Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5828994" data-attributes="member: 42582">Rarely quite like this. What I do quite often, though, is interject when the players are planning/debating/speculating, making suggestions or reminding them of events/concerns from earlier sessions, basically to stir the pot and to amp up the players' sense of what is at stake. Again, perhaps not quite like this, but (i) I will tell my players if they did stuff I hadn't anticipated, and (ii) I will often make it fairly clear what they've accomplished (for good or for ill) as a rseult of the choices they've made in playing their PCs. Again, the idea is to keep the stakes high and clear and mattering.I'm sure I do, although I can't think of an example off the top of my head. Often when we're recapping from a previous session, I may not be exactly certain about what exactly the players had worked out, confirmed, speculated about, etc, and I'm sure sometimes in the course of this I've confirmed information for them that was merely speculative rather than certain coming out of the previous session's play.Yes. And for me, this overlaps pretty much with your first two categories. I don't want to hide the stakes from my players. I want them to know what's at stake, and care about it, so that they drive the game forward in making choices about it.</blockquote>