Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5378087" data-attributes="member: 18280">I assume the term you are using loosely is "dredge up pretty much every"?  Or is it "morass"?And really....."from bloody rust monsters to gotcha monsters"?  That wide of a spread, eh?  <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />It isn't amnesia to not know that Incident A = Incident B, if you identify the two differently.  What I am guilty of was (wrongly, it seems) assuming that what you said in your post is, in fact, what happened.  If you describe two incidents as having different properties, how is anyone to know that they are the same incident?  I think you protest too much.And cheap shots?  Post after post, thread after thread, you bring up something that is someone else's problem, or the system's problem, yet always seems to happen to you.  It doesn't take Einstein to realize what the common element is.  Nor am I the first person to point this out to you.OTOH, it isn't about your abilities as a DM.....it is about what you want out of a game.  The more esoteric what you want out of a game is, the harder it is going to be to find GMs who can supply it, or players who will want it over the long haul.That doesn't mean that you are a "bad GM" or that you should not pursue what you want.  My two rules imply exactly the opposite:(1) As a GM, if you can get players to play, then you can run whatever you want, however you want. (2) As a player or GM, if you don't like a game, don't play it. Life is too short for bad games.What it does imply, though, is that you should at least recognize that what you want in a game may be atypical.  And because of that, at least some of the problems you are having are related to trying to meet those desires.  I.e., rather than blaming others, consider what you really want, and take the steps needed to get that thing.  ALL systems are better at meeting some sets of needs over other sets.Moreover, you know as a fact that, confronted by a system that seems more in line (to me) with what you seem to desire in a system/have more experience with (again, to me), I will ask your advice.  You know this as a fact, because I have done so.But you would probably be better off realizing that, say, because B/X doesn't meet your needs, it doesn't follow that the problem is with B/X.  Just as, because 4e doesn't meet my needs, it doesn't follow that the problem is with 4e.Throwing a new player into mid-level 3.5, with an experienced group, without giving that player any chance to gain experience in the basics of the system, and without adjusting difficulty for that player, is a mistake.  You should know that it is a mistake; you lament the results.  What you seem unable (or unwilling) to do is to place the blame where it should fall.Making a mistake doesn't make one a bad GM.  Being unable or unwilling to do so might, however.  Blaming everything but the person who actually made the decisions involved?  Well, I'll leave others to judge on that.RC</blockquote>

Verification