Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 8345790"><p>This boils down to style. I want to emphasize, I am not saying the type of impartiality I am talking about is necessary. You can run the game however you like, using whatever GMing philosophy makes the most sense to you. I am saying it is an approach and it is an approach some find fun. Some groups want the nudge to the fun stuff in port sul, some don't. Some want the freedom to find fun stuff elsewhere and not be guided by the GMs hand. It depends on what you are doing. I agree having a human as the arbiter of the session is a strength. But I see the strength because of the GMs ability to adapt. One of the things I like about an RPG is I can strike out in any direction, do anything I want, there is a sort of limitless world and I can push the GM in directions they hadn't expected to go if they are open to it. With this style if the GM  is overly intent on port sul and not fairly considering the alternate things I and the other players want to pursue, it can become a problem (fun though port sul may be). That said, not every GM is comfortable with that, so I am not saying this is the way you have to run a game. But it is one area where fairness impartiality can be important if you are running it that way. I was just throwing that in as one potential area of the game for impartiality to have an impact.</p></blockquote><p></p>