# RPGaDay 2026 - 05 - Burden tags: #thoughts #thoughts/RPGaDay/2026 ![[RPG a Day 2026 (illo).jpg]] There is an immense burden associated with the tabletop RPG experience, and that burden is other people, just like hell is other people, and for many of the same reasons. The classic and traditional architecture of the RPG has a GM assume centralized authority for not just bringing the story to the table, but bringing the players to the table in many ways. Does the GM themselves provide snacks? Often, yes. More onerously, does the GM do all of the schedule juggling necessary to make sure that four to six people show up to the same place prepared to play a game several times a month? Also, yes. This is, not to put too fine a point on it, a terrible situation to be in as a person, and even as a non-person. It's actually part of why I gave up being a GM almost 30 years ago, changing my focus to be pretty much entirely on GM-less games, and somewhat more recently, solo games capable of being played co-op. Recognizing that it is a burden — one that is difficult to deal with — seems to be simultaneously discussed constantly, and something from which eyes must be averted. GMs will tell you about their burnout all day long and twice on Sunday, and players will fail to acknowledge that the GM is doing much more than showing up with a fistful of notes and telling a story. Sometimes with or without their actual interaction. [**Skeleton Code Machine** has a great article on Hobson's Choice](https://www.skeletoncodemachine.com/p/hobsons-choice), which is something that comes up on a regular basis in classic RPGs. The summary runs thus: I'm going to show you a lot of things that could happen. But you get a choice in none of them. It is a quintessential false choice. In Hobson's case, he had an entire stable of horses that he could rent out, but when someone came in to rent, they would get the one nearest the door. It appeared that they had a great number of choices. Practically, they did not. I'm sure that you can think of many times that you've been in a game and been presented with Hobson's Choice, the False Dilemma. It boils down to, "accept that this is what's happening or don't play." The entire definition of railroading comes down to Hobson's Choice, where you either get with the program the GM is throwing out in front of you and jump on the tracks, or you don't play. However, the GM is also faced with a terrible Hobson's Choice. Either you accept that the players are going to be unruly, generally ungrateful, and inherently perverse, or you don't play. This is not a recipe for happy people. If one acquires happiness in the midst of it, it is despite rather than because. I will tell you that this needn't be the case. The GM can choose to play systems that reduce their Hobson's Choice by reducing the amount of time and effort they have to put in, by making the responsibility for arranging schedules and showing up that of the players and accepting that sometimes the preferable answer is, "you don't get to play." Position yourself intellectually and emotionally such that you are a player and you are getting to play with the other people, or you aren't and you have other things you can do. Likewise, the GM can reduce the number of Hobson's Choices presented to players by playing systems and approaches to game mastering in general, which don't require players to jump on the railroad and scream "choo-choo" at the top of their lungs. Make it reasonable for the characters to choose to do something other than what you have meticulously scripted. In fact, don't meticulously script things. Lay out broad swaths of ideas that the players may pick through in their labyrinthine complexity; ideas that emerge based on which direction the players are looking. This is going to feel very strange to some of you. You're going to think that having not solved the mystery yourself, there's no way that the players can discover it. Whatever the mystery may be, it's at this point that I reach for one of my favorite axioms from modern game design: *"Play to find out."* The reason that we're playing is just that, to find out. The GM is playing the game just like the players are. It's a game of conversation and exploration. You don't have to have every answer at the beginning. This is not a TV series. You don't have to be scripting out all the reveals to drop along the way. It's okay to have a little mystery box. [^1] You don't and shouldn't let the burden drag you down. Recognize that it exists and either pick it up consciously and carry it only insofar as it serves a purpose or let it fall and be okay with it. Know that you can continue to play without carrying the burden, whether it requires choosing a new system, trying a new philosophy, or getting different players. If you're a player and you feel like the burden of showing up and playing the game is too much, say so. If you feel like the GM is carrying too much burden, say so. Have a conversation. It'll be good for you. Ultimately, playing a game with other people is a burden, and lying about it to one another doesn't make it any better. Some burdens we are better for carrying. Some burdens are part and parcel of taking part in something bigger than yourself. Then again, some burdens are unnecessary. Some things are better put down and walked away from. Only you can make the decision of which one your burdens are. Choose carefully. [^1]: Just as long as you can do it better than Damon Lindelof, which is an extremely low bar to hurdle.