Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9383136" data-attributes="member: 6801228">One thing that I think is hard to acknowledge is that there has been an evolution of TTRPG &quot;technology&quot; over the lifetime of DnD. For example, Session Zero. Session Zero was not a thing people did, but it was in part created to solve a series of problems. For example, the classic issue of one player rolling an Undead Hating Paladin and another player rolling a Necromancer. That is going to immediately cause friction, if not implode the group. Or to give a bit of a sillier example, a player who rolls up a Ranger who hunts giants... when the DM makes a world that has no giants. These things happened, were problems that disrupted and ruined games, so eventually people started crafting a solution to these things. A pre-session get together to discuss the campaign and the characters to point out major problems ahead of time, so people could figure out solutions before committing. And I think the increase in player agency has come about in a similar manner. I don't think it is a matter of Players &quot;dominating&quot; the story, but I think it is a matter of recognizing that people play these games for fun, and as a DM, it is far more of a drag on my enjoyment, if I am forcing a player to do something they do not want to do. It is easier for me as a DM to adjust to fit the player's desired story, than it is for me to try and enforce my enjoyment over everything. Because, for me, my biggest enjoyment is seeing my players have fun. Like you say, it ends up being a balancing act, but the overall goal is to increase communication between DMs and players, and the more communication (not just listening and saying no) there is, the happier and more excited everyone is for the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 9383136, member: 6801228"] One thing that I think is hard to acknowledge is that there has been an evolution of TTRPG "technology" over the lifetime of DnD. For example, Session Zero. Session Zero was not a thing people did, but it was in part created to solve a series of problems. For example, the classic issue of one player rolling an Undead Hating Paladin and another player rolling a Necromancer. That is going to immediately cause friction, if not implode the group. Or to give a bit of a sillier example, a player who rolls up a Ranger who hunts giants... when the DM makes a world that has no giants. These things happened, were problems that disrupted and ruined games, so eventually people started crafting a solution to these things. A pre-session get together to discuss the campaign and the characters to point out major problems ahead of time, so people could figure out solutions before committing. And I think the increase in player agency has come about in a similar manner. I don't think it is a matter of Players "dominating" the story, but I think it is a matter of recognizing that people play these games for fun, and as a DM, it is far more of a drag on my enjoyment, if I am forcing a player to do something they do not want to do. It is easier for me as a DM to adjust to fit the player's desired story, than it is for me to try and enforce my enjoyment over everything. Because, for me, my biggest enjoyment is seeing my players have fun. Like you say, it ends up being a balancing act, but the overall goal is to increase communication between DMs and players, and the more communication (not just listening and saying no) there is, the happier and more excited everyone is for the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification