So we had a good session of BE last night, wrapping up a manuever and just chatting about the game and it’s direction.
Now I haven’t been balls-to-the-wall mean, and I have been trying to be helpful and supportive of the tasks ahead of the characters, giving them ideas and working together to tell a great story (and thus far I think we have really succeeded). However, several of the players have been a little put off by the competetive nature of the game. They claim I am better at this than they are - being manipulative, I suppose - and feel really behind the ball.
I tried to explain that we all knew that it was the intent of the game to have a competetive element and that Luke would probably yell at me if I pulled punches much more than I do and finally that they are still in a pretty good position - I have successfully taken over a faction and they have successfully assessed my disposition thus poised to lower it some in the next manuever.
I suggested communicating with each other a little more than they have been, talking about each other’s character goals and story goals and I also pointed out that their characters are going to feel a little more useful since through the successful Assess they are more “in the know” about the Vaylen threat and their characters can be more proactive about it.
Anyone else run into this sentiment? Anyone else have a group that the competetive nature of the game was a downside? How have other GMs handled their side?