ThoughtBubble
First Post
Well, it's a bit late in the conversation, but let's pick this back up.
The arguement (to that point) went something like:
Players should follow plot hooks.
Only bad players build characters who don't follow hooks.
Here's a bad DM not working with a player.
So, it seemed to be that your example of bad DMing was set up to counter the idea of characters not following hooks. "not the right type of hook" does deal with some of the situations that crop up, but I have personally dealt with players who seemed to create characters where any hook was the wrong type of hook.
And I do like to think that I'm at least a mediocre DM.
edit: hence, asking if the possibility of a bad DM who does not work with a player was enough to rule out players trying to work with any DM.
I agree, it does have to be give and take. However, I find that when I DM, I'm giving 90% of the time. I think that my players probably give about 10% and take about 40% of the time. They'd be taking less, but I do my darndest to force them all into dealing with each other in the same room. In previous games, they probably gave about 5% and took about 20%. So, obviously there's a function of how much my time gets spread among the players, and how well. That's one of the reasons I point this at being one of my better games.
So, from my PoV, asking a player to give a little more is a small thing. Even if they give more than they get (which, as a player, I tend to do), they're still giving far less than I am as a DM.
And that could be a large part of why "Guy" our resident loner orphan who has no friends is the least satisfying character to have in the game. However, when he drew a cool picture of his character, it helped.
Yeah, but it can't be said clearly enough, often enough. Speaking of which, I need to talk to my DM about not manhandling my background.
As long as we're here....I have this idea. I think that good play doesn't just 'happen'. Up until my recent superhero game, this particular group of players has never been strong on group cohesion or interaction. This is to the point where several party members will dispise another member of the party, who won't know about it because it's never mentioned.
Each of our games starts out the same, the DM comes up with an idea for a game, people make characters and roll stats. We expect it to all work out. I've recently been trying to convince people that we should think as a whole. I think we can have a better time of it if we make characters who have an honest reason for sticking together, working together, and talking.
It could be that, as a group, we just really suck.
But, my superhero game is going pretty well. There are still some rough spots, and there's way more shy or distainful charcters than I'd have liked, but there is some working towards actual discussion between the characters. So I think there's hope for the group.
I just think we need to make it happen.
Hence, that whole communication thing.
LostSoul said:I'm not sure I understand you. Interested, though.
The arguement (to that point) went something like:
Players should follow plot hooks.
Only bad players build characters who don't follow hooks.
Here's a bad DM not working with a player.
So, it seemed to be that your example of bad DMing was set up to counter the idea of characters not following hooks. "not the right type of hook" does deal with some of the situations that crop up, but I have personally dealt with players who seemed to create characters where any hook was the wrong type of hook.
And I do like to think that I'm at least a mediocre DM.
edit: hence, asking if the possibility of a bad DM who does not work with a player was enough to rule out players trying to work with any DM.
I was talking about the DM, but you could apply the same logic to any relationship.
I agree, it does have to be give and take. However, I find that when I DM, I'm giving 90% of the time. I think that my players probably give about 10% and take about 40% of the time. They'd be taking less, but I do my darndest to force them all into dealing with each other in the same room. In previous games, they probably gave about 5% and took about 20%. So, obviously there's a function of how much my time gets spread among the players, and how well. That's one of the reasons I point this at being one of my better games.
So, from my PoV, asking a player to give a little more is a small thing. Even if they give more than they get (which, as a player, I tend to do), they're still giving far less than I am as a DM.
And that could be a large part of why "Guy" our resident loner orphan who has no friends is the least satisfying character to have in the game. However, when he drew a cool picture of his character, it helped.
That brings up another good piece of advice: Communicate your desires to the other players and the DM. edit: Which is what you were saying.
Yeah, but it can't be said clearly enough, often enough. Speaking of which, I need to talk to my DM about not manhandling my background.
As long as we're here....I have this idea. I think that good play doesn't just 'happen'. Up until my recent superhero game, this particular group of players has never been strong on group cohesion or interaction. This is to the point where several party members will dispise another member of the party, who won't know about it because it's never mentioned.
Each of our games starts out the same, the DM comes up with an idea for a game, people make characters and roll stats. We expect it to all work out. I've recently been trying to convince people that we should think as a whole. I think we can have a better time of it if we make characters who have an honest reason for sticking together, working together, and talking.
It could be that, as a group, we just really suck.
But, my superhero game is going pretty well. There are still some rough spots, and there's way more shy or distainful charcters than I'd have liked, but there is some working towards actual discussion between the characters. So I think there's hope for the group.
I just think we need to make it happen.
Hence, that whole communication thing.