Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Dm misadventures. Tales of woe. How long did your worse table arguement last?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7344841" data-attributes="member: 97077"><p>Sure. It depends on what you value.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>A counter argument might be that whatever limits you perceive here is paid off with improved game pacing, faster advancement (both in terms of character and plot and/or content covered per session), and an environment that encourages being supportive of the ideas of others. And in exchange, you can count on your own ideas being supported, too.</p><p></p><p>And what are those limits exactly? You don't get to take the lead by framing the idea this scene, but you will next scene? And even though you didn't get to take the lead this scene, you get to add to the initial idea? That doesn't seem like a big loss to me. It seems like supporting your friends' ideas and sharing the spotlight.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>By accepting the idea and adding to it, you turn it into an idea that you <em>can</em> agree with. That's the "and..." part. Accept, then add. That way you don't have to tell your friend that the idea they put forth sucks compared to someone else's (possibly your own) and then have a discussion about why that is which takes up valuable game time. Some may enjoy that and think it's a critical part of the roleplaying experience. I don't. I think it's awful. And the forums are loaded with threads about this issue becoming a problem at the table. In addition to this thread and its many examples, I recall a thread fairly recently where the poster (can't recall whom exactly) recounted an experience where his wife acted in a way that annoyed the party. I spotted that immediately as being the result of a table debate and someone getting fed up then acting unilaterally to resolve the matter to the dismay of others. It's a common result so far as I can tell. The method I describe avoids all that.</p><p></p><p>As for you breaking the plan, that would be a no-no. If you agreed to the table rules before play, you'd be breaking your agreement. What's more, if you agreed to the table rules, which includes this method, then you aren't being forced to do it. You <em>chose </em>to.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And it sure is <em>nice</em> to sit in judgment of those plans, right, and point out the flaws? <em>Satisfying </em>even? <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Nah. A plan offered in good faith that has holes can have those holes patched by adding to the idea rather than debating and/or discarding the original idea. It doesn't need to be perfect, just good enough. And it gets us to the action faster with no dispute.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="iserith, post: 7344841, member: 97077"] Sure. It depends on what you value. A counter argument might be that whatever limits you perceive here is paid off with improved game pacing, faster advancement (both in terms of character and plot and/or content covered per session), and an environment that encourages being supportive of the ideas of others. And in exchange, you can count on your own ideas being supported, too. And what are those limits exactly? You don't get to take the lead by framing the idea this scene, but you will next scene? And even though you didn't get to take the lead this scene, you get to add to the initial idea? That doesn't seem like a big loss to me. It seems like supporting your friends' ideas and sharing the spotlight. By accepting the idea and adding to it, you turn it into an idea that you [I]can[/I] agree with. That's the "and..." part. Accept, then add. That way you don't have to tell your friend that the idea they put forth sucks compared to someone else's (possibly your own) and then have a discussion about why that is which takes up valuable game time. Some may enjoy that and think it's a critical part of the roleplaying experience. I don't. I think it's awful. And the forums are loaded with threads about this issue becoming a problem at the table. In addition to this thread and its many examples, I recall a thread fairly recently where the poster (can't recall whom exactly) recounted an experience where his wife acted in a way that annoyed the party. I spotted that immediately as being the result of a table debate and someone getting fed up then acting unilaterally to resolve the matter to the dismay of others. It's a common result so far as I can tell. The method I describe avoids all that. As for you breaking the plan, that would be a no-no. If you agreed to the table rules before play, you'd be breaking your agreement. What's more, if you agreed to the table rules, which includes this method, then you aren't being forced to do it. You [I]chose [/I]to. And it sure is [I]nice[/I] to sit in judgment of those plans, right, and point out the flaws? [I]Satisfying [/I]even? :) Nah. A plan offered in good faith that has holes can have those holes patched by adding to the idea rather than debating and/or discarding the original idea. It doesn't need to be perfect, just good enough. And it gets us to the action faster with no dispute. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Dm misadventures. Tales of woe. How long did your worse table arguement last?
Top