Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="robertsconley" data-source="post: 9665969" data-attributes="member: 13383">It’s important to recognize that this is a two-way street. What you’re describing highlights real problems that can originate with a referee, but that’s only half the equation. The other half is: how do we tell when a player is being unreasonable toward the referee?In my leadership training, both in and outside of gaming, I didn’t just learn what not to do as a leader. I also learned how to identify when issues are arising from within the group itself, and what to do when one of the group members is contributing to the problem.In my experience, table issues tend to fall into one of three broad categories:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The problem originates with the referee.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The problem originates with the player(s).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The problem arises from both sides contributing to a breakdown.</li> </ul>All three happen. In fact, I’ve seen each many times. That said, most of the time when something goes wrong, it involves players, not because players are inherently less reasonable than referees, but simply because there are more of them. One referee, five or six players: odds are, the source of disruption lies somewhere on the player side, just by numbers alone.And this isn’t just a tabletop roleplaying issue. In any leadership context, whether running a table, a team, or an organization, clarity, consistency, and transparency are the foundation of good leadership. Without them, people lose confidence in the process, and communication breaks down on all sides.Specific to tabletop RPGs, this is why good refereeing is so important. Even if it isn’t based on a written rulebook, it still needs to be transparent and consistent, so that players can understand how decisions are made and what to expect in similar situations. That kind of consistency builds trust over time.</blockquote>

Verification