Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="soviet" data-source="post: 8954573" data-attributes="member: 6925338">The difference is consent. We (generally) accept that the GM has control over monster tactics and world events. As these are largely visible we also have the opportunity to speak up if a particular action doesn't seem plausible or fair, and potentially convince the GM to do something different. A GM secretly changing a success to a failure or a failure to a success is different because I have no opportunity to challenge it and will never know that it happened at all. Which successes, failures, and plot developments were the organic result of play and which were the GM's decision?If a group consents to the GM having this power then that's one thing. But my preference is that it never happen, come what may. And I GM like that too. If a GM is open about it ('You know what guys, it kills the adventure if Jim falls off the ledge. Let's say he grabs a vine instead') then I also don't really have a problem with it, because again I am being asked if I accept.</blockquote>