Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nagol" data-source="post: 6111531" data-attributes="member: 23935">I'm not suggesting that the players should be perfect analytic machines who never make mistakes.&nbsp; I'm suggesting players bear some responsibility and should hold themselves accountable for predicaments of their own making and not get shirty when they aren't given a pass out of them -- particularly when the predicament can be made interesting (at least to a large subset of the player base) relatively easily with complications that follow the tropes of genres commonly emulated in the game engine.If the other players agree (including the DM) to move on then obviously the group moves on.&nbsp; But without unanimity, the group should continue normal play.&nbsp; No player should expect to control flow save through the resources the game offers him -- it is a collaborative game after all and people have different agendas and focus of enjoyment.&nbsp; Most games do offer some measure of control --D&amp;D certainly does with in-game resources.&nbsp; Any player can offer signals (the more clear the better) or attempt to negotiate with the table if they situation is less than agreeable, but not all such attempts will be successful.The alternative is to change the premise of the game and the game engine to remove those types of predicaments.&nbsp; Don't want to deal with weighty decisions?&nbsp; Play a game where they don't come up.&nbsp; Don't want to deal with administration?&nbsp; Play a game where it is minimized.&nbsp; Don't want to deal with exploration/potential NPC agenda/random encounters?&nbsp; D&amp;D wouldn't be my suggested game engine.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nagol, post: 6111531, member: 23935"] I'm not suggesting that the players should be perfect analytic machines who never make mistakes. I'm suggesting players bear some responsibility and should hold themselves accountable for predicaments of their own making and not get shirty when they aren't given a pass out of them -- particularly when the predicament can be made interesting (at least to a large subset of the player base) relatively easily with complications that follow the tropes of genres commonly emulated in the game engine. If the other players agree (including the DM) to move on then obviously the group moves on. But without unanimity, the group should continue normal play. No player should expect to control flow save through the resources the game offers him -- it is a collaborative game after all and people have different agendas and focus of enjoyment. Most games do offer some measure of control --D&D certainly does with in-game resources. Any player can offer signals (the more clear the better) or attempt to negotiate with the table if they situation is less than agreeable, but not all such attempts will be successful. The alternative is to change the premise of the game and the game engine to remove those types of predicaments. Don't want to deal with weighty decisions? Play a game where they don't come up. Don't want to deal with administration? Play a game where it is minimized. Don't want to deal with exploration/potential NPC agenda/random encounters? D&D wouldn't be my suggested game engine. [/QUOTE]

Verification