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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="James Heard" data-source="post: 1994223" data-attributes="member: 7280">It doesn't matter whether or not the player's reasons are vague from the standpoint of the GM or not, it's irrelevant to the discussion on whether or not the GM should somehow intercede in the decision-making process of something that's essentially elemental to the player's side of the table. If the GM starts interceding on the behalf of a player for this allocation of resources then it's essentially the same as if the GM starts deciding how the players spend their money, or divide treasure, or pick their feats. It's never a good idea.Once the decision is made, however, there comes the role of the GM in picking and choosing the players he allows in his game, smoothing over ruffled feathers, making sure that incidents such as this aren't arbitrary the next time by outlining a clear course of required action ("Players are expected to kowtow to the demands of other players, and heal and raise each other despite any consideration to the contrary. This is for the good of the group.") and basically figuring out what becomes of such an incident once it's already happened. It's never a good idea to railroad players except in the clearest and most consensus agreed upon circumstances ("Well if no one can think up any good reasons that your characters would be adventuring together then can I decide for you? Okay? Good."), and this is basically a "is it ok to railroad the player" issue. It isn't. It might be a "kick a player out because he's a jerk" issue, but like I said - that's a separate issue and I think it's worthwhile making sure that you show and explain that they're separate issues for the future of generating confidence in the clarity of your decision-making processes for the game. As a compromise I'd probably end up leaning on the rest of the group, as players, to enforce what I wanted to happen. "Look guys, this is a bad idea. See if you all can't figure out a reasonable way to make this happen this way, ok?" It doesn't force an adversarial relationship with the GM and the player, and players twist each other's arms all the time - it's one of the fun things about being a player as opposed to a GM.</blockquote>

Verification