Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="shilsen" data-source="post: 3963224" data-attributes="member: 198">Something that I've noticed ever since I joined these boards, way back before 3e arrived, is how many of the problems people seem to have in the game stem from interpersonal issues rather than system issues. While that is to be expected with play style issues, they seem to be a factor not only when a DM/player is pissed off with a DM/player, but also when there are rules issues, whether it be problems with something being too strong/weak, issues with how fast/slow characters level up, prevalence of magic in the game, alignment issues, creating a particular character, etc. A big part of that seems to be issues of communication too, and I often find myself suggesting to people (both on this board and on the Rules Forum) that the first thing they should do is talk to the player or DM about what is going on and what they want. I would think that sort of advice is redundant, but that doesn't seem to be the case. I've discussed these phenomena with some of the people I game with who frequent ENWorld and other boards, and they all seem to have noticed the same thing. I'm seriously beginning to think that 95% of problems people have while playing the game has little to do with the game and has everything to do with not gaming in what I'd call a high-trust environment.I'll use a specific example of the advantages of gaming in such an environment. I play in Mallus' game (the Burne story hour in my sig) along with Rackhir, Rolzup and Atlatl Jones. I think Mallus would be the first to admit that all of his players are better versed in the rules than he is and significantly better at power-gaming. Mallus also happens to be mixing AU/AE rules with D&D 3.0e with 3.5e, allows a lot of freedom and flexibility with character creation and development (for example, he allowed usage of the Bo9S without having read it himself), has essentially thrown out normal XP progression, doesn't track character wealth progression, etc. Going by the discussions on these boards, that combines to be a wonderful recipe for disaster. But the campaign has been going just swimmingly for years, since it is a high-trust environment. Mallus trusts us as players enough to know that we're not going to try to break his campaign, and if he finds something too powerful to handle, he can just tell the player, "You know, this is a bit much. Why don't you change it for something else?" And it'll be done or he'll get a dozen suggestions for ways to work with the ability and challenge the character, many of them coming from the player concerned. Similarly, as players we trust him enough to be able to openly discuss whatever works or doesn't work in the campaign, and to bring up any concerns or questions we have and know they'll get a hearing. I've also been playing in Rolzup's game for a while now and the DM-player relationship there is precisely the same. And I try to run my own games with just the same sort of environment. At this point, I really wouldn't be willing to stay in a game without that kind of high trust between players and DM.All of which brings me to my questions. Do you think a high trust environment can minimize or remove many of the supposed problems in the system? Would you be willing to game in an environment which doesn't have that kind of mutual trust? And do you?Mostly, I'm just curious.P.S. In case it wasn't obvious above, Mallus and Rolzup - you guys rock! Big time.</blockquote>

Verification