Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aenghus" data-source="post: 7351991" data-attributes="member: 2656">Trust isn't a single numerical value, it's complex, multifaceted and ideally reciprocal. You can trust people on some issues and not on others. You can trust someone and still have issues with them when they have a bad day.I can't count the number of times as a player that a game has been going wrong, and the referee made an appeal to just trust him and the game would work out, often without taking any steps to improve the situation, just sticking to their guns to the bitter end. This is entirely anecdotal but my impression is that the player's perception of trouble in the game was generally accurate, and mostly the referee was being over ambitious, or hadn't left any room for the players and the game quickly failed. Occasionally the game was able to recover from a nose dive but only when the GM attempted to address the issues causing player unhappiness.IMO trust is more difficult in an adversarial game IMO, as it is in a game that values intra-party conflict. Monolithic parties are to some eyes unrealistic but they are an attempt to sidestep some of the trust issues, and streamline play by avoiding a bunch of the drama such conflict creates. I realise some people like such drama and conflict, but there are others who don't and are willing to take steps to avoid it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aenghus, post: 7351991, member: 2656"] Trust isn't a single numerical value, it's complex, multifaceted and ideally reciprocal. You can trust people on some issues and not on others. You can trust someone and still have issues with them when they have a bad day. I can't count the number of times as a player that a game has been going wrong, and the referee made an appeal to just trust him and the game would work out, often without taking any steps to improve the situation, just sticking to their guns to the bitter end. This is entirely anecdotal but my impression is that the player's perception of trouble in the game was generally accurate, and mostly the referee was being over ambitious, or hadn't left any room for the players and the game quickly failed. Occasionally the game was able to recover from a nose dive but only when the GM attempted to address the issues causing player unhappiness. IMO trust is more difficult in an adversarial game IMO, as it is in a game that values intra-party conflict. Monolithic parties are to some eyes unrealistic but they are an attempt to sidestep some of the trust issues, and streamline play by avoiding a bunch of the drama such conflict creates. I realise some people like such drama and conflict, but there are others who don't and are willing to take steps to avoid it. [/QUOTE]

Verification