Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aenghus" data-source="post: 6303592" data-attributes="member: 2656">The suspicion that statements like this inspire is because unfortunately there are DMs out there who aren't acting in good faith, just as there are players who aren't acting in good faith. In the early days I think DMs had to do a lot of crowd control of the latter, and the default of "if in doubt say no" came from a combination of response to ludicrous requests and adversarial DMing.I'm a lot more choosey about who I play with nowadays, and see very little crowd control. IMO it's not good DMing to keep saying "no" to players acting in good faith, it sends the wrong message. IMO It's mostly players flailing around in the dark who attempt the ludicrous, either in ignorance or a sense of despair. The more opaque the DM's rulings are, the more hidden backstory locks the game down , the harder it is for players to discern what plans are viable and what aren't. I've seen situations where the lack of feedback from the DM renders player decisions essentially random, creating immense frustration. This can cause some players seeking entertainment out of the game in other ways, and acting out, leading to a vicious spiral of frustrated deprotagonised players and an angry frustrated DM. My solution to such problems is to try and nip them in the bud. If the players concoct a plan that isn't viable, let them know that before they waste the whole session on it, and try and impart at least some of the information why that is the case. Also, most players nowadays have more experience of various RPGs and are more open to making the game more of a collaborative process than an adversarial one. The players aren't the enemy and treating them like the enemy isn't appropriate in most games IMO.Different groups have different tastes, and different levels of tolerance for setbacks and red herrings. It is possible to break a group, damage their morale so badly the group splits up. I've seen it happen, and think that if a DM sees the possibility beforehand they should try to prevent it.</blockquote>

Verification