Yeah. Short campaigns and one shots are fine for silliness. I'm not one for long term humor/weird campaigns, but short term they can be really fun.
One DM I played with had us all roll ourselves up as if we were transferred into the D&D world. We picked our class, stats based on ourselves...
Sometimes those things do impact the DM's fun, though. People can stretch their suspension of disbelief only so far. For some, fantasy elves, orcs, etc. are fine, but when it comes to walking humanoid animals, that's just a step too far and they don't have fun with those in the game. They...
I've run the Realms since 1e and it's just not like that unless the DM makes it that way. Elminster and Drizz't only get used if you want to use them. They don't just sit back in the wings and swoop in to save the day. They can't, because they have their own things going on. The PCs feel...
Why should a DM run a game he isn't going to enjoy running just so you can play a turtle person? Why shouldn't the DM also be able to have fun playing the game?
That is all I meant. And yes, I've also said that the extended trust should go both ways. DMs should trust their players until the players show that they can't be trusted.
Or the DM should sacrifice his enjoyment of the game and run a game he doesn't like so the player can have fun. Ignoring that a DM who isn't having fun isn't running a game that's fun, and is running a game that will surely self-destruct before it runs it's intended course.
RPGs have redefined words since their inception. If you don't like it, that's your prerogative, but you will just be confusing yourself and others if you don't accept that.
This habit of yours to keep lumping everyone in one of two camps and to the same degree, is where you continually get yourself into trouble.
Two things have been said, and not all by the same people, and to varying to degrees. First, for long term games with friends, compromise and...