Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6098170" data-attributes="member: 22779">Bingo.&nbsp; Read this after I wrote my reply above.If you want the players to explore the desert, MAKE THE DESERT MATTER.&nbsp; Don't expect the desert to matter to the players just because it's there.&nbsp; Like I keep harping on, there was a clear goal on the other side of the desert.&nbsp; It could have been a desert or a forest or a grass plain or a giant field of jello, who cares?&nbsp; Well, if it was jello, I'd probably care, but, then, there's always room for jello.&nbsp; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />But in any case, the expectation that I'm seeing from Celebrim and others is that I, as the player, should care about everything that the DM brings up, simply because it's there.&nbsp;&nbsp; You want me to care about the desert, then show me why I should care.&nbsp; Otherwise, redline it and let me get to the goal.Instead of constantly presuming that that &quot;one player is at fault Nagol, why not presume that that one player is acting in good faith and honestly is not enjoying what's being presented enough that he isn't willing to simply go along with it?&nbsp; The two examples I've brought up are YEARS apart in real time.&nbsp; Totally unrelated to each other.&nbsp; Just experiences that I've had in the thirty some years I've been gaming.&nbsp; I find that trusting your players results in better games than presuming that the players should have absolute trust in the DM and any deviation from that is only because of problem players.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6098170, member: 22779"] Bingo. Read this after I wrote my reply above. If you want the players to explore the desert, MAKE THE DESERT MATTER. Don't expect the desert to matter to the players just because it's there. Like I keep harping on, there was a clear goal on the other side of the desert. It could have been a desert or a forest or a grass plain or a giant field of jello, who cares? Well, if it was jello, I'd probably care, but, then, there's always room for jello. :D But in any case, the expectation that I'm seeing from Celebrim and others is that I, as the player, should care about everything that the DM brings up, simply because it's there. You want me to care about the desert, then show me why I should care. Otherwise, redline it and let me get to the goal. Instead of constantly presuming that that "one player is at fault Nagol, why not presume that that one player is acting in good faith and honestly is not enjoying what's being presented enough that he isn't willing to simply go along with it? The two examples I've brought up are YEARS apart in real time. Totally unrelated to each other. Just experiences that I've had in the thirty some years I've been gaming. I find that trusting your players results in better games than presuming that the players should have absolute trust in the DM and any deviation from that is only because of problem players. [/QUOTE]

Verification