I don't mind suggestions and friendly debates, but please don't start telling people which moves are the "right" ones when there isn't even any sort of crisis. Insisting on having every decision of any measurable consequence taken by a cabal of experts in the OOC makes the game mechanical and dull, IMO.
Then I'd like to hear what Haspen and the other players think about this.
Not sure if I'm even gonna be a player in this FEF but I definitely think you're overreacting. Also, nice shot at BMM, stay classy. However, other people have already made better points than after-work me can, but the "paranoid micromanagement" comes from difficult to deal with situations that leave people either dead or reeeeeally pushing the death clock. As a GM, my FEF isn't overly difficult and as such hardly requires planning; but if there is planning, it's
usually when there's risk of people dying. However, Haspen's FEFs are notoriously difficult and one fuck up can lead to a whole slew of problems that result in death and (i'd like to believe) that FEF as a community likes to keep people alive and in the game as opposed to dead and sitting in the OOC for a year, maybe longer, so they tend to get more management. Or, as you call it, "paranoid micromanagement". (Not really sure why it being "paranoid" is a bad thing when stuff like FEF5's current situation is a thing).
However, that leads to stuff like the current chapter in FEF5 where he throws basically the impossible at us and expects us to overcome it because of planning being a thing. Or, at least, that's what it feels like to me.
- Are we going to be nice little automatons, making sure that no-one ever dies or even gets KO'ed if we can help it?
- Or should we be allowed to play fast and loose, within reason, to keep things flowing and create a richer story?
- Or is there some third way that is the best of both worlds?
1. Because people living is such a terrible thing, right? Everyone needs to roleplay death drama, not to mention experience possible OOC drama as a result.
2. You're clearly glorifying this option as if it's the end-all-be-all and it really irks me for some reason. Probably because you're acting as if it isn't situational and people are free to discuss plans. Don't deal in absolutes, dude.
3. Play it by ear. If things look sticky, make a plan, discuss the plan, etc. If someone does something that probably isn't in their, or the group's (FEF is a
group game after all) best interests, tell them about your concerns, create a discussion.
Then we'll know what kind of game people actually want to play.
Not to like, discredit this, but that won't really change anything, IMO. Mainly because I feel like GMs will run their game how they want regardless.