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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WayneLigon" data-source="post: 3790631" data-attributes="member: 3649">I don't think it has been lost. What has been lost is the tone taken in early descriptions of the GM-Player dynamic. It often led to bad GMs thinking that the players were some sort of opponents; indeed, it's my opinion that the tone and presentation of the DM-Player dynamic caused a lot of people to be bad GMs. It taught that to them.Go and read, oh, the first thirty issues or so of Knights of the Dinner Table. Yes, it's humor but the humor spins off the idea that lots of GMs really were taught that the style of Weird Pete and the Black Hands and to some extent BA was the way to go.Another idea is that since the rules are more tightly written and better designed, that a player can more successfully show a GM that no, that rule doesn't work the way you think it does. Most of the 1E rules almost seem to be last minute reactions rather than reformulations. Rule is created. Rule is tested. Rule is broken by players. Rather than then go back ad say 'this rule was bad' and fixing the original rule, another was created to patch or band-aid the original rule. It was like once something was written down, then it couldn't be changed. Most people changed the rules, so when a GM said that a rule worked in X way, then most people took it at face value. They didn't know any better.Now, though, if you change a rule you'd probably best be able to explain it and justify it. 'Because I want it that way' probably isn't going to cut it. It's very likely that the rule is in there and works the way it does for a very good and specific reason. I think some GMs - especially those raised in the 'old style' - aren't used to either explaining themselves or thinking in a deep and logical fashion about the reasoning behind the rules. They're used to patching and reacting rather than sitting down to logically work through how and why a rule works like that. They may well perceive someone who presents a successful arguement as 'taking away their power'.</blockquote>

Verification