My personal bias (I'm most often a player) is to give the players a chance/throw them another hint. So what does the GM do: let events play out or throw the players a bone? ![]() I think everyone faces this at some point: the players screw up, perhaps by missing a key plot point or item, and it means they cannot best the scenario the GM has planned out. Otherwise the first sign of that gathering resentment might be when they stop turning up to the game.ĭave, do you think a GM should intervene to assist a set of players growing frustrated/to avoid a TPK? If they're not, make sure there are opportunities for them to shine too. That just forces the game to follow the patterns of a bad TV show: "So I can't shoot this guy, despite being MI6's top assassin, because I already had a couple of highlight moments earlier in the session.?" But you do need to monitor who is demanding the lion's share of your attention, and whether the quieter players are happy about that. I don't think the solution is to bake everyone's fifteen minutes into the rules. ![]() Writers describe the same phenomenon: "The character took over the book!" As the referee you're always alert to moments when the pace of a session might be flagging, and a player who peps it up by improvising brilliantly in character is going to grab more of your attention. Some people are shy or naturally cautious others are in like Flynn. Often the players themselves prefer it that way. Every group has its star players and its supporting characters. ![]() Of all the causes of one player hogging the spotlight, the hardest to avoid is when that player is simply giving better value than the rest.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |