"The truth without kindness is no longer truth but becomes subtle hostility" - Author Unknown
I wish she had. That would have been significantly better than what occurred, given the supposed goal of the communication. To be more specific,
To be clear, from this, the stated goal of the communication was to help the person that messaged you. From here on in, I'm speaking only on the efficacy of that listed goal - help the other person become a better role-player.
Let's start with the most important thing - the exact content of the snowflake message is irrelevant for the purposes of the problem with the response. If you are a teacher, and you slap a kid that says 3+2 is 7, you get dragged away by the police; no amount of saying "BUT IT'S FIVE!!! BUT IT'S FIVE!!!" changes that. There's effective ways to teach someone and non-effective ways to teach someone, and this is why we should pay teachers more in the United States.
It seems like there is this idea that what you are explaining about the snowflake theory justifies any sort of response you want to give, and that is simply not effective communication.
As the GM, you are in the power position. You decide if a character is playing. You set the rules. You dictate the physics. You are God of the game. As a result, there is a power imbalance at play, and that should always be respected. Side tangent - MythWeavers seems to be the polar opposite of real life here. If you are willing to actually take the time to sit with a bunch of people and PLAY in real life you are the demanded product, while MythWeavers has loads of people willing to play, so GMs get their pick of the crop. I just applied to a game that generated 20 applications in three days. Just as with any power imbalance it is up to the person in the power position to control the conversation and keep things safe for everyone involved. By attacking this person, you have told that person that in MythWeavers the people with power are willing to use it against them. That doesn't help someone become a good roleplayer, because they are threatened. Look at Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: Security (not being threatened) is more important than Esteem (the good feelings you get from an activity like role-playing). You will not be able to as easily address his Esteem issue if you are providing a security one... or, to rephrase, this sort of response is more likely to get him or her to leave the Weave rather than become a better roleplayer.
I will address one thing on content - even if I agree with you, and I do on the content, this approach is problematic for one other reason:
You really can't tell someone they are playing a role-playing game "wrong".
@TheFred argued this earlier and, even if I would NEVER EVER EVER EVER be cool with it in /MY/ game, it would be pretty darned arrogant of me to say that he shouldn't have it in ANY game. Mass appreciation doesn't determine the "one true way" to play an RPG - if that were the case, then we all lost out over a decade ago to Everquest, so we can pack this whole thing up now. Trust me... Skyrim and Fallout do NOT see D&D as competition for "the right way to role play".
So yeah... respectfully, I don't think you used the best path to help this person be a better role-player. Everything you said could have been said without demeaning him or her, and the message would have been much better as a result.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Eviltedzies
In regards to the OP's reply to said player:
Instead of a long winded thoughtful explanation of my thoughts on this I'll just say: "You could have just said no and left it at that."[/INDENT] |
Quote:
| If you take these words to heart, you might become a significantly better role-player |
Let's start with the most important thing - the exact content of the snowflake message is irrelevant for the purposes of the problem with the response. If you are a teacher, and you slap a kid that says 3+2 is 7, you get dragged away by the police; no amount of saying "BUT IT'S FIVE!!! BUT IT'S FIVE!!!" changes that. There's effective ways to teach someone and non-effective ways to teach someone, and this is why we should pay teachers more in the United States.
It seems like there is this idea that what you are explaining about the snowflake theory justifies any sort of response you want to give, and that is simply not effective communication. As the GM, you are in the power position. You decide if a character is playing. You set the rules. You dictate the physics. You are God of the game. As a result, there is a power imbalance at play, and that should always be respected. Side tangent - MythWeavers seems to be the polar opposite of real life here. If you are willing to actually take the time to sit with a bunch of people and PLAY in real life you are the demanded product, while MythWeavers has loads of people willing to play, so GMs get their pick of the crop. I just applied to a game that generated 20 applications in three days. Just as with any power imbalance it is up to the person in the power position to control the conversation and keep things safe for everyone involved. By attacking this person, you have told that person that in MythWeavers the people with power are willing to use it against them. That doesn't help someone become a good roleplayer, because they are threatened. Look at Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: Security (not being threatened) is more important than Esteem (the good feelings you get from an activity like role-playing). You will not be able to as easily address his Esteem issue if you are providing a security one... or, to rephrase, this sort of response is more likely to get him or her to leave the Weave rather than become a better roleplayer.
I will address one thing on content - even if I agree with you, and I do on the content, this approach is problematic for one other reason:
You really can't tell someone they are playing a role-playing game "wrong".
@TheFred argued this earlier and, even if I would NEVER EVER EVER EVER be cool with it in /MY/ game, it would be pretty darned arrogant of me to say that he shouldn't have it in ANY game. Mass appreciation doesn't determine the "one true way" to play an RPG - if that were the case, then we all lost out over a decade ago to Everquest, so we can pack this whole thing up now. Trust me... Skyrim and Fallout do NOT see D&D as competition for "the right way to role play".
So yeah... respectfully, I don't think you used the best path to help this person be a better role-player. Everything you said could have been said without demeaning him or her, and the message would have been much better as a result.
