canyonwalker | (Reply)

From:

Planning paralysis is something that Player 1 brought up in our Session Zero. On the subject of playing style, he informed us that he hates groups that sit and dither, and prefers to see the action keep moving. I agreed aloud with him, though I deliberately reframed the issue as striking a balance. Lengthy debate about what to do next anytime there are risks or unknowns really drains the fun out of the game. (I know because my LT group tends to do this.) But it also drains the fun out of a game when a "Ready, Fire, Aim" approach to action means Bad Things Happen that we could have avoided with rudimentary planning.

P1 acknowledged what I said, which I took as a good sign in the moment. I realized later, though, that he wasn't actually discussing play style; he was simply disclosing what he was going to do. And unfortunately what P1 meant by not wanting to "dither" was actually, "I'm not even going to attempt to discuss with the other players what we should do in the face of a shared challenge."

Worse, as I mentioned previously, the GM catered to P1's habit of acting like the only protagonist in the story by adjudicating his actions before the rest of us even got a chance to speak. I was prepared after the first play session to admonish the GM about the need to a) enforce turn taking and b) ensure that every player is given the opportunity to contribute before a situation is resolved. The second play session was better, though not totally.

"Okay, maybe the GM just likes bold action," I said to myself. So I tried acting more boldly in subsequent sessions. And that's where the GM's favoritism became clear. P1's hasty, unilateral actions were rewarded with positive outcomes. Every. Single. Time. Whenever I did something I got luck of the dice. ...And the bolder my action, the tougher the roll for success became.