Is it bad GMing to intentionally cause conflict between PCs?
No, why would it be? Interpersonal conflict is good for roleplay as long as the players can separate IC and OOC conflict.
>>46670614
Depends on the system and type of game being run.
If you push for party conflict in a group of players who are all friends who just want to wreck monsters in a little effort D&D dungeon romp, you're a bad DM. If you don't push for party conflict in Paranoia, you're a bad DM.
>>46670623
>playing in a new group
>start hanging out more outside game
>they think I'm my character irl
>the ic conflict has been genuinely ooc
>>46670614
It would be bad if the DM is railroading the actions of PCs. The actions and feelings of a PC should ideally always come from the player's roleplaying and not the DMs storywriting.
>>46670785
The DM isn't telling PCs how to tell, he presents PCs with situations where he knows the PC's opinions differ.
>>46670836
Ah. It sounds like the DM is setting up an us vs them situation, or a them vs you situation that spills into out of game drama. That's just shitty.
>>46670614
Wait, do you not?
>>46670614
Why is there no option to decline any extra points?
>>46670614
Trick question. The test is graded on a bell curve, so if everyone takes 2 or more than 10% pick 6 then it matters not at all.
>>46671153
Why do you want to choose 0? If you really don't want any extra points then pick 6 in the hopes that enough people do that nobody gets any.
>>46670836
He's stimulating conflict. That's not a bad thing, as long as the players have some maturity. If you can't argue over differing opinions in a RPG, you're not qualified to live on our world.
He's being a bad DM if he's stimulating conflict in a group that he knows are a bunch of manchildren, as it's detrimental to the group. Even if the fault is on the players, a DM who knows his group can't handle shit and still pushes said shit onto them is being a bad DM.
>>46670614
Wouldn't that be a result of godmodding?
>>46671281
>Why do you want to choose 0?
Because I don't want or need any extra help. This test robs me of the option to guarantee my success by my own bootstrapping.
I get that as a student of the University of Maryland this is a foreign concept.
>>46671503
Nobody cares dude.
Nobody cares.
>>46671503
Go masturbate to the Atlas Shrugged audio book.
I'm gonna say yes, because PC interactions should be directed by the players, and unless the conflict is absolutely necessary to the campaign and very-well thought, it's almost sure to backfire and sour the mood.
A good GM will provide opportunities for conflict, not force it.
>>46671281
Because it's unfair in the sense that it's not related to evaluation of the quality of your work.
Seriously, would you trust someone that obtained a diploma based on such tests ?
>inb4 I wouldn't trust diplomas at all.
>>46670623
So, interpersonal conflict isn't good for roleplay?
>>46671406
>He's being a bad DM if he's stimulating conflict in a group that he knows are a bunch of manchildren
Anyone who plays RPGs is a manchild.
>>46670614
I like prisoners' dilemma. I hate bribes. Click 6!!!
>>46670614
That question is nonsensical to have in any kind of a test. It doesn't measure any sort of knowledge, it's just gambling. You might as well roll a d6 and add it to everyone's score.
>>46675189
see >>46675159
Prisoner's dilemma! It's a game! Do everyone get a little bonus or do everyone lose it all?
>>46670614
>Is it bad GMing to intentionally cause conflict between PCs?
Yes. Always yes. I don't give a fuck what anyone says, there is NO situation where conflict among your players helps things. Even if it's a PVP campaign, you still shouldn't try to get them to fight.
>>46675221
>Prisoner's dilemma! It's a game!
"Games" do not belong to a fucking test. You don't give people extra credit if they beat you at Guilty Gear.
I would fire whichever professor put that shit on anything.
>>46670614
There is no such thing as bad gming without context and the opinion of the rest of the group.
My group loves party drama and getting in eachothers faces, so setting things up where they can have in character arguments is great for them and fun for me.
Some other group might operate under the opinion that any distraction from being an efficient dungeonlooting machine constitutes shit dming and thatguyism, that's up to them.
People on the internet can't decide this for you, only you and your group can, there's no golden, unassailable rule for gming or role-playing that is kept and curated by fa/tg/uys, the only things that we can tell you that are hard to argue with are:
1: make sure that everyone is on the same page and don't have clashing hopes and expectations.
2: Be respectful of peoples time, don't waste it, don't bullshit them.
3: Character conflicts are resolved in character, player conflicts are resolved out of character.
That's it.
>>46675313
Characters and players are not the same thing you tool.
>>46675335
First, cool your tits. This sort of thing isn't exactly rare, particularly in the Psychology or Political Science departments where the "prisoner's dilemma" is an actual thing that gets taught in introductory coursework. Hell, I knew a professor who gave out the six topics for each exam to his postgrads ahead of time and rolled dice to determine which ones they had to answer. I used to give him d12s and d8s to fuck with his students, shit was great.
Second this seems like the work of a tenured professor, and it's nowhere near enough to get a tenured full fired. You usually have to establish something as "malicious and capricious", meaning it needs to violate that professor's stated grading policies and be targeted at a single individual (this is clearly neither). And even then, the result probably isn't a full hearing but rather some form of sanction handed down from the Department or School. It may even be as informal as losing one of the courses you want, or being passed over for a raise or a new position.
You basically have to either go full cackling Bond villain on your students or diddle someone to lose your job if you've made tenure. With the outrageous pay differences between instructors and administrators and the amount of off-the-clock work that gets in the way of your research, the perks of having tenure are one of the only reasons to BE a professor.
It's more ethical to choose the 6 points knowing you'll likely hit 10%, that way students have to get by on their merits rather than an end-of-test gimmick.
