Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="slobster" data-source="post: 7935100" data-attributes="member: 6693711">Lots of things to unpack here, but I won't get super into each one in the interest of respecting the thread topic. But briefly:In terms of DMs who want to keep the PCs on rails, the real issue here is the railroad, IMO. Now I'm not actually against railroads per se, I think as long as the GM and players all know the score and are on board with the idea of a plot that's on rails, it can be okay. But a GM who tells players &quot;you decide to trust Baron McObviousEvil&quot; and compels them to walk into a clear trap is sinning because he's ignoring player choice far more egregiously than an occasional flavor embellishment which assumes that your character thinks flowers smell nice, or wtv. I think the two things are so different that you should consider them different issues.As to sneaky GMs, well, we're a sneaky lot. I subtly use GM tricks to try and set up surprises for my players and play off of their likely assumptions all the time. I do see how it can be more annoying for a GM to tell you what your character thinks, then betray that stated opinion with a SHOCKING TWIST!, than it would be for that GM to just describe a situation, let you come up with your own idea, and then pull the rug out from under you with that same SHOCKING TWIST!So I feel where you are coming from, but I also think that most GMs who use the &quot;you feel like the sword is heavier than it should be&quot; rather than &quot;the sword is about 1.4 times as dense as steel usually is&quot; are usually just falling back on more natural language, and that no harm is meant by it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="slobster, post: 7935100, member: 6693711"] Lots of things to unpack here, but I won't get super into each one in the interest of respecting the thread topic. But briefly: In terms of DMs who want to keep the PCs on rails, the real issue here is the railroad, IMO. Now I'm not actually against railroads per se, I think as long as the GM and players all know the score and are on board with the idea of a plot that's on rails, it can be okay. But a GM who tells players "you decide to trust Baron McObviousEvil" and compels them to walk into a clear trap is sinning because he's ignoring player choice far more egregiously than an occasional flavor embellishment which assumes that your character thinks flowers smell nice, or wtv. I think the two things are so different that you should consider them different issues. As to sneaky GMs, well, we're a sneaky lot. I subtly use GM tricks to try and set up surprises for my players and play off of their likely assumptions all the time. I do see how it can be more annoying for a GM to tell you what your character thinks, then betray that stated opinion with a SHOCKING TWIST!, than it would be for that GM to just describe a situation, let you come up with your own idea, and then pull the rug out from under you with that same SHOCKING TWIST! So I feel where you are coming from, but I also think that most GMs who use the "you feel like the sword is heavier than it should be" rather than "the sword is about 1.4 times as dense as steel usually is" are usually just falling back on more natural language, and that no harm is meant by it. [/QUOTE]

Verification