Search results

Yeah, my comment on agency was written as if it was a value judgement, when it shouldn't really be. It was there because I know I've engaged with people in this discussion who spoke very strongly about agency, and I assumed you were one of them but, on reflection, I don't actually recall if that...

That's one way to play. But that sounds like removing a lot of player agency to me. As an involved and invested participant in the game, having my own feelings as GM about how I would like the game to progress is obviously something that is going to happen. As I mentioned quite some time ago...

Yes, I clearly didn't do it fast enough, but I actually went back and changed my wording in the bit you were responding to there, because there are some situations where the advice I was giving won't necessarily apply. I think it does apply to most of the specific examples I've come across in...

No real disagreement there. I think I covered the second point as part of my final example (that was my intent at least), but it could probably have been separated out into it's own thing. Your first point can certainly be an issue and is why I try really hard to make sure I set clear...

I'm not sure that anyone has actually said you shouldn't give GMs feedback or ask questions. Someone may have, but most people seem to be in agreement that it is not only acceptable, but desirable, to ask for clarification if you have doubts about reasoning, technique, etc. Most people also...

My advice is: If you don't like what the GM is doing, mention it. If you don't like the answers you get, try and find a compromise solution. If you can't reach a solution that satisfies you, leave. No player should feel obligated to participate in a game they're not comfortable with, and...

I'm not sure I disagree with any of that. Lack of trust in the context I've been talking about is something like a hyper-vigilance for any possible slip, or an active worry that something might be a problem not because there are signs of a problem but simply because there is no overt proof...

To be clear, I don't really understand not extending trust in judgement in an RPG session, where the stakes are low (worst case you waste a few hours, maybe a couple sessions) and the potential pay-off is reasonably high if it's something of interest to you (many sessions of fun). There are...

All styles of play are dismissive of concerns that boil down to, "I don't like this style of play". I edited a bit while you were quoting me, and it might be important to us understanding each other: I would assume that the style of game has established up front (if not, I believe it certainly...

In this case, grievance appears to be, "I don't like this style of play." We don't have a GM here maliciously withholding critical information. It has been pointed out and agreed that, in this example, it's a GM running a game that uses secret information. I would assume that the style of game...

Yeah, it's probably fair to say having the core two or three people I mentioned as requisite all in the one city on a long term basis would count as the part where I got lucky.

I agree we have different experiences. And my group must owe itself, to some degree, to the whims of fate and some lucky breaks. But I've also worked to make it happen. We recruit the right people, bringing in new blood as we find people who seem to be a good fit. Sometimes, it's not for them...

The way I'm been doing it has been working fine for 40-odd years, so I'm confident the things that need saying are said and anything things left unsaid doesn't need saying. Yes, absolutely. I think there is some nuance you've missed then. Sometimes a decision needs to be made, and the GM is...

My players know me, generally. They know that our group, in general, involves taking the mickey out of each other as necessary and not taking silly things too seriously. They're not shy about speaking up, and have learned I am OK with feedack. Or, they are shy, but they've seen others speak up...

I've stated on more than one occasion that I fully expect my players to speak up if they feel a ruling I've made is unreasonable. Part of the reason the game works and there is trust is explicitly because they know they can do this.

My initial instinct was to disagree with you here. But when I tried to explain why, it started sounding to me like I actually agree. Which leads me to feel you can call these things the same or call them different, and it's really just a matter of where you choose to draw a line.

I don't feel it's fortune (at least, not in the main). I carefully cultivate my friends and people don't join our group unless they are vetted by an existing member. I don't recall any real issues when we were in our early teens either. Looking back as objectively as I can, I think it's fair to...

I agree they're not the exact same thing, but have never had either be a problem. I'm baffled that so many people have experienced issues with either, yet continue to game. I wouldn't, because if my games were like that, the hobby just wouldn't hold much appeal for me. I've seen people talk...

This kind of thing is part of the reason why I don't find any appeal at all in the idea of playing RPGs with strangers. That's not intended as a judgement on anyone who does game with lots of different people and I understand that, for some people, meeting lots of different people is actually...

I agree players can forget a lot of information. Speaking for myself as a GM, I don't believe I generally forget this, and I'll check with a player and remind them of things if they're making decisions that appear to overlook things their chactet should recall. Similarly, if the players are...