Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supplemental books: Why the compulsion to buy and use, but complain about it?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6406828" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>My view is that there really is no such point. If the group is committed to gaming together - which, as [MENTION=40166]prosfilaes[/MENTION] has emphasised, is a simple fact of the matter for many groups - then compromise will have to be achieved. Much like, if a group is committed to going to the movies together, then compromise will have to be achieved.</p><p></p><p>If there are individuals who aren't committed to the group, then of course they can just walk. But then, as prosfilaes and [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] have observed, when they walk they might take others with them. If you treat the choice to game as basically a transaction among anonymous games (eg as might be the case at a convention or in a club), with no overriding obligations of participation in a collective endeavour, then you have no basis for complaining about "player revolts" or similar activities. </p><p></p><p>I agree. That is why, in this thread and some other recent threads, I've said that the DMG (pehaps also the PHB) should talk about different sorts of approaches to the game, and the way different techniques, in the hands of players and even more so GMs, can support or undermine those different sorts of approaches.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I am overwhelmingly a GM, and have been for 30-odd years. And I don't really understand these remarks about "trust". What are my players expected to trust me to do? Not be a nasty person? I mean, that's pretty basic in human relationships and has nothing to do with RPGing.</p><p></p><p>But once we get into particular aspects that <em>are</em> relevant to RPGing, what should my players trust me to do? To run scenarios that interweave the PC backgrounds and player priorities in roughly equal measure? Well, that is important if I'm GMing Burning Wheel, and it's a big part of how I like to GM my 4e game, but it woud be irrelevant if I was running an AD&D module-of-the-week game.</p><p></p><p>Should my players be trusting me to take them along for an awesome ride? That seems pretty important to some of the posters in this thread, but is basically irrelevant to how I run my game, and if my players came along expecting that - and expecting the corollary, that most of the energy for the game will come from me rather than them - then they would be dissapointed!</p><p></p><p>Should my players trust me to run scenarios where player skill is not relevant to outcomes? Absolutely not, which means that my games may not suit [MENTION=67338]GMforPowergamers[/MENTION]. Should my players trust me not to run scenarios in which the outcome will depend upon interrogating barkeeps about the ingredients of otherwise non-suspicious soup? Absolutely they should - I personally could hardly think of a more puerile plot device if I tried.</p><p></p><p>In other words, what players should be trusting GMs to do, and vice versa, is utterly dependent on what sort of play experience the game participants are hoping to generate. Talking honestly about the possible varieties of these, and how roles and responsibilities can be allocated to help achieve them, should be the number one priority.</p><p></p><p>I don't disagree with any of this - but I think it <em>is</em> another illustration that there are different approaches to the game.</p><p></p><p>In the sort of game I prefer to run, I want the players to help establish the scope and theme of the game, and I don't want them to just turn up and wing it. Part of getting to where I want to get to in RPGing means recognising that sole GM authority over setting and backstory isn't going to work.</p><p></p><p>A good DMG would talk about the things [MENTION=6778458]bleezy[/MENTION] has mentioned, and the things I've just mentioned, in the context of talking about different approaches to RPGing.</p><p></p><p>The only thing that discouraged me was that someone, somewhere, thought that the soup scenario was worth publishing!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6406828, member: 42582"] My view is that there really is no such point. If the group is committed to gaming together - which, as [MENTION=40166]prosfilaes[/MENTION] has emphasised, is a simple fact of the matter for many groups - then compromise will have to be achieved. Much like, if a group is committed to going to the movies together, then compromise will have to be achieved. If there are individuals who aren't committed to the group, then of course they can just walk. But then, as prosfilaes and [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] have observed, when they walk they might take others with them. If you treat the choice to game as basically a transaction among anonymous games (eg as might be the case at a convention or in a club), with no overriding obligations of participation in a collective endeavour, then you have no basis for complaining about "player revolts" or similar activities. I agree. That is why, in this thread and some other recent threads, I've said that the DMG (pehaps also the PHB) should talk about different sorts of approaches to the game, and the way different techniques, in the hands of players and even more so GMs, can support or undermine those different sorts of approaches. I am overwhelmingly a GM, and have been for 30-odd years. And I don't really understand these remarks about "trust". What are my players expected to trust me to do? Not be a nasty person? I mean, that's pretty basic in human relationships and has nothing to do with RPGing. But once we get into particular aspects that [I]are[/I] relevant to RPGing, what should my players trust me to do? To run scenarios that interweave the PC backgrounds and player priorities in roughly equal measure? Well, that is important if I'm GMing Burning Wheel, and it's a big part of how I like to GM my 4e game, but it woud be irrelevant if I was running an AD&D module-of-the-week game. Should my players be trusting me to take them along for an awesome ride? That seems pretty important to some of the posters in this thread, but is basically irrelevant to how I run my game, and if my players came along expecting that - and expecting the corollary, that most of the energy for the game will come from me rather than them - then they would be dissapointed! Should my players trust me to run scenarios where player skill is not relevant to outcomes? Absolutely not, which means that my games may not suit [MENTION=67338]GMforPowergamers[/MENTION]. Should my players trust me not to run scenarios in which the outcome will depend upon interrogating barkeeps about the ingredients of otherwise non-suspicious soup? Absolutely they should - I personally could hardly think of a more puerile plot device if I tried. In other words, what players should be trusting GMs to do, and vice versa, is utterly dependent on what sort of play experience the game participants are hoping to generate. Talking honestly about the possible varieties of these, and how roles and responsibilities can be allocated to help achieve them, should be the number one priority. I don't disagree with any of this - but I think it [I]is[/I] another illustration that there are different approaches to the game. In the sort of game I prefer to run, I want the players to help establish the scope and theme of the game, and I don't want them to just turn up and wing it. Part of getting to where I want to get to in RPGing means recognising that sole GM authority over setting and backstory isn't going to work. A good DMG would talk about the things [MENTION=6778458]bleezy[/MENTION] has mentioned, and the things I've just mentioned, in the context of talking about different approaches to RPGing. The only thing that discouraged me was that someone, somewhere, thought that the soup scenario was worth publishing! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Supplemental books: Why the compulsion to buy and use, but complain about it?
Top