Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mort" data-source="post: 5729793" data-attributes="member: 762">The decision speed is directly a result of the DMs &quot;convince me&quot; attitude. Had he just said yes or no and moved on, problem solved. So yes, decision speed is part of the problem I have but it's only part of the bigger issue here (see below).The two big issues at play here (for me) are time and trust. By adopting the attitude he did, on the first encounter of the first session, the DM has conveyed two things to his players:First that any nonstandard decision will literaly stop the game and require a secondary debate with the DM.&nbsp; Basically the players only other choice is to try as hard as possible to only think inside the box and only with &quot;standard&quot; solutions to any problem (whatever that even is). I don't think this is something to be encouraged.Second, and more importantly, that the DMs attitude toward the players is &quot;I don't trust you, convince me why I should&quot; and yes I do think that this type of attitude will lead to a worse game.&nbsp; The DM has essentially stated &quot;I'll default to no unless you convince me otherwise&quot;, and of all the attitudes to addopt I think this is among the least conducive&nbsp; to a good game (IMO of course).IMO the best games result when the players trust the DM (Not in a &quot;nothing bad will happen to us sense&quot; but in a &quot;we know the DM is going for the best gaming experience sense&quot;) and that's not likely to happen if the players get the impression right of the bat that the DM has no trust for them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mort, post: 5729793, member: 762"] The decision speed is directly a result of the DMs "convince me" attitude. Had he just said yes or no and moved on, problem solved. So yes, decision speed is part of the problem I have but it's only part of the bigger issue here (see below). The two big issues at play here (for me) are time and trust. By adopting the attitude he did, on the first encounter of the first session, the DM has conveyed two things to his players: First that any nonstandard decision will literaly stop the game and require a secondary debate with the DM. Basically the players only other choice is to try as hard as possible to only think inside the box and only with "standard" solutions to any problem (whatever that even is). I don't think this is something to be encouraged. Second, and more importantly, that the DMs attitude toward the players is "I don't trust you, convince me why I should" and yes I do think that this type of attitude will lead to a worse game. The DM has essentially stated "I'll default to no unless you convince me otherwise", and of all the attitudes to addopt I think this is among the least conducive to a good game (IMO of course). IMO the best games result when the players trust the DM (Not in a "nothing bad will happen to us sense" but in a "we know the DM is going for the best gaming experience sense") and that's not likely to happen if the players get the impression right of the bat that the DM has no trust for them. [/QUOTE]

Verification