Post by drfantasy on Apr 18, 2021 7:26:42 GMT
To me, playing an RPG was basically a bunch of friends hanging out together, having fun. Have I been wrong allt this time?
So my problem is this: RPG:ing seems to be thought of/described/discussed in two almost opposite ways. 1) As I described it above, a ”flat” group without a formal leader and complicated ways of negotiating social behaviour; and 2) as a hierarchy, with a DM leading the group’s activities and carrying responsibility for what goes on at ”his/her/their” table.
I’ve listened to any number of podcasts and read blogs, rule books, and forum posts, and these two seem to be mixed up but the second is dominating (it seems to me): the DM is Responsible. Responsible for planning, for people having fun, for sorting out social issues in the group, to deal with PvP conflicts, even keep track of the group’s character sheets. I get that if you are running a game with a clear age diff between DM and players, but when you have a group of peers? Why should one person have all that responsibility? It’s not generally the case when friends meet up, for a board game, or just an evening of socializing.
And that leads me to a second issue: what should the division of Responsibility for the group’s fun and enjoyment be? DM 90%/players 10%? Or DM 50/players 50? Or the same value for everyone, players and DM alike?
And if the DM is suddenly the peer responsible for the social situation, does that come with any social rights?
It almost seems as if the DM’s role is constructed, by us and by the players and by all the rulebooks, as more and more onerous, a bunch of responibility and duties but very few rights to go with them.
I would really like to hear what people think about this!
So my problem is this: RPG:ing seems to be thought of/described/discussed in two almost opposite ways. 1) As I described it above, a ”flat” group without a formal leader and complicated ways of negotiating social behaviour; and 2) as a hierarchy, with a DM leading the group’s activities and carrying responsibility for what goes on at ”his/her/their” table.
I’ve listened to any number of podcasts and read blogs, rule books, and forum posts, and these two seem to be mixed up but the second is dominating (it seems to me): the DM is Responsible. Responsible for planning, for people having fun, for sorting out social issues in the group, to deal with PvP conflicts, even keep track of the group’s character sheets. I get that if you are running a game with a clear age diff between DM and players, but when you have a group of peers? Why should one person have all that responsibility? It’s not generally the case when friends meet up, for a board game, or just an evening of socializing.
And that leads me to a second issue: what should the division of Responsibility for the group’s fun and enjoyment be? DM 90%/players 10%? Or DM 50/players 50? Or the same value for everyone, players and DM alike?
And if the DM is suddenly the peer responsible for the social situation, does that come with any social rights?
It almost seems as if the DM’s role is constructed, by us and by the players and by all the rulebooks, as more and more onerous, a bunch of responibility and duties but very few rights to go with them.
I would really like to hear what people think about this!