2 ms·

Sometimes, yes, we talk to them. But I'm a DM, not their therapist or their dad - I'm not obligated to hand-hold someone through a radical restructuring of the

Sometimes, yes, we talk to them. But I'm a DM, not their therapist or their dad - I'm not obligated to hand-hold someone through a radical restructuring of their personality. And, it might not surprise you to find out, some people react very badly to being criticized. And I'm not particularly interested in having an argument over my subjective opinion of a person. I just don't want to be around them anymore.

doublerabbit 2y ago
I suppose, and that's fair enough. I just tend to trial their behaviour. "No that's not alright, cut the crap otherwise your out of here" Why play with them and not just cut them out completely? By keeping them in group your only enforcing their unpleasantness.
- pavel_lishin 2y ago
  > Why play with them and not just cut them out completely? By keeping them in group your only enforcing their unpleasantness. The people who actually ruin the game and make it not fun to play, we do cut them out. But other people, well - I guess the threshold for playing a cooperative game with someone is different than the threshold for inviting them to a party at my house. Plus, at D&D, they spend a lot of their time inside a character who may be more interesting and pleasant than the person rolling the dice.
kstenerud 2y ago
> But I'm a DM, not their therapist or their dad - I'm not obligated to hand-hold someone through a radical restructuring of their personality. Therein lies the crux of the issue. Everyone agrees that this person needs help, but also agrees that they shouldn't feel obligated to provide it. And so they continue on, blissfully unaware of the chafing they cause. Life goes on, and their contribution remains minimal.
- fragmede 2y ago
  Am I my brothers keeper? Culturally, we've just bought into the notion that I'm not your therapist, so as to absolve myself of the responsibility of fixing broken people. But if I don't do it, who will? so I take care of myself first, so that I'm sable to take care of others, but when I encounter broken people, I still try to fix them (as if people are devices like microwave ovens that need fixing) , because we all have to live in a society and hurt people hurt people, so don't over extend yourself, but also do the work that's staring you in the face.
  - intended 2y ago
    This is 10 hours later. > Therein lies the crux of the issue. Everyone agrees that this person needs help, but also agrees that they shouldn't feel obligated to provide it. This sentence will definitely seem targeted at you. However both the following are true: 1) You are not their keeper 2) Therein lies the crux of the issue I would say your anecdote did its task brilliantly, it described a situation fairly, which presented reasonable expectations humans can have today. The pros/cons of this current accommodation were then discovered.

doublerabbit 2y ago

I suppose, and that's fair enough. I just tend to trial their behaviour. "No that's not alright, cut the crap otherwise your out of here" Why play with them and not just cut them out completely? By keeping them in group your only enforcing their unpleasantness.

pavel_lishin 2y ago
> Why play with them and not just cut them out completely? By keeping them in group your only enforcing their unpleasantness. The people who actually ruin the game and make it not fun to play, we do cut them out. But other people, well - I guess the threshold for playing a cooperative game with someone is different than the threshold for inviting them to a party at my house. Plus, at D&D, they spend a lot of their time inside a character who may be more interesting and pleasant than the person rolling the dice.

kstenerud 2y ago

> But I'm a DM, not their therapist or their dad - I'm not obligated to hand-hold someone through a radical restructuring of their personality. Therein lies the crux of the issue. Everyone agrees that this person needs help, but also agrees that they shouldn't feel obligated to provide it. And so they continue on, blissfully unaware of the chafing they cause. Life goes on, and their contribution remains minimal.

fragmede 2y ago
Am I my brothers keeper? Culturally, we've just bought into the notion that I'm not your therapist, so as to absolve myself of the responsibility of fixing broken people. But if I don't do it, who will? so I take care of myself first, so that I'm sable to take care of others, but when I encounter broken people, I still try to fix them (as if people are devices like microwave ovens that need fixing) , because we all have to live in a society and hurt people hurt people, so don't over extend yourself, but also do the work that's staring you in the face.
- intended 2y ago
  This is 10 hours later. > Therein lies the crux of the issue. Everyone agrees that this person needs help, but also agrees that they shouldn't feel obligated to provide it. This sentence will definitely seem targeted at you. However both the following are true: 1) You are not their keeper 2) Therein lies the crux of the issue I would say your anecdote did its task brilliantly, it described a situation fairly, which presented reasonable expectations humans can have today. The pros/cons of this current accommodation were then discovered.