Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Warrior Poet" data-source="post: 6904593" data-attributes="member: 1057">I have done both.And have not been particularly good at either. Hence, for the last fifteen years, I have been a player, and eschewed the GM's chair. Part of my difficulties have stemmed from my relationship to the system (I have grown increasingly disillusioned with arms races, alignment and alignment essentialism, and high fantasy); still more from an unsophisticated approach to being a GM.So, in addition to the good advice already in the thread, wanted to encourage you find the customized (and dynamic) approach that incorporates the necessary elements that make for an interesting and fun game, rather than looking at the structure as a choice of only (or merely) one or the other. If you take the time to build, to create, and to include conversations with the players about what everyone wants in a game, then you end up with a world that has many different aspects across a range of challenges and delights that keep the players feeling like they're having an adventure (which is a key, I think).Also, a quick thought about something else:I would add that the game is also for the express purpose of the GM having fun, too. If there are six people around the table, and five of them are having consistent fun, but one of them (charged with setting the stage) isn't, then that's not a great game, either, in my opinion. I really do think it's possible for everyone—GM included—to have fun, and that's where the conversations about what people want come into play.Good wishes for your games!Still learning,Robert</blockquote>

Verification