Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7504641" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think you've completely missed my point.I could spend my leisure time playing backgammon with my daughter. The last time we played, a few days ago, I had a piece on the bar and rolled double sixes on two or even three occasions. That's frustrating in the context of trying to win a game. But it is not frustrating my enjoyment of the game. I enjoy backgammon whether I win or lose. It's far and away my favourite traditional boardgame.I am currently a player in a Burning Wheel game. My PC had a piece of masonry fall on him while exploring an old chapel. As a result he is carrying an injury that impedes his performance. That's frustrating in the context of wanting my PC to succeed. But it does not frustrate my enjoyment of the game. It doesn't stop me declaring actions for my PC, engaging the fiction, and finding out what happens.But if a GM is going to run a game in which I can't engage the fiction in any meaningful way. Or in which the fiction sucks. Then that will frustrate my enjoyment of the game. And why would I waste my time on that? I'd rather play backgammon with my daughter.Again, you've completely missed my point.I can sit around with people and enjoy a conversation. Why would I also want to include in that a back-and-forth with a referee who wants to read me his notes? (Or, more likely, the text of the module?) Just fax me the thing and I'll read it in my own time! Or not - if I wouldn't bother reading it in my own time because it's not very well written or interesting, why would I want to sit around and be read it in the context of ostensibly "playing" a game?As I already posted, I'm not interested in emoting my PC while the GM tells me a story. Nor in seeing my friends do that. When I play a RPG I want fiction that is engaging, and that I can engage in a back-and-forth with the GM and fellow players.That's not a sign that I'm a boring person. Personally, in fact, I think it's a sign that I'm an interesting person who is good company at the RPG table!I didn't "admit" the game was good. The game was fun enough in a context where I had a lot of spare time, but none of that was due to the GM. It was all due to the players doing their own thing, using the GM's contributions as props, and often just ignoring the GM who was running what was almost a "parallel" game for the player of the "chosen one" PC.The GM was pretty bad.Says who? If I join a chess club, and all the players suck, or (in my case) are far too strong for me to meaningfully play against, then I'm going to look for a different club.If I turn up at a RPG club - as I did - and join a game that turns out to suck big time, then why would I keep wasting my time? If I can't find a better game, I can find a better way to spend my Friday evenings.In this particular case, I offered to the other players to start a game for them, and they accepted the invitation. We invited the (ex) GM to join us, but he declined. That game that I started ran, with a gradually changing mix of players (a number of whom were also refugees from bad GMs in the club) but a high degree of continuity, for about 19 years, which I think would count as "long haul".This idea that players have a moral obligation to play with GMs who suck is something I don't get. Especially on a forum where the most common response to suggestions that a GM should be responsive to his/her players is that if a player doesn't like it, s/he can leave. As soon as I post about some times when I did that, I get told that I was doing the wrong thing and instead should have wasted my time on bad RPGing rather than spending my time on good RPGing. Why?</blockquote>

Verification