NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8285637" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I'm not sure how apt it is to be honest with you. When you're running a dungeon (or any game to be honest), here is what the GM has to work with:* What the point of play is.* How play is structured.* How well-developed the GM's skillset is.* What resources the players can bring to bear against the obstacle.* The GM's movespace.* How much force the GM can bring to bear.Now, hopefully, all of the stuff below the first bullet point is well-designed and integrated such that merely playing with integrity will result in the game feeding back naturally into that first bullet point. If the game has some design issues (the GM's movespace isn't sufficiently focused or constrained, or the force they can bring to bear is unlimited, or the resources the players can marshal is insufficient to the task, or the structure of play easily unravels or just doesn't work, or the GM isn't particularly skillful or the players aren't particularly skillful, etc)...well, then you're going to have a problem.But if all of that stuff is functional in the opposite direction, then GMs should be able to play aggressively because the system/rules/movespace gives the game purpose, shape, clarity, and constraint.  The problem lies when it fails to do one/some/all of those things and I feel like the "wrestling with your child" analogy is an outgrowth of that presumption; "well you're the GM without any focused agenda, without any constraint on movespace or force that can brought to bear...if you're not letting loose the magical Kraken of Flying with a Demonic Rider on the level 1 seafarers then you're coddling them!"That feels like an AD&D perspective mapped onto all games ever.</blockquote>

Verification