Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2572237" data-attributes="member: 18280">Why do you need to add the word &quot;reactionary&quot;?&nbsp; Has anyone, anywhere ever banned anything they wanted to happen?Sorry, but the argument that a)&nbsp; Some people abuse right X, therefore
b)&nbsp; Right X should be abolishedis a little too...convenient...for me.&nbsp; And now I will abandon this line of reasoning, because it is impossible to both meet the EnWorld board guidelines and pursue it.In any event, no matter what the ruleset says, and no matter what any player argues, the game always has and always will rest in the domain of the DM as final arbiter.&nbsp; Not unlike (though I shudder to say it) the programmers are the final arbiters in a PlayStation game.&nbsp; Could you imagine having this argument about Silent Hill?&nbsp; &quot;I didn't know that would happen if I attacked the monster!&nbsp; What's up with this arbitrary cut scene?&nbsp; This game totally blows!&quot;So far as I know, no one has ever been chained to a particular DM's table.&nbsp; Not having fun?&nbsp; Get up and go.&nbsp; Having enough fun that you want to keep playing, but still not getting everything you want?&nbsp; Grow up.&nbsp; You don't always get everything you want, even if it is written in a book.&nbsp; Or start your own game.&nbsp; There are always more players than DMs, and I am sure someone out there is willing to give you a chance.&nbsp; Players who bemoan every setback, regardless of its cause, can easily be replaced.&nbsp; Having a great time?&nbsp; Then, lucky you, you've got (or are) an excellent DM.&nbsp; I'll bet dollars to donuts he's not afraid to rule based on the common sense of his campaign world.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 2572237, member: 18280"] Why do you need to add the word "reactionary"? Has anyone, anywhere [I][B]ever[/B][/I] banned [B][I]anything[/I][/B] they wanted to happen? Sorry, but the argument that [INDENT]a) Some people abuse right X, therefore b) Right X should be abolished[/INDENT] is a little too...convenient...for me. And now I will abandon this line of reasoning, because it is impossible to both meet the EnWorld board guidelines and pursue it. In any event, no matter what the ruleset says, and no matter what any player argues, the game always has and always will rest in the domain of the DM as final arbiter. Not unlike (though I shudder to say it) the programmers are the final arbiters in a PlayStation game. Could you imagine having this argument about Silent Hill? "I didn't know that would happen if I attacked the monster! What's up with this arbitrary cut scene? This game totally blows!" So far as I know, no one has ever been chained to a particular DM's table. Not having fun? Get up and go. Having enough fun that you want to keep playing, but still not getting everything you want? Grow up. You don't always get everything you want, even if it is written in a book. Or start your own game. There are always more players than DMs, and I am sure someone out there is willing to give you a chance. Players who bemoan every setback, regardless of its cause, can easily be replaced. Having a great time? Then, lucky you, you've got (or are) an excellent DM. I'll bet dollars to donuts he's not afraid to rule based on the common sense of his campaign world. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification