Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cadence" data-source="post: 8609022" data-attributes="member: 6701124">It was a reply about vouching.  You brought up lots of issues with vouching that make it not anywhere near 100% trustworthy.  To me it still felt like playing with a GM others vouched for gives me more more trust/expectation/hope going in that with a GM I don't know anything about.  I'm not sure how that is a goal post move from your remarks about vouching.You seem to keep wanting me to be focused on trust the GM.  It wasn't something I was arguing.You say it is.See apology below.Starting a thread on advice certainly would be unsolicited homework. I thought ot viewing everything as GSABTPSNBT just seemed like it might [edit: not] be helpful, but see apology below.Play of a particular D&D campaign feels like it literally cannot happen if the GM can't be there.  It feels fairly trivial to run a game with several players when one is missing.  You'd probably check with that player to see how they feel about it.   Whether an absent player cancels the game probably depends on a combination of their feelings about it, how often they miss games, how many other players they are, and what looks to be on tap for the session.As the topic directly included the GM seemingly being given unearned trust, it felt relevant...If the only thing you wanted to discuss was "Trust the GM Never Trust the Players", and not the other issues raised along the way or related to it, then I apologize for what has apparently been inadvertent derailing on my part!Yup.  And I'm flabbergasted.  Point to your side (if we're keeping score).  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Thank you for the detailed reply.</blockquote>

Verification