Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5810218" data-attributes="member: 957">I would strongly object to the term &quot;adversarial&quot; here.First, if the group WANTS to create a collective responsibility campaign no D&amp;D system I am aware of would remotely hinder it.&nbsp; It may not actively promote it, but simply being silent on the issue is a far cry from &quot;adversarial&quot;.And, frankly, DM control runs in line with the grain for 90+% of all groups out there.&nbsp; It could be fairly argued that the realistic options are neutral silence or boat-rocking *anything else*.&nbsp; My personal opinion remains that the very best of the best games happen when the DM is fully in control but (A) absolutely remains focused on making players more than eager to play whatever it is that the DM has dreamed up and (B) is willing to accommodate and even encourage reasonable and constructive ideas and curve balls from the players.Obviously that last part is nothing more than as I described it: &quot;my opinion.&quot;&nbsp; No argument if you completely disagree.&nbsp; But if you truly call it adversarial then I would question the thoughtfulness of your assessment of other styles.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 5810218, member: 957"] I would strongly object to the term "adversarial" here. First, if the group WANTS to create a collective responsibility campaign no D&D system I am aware of would remotely hinder it. It may not actively promote it, but simply being silent on the issue is a far cry from "adversarial". And, frankly, DM control runs in line with the grain for 90+% of all groups out there. It could be fairly argued that the realistic options are neutral silence or boat-rocking *anything else*. My personal opinion remains that the very best of the best games happen when the DM is fully in control but (A) absolutely remains focused on making players more than eager to play whatever it is that the DM has dreamed up and (B) is willing to accommodate and even encourage reasonable and constructive ideas and curve balls from the players. Obviously that last part is nothing more than as I described it: "my opinion." No argument if you completely disagree. But if you truly call it adversarial then I would question the thoughtfulness of your assessment of other styles. [/QUOTE]

Verification