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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3638657" data-attributes="member: 18280">You must not put up with very many social scenarios at all, then.In any social scenario, each person in that scenario is trying to get at least a part of what they want.  They have to gain some value for the energy put forth.  You can go into a social scenario hoping to change the other people involved into to meet your needs, or you can hope to have reasonably compatable needs.  If you have reasonably compatable needs, you can determine which needs of each party are most important and attempt to make everyone happy to some extent.But every compromise situation has, inherent within it, for each participant, a "this is how far I'll go, take it or leave it".Because reward must exceed investment in order to make the investment worthwhile, the person or persons who invest the most must meet more of their needs, or they have no motive to invest.  In a rpg, this means that if the GM invests the most time, effort, and often money, he or she is going to want a return on that investment.  If the return on investment isn't as great as the investment itself, the GM will experience "GM Burnout" and simply not want to do it any longer.It is also true that the players must experience a greater reward than their investment.  In order to have invested players, investment has to result in greater reward.  When I read Remathilis' post, this is what I saw him as saying.As a DM, I do some things to minimize my investment so that I can minimize my need for reward (and hence, be further open to compromise).  One of the things I do is use a consistent world for a backdrop.  If I was to create a new world, or use someone else's world, I would have to invest more, and thus would require some incentive for so doing.  This is a point where, in general, the buck stops.  Likewise, I have no desire to argue rules in the middle of the game.  You can make a brief argument, but when I've made the final call, that's what happens.  We can discuss it more outside of the game, to a limited extent, but that still isn't an invitation to harrangue me until I change my mind to your point of view.  Anyone who does that may use the door, because the reward ceases to be worth the investment of DMing for that sort of individual.Player investment is often a reward for the DM.  DM investment is often a reward for the players.  If you get a good group, you can often hit a point where everyone gets a hell of a lot more out of it than they put it.  That's why I enjoy this hobby.  Sometimes its golden."Take it or leave it", IMHO, just means that there are limitations to how far compromise can go.  That is inherent in every type of social interaction.  Sometimes, taking it is wonderful because you are being offered something you want.  Sometimes, taking it is okay because you are compromising on some things you want.  Sometimes, taking it involves too much compromise and it is better to leave it.IMHO, of course.  I'd say "YMMV" but I don't really believe that's true.  More like "Your understanding of your mileage might vary."RC</blockquote>

Verification