Flynnster wrote:
“Silver, they are taking issue with the concept that in YOUR game, YOU as the DM *are* the God. They did not continue to read on where I commented on the idea that most of us are not looking to spoil the adventure or force anyone to have a bad time, quite to the opposite, I actively WANT people to enjoy my campaign. They also completely glazed over the concept of the game being a covenant between the DM and players...an agreement that the DM will make the rulings in a fair and attentive (open to suggestions and ideas) manner...but that their rulings are final. This is for THE BENEFIT OF THE @#$^%$^ GAME. All "they" are concerned with is their own fantasy little "uber" powers. Waaaa!
They're just pathetic little "me-me"'s who desperately need to revisit the attention that Ma-ma and Pa-pa apparently denied them during the suckling phase of development.”
I think if that is true then I was very lucky to find the group I did. As I have mentioned before I am too old for mind games and whiny people that cannot view the world with realistic eyes. I had thought for a while last night that the thred had been jacked, but was glad to see your responses this morning. It has been interesting reading your posts.
Just my 2 cp.
Oh, and as a general suggestion to those who truly wish to play without a DM, might I suggest a video game? Learn your rules ALL YOU WANT...and then have NOBODY to petition when you lose :)
And yes, I am genuinely gleaning from the approach of quite a few of you that given your statements, you'd truly rather not have a DM. You want everything to be a matter of what you perceive the rules to be.
Enjoy!
I think if that is true then I was very lucky to find the group I did. As I have mentioned before I am too old for mind games and whiny people that cannot view the world with realistic eyes. I had thought for a while last night that the thred had been jacked, but was glad to see your responses this morning. It has been interesting reading your posts.
Just my 2 cp.
Like I've said before, I think this mentality is a direct result of pick-up style gaming and also due to video games.
There's no trust.
Could you imagine working with some of these folks given the attitude they've displayed ? "Me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me -me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me -me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me-me -me" ?
Sometimes, you simply have to follow. There is ONE leader. One person in charge.
They have problems with this concept.
Oh, and as a general suggestion to those who truly wish to play without a DM, might I suggest a video game? Learn your rules ALL YOU WANT...and then have NOBODY to petition when you lose :)
And yes, I am genuinely gleaning from the approach of quite a few of you that given your statements, you'd truly rather not have a DM. You want everything to be a matter of what you perceive the rules to be.
Enjoy!
Depends on what you mean by DM. If you mean a small person with a pathetic ego that must try to force their whims on other players at the table. Sure, alot of us have no interest in such an individual. If you instead mean a co-player who is responsible for handling all the NPCs and the details of the setting. At least for myself, I have no problem with having one. In fact I am often the DM for the groups I play in. In those games, as the DM, it is not MY game, but the group's game. I am one of several players and in the end my opinion is not more valuable than theirs on various rule decisions. Frankly it is kind of sad for so many DMs to have such low regard for their fellow players that they feel like they have to be treated as children. "No! You may not have another cookie [level in a different class]!"
I had a post eaten last night by the postmonster.
It essentially commented on House Rules. On Sunday, I mentioned to the other 2 DM’s in the game that when they decided to institute House Rules I would like to be in on the decision making process. Their comment was that since we are now a “Group” before any House Rules are brought into the game all of the interested parties would sit down and talk them over. That seems like a fair course to me.
I can see where a new player coming in might be confused and frustrated if he does not have the opportunity to learn the House Rules before he starts playing. Therefore a sheet of the applicable House Rules for new players would be appropriate.
But during the game there will be times when the DM has to make a judgment call and it doesn’t fall under the House Rules nor the RAW. Those are the times of possible players’ uprisings against the DM. I think then it might be necessary to take a break and discuss the issue.
A lot of what we are talking about is contingent on the personalities of those involved. Hopefully, they mesh enough to allow for intelligent discussion. If not, then a separation might be better for everyone concerned.
Just my 2 cp.
Depends on what you mean by DM. If you mean a small person with a pathetic ego that must try to force their whims on other players at the table. Sure, alot of us have no interest in such an individual. If you instead mean a co-player who is responsible for handling all the NPCs and the details of the setting. At least for myself, I have no problem with having one. In fact I am often the DM for the groups I play in. In those games, as the DM, it is not MY game, but the group's game. I am one of several players and in the end my opinion is not more valuable than theirs on various rule decisions. Frankly it is kind of sad for so many DMs to have such low regard for their fellow players that they feel like they have to be treated as children. "No! You may not have another cookie [level in a different class]!"
you are really rather laughable!!! :)
I had a post eaten last night by the postmonster.
It essentially commented on House Rules. On Sunday, I mentioned to the other 2 DM’s in the game that when they decided to institute House Rules I would like to be in on the decision making process. Their comment was that since we are now a “Group” before any House Rules are brought into the game all of the interested parties would sit down and talk them over. That seems like a fair course to me.
I can see where a new player coming in might be confused and frustrated if he does not have the opportunity to learn the House Rules before he starts playing. Therefore a sheet of the applicable House Rules for new players would be appropriate.
But during the game there will be times when the DM has to make a judgment call and it doesn’t fall under the House Rules nor the RAW. Those are the times of possible players’ uprisings against the DM. I think then it might be necessary to take a break and discuss the issue.
A lot of what we are talking about is contingent on the personalities of those involved. Hopefully, they mesh enough to allow for intelligent discussion. If not, then a separation might be better for everyone concerned.
Just my 2 cp.
Absolutely, fair enough! Couldn't agree with you more!
|
Character death is now a "flaw in DMing", it doesn't "advance the story"...
What?
LOLRevenge totally works as a tool to get the players moving!
And if the villain can publicly slam dunk their honour, while killing a party member, they'll chase him through all Nine Hells!
Anything that actually challenges players, puts them in situations where they may not have access to all their goodies is "unfair".
I find sessions that go exactly to plan, with no surprises, a total yawn-fest.
The encounters I'll remember for years are the ones where it all went wrong, and I had to pull something out of my ass.And when I DM, I find that my players are the same.
Snorter,
If you have read through the thread you should have a good idea of how it started out and how some people have tried to change the topic.
The impression I get, and I may be wrong, is that if the DM wants to make a judgment call on a situation he must submit an explanation in triplicate for the players consideration before making the decision.
My take on the matter is that while I will listen to comments and suggestions the final decision is mine as to whether I follow RAW or deviate from them for the sake of story and campaign line.
Also, I detest a player trying to run the game I am DMing from his chair. As I have stated, if you want to run the game be the DM.
Or play a video game...
Don't feed the trolls.
|
|
And, frankly, I haven't met too many "rules lawyers" who know the rules half as well as they think they do.
I don't think anyone knows the rules as well as they think they do. Especially when new editions come out, that are 99% similar to the last. Similar enough to lull you into a false sense of security, different enough to ocasionally trip you up.
For example, I was reading Mothman's 'Whispering Cairn' pbp, and a druid PC took a level of barbarian, and announced he could use new, non-druidic weapons, which was a double-take for me, and anyone else still thinking in 3.0 terms. Simple fact is, I hadn't realised the prohibition had been dropped, since I'd never had cause to check. I'd never run or played in a 3.5 game that had a multi-classed druid.
Having said that, there are a breed of players who do know that something changed, and the good reasons why, yet keep schtum about it, to gain an advantage. Instead of reading the errata or FAQ to improve the game for their whole group, they use them as a means to find which rules were unclear or abusable, and incorporate them into their next 'build'.
Snorter wrote:
“Having said that, there are a breed of players who do know that something changed, and the good reasons why, yet keep schtum about it, to gain an advantage. Instead of reading the errata or FAQ to improve the game for their whole group, they use them as a means to find which rules were unclear or abusable, and incorporate them into their next 'build'.”
And when the DM calls them on it or makes a ruling against what they were trying to pull they shout that he is being unfair to them, or he is picking on them. GRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!
|
|
Snorter,
If you have read through the thread you should have a good idea of how it started out and how some people have tried to change the topic.
I don't know if your post is saying I'm off topic, or Derek.
If I have thread-jacked, then I apologise. Please return to your scheduled debate.I thought it was pertinent to the theory, among us crotchety old grognards, that newer players expect the DM to revolve the game around them, in a series of 'Heads we win, Tails they lose' cakewalk encounters, specifically tailored to them, as opposed to the old-school approach that the PCs are a bunch of hubristic chancers who just fell off the turnip-cart, in a hostile and uncaring world.
It's now a case of "I have projected my bonuses when my Build achieves level 20...", rather than "I wonder if my character will survive to level 2...".
I am posting as I go, I admit, since I'll forget the good posts if I wait till the end.
I'm actually agreeing with him; I find you, Kirth and Derek to be very close to my own views on a lot of topics, and it's a shame I'm on the other side of the Atlantic, as I think you'd be a great group to sit with.
Snorter,
If you have read through the thread you should have a good idea of how it started out and how some people have tried to change the topic.I don't know if your post is saying I'm off topic, or Derek.
If I have thread-jacked, then I apologise. Please return to your scheduled debate.I thought it was pertinent to the theory, among us crotchety old grognards, that newer players expect the DM to revolve the game around them, in a series of 'Heads we win, Tails they lose' cakewalk encounters, specifically tailored to them, as opposed to the old-school approach that the PCs are a bunch of hubristic chancers who just fell off the turnip-cart, in a hostile and uncaring world.
It's now a case of "I have projected my bonuses when my Build achieves level 20...", rather than "I wonder if my character will survive to level 2...".
I am posting as I go, I admit, since I'll forget the good posts if I wait till the end.
I'm actually agreeing with him; I find you, Kirth and Derek to be very close to my own views on a lot of topics, and it's a shame I'm on the other side of the Atlantic, as I think you'd be a great group to sit with.
Ok, I like you...next time I'm in the Three Tuns in Whitehaven, Cumbria I'll call out your name to see if you're there...if you are, you'll be cordially invited to my table....
No, I was not talking about you. There have been others, not naming them and Derek isn't one of them, that have tried to jack the thread.
It's now a case of "I have projected my bonuses when my Build achieves level 20...", rather than "I wonder if my character will survive to level 2...".
I think World of Warcraft is to blame for this mentality, personally...
|
|
I think World of Warcraft is to blame for this mentality, personally...
I think it started waaaay before that.
[EDIT]I think Dragonlance greased up that slippery slope, by tying the events in the modules far too close to the pre-gens from the novels, and even flat-out setting an infamous 'Obscure Death Rule' in writing, which was stretched waaaay beyond its intent, by DMs and players alike (basically, infinite Hero Points for dumb-ass players, or worse, a means for rotten DMs to keep bringing back totally insignificant losers like Master Toede, even when the players wise up, and decapitate him, burn the body, and dip the ashes in acid!).
A whole generation of players thought nothing of reading fiction full of spoilers, and insisting on benefitting from it during 'play'.
Because of the 'Hey, I'm on the cover of the sequel!' syndrome, they got the garbled message that their PCs were 'special', and actually believed they could hurl themselves recklessly into danger, while rubbing their DM's nose in it with "You can't kill me off, I come back in chapter 513, to do blah, blah, blabbity blah f+&+ing blah...".
Since the authors had their noses riiight up Raistlin's botty, if you were playing him, you effectively had a free pass. Of course, if you had the bad luck to pick Sturm, well..."You're going home early. Don't bother to unpack your sheet...".
|
I think World of Warcraft is to blame for this mentality, personally...I think it started waaaay before that.
I think Dragonlance greased up that slippery slope, by tying the events in the modules far too close to the pre-gens from the novels, and even flat-out setting an infamous 'Obscure Death Rule' in writing.
A whole generation of players got the garbled message that their PCs were 'special', and actually believed they could hurl themselves recklessly into danger, while rubbing their DM's nose in it with "You can't kill me off, I come back in chapter 513, to do blah, blah, blabbity blah f~**ing blah..."
Oh. God. Do NOT get me started on Dragonlance...
(Or Ravenloft, or any other Hickman adventure, for that matter...)
As a player I don't mind my character dying. However I don't want it to be an useless or stupid death. I die in combat fine, that happens. Dying because the DM sets up a regular goblin to fall on my head from 1000 feet up where it was summoned (nevermind I'm not allowed to summon cows above people) and drops it on my head so it's dagger goes straight through my brain at when my character is level 12? That bothers me (this was an extreme example. It did happen, the DM did NOT like me as a person and this was his first action of the game).
PC death is just a chance to have fun with a new type of character. However I also believe it shouldn't happen lightly... the player has worked hard on that character and earned a little larger of a part than that of a red shirt.
|
|
As a player I don't mind my character dying. However I don't want it to be an useless or stupid death. I die in combat fine, that happens. Dying because the DM sets up a regular goblin to fall on my head from 1000 feet up where it was summoned (nevermind I'm not allowed to summon cows above people) and drops it on my head so it's dagger goes straight through my brain at when my character is level 12? That bothers me (this was an extreme example. It did happen, the DM did NOT like me as a person and this was his first action of the game).
PC death is just a chance to have fun with a new type of character. However I also believe it shouldn't happen lightly... the player has worked hard on that character and earned a little larger of a part than that of a red shirt.
I'd let you summon a cow over someone's head, if you did the proper spell research ;)
Edit: I think the "red shirt" thing is the difference between old school and new school (and 2e "middle school" - too heavily "hickmanized", imo). Old school players got used to the feeling of being little better than "red shirts" until they earned higher levels (and became more clever as a result...), new school gamers (from what i've seen personally - anecdotal evidence alert!) seem to think they're special with a goose egg in the XP column...
|
|
Ok, I like you...next time I'm in the Three Tuns in Whitehaven, Cumbria I'll call out your name to see if you're there...if you are, you'll be cordially invited to my table....
I'm from Yorkshire, but I spent a lot of time in Cumbria, tromping round the countryside around Sellafield with a tripod on my back.
My cousin owns a bakery and tea-room in Kirkby Lonsdale, so get yourself a bun, and tell him Bob sent you.
|
|
Oh. God. Do NOT get me started on Dragonlance...
(Or Ravenloft, or any other Hickman adventure, for that matter...)
I think the Dragonlance 'Adventure Path' could work fine, if it were run 'straight', instead of a pre-determined amateur dramatics hug-fest.
Those isometric maps by Sutherland were cutting-edge at the time, and some of the locations were cool, like the draconic 'Mount Rushmore'-style fortress...
Just keep the basic plot (PCs need to go here and here, get this McGuffin, recruit these allies...) cut out the more flowery boxed-text, and run it for brand-new PCs, with the understanding that this is a mirror-universe/alternate timeline, where the events can, and will deviate from the books, and the players can balls it all up.
And that anyone caught metagaming, or quoting from a novel to justify what 'should' happen, will get a slap upside the head, and docked xp.
I'm from Yorkshire, but I spent a lot of time in Cumbria, tromping round the countryside around Sellafield with a tripod on my back.
My cousin owns a bakery and tea-room in Kirkby Lonsdale, so get yourself a bun, and tell him Bob sent you.
AHA, you were one of those PETA scum stalking the power plant, weren't you!!!!
We've got our eyes on you now, SCUM...
And let me give you fair warning...if you do make it to the Tuns, do not, I repeat, DO NOT lick the walls..no matter how tempting it may be...
I always felt that the fish in the chip shops around sellafield had such a nice, unique flavor :)
Speaking of chips...
it's been about four years....I am DYING for chips and curry gravy...
|
|
To sum up my opinion:
You can be a rules lawyer. You just have to understand, in my game, I am the Rules Supreme Court. File a writ of certiorari, and I'll get back to you. Argue during the game, I'm going to find you in contempt...
Ooh! Ooh!
Sticky post!
Get this added to the outside of every DM screen!
To sum up my opinion:
You can be a rules lawyer. You just have to understand, in my game, I am the Rules Supreme Court. File a writ of certiorari, and I'll get back to you. Argue during the game, I'm going to find you in contempt...
Ooh! Ooh!
Sticky post!
Get this added to the outside of every DM screen!
Stolen!!! Or borrowed, to be exact!
I look at it this way: you're better off not playing with people you don't get along with. Then all these issues of "who's in charge" and "what's allowed" sort of fall out of the equation, and you can all discuss ideas and implement some of them and have fun at the table. And, if you all get along, it doesn't even matter that much if everyone is playing by slightly different sets of houserules, as long as there's enough overlap that you can all play together.
Thankfully, our group so far seems to fall into that category for the most part. Silverhair is a good DM: he's not all ruthless and iron-fisted just to be a dick, but he's also not a guy to let anyone walk all over him. (As a player, he's never afraid to ask for clarification, but he's never pushy about it, either.) Derek is a good DM, too, but different: he fudges stuff shamelessly at times, and other times lets the dice fall where they may, but at the end of the day, everyone has a good time. As DM, I have fun trying to figure out a rationale for any outrageous combination a player wants to try. You want to be a wizard/barbarian? I'm all for it... just please give me some sort of feeble attempt at a rationale!
One last thing we maybe haven't touched on in the thread, but that has some importance, is the fact that it doesn't pay to get too "rules-lawyery" in a Beta playtest anyway, when the rules you're lawyering were different last week, and might change again in a month...
If you were an arrow, you'd be headed to Youngstown Ohio...and your target would be Rome.
Enjoy your own viewpoints. Now go crawl away.
If you were a good DM . . . you would be playing a character in a fantasy role-playing game!
But probably rather poorly.Go blog and turn comments off.
Pal, you don't know me. Just don't even attempt to go there. It's a completely futile effort on your part. No matter how you slice it, you'll be wrong.
As a player I don't mind my character dying. However I don't want it to be an useless or stupid death. I die in combat fine, that happens. Dying because the DM sets up a regular goblin to fall on my head from 1000 feet up where it was summoned (nevermind I'm not allowed to summon cows above people) and drops it on my head so it's dagger goes straight through my brain at when my character is level 12? That bothers me (this was an extreme example. It did happen, the DM did NOT like me as a person and this was his first action of the game).
PC death is just a chance to have fun with a new type of character. However I also believe it shouldn't happen lightly... the player has worked hard on that character and earned a little larger of a part than that of a red shirt.
Yup. This exactly the kind of thing that gets people into a "Rules Lawyer" mode. It is also because of DMs like this that D&D versions have been becoming more and more a "The Rule is the Rule" type of game and taking more authority from the DM. There are too many bad DMs out there that give the rest of us a bad name. My wife had a similarly bad DM and would have never had played D&D again had she not started dating me and got to play with some people that didn't have their head up their rears.
And while I believe pushing the idea that the "DM is GOD" out the door will improve the situation in the long run(so new DMs do not develop into the horrible type you described), ultimately it comes down to Kirth's point. Game with people that you respect and that respect you. Mutual respect goes a long way to creating a good gaming environment.
As a player I don't mind my character dying. However I don't want it to be an useless or stupid death. I die in combat fine, that happens. Dying because the DM sets up a regular goblin to fall on my head from 1000 feet up where it was summoned (nevermind I'm not allowed to summon cows above people) and drops it on my head so it's dagger goes straight through my brain at when my character is level 12? That bothers me (this was an extreme example. It did happen, the DM did NOT like me as a person and this was his first action of the game).
PC death is just a chance to have fun with a new type of character. However I also believe it shouldn't happen lightly... the player has worked hard on that character and earned a little larger of a part than that of a red shirt.
Yup. This exactly the kind of thing that gets people into a "Rules Lawyer" mode. It is also because of DMs like this that D&D versions have been becoming more and more a "The Rule is the Rule" type of game and taking more authority from the DM. There are too many bad DMs out there that give the rest of us a bad name. My wife had a similarly bad DM and would have never had played D&D again had she not started dating me and got to play with some people that didn't have their head up their rears.
And while I believe pushing the idea that the "DM is GOD" out the door will improve the situation in the long run(so new DMs do not develop into the horrible type you described), ultimately it comes down to Kirth's point. Game with people that you respect and that respect you. Mutual respect goes a long way to creating a good gaming environment.
Thanks for the laughs :)
|
|
...ultimately it comes down to Kirth's point. Game with people that you respect and that respect you. Mutual respect goes a long way to creating a good gaming environment.
Do you think that those who would make arbitary, biased, abusive DMs, would reveal hints of such behaviour in a non-gaming environment?
...ultimately it comes down to Kirth's point. Game with people that you respect and that respect you. Mutual respect goes a long way to creating a good gaming environment.Do you think that those who would make arbitary, biased, abusive DMs, would reveal hints of such behaviour in a non-gaming environment?
From my experience, most likely. Usually they have a dominating attitude and tend to try to belittle others when they disagree with them. And usually they are obsessive that they be percieved as more intelligent then those around them.
|
|
Do you think that those who would make arbitary, biased, abusive DMs, would reveal hints of such behaviour in a non-gaming environment?
From my experience, most likely. Usually they have a dominating attitude and tend to try to belittle others when they disagree with them. And usually they are obsessive that they be percieved as more intelligent then those around them.
Well, there's plenty of them about! In the gaming community and out.
LOLI agree that it should be fairly easy to spot when someone's generally being a dick, and resolve not to get roped into their world. Whether that world be RPGs, sport, or just generally hanging out.
Do you think some players mistakenly put up with a bad game, because they think they have no alternative? It's a niche hobby, it's hard to find a group, better to stick it out than have no game at all?
I don't subscribe to that. For me, better to have no game, than a game which causes you stress and aggravation. Use the extra free time to catch up with your reading backlog and work at getting the ideal group together. They may be out there, but you'll never know, if you're wasting your time with the jerks.
Yeah I knew what type he was going to be, but we had some common friends, so I decided to give it a go and hope for the best. It worked out in the end: I have a nice steady job, no debt, raising my family on my income alone, and own my own house. He has no job, tons of debt, family is in the dumps and lives in his aunt's basement (his mom kicked him out)... I call it even really.
As I read this thread, I keep getting derailed by the undercurrent of hostility by some of the posters against other posters. Maybe I'm just a bit loopy since its 4 AM, but it just strikes me as odd; I find this sort of intentionally dismissive and agressive hostility extremely out of place on these boards.
Regardless, I've been lucky with my groups, I suppose. Not much in the way of rules lawyers, no real problems with "rolling back" to deal with an unexpected rules situation.
I have noticed the trend towards "death = bad, possibly a failure on the DMs part". I don't blame MMOs, because they are experiencing the same thing: Blizzards newest patch is adding over 60 graveyards to the origional zones, which is over double the origional number. Which means the "hassle" of running back to your body is being cut by more than half, average distance-wise.
No, I blame novels based in recognizable game worlds. I blame Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Mystarra, and especially Forgotten Realms novels. Prior to these, almost every group I played in had the "oh, crap, I died. Well, I had a few new character ideas I wanted to try, no biggie". Now, everyone's character isn't "random joe trying to make it big" but "someone who will have greatness thrust upon them" regardless of whether its via prophecy, hard work, or luck.
Many players now seem to feel that their character has some sort of special destiny to explore, and that dying denys them the opportunity to do so. I suppose in that regard I blame special destiny character options, which would be most prestige classes (Dragon Disciple, Alienist, transformative ones are the big offenders) and a few base classes (Warlock comes to mind, although I love the class to death).
I think we are in a new era of gaming, in regards to this shift in player mindset. I say that because theres really no way to shift it back, which would make it a phase, not an era. Heck, even the Dragon and Pathfinder Adventure Paths can be seen as symptoms and/or further reinforcement of the paradigm shift.
So really, the question is, how do we, as DMs, adjust to this new era of "Main Character" PCs, as the era of "Red Shirt" PCs wanes?
Funny thing is that I've seen alot of posts from DMs that claim that death is not permanent enough. That by seventh level (when druid's get reincarnate) most parties end up seeing death as a minor inconvience, earlier for high magic settings where powerful clerics are easy to hire. They claim that death has become a joke, that players have no fear of making poor choices because they can come back so easily.
I find this duality fascinating. On the one hand you have people claiming players blame DMs for death and are "unfun" and on the other you have people claiming death is a joke.
In my own game there has only really been one time where I as a DM felt that a character's death was strongly my fault. The party was attacked by a hydra and I choose a particularly stupid way of deciding how many heads attacked one of the PCs and killed the character out right before they even had a turn. Luckily it was my wife's character and she forgave me for being a total bonehead.
In my own game there has only really been one time where I as a DM felt that a character's death was strongly my fault. The party was attacked by a hydra and I choose a particularly stupid way of deciding how many heads attacked one of the PCs and killed the character out right before they even had a turn. Luckily it was my wife's character and she forgave me for being a total bonehead.
Ohhh.... I'm sure she'll bring it up sometime in the future out-of-the-blue. "You hate me! Just like when you killed my character at.." such and such... :P
Death to short-sighted know-it-alls who are convinced they have the authoritative final word on the DM-player relationship!!!
Seriously, flynnster, your observations are not new, not really that insightful, and do not lead to the conclusions you want them to lead to. To top it all off, you've decided to act like a tremendous jerk to everyone who disagrees with you. I mean, wow, you've really made a concerted effort to offend anyone who brings up a counter-point. I'm very concerned about what your game environment must feel like to your players if your treatment of people online is any indication of your treatment of people in real life.
Starting this thread was a pretty poor decision in the first place. Exacerbating it by continually being provocative (and, often, egregiously wrong) has been even worse.
Consider yourself not invited to my game :)
I thought you had a decent point based on your orginal post, Flynnster, but wow... after reading the reast of this thread... thanks be to Jeebus we've never met or played together.
Your need for control over your players and this thread is pretty disgusting.|
|
No, I blame novels based in recognizable game worlds. I blame Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Mystarra, and especially Forgotten Realms novels. Prior to these, almost every group I played in had the "oh, crap, I died. Well, I had a few new character ideas I wanted to try, no biggie". Now, everyone's character isn't "random joe trying to make it big" but "someone who will have greatness thrust upon them" regardless of whether its via prophecy, hard work, or luck.
Hindsight will sort out who was destined for greatness, and who was a deluded wanabee with stars in their eyes.
The followers of a prophecy will prefer to seize upon an already-famous adventurer, and retcon him into their mythology, rather than throw the dice on an untested child.
NPC: "Hey, you! Were you born under a full moon?"
PC: "Err yeah, so what?"
NPC: "Did a crow circle the house three times, widdershins, while cawing three times?"
PC: "Umm, it...might..have done...why?"
NPC: "Aha! He is the one we seek!"
Please get on a flight to San Francisco. You'd fit in with them.
Less of this please. Passive aggressive attacks are still attacks.
They're just pathetic little "me-me"'s who desperately need to revisit the...
Less of this, please.
Uh-HUH Uh-HUH, this thread needs a hunk-a hunk-a Lembas love!
Thread closed.