Bait & Switch

[Lord Pendragon]

I don't think that I can make a blanket statement on this. It depends entirely on the GM, and how cool things look like they'll turn out to be. There are a few GMs I know who, if they tried such a tactic, I'd be perfectly fine with it. There are others with whom I'd be... highly skeptical.

I think, to do this well, a GM really needs to know his players.

My sentiments exactly. Since the mutated player was okay with it, it looks like the DM is doing okay so far.

 

[Bumbles]

I have limited amount of time to play, and I don't want to spend it playing a genre or style I don't care for. If the GM had been upfront that this would have been a horror game (to use my example) than I could have just bowed out of that game, and spent that time playing something I would have enjoyed.

OTOH, by not telling you, the GM (and the group) gets the opportunities to be offered with a surprise opening. Sure, you get bitten sometimes, when a player like you, doesn't want to play a horror or western horror game, but OTOH, if everybody knows it's going to be a horror game, that can color their choices a bit, and put them ahead of the game. Or they can just not be as shocked to find themselves facing undead vampire cowboys!

And in the case of Metamorphosis Alpha, it's not necessarily quite as much of a genre change anyway. It's a bit like crashing the space ship I guess.

 

[Raven Crowking]

OTOH, by not telling you, the GM (and the group) gets the opportunities to be offered with a surprise opening.

Absolutely.

The DM is not beholden to the players. If the players don't like the game, they have the ability to walk away, but they have no right to tell the DM what to run or how to run it. The DM has an absolute right to run the game in any way, shape, or form that he believes will result in a better game.

If he flops, boo hoo. You weren't paying for it; you don't have a right to a ticket refund.


RC

 

[Umbran]

If he flops, boo hoo. You weren't paying for it; you don't have a right to a ticket refund.

But, RC, that simply isn't true. While the GM generally spends more time on a game than the players, the fact of the matter is that the players do have an investment of time and brain-sweat and dedication.

This goes especially adult players, with children, family, and work commitments - these folks are apt to have gone to some effort to make it to your table. If the player hired a babysitter, or used up their "darling, you watch the kids tonight" for the week to come to your game, they most certainly have paid something.

Good DMs, in my experience, are rather service-oriented - they enter into the thing with the intent of showing the players a good time. This doesn't mean bowing to every player whim, but it does mean engaging in a cooperative effort, taking player desires into account.

Also, GMs are often working with their friends as players. You don't go telling your friends "my way or the highway" too often, do you?

 

[Bullgrit]

My game group has just started a campaign of Alternity in the Starship Warden (Metamorphosis Alpha) setting.

but we weren't playing MA

The above could be where the confusion stems from.

Yeah, I see how that could be confusing.

For the record:
We were told and are playing the Alternity game system. We were told the setting would be a place called the Starship Warden -- described as a fully functioning city-ship. We imagined and created characters based on the idea that we would be playing in a fully functioning city-ship.

There was no mention of Metamorphosis Alpha by the DM. (And I don't think any Player other than me has ever even heard of MA. I only knew it is a game from the old days; I knew nothing more about it.)

Once the game started, our very first scene was our PCs waking up in a post-apocolyptic version of the ship. One of the PCs has been mutated.

Through out-of-game discussion *after the first game session*, we learned that we're playing the Alternity game system in the Metamorphosis Alpha campaign setting -- the post-apoc Warden.

I have no problem with my character in this unexpected campaign setting, and no change was made to my character. I have not complained about it to my group or on this forum.

But upon thinking about it, I think such "bait and switch" concepts are not a good idea, in general. I would not like my character to be changed at the opening game session with no warning or no action by me.

As a general rule, I would not like to be told we're going to play a Greyhawk campaign, and create my Greyhawk-style character, and then discover in the opening of the first game session that we're in Darksun and that my elf is now an orc. Sure, it might turn out to be fun, but it's poor form.

Bullgrit

 

[Crothian]

The DM is not beholden to the players. If the players don't like the game, they have the ability to walk away, but they have no right to tell the DM what to run or how to run it. The DM has an absolute right to run the game in any way, shape, or form that he believes will result in a better game.

Without players the DM has no game. Players can tell the DM and talk to him anyway they want to. This isn't about rights it is about doing what is best for your game. A DM that ignores what the players want to do will soon find he has no group to DM. DM's are not gods, they do not always know what is best for the game.

 

[Raven Crowking]

But, RC, that simply isn't true.

Sure it is.

While the GM generally spends more time on a game than the players, the fact of the matter is that the players do have an investment of time and brain-sweat and dedication.

Sorry, but are you suggesting that the DM is obligated to run a particular type of game. Or to avoid using particular methods of achieving what they believe will create a better game?

Also, GMs are often working with their friends as players. You don't go telling your friends "my way or the highway" too often, do you?

There is no difference IMHO between a player saying "You can't do X or I'll walk" and the DM saying "I am doing X, walk if you want to".

Believing otherwise is just kidding yourself.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Without players the DM has no game.

True. And if this happens, and the DM wants a game, he'll have to change.

Players can tell the DM and talk to him anyway they want to.

Really? Abusively? And the DM cannot simply end the conversation?

Frankly, I don't believe that anybody has the right to talk to anybody else in whatever way they want.

I do believe that the players have the right to tell the DM what they would like. They have the right to tell the DM what they are looking for in a game. What they like and dislike about any given session.

And the DM decides what to do with that information. Does he believe that the players will actually have more fun once they see the bigger picture, and that he should stay the course? Does he believe that he should change? Would allowing Bob to play a Telletubby ruin the game for him (and possibly/probably), or should he allow it? Does he really want to run a game for the complainer who hates learning that there is a supernatural element in what he thought would be a regular western? Does he really want to run a game for the guy who only plays Telletubbies, or the one who demands that the campaign narrative focus on his oh-so-cool supercool character?

Sometimes, it is better not to run a game at all.

And, if you run a superior game, IME and IMHO, running out of players isn't ever even remotely a problem. YMMV.

DM's are not gods, they do not always know what is best for the game.

No.....but a DM who ignores what he believes is best for the game does so at his peril. And, while he might have a game for a while longer, my experience suggests that this is almost 100% of the time a poor trade-off.


RC

 

[Crothian]

Really? Abusively? And the DM cannot simply end the conversation?

Who said anything about abusive language? That's not part of this discussion.

I do believe that the players have the right to tell the DM what they would like. They have the right to tell the DM what they are looking for in a game. What they like and dislike about any given session.

Be careful, you're agreeing with me.

 

[Mallus]

This boils down to two questions.

Do you trust the DM enough to let them surprise you?

Do you trust that the DM will listen and change the campaign if those surprises don't pan out?