Sentinels of Justice: “Justice for All”

It’s been a while due to player schedules, but we finally got this game back to the table. In general, I thought play was quite good, and folks left the table excitedly asking when we could resume. That being said, I dedicate some time in this video to ruminating over a potential issue that I see creeping in. The issue is somewhat related to those Ron raised in response to my last play report. As of this writing, I still haven’t had the discussions I probably need to have regarding the genre vs. idiom, but I probably will soon. Currently, Issue 5 is scheduled for February 15, so I should have another update in a week or two.

, , ,

2 responses to “Sentinels of Justice: “Justice for All””

  1. Maybe consider whether you’re activating nanny habits.

    The characters have various and to some extent evolving views on justice, violence, and the law, which is only perfect and proper given the parameters of play. It looks to me, anyway, as if every single one of them is reasonable, or has reasons, and that every player is acting (i.e. character actions) and responding about it. I think they’re fantastic at it, in fact. They look capable of continuing to do it via character dialogues and actions, perhaps arriving at a synthesis that no one can see yet, without you involved at all, or with you commenting only as a person at the table without a special overview role because you’re GMing.

    [speaking a bit out of turn here] The players are all adults with their own emotions and viewpoints, and I can’t see how their feelings and enjoyment are your business, at least not as a central node or supervisor. If any of the persons in the dialogue scene felt mansplained to, I’m sure she doesn’t need a feelings meeting organized by, as it happens, another man, to say so. I don’t know any of the players myself, but you’ve presented really striking portraits which I trust – and I think they can take care of themselves and initiate whatever dialogues they need.

    To close out with some positives, the interplay of Detective Work, varying and incomplete information among characters, and your work with the Now, all seem exemplary.

    • Hi Ron,

      I appreciate the advice, and you’re right: I should let it go and allow things to unfold at the table via character dialogue and play. Indeed, non-intervention is my default approach, and one of the reasons I’ve yet to have the conversations is because it hasn’t felt right to do so.

      I guess I’m still smarting from a previous play experience that saw the collapse of a promising superhero game I was running for this group of players (plus a few others). Afterward, I wondered if I could have saved that game by checking in when I saw signs of discord. But this is a different situation, and I’m probably overreacting. Despite my overreaction, I recognize that I’m playing with a talented group. I’m grateful to play with them and blessed to count them as my dearest friends. I hope my comments didn’t suggest otherwise.

      Thanks also for the feedback on Detective Work and the Now. I’ve felt confident about the Now throughout. It’s clicked with me from the get-go and is not dissimilar from the way my brain has long thought about superhero game-play. However, Detective Work is something that I’ve been working hard to figure out, so I’m glad that I am handling it as intended.

      As always, I appreciate your perspective, insight, and candor.

Leave a Reply