Started by Josh Porter, December 15, 2011, 06:41:06 PM
QuoteIn addition, there are very few players in my group who are interested in the other characters. People will pull out their phones/iPads/etc. whenever someone else has the spotlight.
Quote from: Frank Tarcikowski on December 21, 2011, 08:51:48 AMI'm skeptical whether those emails and more talk along those lines will be helpful. From my experience, in particular when talking on an abstract level, miscommunication is inevitable as everyone is caught up in their way of thinking. Callan is right: When your GM says he wants you to be more pro-active, he means he wants you to do what he expects you to do without him having to basically force it down your throat, as in the Yeti example.
Quote from: Alfryd on December 21, 2011, 11:03:12 AM As far as I can tell, Lloyd as a character had perfectly good reasons for not telling the rest of the group, and if the GM failed to pick up on that, it's unfair to blame the player for it.I don't understand how GMs that insist on allowing players only in-character knowledge about their environment can then expect their characters to act based on out-of-character motives (i.e, what will keep the GM happy.)
Quote from: Frank Tarcikowski on December 21, 2011, 12:41:20 PMWell, if I interpreted correctly, Josh made those "perfectly good reasons" up on the spot because he was annoyed by the GM's spoon-feeding techniques and wanted to derail him.Amen for the second paragraph, though. This whole "good role-players don't use OOC knowledge" stuff is just bogus.- Frank