NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6123080" data-attributes="member: 22779">Not quite.  I have no interest in playing out a scene which has no player buy in before the scene.  In other words, no investment in the scene.  I don't have to express interest in a scene beforehand.  However, that scene better include elements of investment and that better be pretty obvious up front, if you want me to engage in the scene.Not really.  I can enter the city by teleporting, thus skipping the desert and that's okay.  Granted, that also gets me past the siege, but, now the siege is still there to be leveraged.  If I want to leverage anything in the desert, I first have to find out about the existence of that thing while in the city, then I have to leave the city to use it.  The siege does not require these steps. Overly pendantic semantic games are not fun.  Let's not go there shall we.  One player wants to play through the desert.  One player does not.  The no wins, in my game. Huh?  The two players most certainly were advocating dealing with the cult.  But, it turned out in play that the cult just wasn't that much fun.  So, the group, as a group, likely decides to abandon the cult plot.  But, then, again, you are presuming bad faith on the part of the players.  I don't presume that. Of course I take it to mean you want the GM to make these decisions.  I mean, sheesh, how can I not.  It's entirely the DM's decision to play out the desert.  It's entirely the DM's decision that one of the hirelings is really a wanted criminal.  On and on.  You expect the players to automatically buy into any complication simply because they are playing at your table.  You do not require any buy in.  Players who don't want to participate in a complication are expected to sit quietly and wait while the complication is played out.  Players are not permitted to leave if they don't like a complication, doing so would cause you to eject them from the group.How is this not a heavily GM controlled game?And, again, so what if the GM can also say no?  It's a collaborative effort.  Of course the Gm has say here.  By and large he's going to set the starting parameters.  Again, I suggest you take a look at the FATE character generation rules:  <a href="http://www.faterpg.com/dl/df/charactercreation.html" target="_blank">http://www.faterpg.com/dl/df/charactercreation.html</a>  This is what I consider the gold standard for chargen.--------Examples are a good thing.  This thread details one method I use for creating group templates:<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?239705-An-interesting-method-of-group-chargen-My-players-stay-out" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?239705-An-interesting-method-of-group-chargen-My-players-stay-out</a>I used this for my Savage Tides game a couple of years back to great effect.  Worked like a charm.  For my group.</blockquote>

Verification