My OP had me thinking about some of the past threads we had here about things such as railroading and players and DMs both taking part in the game. Some of the homebrew DMs talked about limiting races and classes. Some have pages of new rules and restrictions for their home games. There was talk about "my game, my rules" and such and I was getting the impression of some DMs thinking that if it is my game, then what I make is what we play regardless of what the players want to play. I also got the idea that some were thinking that if players do not want to play in their world they can go away.
Is there different attitudes among DMs that make their own world vs. others that just uses FR or Greyhawk for example, or just runs the adventure books that come out?
Each table and group has different local rules they play with and changes to make things run better for them. We discuss may rule changes here and everyone agrees with a few and not with others. Is there a place where the rules are changed so much that it influences the game as a whole? Does this influence the way some may look at other tables? I'm not sure this last part comes into play, but I may take some ideas to make my game better (at least according to me and my local group).
I saw this go by, and while I don't have a strong feeling on the DM being more important than the other players (I think there's a gestalt at a TRPG table, where the whole is more than the sum of the parts; but while all parts are in principle equal, in practice some parts are more equal than others) I do run a homebrew campaign, and I do have limitations on races and classes, and I do think I have something to say about that.
TRPGS, like any form of fiction, require willing suspension of disblief from the audience and (in my experience) the author/s. If I'm going to be running campaigns in a world, I need to be willing to believe in that world, at least a little. That's going to be harder if there are things that don't make sense, or even if there are things that clash (past a threshold) with my tastes. Heck, the fact that published adventures literally make no sense to me when I read or play them (and if they don't make sense I can't suspend disbelief to play/run them) is probably connected to my running homebrew adventures exclusively.
There are some rules I usually run with (like no evil PCs) that are unquestionably about aesthetics of play, and preferences for the type/s of stories that emerge from play. Some of the class/race restrictions are, now that I think of it, coming from a similar place.
There's a line in what I'm quoting about "my game, my rules," and it doesn't feel from inside my head as though that's exactly what's happening; I won't disagree strongly with someone who believes otherwise, though. I don't
want players to feel unwelcome at my table, and that's not really what my rules are about. I wouldn't doubt (much) though that there are players who would prefer not to play at my tables, and if the fit is that off I'm not sure it's a bad thing those players aren't playing at my tables.