D&D General Survivor Dungeon Masters -- discussion

[Snarf Zagyg]

Same here; think it would be interesting to hear everyone's positive experiences. But alas, I don't think it's wise at this time. I don't want to host the first "Survivor" thread to ever get locked.

Search is your friend.

 

[Charlaquin]

I'm having second thoughts about the next Survivor thread. I was seriously considering a "Survivor: Editions of D&D" challenge, but I don't know if I'm ready for the stress.

Yeah, that sounds like a recipe for starting arguments.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think for that, rather than a survivor thread, a + (positive only) threat with something like "what editions of D&D have you played and what did you like about them..." would be more productive?

That’s been attempted before and the 4e one still ended up getting locked for edition warring.

 

[Bolares]

Search is your friend.

Oh god, I was in that thread, what a shame...

 

[mcmillan]

Imagine you're a jobbing actor. A company hires you for a role. One of the other new hires is mean to you. You want to work with the company again. Do you: A) act unprofessionally, i.e. publicly bad mouth the other employee and risk no new work from that company and possibly less work from other companies, or; B) act professionally, i.e. play nice in hopes of getting more work.

If there were problems they might not have been public about it, but probably wouldn't say things like "It doesn’t go without saying that I never expected a TTRPG to be my favorite work experience in an over decade-long career.⁣ ⁣ It really has been a dream job."


or
"To [Aabria] for a soul connection so strong, folks really thought our pc beefs were personal beefs. Thank you for showing me anything is possible with enough belief and haggling love u sm!"


I really didn't see that much more railroading than I would have expected in a limited run campaign with a fixed end time. I must have missed the inside/avoid fight situation but I've certainly seen miscommunication like that in games. On the other hand it seemed clear that the group took a different approach to Poska/the Nameless Ones than Aabria expected which seemed to be built up to be a more significant role in the game. And Aabria talked about how she had planned a much more involved trial encounter that started with the crocodile fight, but decided to cut it short after Aimee shut the whole thing down early. Also I find the claim of "railroading" to put on the crown weird, since it seemed obvious to me to be in-character temptation that was also directed at other players.

There's also the fact that Aimee seemed to have her powers shutdown, but in most circumstances she would have been able to resolve it by making choices (such as choosing not to apologize to Ted and dragging things out). But Aimee has said she approached the role more as an actor and was looking for ways to draw out conflict and less thinking about the game mechanics which would fit into this.

 

[CleverNickName]

Search is your friend.

Ugh, I had blocked that from memory.

Well in that case...
...still no.

 

[Bolares]

Also I find the claim of "railroading" to put on the crown weird, since it seemed obvious to me to be in-character temptation that was also directed at other players.

Yeah, I've done something similar with a player. It may seem like the DM is taking agency form a player, but if the subject was talked about before the game, and the player was ok with the possibility of agency being taken away from them, because a temptation or other effect, I think it's completely ok to do it. Consent is key here. As we can't know if there was a talk between Aimee and Aabria, it can seem like Aabria's call was a dick move, but I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Maxperson]

I think for that, rather than a survivor thread, a + (positive only) threat with something like "what editions of D&D have you played and what did you like about them..." would be more productive?

Just what exactly is a positive threat?

 

[Maxperson]

Search is your friend.

Wow! I pleasantly missed that one entirely.

 

[overgeeked]

Yeah, I've done something similar with a player. It may seem like the DM is taking agency form a player, but if the subject was talked about before the game, and the player was ok with the possibility of agency being taken away from them, because a temptation or other effect, I think it's completely ok to do it. Consent is key here. As we can't know if there was a talk between Aimee and Aabria, it can seem like Aabria's call was a dick move, but I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt.

As do I. But by the end she had burned every ounce of benefit of the doubt I was willing to give her. As I said a few times now, insulting the players burns infinite good will from me. That's a dick move.