Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7560044" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>It's not the de facto standard way, though, it's your way. Even in the games you've listed, it's not the standard way. You're positing DM as god, which, while popular, isn't standard, largely because no one enjoys playing under a power tripping fool. I strongly doubt you actually play that way, even, as I'm pretty sure there's a huge social pressure involved that means you aren't the "my way or the highway" GM you're proposing as the standard model.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Maybe, or maybe you should be aware of how you're coming across with unsupported statements of "how it is".</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is the ultimate limit of ANY social interaction, though. It's trivial to say "if I'm a jerk, people can leave." It doesn't define RPGs in any meaningful way, and instead pretends to be an argument defending a GM centered playstyle using bad behavior.</p><p></p><p></p><p>No. It's because the players, GM included, form a social contract as to what the roles in the game are. The GM retains any power because the players have allowed it, the game works because of the group decisions. You're actually positing a bully situation as the standard, which is bad.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, you've posited a dysfunctional position as your motte, and are now venturing out to claim the bailey.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, it hasn't. You'd prefer that it has, just as you'd prefer we all accept your claims of the standard way 'trad' RPGs run, because that supports your arguments. But, the problem here starts with your premises, so there is no 'moved on' to this debate.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Your example is just one where the rules of the game are ignored, it doesn't adhere that it's only the GM that can do so. Instead, you've presented a case where the social contract is that the GM can cheat but players are held to a higher standard. You can do this, sure, you can make any social contract for a game you want, but it's not an example of GM authority, it's just an example of how the table has decided to play. I can point to many similar examples where the rules of the game are actually enforced, and those don't point to GM authority at all, either.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And the motte shows up again, back to 'bad behavior' as the argument. Let's, instead, example actually good behavior in games and look at how that works, yeah? Postulating jerks to make your point that your style of play means the GM is the biggest, meanest bully in the room isn't a good look.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7560044, member: 16814"] It's not the de facto standard way, though, it's your way. Even in the games you've listed, it's not the standard way. You're positing DM as god, which, while popular, isn't standard, largely because no one enjoys playing under a power tripping fool. I strongly doubt you actually play that way, even, as I'm pretty sure there's a huge social pressure involved that means you aren't the "my way or the highway" GM you're proposing as the standard model. Maybe, or maybe you should be aware of how you're coming across with unsupported statements of "how it is". This is the ultimate limit of ANY social interaction, though. It's trivial to say "if I'm a jerk, people can leave." It doesn't define RPGs in any meaningful way, and instead pretends to be an argument defending a GM centered playstyle using bad behavior. No. It's because the players, GM included, form a social contract as to what the roles in the game are. The GM retains any power because the players have allowed it, the game works because of the group decisions. You're actually positing a bully situation as the standard, which is bad. Yes, you've posited a dysfunctional position as your motte, and are now venturing out to claim the bailey. No, it hasn't. You'd prefer that it has, just as you'd prefer we all accept your claims of the standard way 'trad' RPGs run, because that supports your arguments. But, the problem here starts with your premises, so there is no 'moved on' to this debate. Your example is just one where the rules of the game are ignored, it doesn't adhere that it's only the GM that can do so. Instead, you've presented a case where the social contract is that the GM can cheat but players are held to a higher standard. You can do this, sure, you can make any social contract for a game you want, but it's not an example of GM authority, it's just an example of how the table has decided to play. I can point to many similar examples where the rules of the game are actually enforced, and those don't point to GM authority at all, either. And the motte shows up again, back to 'bad behavior' as the argument. Let's, instead, example actually good behavior in games and look at how that works, yeah? Postulating jerks to make your point that your style of play means the GM is the biggest, meanest bully in the room isn't a good look. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Introducing Complications Without Forcing Players to Play the "Mother May I?" Game
Top