Quote Originally Posted by KorvinStarmast View Post
Annoying is the term I'd use. I've been the scribe for a lot of the games we have had since 2014 and I have lately gone minimalist. The others simply are not contributing with a few exceptions, and I burned out on being the scribe.
Which is too bad, since our Curse of Strahd group is a pretty good bunch.
To reference the other thread about WBL and "other people being annoying"...

I often find being a GM easier because I'm in control. If something drags out too long or wastes table time, I can declare that it is over and we can move on. If a player engages too long with a merchant, if combat drags out, if a skill challenge becomes increasingly troublesome without meaningful resolution then I, as GM, can alter course and end the conversation, wrap up combat, alter course on the skill challenge or if the problems are too great to be resolved in game (perhaps player drama), I can end the session.

As a player, I can do none of these things. If a player engages too long with a merchant and the GM is into it, as you say "time to floss the cat", if combat drags on there is no choice but to endure it, if a skill challenge becomes a brick wall the time is simply wasted, if there is player drama and the DM won't intervene, all I can do is leave the game.

The discrepancy in power dynamic is one reason I have moved away from "strong DM" games to ones where the game is more collectively run and the players have some level of power over the scene and the general goings on, with the DMs job being more to "sort things out" rather than to command the entire world.

It can be easy to be a GM because I have all the power. Sure it's more work, but I also have all the power.
It can be hard to be a player because I have no power. Maybe it's less up-front work, but I also have no leverage. And it can be difficult to find a table with a DM skilled enough to empower their players, rather than indulge them.