Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 5653025" data-attributes="member: 177">This thread is apt to turn into one big knot of semantics.For example, here's a thought - as the GM, you either design the adventure and encounters, or you review and edit a published adventure (and the choice to not edit is still an editorial choice).&nbsp; As you say, the GM has a lot of power.Since the GM is doing this by choice, you can say that the bias introduced by the GM stems back to that point - if the PCs die (or succeed), it is in part due to the GM's design choices, even if the GM slavishly follows the rules as written during play.&nbsp; You only lose that impact if you generate the encounters randomly, too.&nbsp; But then, the choice to do that is still a choice!But, I think, ultimately, the root may sit at another point.&nbsp; Consider the definition of &quot;fair&quot;.&nbsp; One such definition is &quot;free from bias&quot;.&nbsp; But another is &quot;free from injustice&quot;, and justice is subjective, and thus *includes* bias sometimes.&nbsp; Another definition is, &quot;neither excellent nor poor; moderately or tolerably good&quot;.So, if we seek to be &quot;fair&quot;, are we seeking to be completely unbiased (knowing we can't do it, but striving because that'll get us closest), or are we seeking to be good and just?I think of it this way - I'm a GM.&nbsp; I have taken it as my responsibility to make sure that my players have a good time.&nbsp; What that means will change from group to group, and is by no means a universal constant.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 5653025, member: 177"] This thread is apt to turn into one big knot of semantics. For example, here's a thought - as the GM, you either design the adventure and encounters, or you review and edit a published adventure (and the choice to not edit is still an editorial choice). As you say, the GM has a lot of power. Since the GM is doing this by choice, you can say that the bias introduced by the GM stems back to that point - if the PCs die (or succeed), it is in part due to the GM's design choices, even if the GM slavishly follows the rules as written during play. You only lose that impact if you generate the encounters randomly, too. But then, the choice to do that is still a choice! But, I think, ultimately, the root may sit at another point. Consider the definition of "fair". One such definition is "free from bias". But another is "free from injustice", and justice is subjective, and thus *includes* bias sometimes. Another definition is, "neither excellent nor poor; moderately or tolerably good". So, if we seek to be "fair", are we seeking to be completely unbiased (knowing we can't do it, but striving because that'll get us closest), or are we seeking to be good and just? I think of it this way - I'm a GM. I have taken it as my responsibility to make sure that my players have a good time. What that means will change from group to group, and is by no means a universal constant. [/QUOTE]

Verification