Fellow GMs, are your players more reactionary/go along with the story you present or are they more proactive/craft new threads in play (ideally without derailing the adventure)?
Which do you prefer?
@attercap Hm, I have a hard time telling what you mean by the two. What counts as a "new thread"? And, how railroady is the adventure?
I normally play GMless, but the kinds of scenarios I (used to) write are one-shots with pregen PCs. I want the players/PCs to be engaged in the story, but there's no railroad: just characters, possible events, stuff like that. So they might very well come up with things that I didn't think of, and it's fine... as long as it's consistent with the situation.
@hardcorenarrativist I've just noticed that the players in the last few groups I've GMed usually sail along with the plot and don't have a lot of personal initiative. Some minor character growth plans, but not a lot of personal initiative. It could be a Call of Cthulhu thing, but I'm used to players giving me more threads that I can weave into the overall campaign.
@attercap Oh, right, campaigns! I forget people usually play those. I guess it would be kind of weird in a campaign context, yeah. I think I'd feel like there's no character development and that the characters aren't really alive or something.
So I guess I definitely go for preferring players with initiative, now that I understand the question better.
@attercap Usually the opposite of what I'm planning for 🙃
We are an inclusive Mastodon community for everything tabletop (and more). We welcome everyone that wants to be part of the community, boardgamers, RPG players, casual gamers, party gamers, hobbyists, LARPers, game designers and publishers, RPG characters, artists, writers, vlogers, podcasters, reviewers, streamers, lego builders and more. This is meant to be a positive and safe space for people to enjoy each other's ideas, opinion and have fun. To keep tabletop.social that way, the Code of Conduct and Rules will be applied and enforced thoroughly.