Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 3028836" data-attributes="member: 8835">I might ammend my scoring.&nbsp; In my above post, I ding the DM twice, for basically the same mistake.&nbsp; He either should have had multiple hooks, OR he should have realized his time was being monopolized by a party split and shifted to the Paladin and invented something.The fact is, each person at that table made some mistakes.&nbsp; Not in-game mistakes, but at the table game-flow (or metagame) mistakes.&nbsp; Each had an opportunity to get everybody involved, but they didn't.For some players, they have to make a choice of making what seems to be an &quot;in character&quot; choice that reduces fun for another player.&nbsp; What I tend to find is that the &quot;in character&quot; choice is often one where the player views only one path for the PC (&quot;I might get imprisoned, I want to protect the secret passage for the future&quot;) and fails to see how pursuing that opportunity hurts another player.&nbsp; The Thief player could have also simply chosen to ignore that opportunity, and told the entire party about the secret, so they could go do the mission together.&nbsp; The adventure would have continued, and everybody would have had fun.My advice is this, if you ever find a point where acting in character would cause less fun for another player, consider a more fun choice, and see if you can justify that new choice as in-character.&nbsp; Odds are good you can.&nbsp; Role-playing in character does not have to come at the sacrifice of fun for others, therefore it should not sacrifice fun for others.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Janx, post: 3028836, member: 8835"] I might ammend my scoring. In my above post, I ding the DM twice, for basically the same mistake. He either should have had multiple hooks, OR he should have realized his time was being monopolized by a party split and shifted to the Paladin and invented something. The fact is, each person at that table made some mistakes. Not in-game mistakes, but at the table game-flow (or metagame) mistakes. Each had an opportunity to get everybody involved, but they didn't. For some players, they have to make a choice of making what seems to be an "in character" choice that reduces fun for another player. What I tend to find is that the "in character" choice is often one where the player views only one path for the PC ("I might get imprisoned, I want to protect the secret passage for the future") and fails to see how pursuing that opportunity hurts another player. The Thief player could have also simply chosen to ignore that opportunity, and told the entire party about the secret, so they could go do the mission together. The adventure would have continued, and everybody would have had fun. My advice is this, if you ever find a point where acting in character would cause less fun for another player, consider a more fun choice, and see if you can justify that new choice as in-character. Odds are good you can. Role-playing in character does not have to come at the sacrifice of fun for others, therefore it should not sacrifice fun for others. [/QUOTE]

Verification