D&D 5E (2014) DM imposed restrictions to the game (+)

Lanefan said:

To me, saying I can't play an evil character IS, in broad strokes, telling me how to play..

Click to expand...

I have tempered my "no evil" PC rule with a more board "don't be a jerk" rule. The latter assumes you are here to play, willing to participate, not in competition with the other players, and you are willing to engage with the games theme, tones and tropes. I find that sufficiently keeps people who would be disruptive out while still allowing evil or anti-hero PCs.

Remathilis said:

OMG I'm glad it's not just me!

Click to expand...

I've been getting a lot of 502 bad gateway.

AlViking said:

Like I said, it's not going to work for every potential player. Just like I've occasionally listened to someone's pitch or played a few sessions and it wasn't for me. I stopped worrying about pleasing everyone - as DM and in many other aspects of life - a long time ago.

Click to expand...

It's not a matter of pleasing everyone for me, it's more a matter of I'm an impartial arbiter of the rules. What they decide to do within those rules is entirely up to them; and while I'll almost certainly have a story in mind I'm by no means married to it, nor do I have a schedule by when it is to be completed. There's always more sessions, thus no skin off anyone's nose if this one gets spent on CvC infighting.

AlViking said:

Would you really want me joining your game when someone else at the table is running an evil character that initiates PVP because my character wasn't happy with something they were going to do? Because that's not something I want to spend what little time I get to play doing. Yet IIRC you have no problem with PVP.

Click to expand...

I do have a problem with PvP (as in, player vs player out of character).

I do not have a problem with CvC (character vs character), and I see CvC and PvP as two completely separate things.

It does say up front in my game intro that in character, other than violent SA pretty much anything goes. And, where applicable, in-setting consequences may follow. What long-term experience has shown me is that while every now and then (especially when just starting out at low levels) a round of infighting will arise, once they get it out of their systems the game carries on in likely not too dissimilar a fashion to your table.

Zardnaar said:

I've been getting a lot of 502 bad gateway.

Click to expand...

Known issue - see thread in Meta. They're working on it.

Lanefan said:

It's not a matter of pleasing everyone for me, it's more a matter of I'm an impartial arbiter of the rules. What they decide to do within those rules is entirely up to them; and while I'll almost certainly have a story in mind I'm by no means married to it, nor do I have a schedule by when it is to be completed. There's always more sessions, thus no skin off anyone's nose if this one gets spent on CvC infighting.

I do have a problem with PvP (as in, player vs player out of character).

I do not have a problem with CvC (character vs character), and I see CvC and PvP as two completely separate things.

It does say up front in my game intro that in character, other than violent SA pretty much anything goes. And, where applicable, in-setting consequences may follow. What long-term experience has shown me is that while every now and then (especially when just starting out at low levels) a round of infighting will arise, once they get it out of their systems the game carries on in likely not too dissimilar a fashion to your table.

Click to expand...

I'm more than just an impartial arbiter of the rules. I'm setting the tone of the campaign and to a certain degree the coordinator of the social dynamics at the table. I don't want to deal with characters doing evil deeds so I deal with it by barring that behavior, I have to enjoy the game too. I'm also providing opportunities for players to interact with the world and those opportunities simply aren't going to include burn down the local orphanage so the developer can buy the land cheap.

Po-tae-to-po-tah-toe when it comes to PVP. It's the terms games use even though it's not the players entering a boxing ring and duking it out. There is of course different issues with behavior by the players at the table.

AlViking said:

I'm more than just an impartial arbiter of the rules. I'm setting the tone of the campaign and to a certain degree the coordinator of the social dynamics at the table. I don't want to deal with characters doing evil deeds so I deal with it by barring that behavior, I have to enjoy the game too. I'm also providing opportunities for players to interact with the world and those opportunities simply aren't going to include burn down the local orphanage so the developer can buy the land cheap.

Po-tae-to-po-tah-toe when it comes to PVP. It's the terms games use even though it's not the players entering a boxing ring and duking it out. There is of course different issues with behavior by the players at the table.

Click to expand...

This.

No pvp, evil, stealing off PCs, cowards/pacifist, lone wolves. Dont be a jerk dont roll play a perk.

Its just easier without those types.