Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8574280" data-attributes="member: 16814">You're showing &quot;problems&quot; where the players are doing something that the GM doesn't want them to do.&nbsp; Either their going somewhere the GM doesn't want them to or they're doing what the GM doesn't want the players to do or they're not going where the GM wants them to.&nbsp; The solution to this is to let them but then make that choice unpleasant.&nbsp; When the players do what the GM wants, the GM makes that pleasant (&quot;positive reinforcement&quot;).&nbsp; I'm not sure if you're up on the definitions of passive aggressive, but this is that.&nbsp; When you don't have an open discussion but instead make other's miserable for doing not doing what you want, that's it.I'm super curious to see the response to [USER=7635]@Remathilis[/USER] on this.&nbsp; You seem to think it's either all the GM's way or the GM is reduced to serving player desires.&nbsp; Have you considered the possibility of a collaboration?You're suggesting above that the GM withhold things after the fact!&nbsp; Can we at least have a discussion where you suggest a thing is a useful tool in one edition and then excoriate someone suggesting you can do that same kind of thing in another is bad?&nbsp; I mean, the double standard here is pretty staggering.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8574280, member: 16814"] You're showing "problems" where the players are doing something that the GM doesn't want them to do. Either their going somewhere the GM doesn't want them to or they're doing what the GM doesn't want the players to do or they're not going where the GM wants them to. The solution to this is to let them but then make that choice unpleasant. When the players do what the GM wants, the GM makes that pleasant ("positive reinforcement"). I'm not sure if you're up on the definitions of passive aggressive, but this is that. When you don't have an open discussion but instead make other's miserable for doing not doing what you want, that's it. I'm super curious to see the response to [USER=7635]@Remathilis[/USER] on this. You seem to think it's either all the GM's way or the GM is reduced to serving player desires. Have you considered the possibility of a collaboration? You're suggesting above that the GM withhold things after the fact! Can we at least have a discussion where you suggest a thing is a useful tool in one edition and then excoriate someone suggesting you can do that same kind of thing in another is bad? I mean, the double standard here is pretty staggering. [/QUOTE]

Verification