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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6101739" data-attributes="member: 6681948">As celebrim has said repeatedly, there is no evidence that there is a problem player or a bad GM.  There is definite evidence of a failure to communicate and an expectation gap between what Hussar expected from the game and what the GM expected.  The guy who was there either can't remember or won't elaborate, which leaves us to assess what possibilities may have existed.  And the fact that there are multiple possibilities tells me there is no cut and dried answer to what is the right or wrong approach, only that the answer must be tailored to the specific situation.You're very big on everyone else's evidence.  What evidence is there that the other players were not enjoying the interaction, or were not engaged in the desert crossing?  You are assuming that Hussar's perspective was shared by everyone at the table.  I question why, if everyone was "bored out of their skulls", which is how Hussar described himself, they sustained 90 minutes of interaction with the NPC's.  Hussar's complaints are compelling evidence that ONE PLAYER at the table was not engaged.  The fact that the matter went on for 90 minutes is pretty strong evidence (not "proof", "evidence"), to me, that at least some of the gamers at the table were, in fact, engaged.Again, you are imputing that what Hussar (one player) wants to be what "the players want".  You are dismissing outright the possibility that the GM has set a scene which is, perhaps obviously perfectly consistent with what (one? some? all but one?) player(s) want, and that a number, possibly a solid majority, of players want the action to be precisely where it is.  Clearly, at least one person at the table wants the action to be at the desert.  Why is the one gamer who wants the action to be at the city more important than the one gamer who wants the action to be in the desert?I don't know.  I wonder who brought the BW sword scenario analogy into the discussion?  Presumably, as you are now saying it's pretty much irrelevant, whoever brought it up is a bad internet discussion poster, dragging in irrelevant tangents to the discussion.A group might well agree to playtest D&DNext, playtest BW with The Sword, play in the GM's campaign where landing 250 miles off target carries the consequence of having to figure out how to cover the 250 miles to the target, or in a game where NPC's are people too and the PC's interact with them on that basis.I've also had players who insist on dictating the course of in-game events.  Either seems a possibility in this instance.  I prefer to give all parties the benefit of the doubt, and assume that both sides had concerns, and that communication could have been improved.  But improving that communication does require both parties (all parties - every player) consider where the other is (others are) coming from, not dig in their heels and get "shirty" or "get in a snit".Again, you are projecting Hussar's goals onto the entire group.  It ain't necessarily so.No, I am saying that the players' desire for a specific occurence does not mean that the rest of the world parts to create a tunnel directly to this scene.  There is a desert between you and the city.  Logically, you need to deal with the desert to achieve your goal of getting to the city.  Just as, I suspect, there were things to do in the city in order to achieve the goals which lead the PC's to travel to the city.  Who says that anything, much less everything, in the way is low stakes.  If two of the spearmen you hire turn out to be HFETG* members, then those interviews had some pretty high stakes.  If the desert, unbeknownst to our heroes (PC's and players are rarely omniscient, at least in my experience), holds the key to their ability to achieve the goal which leads them to the city, then the desert trip may have some pretty high stakes as well.  You are assuming that Hussar's perception reflects omniscience on his part.  I choose to examine other possibilities.*Homocidal Fanatics for the Ethical Treatment of GrellsOr he made the game entertaining for those players that find tactical combat dull, and role playing interactions with PC's and NPC's the high point of the game, not just for those players for whom tactical combat is the most exciting aspect of play.A good GM would allow the players to choose whether they wish to spend the time to determine exactly who their hiring choices are, or grab the first six that happen to walk through the door and hope for the best, and be prepared to play out either outcome, or any in between.  A good player would consider the pros and cons of each approach.  And a good role player would make a poor choice in that regard because that is more in character for his PC than making the best tactical choice.  And good players would live with the consequences of their choices, not whine about the GM exercising a vendetta in-game because we didn't do it HIS way.Precisely.  Let's say the PC's have no gold.  Should the city guard suddenly have a maniacal hatred of Grell and throw their lives away in a fanatical desire to help the PC's slay this one?Why are there no options between "spend the next three hours alternating between rope use checks and descriptions of sand dunes" and "skip over the desert"?  You are assuming the GM has put no thought at all into the desert, or any encounters therein, but will nevertheless drag out the desert scenes for three hours - why?  What fun does he derive from this?  I disagree with that classification.  Where you say the GM has failed to go where the action is I suggest that all we know with any certainty is that the GM has failed to immediately go where Hussar desires the action is.  None of us can say where the other players want the action to be, with the possible exception of Hussar, and I take his silence on that point as confirmation that he also does not know what the other players' wishes were with any certainty.Correct.  Should have just quoted Umbran and saved wear and tear on my keyboard!</blockquote>

Verification