Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AlViking" data-source="post: 9668907" data-attributes="member: 6906980">Just discussing D&amp;D here but it applies to other &quot;traditional&quot; games as well, and I'm also not saying that AW is doing anything wrong but there's just so much implied &quot;this is the way&quot; in the following whether it's intentional or not.As DM I want to run a fun and engaging story for my players.&nbsp; I'm just as invested in making the game work for my players as a Master of Ceremonies. The focus of the game is different, but the players are more important than my world building because my world is only there to act as a playground for the players.I do my best to be neutral on rulings and adjudicating results of actions.&nbsp; I don't overrule anyone because things are not going the way I &quot;want&quot; them to go because I don't want any specific outcome.Not sure what those means one way or another.&nbsp; But I encourage and reward creativity in my games.So AW is better because it weeds out &quot;unwelcome elements&quot;?&nbsp; Sounds like self-referential justification and elevation to me.A DM doesn't &quot;sit above&quot; the games. We provide the setting, but the players are full and equal participants in my games.&nbsp; more self-referential-self-praise tacked on at the end.Listen, I don't have any issue whatsoever with other approaches to the game.&nbsp; It's fine.&nbsp; If you enjoy a different approach go for it.&nbsp; But this whole thing comes off as holier-than-thou with not real justification or explanation.&nbsp; Just declaring that the role of the Master of Ceremonies somehow improves quality or avoids issues doesn't make it so.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AlViking, post: 9668907, member: 6906980"] Just discussing D&D here but it applies to other "traditional" games as well, and I'm also not saying that AW is doing anything wrong but there's just so much implied "this is the way" in the following whether it's intentional or not. As DM I want to run a fun and engaging story for my players. I'm just as invested in making the game work for my players as a Master of Ceremonies. The focus of the game is different, but the players are more important than my world building because my world is only there to act as a playground for the players. I do my best to be neutral on rulings and adjudicating results of actions. I don't overrule anyone because things are not going the way I "want" them to go because I don't want any specific outcome. Not sure what those means one way or another. But I encourage and reward creativity in my games. So AW is better because it weeds out "unwelcome elements"? Sounds like self-referential justification and elevation to me. A DM doesn't "sit above" the games. We provide the setting, but the players are full and equal participants in my games. more self-referential-self-praise tacked on at the end. Listen, I don't have any issue whatsoever with other approaches to the game. It's fine. If you enjoy a different approach go for it. But this whole thing comes off as holier-than-thou with not real justification or explanation. Just declaring that the role of the Master of Ceremonies somehow improves quality or avoids issues doesn't make it so. [/QUOTE]

Verification