Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 8584550" data-attributes="member: 7635">I think a separate, but equal, element that ties into this and what [USER=93670]@tetrasodium[/USER] has been on about is that it wasn't just the setting that was important, it was that the DM was THE Most Important Player. It was HIS game, it was his vision that mattered, and it really didn't matter who the players are, what they did, or who they played; it was the DM that was the star of the show. As time progressed though, the game (first in the culture of it, and progressively in the rules of it) started to give the player's more agency. They had a say in the game too, beyond what thier dice rolls could affect. They wanted narratives that mattered, to grow attached to PCs (and more say in what that PC was). They wanted to be important too. Which of course has created the issues presented: the DM has increasingly had to share power and narrative vision with his players like a first among equals rather than the Rainmaker. His vision is compromised. He has lost narrative control. He had become a tour guide rather than a benevolent dictator. It's not about the DM and his world and the events of the player interacting with it, it's about the collaboration of players (the DM being one of them) to create a experience that benefits all. In essence, the notion that it's the DM's game and he is the only important player is fading, and it is being replaced by the idea that every player, DM included, has a collective stake in the game. I can see why that's a hard transition to make.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 8584550, member: 7635"] I think a separate, but equal, element that ties into this and what [USER=93670]@tetrasodium[/USER] has been on about is that it wasn't just the setting that was important, it was that the DM was THE Most Important Player. It was HIS game, it was his vision that mattered, and it really didn't matter who the players are, what they did, or who they played; it was the DM that was the star of the show. As time progressed though, the game (first in the culture of it, and progressively in the rules of it) started to give the player's more agency. They had a say in the game too, beyond what thier dice rolls could affect. They wanted narratives that mattered, to grow attached to PCs (and more say in what that PC was). They wanted to be important too. Which of course has created the issues presented: the DM has increasingly had to share power and narrative vision with his players like a first among equals rather than the Rainmaker. His vision is compromised. He has lost narrative control. He had become a tour guide rather than a benevolent dictator. It's not about the DM and his world and the events of the player interacting with it, it's about the collaboration of players (the DM being one of them) to create a experience that benefits all. In essence, the notion that it's the DM's game and he is the only important player is fading, and it is being replaced by the idea that every player, DM included, has a collective stake in the game. I can see why that's a hard transition to make. [/QUOTE]

Verification