Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8960289" data-attributes="member: 7026617">This is where I often sit with a leg on both sides of this camp.  I've publicly stated that the automatic assumption the GM deserves some authority on metapower in a game is both outdated and generally a negative drag on the hobby.But that said, when I'm GMing, while I'm willing to share power with my players (I often wish they'd take on a bit more, honestly), there are also things where, even if the majority wants it, are a bridge too far for me.  Now I realize in some story games and related, this doesn't mean anything particularly special since the game is being developed as it goes to some degree, and its far from impossible for someone else to just pick up the reins.  But in the (I think; I'm still not entirely sure I'm using the term right) neotrad games I mostly run, in practice this means that my displeasure at a development has more weight than the players because they can't, in practice, just pick up where I've left off because they don't really know what that is (and would have trouble doing so even if I gave them all my notes since at least some of it is only in my head).So you could argue that in some case I'm effectively saying "Because GM" simply exercising my right to not play in a game going in ways I dislike.</blockquote>