Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 3152748" data-attributes="member: 957">Trust but verify????Seriously, I think you're being a bit over harsh on this.You don't have to distrust a DM to find added fun in having things physically set.And there will always be times, even with the best DM ever to sit at a table, where an player idea will come up that the DM had not thought of.&nbsp; So the DM is forced to make a choice after knowing exactly what the implication of their choice will be.&nbsp; It isn't a lack of trust to understand that the DM is still human.Does that mean no minis is a bad thing?&nbsp; No, absolutely not.But there are certainly positives that minis bring to the game and this is one of them.I don't think it is a fair argument to try to discount this very real advantage by implying that DMs should be unreasonably assumed immune to any hint of bias, either towards or against players or towards or against impacts to the plot of the game.&nbsp; Even if the DM is 100% convinced that they ignore all bias, they can be wrong.&nbsp; AND there is value to the players in KNOWING (not just trusting) that they got through (or failed) fairly.&nbsp; That is an upside that any great game can easily persist for years without ever needing.&nbsp; But it remains an upside.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 3152748, member: 957"] Trust but verify???? Seriously, I think you're being a bit over harsh on this. You don't have to distrust a DM to find added fun in having things physically set. And there will always be times, even with the best DM ever to sit at a table, where an player idea will come up that the DM had not thought of. So the DM is forced to make a choice after knowing exactly what the implication of their choice will be. It isn't a lack of trust to understand that the DM is still human. Does that mean no minis is a bad thing? No, absolutely not. But there are certainly positives that minis bring to the game and this is one of them. I don't think it is a fair argument to try to discount this very real advantage by implying that DMs should be unreasonably assumed immune to any hint of bias, either towards or against players or towards or against impacts to the plot of the game. Even if the DM is 100% convinced that they ignore all bias, they can be wrong. AND there is value to the players in KNOWING (not just trusting) that they got through (or failed) fairly. That is an upside that any great game can easily persist for years without ever needing. But it remains an upside. [/QUOTE]

Verification