Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The Walking Dead
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="Mercutio01" data-source="post: 5752028" data-attributes="member: 37277"><p>And, conversely, the players is unwilling to work within the bounds that the GM set up.</p><p></p><p>I think we're at cross-purposes for good here. I see the GM setting a scene, giving the source, and effectively setting a stage for the kind of game he would like to run. The other players, except RR, understand what the setting is and agree, implicitly at least, to partake of that world as though they were participants in the world, choosing to portray "heroes" as set out by the basic literature. RR was unfamiliar with the source material and did nothing to educate himself on it before the game session.</p><p></p><p>When the game proved itself to not be what he thought it would be, rather than accept the social construct that he was observing, chose to rock the boat against the wishes of everyone else at the table. After the session ended, the GM took the RR aside and told him that his play style was not suitable to the game the GM intended to run.</p><p></p><p>You call that rail-roading. I call that setting the bounds for the game and establishing the social contract that the GM would like to set. RR is free to accept that contract, attempt to modify it, or reject it out of hand. If the GM is unwilling to accept changes to that contract, then RR is left with two options--fall under the contract and accept it despite his preferences, or reject it and sit out the game.</p><p></p><p>Frankly, as I said, were I the GM, I would find a way to allow RR's character into the game with the express understanding that he is playing a very specific type of character, and that his clashes IC with the other members of the group would be good fodder for the game. But I'm not the GM, and I can understand a GM who would rather not allow "evil" characters in a game where he wants everyone to be "good."</p><p></p><p>Since you think my analogies are out of whack, I will leave it at that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercutio01, post: 5752028, member: 37277"] And, conversely, the players is unwilling to work within the bounds that the GM set up. I think we're at cross-purposes for good here. I see the GM setting a scene, giving the source, and effectively setting a stage for the kind of game he would like to run. The other players, except RR, understand what the setting is and agree, implicitly at least, to partake of that world as though they were participants in the world, choosing to portray "heroes" as set out by the basic literature. RR was unfamiliar with the source material and did nothing to educate himself on it before the game session. When the game proved itself to not be what he thought it would be, rather than accept the social construct that he was observing, chose to rock the boat against the wishes of everyone else at the table. After the session ended, the GM took the RR aside and told him that his play style was not suitable to the game the GM intended to run. You call that rail-roading. I call that setting the bounds for the game and establishing the social contract that the GM would like to set. RR is free to accept that contract, attempt to modify it, or reject it out of hand. If the GM is unwilling to accept changes to that contract, then RR is left with two options--fall under the contract and accept it despite his preferences, or reject it and sit out the game. Frankly, as I said, were I the GM, I would find a way to allow RR's character into the game with the express understanding that he is playing a very specific type of character, and that his clashes IC with the other members of the group would be good fodder for the game. But I'm not the GM, and I can understand a GM who would rather not allow "evil" characters in a game where he wants everyone to be "good." Since you think my analogies are out of whack, I will leave it at that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The Walking Dead
Top