PC and monster weaknesses are very easy to look up and apply, but finding out what the actual people at the table will fall for is a lot harder, so what have you noticed your players always get pulled in by?
PC and monster weaknesses are very easy to look up and apply, but finding out what the actual people at the table will fall for is a lot harder, so what have you noticed your players always get pulled in by?
Yeah I reflected a bit, I guess it’s hard to understand which are my player preferences that I’ve built into my PC, and what I reveal beyond that. So for example, I find it frustrating when co-players refuse to take the plot bait, and overintelectualise their decisions to play ‘against’ the GM. So the characters I play tend to be, similar to how you mentioned, naive or impulsive so I can make the rash decisions to keep the plot moving.
I’m also aware of talking too much or holding the spotlight too long or too often. If I have a ‘big’ moment I’ll often just stay low key and give minimal input for a good while/the rest of the session so others can take focus. I wouldn’t mind if my GMs recognised this and played to it (challenge it), like it could force both me and my character into scenarios where I would instinctively back off. If they played around it (accommodate it), they could set my character up with an in-world mystery to mull over in the background which explains why I’m taking a back seat.