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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5646494" data-attributes="member: 6668292">First, I'm not sure why you added a spelling mistake to my quote, but it's all good <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Secondly, I'm also not sure why you seem at odds with me, as you didn't clarify. I specifically said that it depends on the group, which I assume you can reasonably agree that group dynamics will differ, as evidenced in your later post:As for your later quotes, you seem to be disagreeing with a point I never made (at least, by saying you agree with Pentius, it feels like there's an implication of disagreement with me, considering the context of the earlier quote of yours [although I could be mistaken]):I said, "Sometimes, saying, "you can cheat, but if you do, I'll cheat better" is more effective", which is blatantly letting the players out of game that you consider it cheating. Now, I haven't discussed how I deal with metagaming at my group. I've simply said how one rule on "cheating" (as I think we both admit varies from group to group) can be implemented more effectively, depending on the group. It does not preclude out of game communication, it specifically includes it. To some groups, I hold to the opinion of "if they want to cheat to 'win' at the game, then it's often best to cheat to make them 'lose' at the game." From my experience, some players respond positively to simply asking them to stop, while some disregard it. The same goes for the rule I mentioned above. People are like children (GMs included) in that they're unique in how you should approach them.You can't discern the line easily, but it's been talked about at length in those very threads, and there are obviously people who agree that there is a line. Just because you cannot personally see the logic behind it, I find it odd it dismiss a line of thought that happens to be shared by many people who do see the logic. Not understanding the logic makes sense to me; questioning the logic makes sense to me; dismissing the logic in this conversation because you don't understand it does not make sense to me.That's not to say that you're aggressively dismissing it (as others on this board often do), but your response totaled something along the lines of, "I don't see where to draw the line." Other groups do.As always, play what you like <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=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification