Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8397527" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Which is a better way of going about it, but we all slip up. I know for ease of typing quickly I've often overstated a point.In the spirit of? Maybe. But I think that language ends up flowery and vague, which makes it harder for people to turn that into something to empower the player's voices. I know a lot of people are worried about tyrannical players bullying their DMs, but I think people like Max and Lyxen have swung too far the other way. I think we need more balance instead of a an all-powerful DM.I think trying to alter the culture of the game community (which is a nigh impossible task) would go a long way. I think the major problem with that paragraph is that the players are passive. The DM decides is the game world is slaughtering the adventures or revolving around their decisions. And I go back the DM who cursed my character. I flat out told the guy that, as a player, I felt that I had no options. That this was a massive escalation from what I expected, and that I was not enjoying the situation. He was adamant that this was the consequences of my own decisions and that he was being merciful in not having my character killed. The decision that ended up with me being turned into an undead with a soul destroying curse? Putting out a book burning fire, as a scholar born with fire powers and with a history involving book burning. And I think this highlights another facet. The DMs I've seen who are the worst give false choices. "You can do what I want, or walk. That is your decision." "you can follow the path, or your character can die. You have a choice, so it isn't railroading". But all the power to decide this is vested in the DM. Read that paragraph again, can you find anything in it that credits the players for the memorable campaign? Anything that gives them any say over what happens? I can't. The part you highlighted is about the DM choosing to make the world react to their choices. Meaning the DM could just as easily choose not to do it, and the players have no recourse. The game seems to promote this idea that various posters have espoused, albiet subtly, that the good comes from the DM, and the bad from the players. And changing that isn't about putting in a caveat on a specific rule, but from out-right saying "DMs if you are changing things, we recommend an open discourse with your players. Get them involved in making the game better, it is their story as much as it is yours."</blockquote>

Verification