Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 6865140" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Well yes, at times there is an adversarial angle to the game; the DM is in control of the players' opponents, and should try to run them believably and effectively. But what I mean is deeper than that aspect of the game. There are. And their opinion is just as valid as yours. There's no one right way to DM. In my opinion, a good DM knows when to allow player choices to shape and mold the events, but knows that at times it is equally important to take the reins a bit. Whether it is to steer the story back on track a bit (example: the characters are doing everything except go to Castle Ravenloft) or to avoid a TPK (by having a critical hit that would put the entire party at risk be only a hit, or something similar). Player agency is important to the game...and that very may well be true for some players/DMs more than others...but it isn't the only concern. Nor should it be.So, it's perfectly fine if someone read [MENTION=6788736]Flamestrike[/MENTION]'s post in the Design Debate thread and found nothing to be wrong with it. Especially within the context of that thread and the ongoing discussions happening there. Both the DM and the players need some latitude for the game to work. This edition swings the pendulum back toward the DM a bit. Obviously, whether that's good or bad is a matter of opinion. Why is player latitude to be valued so highly, but GM latitude is so frightening?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 6865140, member: 6785785"] Well yes, at times there is an adversarial angle to the game; the DM is in control of the players' opponents, and should try to run them believably and effectively. But what I mean is deeper than that aspect of the game. There are. And their opinion is just as valid as yours. There's no one right way to DM. In my opinion, a good DM knows when to allow player choices to shape and mold the events, but knows that at times it is equally important to take the reins a bit. Whether it is to steer the story back on track a bit (example: the characters are doing everything except go to Castle Ravenloft) or to avoid a TPK (by having a critical hit that would put the entire party at risk be only a hit, or something similar). Player agency is important to the game...and that very may well be true for some players/DMs more than others...but it isn't the only concern. Nor should it be. So, it's perfectly fine if someone read [MENTION=6788736]Flamestrike[/MENTION]'s post in the Design Debate thread and found nothing to be wrong with it. Especially within the context of that thread and the ongoing discussions happening there. Both the DM and the players need some latitude for the game to work. This edition swings the pendulum back toward the DM a bit. Obviously, whether that's good or bad is a matter of opinion. Why is player latitude to be valued so highly, but GM latitude is so frightening? [/QUOTE]

Verification