Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Reynard" data-source="post: 9134819" data-attributes="member: 467">Why would we assume bad faith in any of these hypotheticals? That seems to be a bugbear that haunts many of these sorts of discussions: the assumption going in that someone in the situation is doing something nefarious, trying to get one over on the GM or viking-hat the players. Why can't we take statements at face value rather than attempt to undermine them with paranoia?Sure. Maybe it would be easier if we just assumed the question of &quot;we want to take over the thieves guild&quot; came out during session zero, when the GM was thinking to run a megadungeon. Does that make it a more reasonable hypothetical?We still end up in the same place: the players want a certain kind of game, and the GM has to decide whether they want to run that game or not. As is oft repeated on this site: without both players and a GM, there is no game. The GM is just one person, though, and it is much easier for the players to vote with their feet. Of course, one of them might have to step up and run the game they want -- to which I say &quot;Good! About time!&quot; but that is a different issue.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Reynard, post: 9134819, member: 467"] Why would we assume bad faith in any of these hypotheticals? That seems to be a bugbear that haunts many of these sorts of discussions: the assumption going in that someone in the situation is doing something nefarious, trying to get one over on the GM or viking-hat the players. Why can't we take statements at face value rather than attempt to undermine them with paranoia? Sure. Maybe it would be easier if we just assumed the question of "we want to take over the thieves guild" came out during session zero, when the GM was thinking to run a megadungeon. Does that make it a more reasonable hypothetical? We still end up in the same place: the players want a certain kind of game, and the GM has to decide whether they want to run that game or not. As is oft repeated on this site: without both players and a GM, there is no game. The GM is just one person, though, and it is much easier for the players to vote with their feet. Of course, one of them might have to step up and run the game they want -- to which I say "Good! About time!" but that is a different issue. [/QUOTE]

Verification