Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tyrlaan" data-source="post: 6663070" data-attributes="member: 20998">I agree with all of this, but... This isn't a counterpoint to player obligation. In fact, you agree with player obligation as per your last sentence here. You can replace the word responsibility with obligation and there you have it. So if you're supplementing commentary of both of ours from prior posts, totally agree. But starting with the word "no" seems very contradictory to your own words.Sure... but, as the GM I have a large portion of the control over how much fun a player can have. I could run a game where I kill everyone's PC each session in the most absurd and uninteresting way possible. Is it fair for me to turn around and say to the players that "they're responsible for their own fun?" I'm sure I'd quickly be out of players. And actually you agree with me on this, as per the second quote above, which means you concede that you have at least partial responsibility for the fun of the players.In a group/team environment, everyone at the table has an impact on everyone else's fun. That means they have a responsibility to be aware of this dynamic and keep it in mind when playing the game. You've already demonstrated that you know what I'm talking about here because one of your chargen rules is to make someone who will play relatively nice with others, which means you probably agree with me. Why would you have this rule if not for the fact that playing someone who is a lone wolf/psycho evil/etc character is going to damage other people's fun? For starters, I must confess I don't see what the point of contention is between the two players, unless you're saying one is complaining about the other for some reason. What is the situation that needs to be rectified?If there is no complaining from either player.... there's no issue here and why would I as a GM think I need to intervene? And what does it have to do with worrying about their respective fun? Sorry, couldn't follow this, so not sure what you are demonstrating here, though one thing is that you seem to be pigeon-holing fun issues to rules related only?</blockquote>

Verification