that I can remember, our entire reason for going on the road trip was derailed and our game turned into an action movie out of nowhere. The obstacles ended up feeling a little too external and intrusive instead of feeling like they were intrinsic to the story as it evolved.
Great episode. A few things:
First, about Ribbon Drive. So one weird thing that belatedly occurred to me is how the abrupt endgame can affect things. You mentioned that our PCs were fairly contentious, and that’s true. However, I was seeing this as the way we were at the start of our journey, the likelihood being that we would grow closer and change by the end of the road trip. But the fairly abrupt and somewhat unpredictable endgame triggering means that while I was sort of predicting another three or four scenes in which to mellow/learn/grow–drug muling, getting paid, making it to Mexico, etc.–our game was over much earlier than seemed fictionally appropriate. So while maybe most of our characters were off on a beach growing closer and learning the true value of friendship or whatever, on-screen our new-found protagonist is saying fuck it and heading back home. The end. It was weird.
Also, I’m not sure I like obstacles, or at least the way they played out in our game. I believe we had three (or was my character’s overdose an obstacle?). Getting arrested seemed to fit, but between the other two that I can remember, our entire reason for going on the road trip was derailed and our game turned into an action movie out of nowhere. The obstacles ended up feeling a little too external and intrusive instead of feeling like they were intrinsic to the story as it evolved.
So I liked the discussion, but I’ve never heard what you guys were talking about in the sense of “good railroading” referred to as railroading. I’d call that structure. But since I’d rather not get bogged down in semantics I’m fine with conceding the definition.
Roleplaying games involve a promise, whether explicit or implicit. Dungeons & Dragons, for instance, promises players that they can be fantasy heroes or scoundrels, stabbing creatures and taking their things while adventuring through a fantasy land. It’s a vague, but expansive promise. What can you do in this game? All sorts of things. The game itself, like most traditional games, imposes little in the way of structural limitations on the agendas players can pursue. Can they invade a dungeon and kill everything that moves? Totally. Can they say “screw that” and try to take over the kingdom next door? Totally. Can they set up a mercenary crew? Keep dungeony pets? Bring magic to the masses? Yeah, probably.
Railroading at its worst is an unspoken violation of that promise. What can you do in this game? All sorts of things… that I planned for you to do. And in a more traditional game, often the only thing players have any sort of real control over is their characters’ actions. Railroading is furthermore a violation of the promise that their characters are just that: theirs. And since none of this is in the rules–right there for the players to take a look at, and to object to if need be–it’s a thoroughly unpleasant bait-and-switch. You thought you were here to play this game, but often enough you’re just seat-fillers listening to me tell my story.
A structured game, on the other hand, incorporates its “railroading” into its mechanics. In other words, it makes a different promise to players. Kagematsu doesn’t promise that PCs are a ronin and the women of a Japanese village left to do whatever they’d like; it promises that the women will try to convince Kagematsu to stay and fight off some sort of horrible doom, and that Kagematsu may or may not be persuaded. A Taste for Murder doesn’t promise characters from an English manor home doing whatever suits them; it promises accusations and cajoling, followed by murder, then investigation and a final big reveal. The Mountain Witch is ronin heading toward a final confrontation with a witch. Gray Ranks is a series of missions on specific days dealing with specific events of the Polish resistance.
All of these things are baked in. You sit down to play one of these games, and in learning the game’s mechanics, you learn to an extent what you’re in for. The traditional railroading GM, on the other hand, is basically attempting to trick and/or force a group of players into doing things they might not agree to if they were forewarned. This is why players despise it. There’s a level of consent that’s lacking.
So I liked the discussion, but I’ve never heard what you guys were talking about in the sense of “good railroading” referred to as railroading. I’d call that structure. But since I’d rather not get bogged down in semantics I’m fine with conceding the definition.
Roleplaying games involve a promise, whether explicit or implicit. Dungeons & Dragons, for instance, promises players that they can be fantasy heroes or scoundrels, stabbing creatures and taking their things while adventuring through a fantasy land. It’s a vague, but expansive promise. What can you do in this game? All sorts of things. The game itself, like most traditional games, imposes little in the way of structural limitations on the agendas players can pursue. Can they invade a dungeon and kill everything that moves? Totally. Can they say “screw that” and try to take over the kingdom next door? Totally. Can they set up a mercenary crew? Keep dungeony pets? Bring magic to the masses? Yeah, probably.
Railroading at its worst is an unspoken violation of that promise. What can you do in this game? All sorts of things… that I planned for you to do. And in a more traditional game, often the only thing players have any sort of real control over is their characters’ actions. Railroading is furthermore a violation of the promise that their characters are just that: theirs. And since none of this is in the rules–right there for the players to take a look at, and to object to if need be–it’s a thoroughly unpleasant bait-and-switch. You thought you were here to play this game, but often enough you’re just seat-fillers listening to me tell my story.
A structured game, on the other hand, incorporates its “railroading” into its mechanics. In other words, it makes a different promise to players. Kagematsu doesn’t promise that PCs are a ronin and the women of a Japanese village left to do whatever they’d like; it promises that the women will try to convince Kagematsu to stay and fight off some sort of horrible doom, and that Kagematsu may or may not be persuaded. A Taste for Murder doesn’t promise characters from an English manor home doing whatever suits them; it promises accusations and cajoling, followed by murder, then investigation and a final big reveal. The Mountain Witch is ronin heading toward a final confrontation with a witch. Gray Ranks is a series of missions on specific days dealing with specific events of the Polish resistance.
All of these things are baked in. You sit down to play one of these games, and in learning the game’s mechanics, you learn to an extent what you’re in for. The traditional railroading GM, on the other hand, is basically attempting to trick and/or force a group of players into doing things they might not agree to if they were forewarned. This is why players despise it. There’s a level of consent that’s lacking.
Steve Mains We actually did discuss the obstacles in Ribbon Drive, but I think that part of the discussion was cut for pacing purposes.
I think we were using a narrower definition of railroading (a definition of our own making, mind you), and meaning something a little closer to when a video game is “on-rails.” In other words, you move from pre-determined scene to pre-determined scene. It’s a pretty small universe of games, actually. Minus the “harboring” games we mentioned (which should have included The Mountain Witch), we talked about games where there is a specific thing that happens in each scene and you can’t avoid it. I think it’s a version of structure. But, again, these are largely semantics. I think our greater point was that a highly-disciplined narrative doesn’t always have to be bad.
Steve Mains We actually did discuss the obstacles in Ribbon Drive, but I think that part of the discussion was cut for pacing purposes.
I think we were using a narrower definition of railroading (a definition of our own making, mind you), and meaning something a little closer to when a video game is “on-rails.” In other words, you move from pre-determined scene to pre-determined scene. It’s a pretty small universe of games, actually. Minus the “harboring” games we mentioned (which should have included The Mountain Witch), we talked about games where there is a specific thing that happens in each scene and you can’t avoid it. I think it’s a version of structure. But, again, these are largely semantics. I think our greater point was that a highly-disciplined narrative doesn’t always have to be bad.
Also, a complete side note, but we have contented ourselves with the idea that we don’t have to reach some sort of elemental truth in each episode, and that we can just discuss roleplaying games in much the way we would after a gaming session. That means there will be inaccuracies or things we change our minds about down the road. And I think that’s ok. In a lot of ways, we’re teaching each other, and that’s a good thing.
This is also the reason we are doing the listener feedback section, because we anticipate others will have different (or better) ideas about these things than we do. We just happen to have the resources and ability to execute a weekly podcast.
Also, a complete side note, but we have contented ourselves with the idea that we don’t have to reach some sort of elemental truth in each episode, and that we can just discuss roleplaying games in much the way we would after a gaming session. That means there will be inaccuracies or things we change our minds about down the road. And I think that’s ok. In a lot of ways, we’re teaching each other, and that’s a good thing.
This is also the reason we are doing the listener feedback section, because we anticipate others will have different (or better) ideas about these things than we do. We just happen to have the resources and ability to execute a weekly podcast.
Russell Benner I think there actually is a weird sex thing called “docking.”
Russell Benner I think there actually is a weird sex thing called “docking.”
I would say those games are “scripted” or “storyboarded”. you have a basic outline for a show, move, novel, story but now you sit down with a bunch of writers and hammer out the details and the dialog.
in video gaming you often hear the term “scripted encounter”. you can run around Morrowind all you want but the main story guest and some of the bigger ones, revolve around certain scenes.
how you got there and the choices you make can change but you still have the beginning “you break out of prison”, some middle parts “fetch the stone of McGuffin before the General big bad gets his hands on it”, and a final showdown “stop the ritual that will end the world”.
I would say those games are “scripted” or “storyboarded”. you have a basic outline for a show, move, novel, story but now you sit down with a bunch of writers and hammer out the details and the dialog.
in video gaming you often hear the term “scripted encounter”. you can run around Morrowind all you want but the main story guest and some of the bigger ones, revolve around certain scenes.
how you got there and the choices you make can change but you still have the beginning “you break out of prison”, some middle parts “fetch the stone of McGuffin before the General big bad gets his hands on it”, and a final showdown “stop the ritual that will end the world”.