But I don't want to do that...
I saw an interesting post on one of the many RPG related Facebook groups I'm a part of...
...it really made me think about the three-way tension that forms the basis of my understanding of the hobby.
It basically states that this sort of things is full of red flags and there IS going to be tension forming as a result of the choices made before the game even begins.
For those who aren't familiar with the concept, it basically works like this.
(A couple of fairly comprehensive posts on the concept can be found here and here)
Where do I see the red flags...
The homebrew....
...no.
The high fantasy...
...that says heartbreaker to me in combination with homebrew, but that's not a dealbreaker. I've been a part of plenty of great high-fantasy homebrews, and I'd like to think that I've run a few of them over the years that have really done well.
The expectation that players will pick certain types of characters and the challenges have been predefined before the characters have been chosen...
...yeah, that says to me that there will be a level of railroading in this story. The kind that deprotagonises the characters before they're even written. It just looks like the DM wants to tell their own story, and see if the characters can make it through, but he doesn't want to sacrifice his ideas or imaginative control to provide a story that matches what the players are showing their interest for. There's going to be an instant dissonance between what the players want and what the DM wants. I foresee both the players getting very frustrated very quickly. The two sides are in direct tension with one another.
Changing the rules to accommodate the story, without giving the story a chance to forge it's own path...
...seeing a red flag there as well. If the third pull on the story is coming from the rules, and the players have made their characters based on what they thought the rule were, but now there's the possibility that things will be different once thew story actually gets going. Usually a good session zero will be used for players to understand where each other are coming from, and for the DM to adjust their intentions to ensure everyone will have the opportunity to shine in the upcoming story. Instead it looks like the DM is choosing to double down at this point, and he's going to tell his story regardless of the consequences.
But then he asks what to do...
...and I guess that's a good thing. I haven't dug through al the responses (and at the time I screencaptured this post, there were 108 responses), but a few of them have suggested that he is running a game for other people and needs to consider what they want out of a game. So I hope he's taken some of those comments on board.
Don't get me wrong, I'm trying to critique what I'm seeing here, not trying to attack a DM who has put themself out there. It's just that what I'm seeing is the kind of thing I've seen in so many dysfunctional groups over the years, and while the pattern hadn't been noticeable at first, once you've see it a few times, you start to know what to expect. I often just walk away from games where I see these sorts of red flag happening (only to see the games collapse two or three weeks later). Often the players indicate that they felt like the DM was just being blatantly antagonistic or bullying, and while that's a common old school way to play, it's the kind of thing that drives people away from the hobby. Not something I want at all.
Anyway, enough rant for the moment.
What do you think?
xxx
ghkjghjg kh kjhu uoh ou
.png)
Comments