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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 9836733" data-attributes="member: 7026617">As a group, I think they're absolutely at least as important.  This shouldn't be controversial; even people I've disagreed with about the appropriate power relationship between players and GMs willingly admit that without players, you aren't a GM.  You're just a person who'd like to be one.No, I mean that if its entirely one sided, you're essentially just using your players for your entertainment.  I don't think even you believe that because things you've said in the past indicate to the contrary.But remember, that's not the argument.  The question is "To what extent should I make the game I'm running more difficult or unpleastant to my players (not some abstract group you may never play with, but that actual group of people you're playing with) to support my desires?"  Is there a way to read "I'm going to do it anyway" as anything but profoundly selfish in that case?  Shouldn't you either be fixing that to the degree you can (remember the two qualifications I made on this at the start: no meaningful difference in degree of output nor player facing input--the lack of those should not be necessary even with a simulationist-centric game; in fact I'm not sure having that actually supports a sim agenda optimally) or finding people who are more compatible with what you're trying to do?  If not, why not?I'd ask another question here about the apparent position of the players in what you seem to be arguing for, but I find its opposite hyperbolic as usually expressed and I can't think of better way to frame it.</blockquote>

Verification