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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 9280019" data-attributes="member: 93670">166 got posted while I was typing so I adjusted a few things to address that too instead of quoting it & addressing it separate <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />.The player is the one with a strong & frankly unreasonable expectation of being able to seal off chunks of their GM's game world.  In your question did that player ensure that the group had a session zero or similar so that player with what a few people have openly started to be a red flag?  If so how did the group react? -OR- did the player carry the baggage of that undisclosed expectation into their GM's game world without telling anyone until after that player did significant things & stopped playing the PC for whatever reason?"I expect my  GM to create an entirely new world for every session & never pull from events that took place in it during past campaigns or sssions" is a pretty extreme viewpoint for a player to hold & it becomes even moreso if they are not making it clear before they are even allowed to start playing with any GM.  For years we've heard "well did you bring it up in session zero" quickly thrown at GMs who need to change a rule or deal with a problem player & more.  In this case we have a nonspecific player expressing an extreme view that they would maintain control over parts of the GM's setting.The GM isn't going out of their way to take control of the former PC.  That GM is just running their game in their game world & something the PC accomplished in the world or for itself becomes relevant to events in a future session. The player's claim is trying to deny their GM the ability to manage their own world without significant retcons or gaining control over a second PC they aren't playing.  That gain in control carries either the ability to question the GM on things that NPC would know or make use of whatever capabilities that PC might have in its current situation.[spoiler="DMG4"]Consistency is a key to a believable fictional world. When the adventurers go back into town forsupplies, they should encounter the same nonplayercharacters (NPCs) they met before. Soon, they'll learnthe barkeep's name, and he or she will remembertheirs as well. Once you have achieved this degree of consistency, you can provide an occasional change. Ifthe adventurers come back to buy more horses at thestables, they might discover that the man who ran theplace went back home to the large city over the hills,and now his niece runs the family business. That sort ofchange-one that has nothing to do with the adventurersdirectly, but one that they'll notice-makes the playersfeel as though their characters are part of a living worldthat changes and grows along with them.[/spoiler]In this case that consistency takes the form of past achievements in that world not being retconned & rebuilt when a PC is retired.  If a player is expecting to silently hold the intention of forcing their GM rework their own setting after a PC who accomplished notable things ceases to be played... That player is holding an incredibly unreasonable expectation & acting quite rude by not even bringing it up.[spoiler="DMG21"]FACTIONS ANDORGANIZATIONSTemples, guilds, orders, secret societies, andcolleges are important forces in the social order ofany civilization. Their influence might stretch acrossmultiple towns and cities, with or without a similarlywide-ranging political authority. Organizations canplay an important part in the lives of player characters,becoming their patrons, allies, or enemies just likeindividual non player characters. When characters join these organizations, they become part of something larger than themselves, which can give their adventures a context in the wider world. [/spoiler]A player who wants to ensure that their PC never shows up being "part of something greater than themselves" in the future should go out of their way to avoid becoming part of something or make their unreasonable expectation known immediately to the table should that happen during play.  Should a player make that clear before they "become part of something larger than themselves" I'd be happy to tell them that this is probably not the table for them & that they should find some other GM.  Waiting till it comes up in a future session just creates a big disruption & unreasonable extra work.</blockquote>

Verification