Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8222002" data-attributes="member: 16814">Wait, let me understand.&nbsp; If a GM changes what's in their notes this is playing in bad faith?&nbsp; I want to make sure that this is what you've said, because this seems extremely wonky, and it can't actually be what you mean.&nbsp; Right?If you change things after their introduced, that's a whole different ball of wax.I'm not arguing that notes don't have an impact on the game - I'm saying they aren't the fiction of the game until introduced.&nbsp; Sure there are, else how could they learn to be good GMs?&nbsp; And where do all the horror stories come from?&nbsp; A lot doesn't mean a majority, Max.&nbsp; And I, absolutely, without any doubt, was once a very bad GM.&nbsp; Given the threads here, I find it quite nonsensical to imagine everyone starts at good.Then how can you notice when he shows you he cannot be trusted?&nbsp; I mean, nothing I said requires or even encourages keeping an eagle eye on the GM to see if they're being untrustworthy.&nbsp; That's not warranted.&nbsp; But unless you're willing to state that a railroad is just as good a game as a non-railroad (and I'm talking blatant, not well hidden, here), then we're going to have to deal with the fact that constraints on the GM are critical to both agency and trust.&nbsp; It might be that a GM self-constrains, and, honestly, this is the default D&amp;D goes to because the game certainly doesn't do anything to constrain the GM, or it might be that a game has a structure that constrains the GM.&nbsp; Take Blades in the Dark, for instance.&nbsp; The GM is very much more constrained in that game than in a D&amp;D game, and this is quite visible to the players.&nbsp; Yet, no one suggests playing BitD if you're not sure you can trust your GM.&nbsp; Constraints can help with trust, though, especially in building it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8222002, member: 16814"] Wait, let me understand. If a GM changes what's in their notes this is playing in bad faith? I want to make sure that this is what you've said, because this seems extremely wonky, and it can't actually be what you mean. Right? If you change things after their introduced, that's a whole different ball of wax. I'm not arguing that notes don't have an impact on the game - I'm saying they aren't the fiction of the game until introduced. Sure there are, else how could they learn to be good GMs? And where do all the horror stories come from? A lot doesn't mean a majority, Max. And I, absolutely, without any doubt, was once a very bad GM. Given the threads here, I find it quite nonsensical to imagine everyone starts at good. Then how can you notice when he shows you he cannot be trusted? I mean, nothing I said requires or even encourages keeping an eagle eye on the GM to see if they're being untrustworthy. That's not warranted. But unless you're willing to state that a railroad is just as good a game as a non-railroad (and I'm talking blatant, not well hidden, here), then we're going to have to deal with the fact that constraints on the GM are critical to both agency and trust. It might be that a GM self-constrains, and, honestly, this is the default D&D goes to because the game certainly doesn't do anything to constrain the GM, or it might be that a game has a structure that constrains the GM. Take Blades in the Dark, for instance. The GM is very much more constrained in that game than in a D&D game, and this is quite visible to the players. Yet, no one suggests playing BitD if you're not sure you can trust your GM. Constraints can help with trust, though, especially in building it. [/QUOTE]

Verification