Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 9239808" data-attributes="member: 7026617">As with all such things, not impossible, but the fact other people say it doesn't make it true.The problem with this is that GMing has a lot of functions.  So the fact they, say, don't want to do game prep or participate in world construction in general doesn't say they don't want to participate in mechanical decisions or other elements.  Or vice versa.  Assuming because they don't want to be doing the whole package (or perhaps more to the point, want to be able to play without constantly thinking of the big picture) that they don't want any involvement in any part of it that isn't just at the GM's sufferance is a big reach from just the fact they don't want that widely encompassing position known as "GM".So, yeah, I don't think my position says anything about how many people want to GM.  That only makes sense if you have an all-or-nothing view of both the job of the GM and of what I'm saying.I'm perfectly willing to discuss the tradeoffs.  What I'm not going to do is let pass the assumption that the centralized option is clearly the more benign for most groups without qualification, and with the defense making arguments that seem blind to how much of it also applies to that centralized position.  If that seems to me making it "not possible" to your view, well, that's your choice.</blockquote>