Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7310708" data-attributes="member: 6919838">i pretty much agree with all this except the first sentence. While i do not disagree with it per se, I think scenarios such as the one described by the Op and the intent behind it -  a setup scenario to force the crisis - is hard to imagine not strining or lessening the degree of existing trust and thus hurting the game.The players who have always had the most fun in my games have been the ones who understood "you are not playing against me" anbd did not view it as a competition or me as a threat. The ones who bring in their old habits and never get comfortable always seem to be limiting themselves by spending a lot of effort and brainpower and focus on threats that exist only in their minds while the other players just go on with the fun they are creating.As iirc i said earlier in the thread, this kind of scenario and intent really goes against my fundamanetal GM objectives and i do not see the particular moment of drama that *the GM* desires to see as enough payoff to risk the potential damage or loss of fun for the other players. I can think of thousands of scenarios that are fun, challenging and all those other adjectives that don't invole so many potential slams to the table trust.</blockquote>