Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2579366" data-attributes="member: 18280">Testament,From basic blue-boxed D&amp;D through 3.X, I've never had a problem attracting players.&nbsp; The problem I have is that there are a lot of people I don't have room for at the table, and I hate to disappoint them.&nbsp; There are several other people who GM games in our group, and none of them have the same problem.&nbsp; So, indeed, my mileage does vary.I didn't mean to suggest that I am &quot;up on a cross&quot;.&nbsp; The statements you quoted were not to be taken as an excuse for poor DMing; the were meant to be a broad statement of gaming philosophy.&nbsp; And, I suppose, life philosophy.&nbsp; Simply put, the two cruxes are:&nbsp; &quot;If you're not having fun, stop doing it&quot; and &quot;Whoever puts in more work has more say&quot;.&nbsp; Every right has corresponding responsibilities, and every responsibility has corresponding rights.&nbsp; Neither rights nor responsibilities have meaning without each other.&nbsp; Because the DM has so many responsibilities, his rights are correspondingly larger.&nbsp; Because the DM has so many rights, his responsibilities are correspondingly higher.Time and again, though, I hear the argument on these boards that &quot;a DM with no players isn't gonna being doing much DMing&quot; (or words to that effect), nearly always in conjunction with a statement such as yours that claims that the DM does not have the right to say &quot;My way or the highway.&quot;Of course the DM has that right.&nbsp; No one can be forced to play with people they do not wish to.&nbsp; You cannot force the DM to run a game.&nbsp; You cannot force anyone to run a game in a way you prefer.&nbsp; You may be able to compromise, but your two absolutely always-available choices are &quot;Play in the game I'm running as I am running it&quot; and &quot;Don't play in the game I'm running as I am running it.&quot;&nbsp; This is not only true, it is self-evident.Sure, if the DM is a dink and runs &quot;Dink way or the highway&quot; games, he's going to spend a lot of time at an empty table.&nbsp; I've said this (or things like it) numerous times myself.&nbsp; The qualifier, though, is all-important.You say, &quot;Now, your mileage may vary, and RC and BU's mileage I know does, but last time I checked, a DM with no players isn't gonna being doing much DMing.&quot;I say, &quot;The twin philosophies stated above, combined with not being a dink, are why our mileage varies.&quot;I have a huge group of players.&nbsp; I have another large group of players begging me to DM.&nbsp; Both groups have others who want in if I am willing to allow it.&nbsp; I have no concerns at all about not having players.&nbsp; Honestly, I don't even have concerns about handling problems that arise with players during the game.&nbsp; Everyone who plays is told, now upfront and in writing, that I am the final arbiter of the game and if they don't want to play under those conditions they can, and should, choose not to play.And they keep coming.And, as I said, I'm not the only person in our group(s) who GMs, but I am the only one with too many players.&nbsp; I am also, oddly enough, the only one who doesn't follow a &quot;democracy gaming&quot; philosophy.&nbsp; Is it just possible that there is a correspondence between those two facts?If you're not having fun, stop doing it.&nbsp; Whoever puts in more work has more say.&nbsp; Easy rules to live by.&nbsp; Easy rules to game by.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 2579366, member: 18280"] Testament, From basic blue-boxed D&D through 3.X, I've never had a problem attracting players. The problem I have is that there are a lot of people I don't have room for at the table, and I hate to disappoint them. There are several other people who GM games in our group, and none of them have the same problem. So, indeed, my mileage does vary. I didn't mean to suggest that I am "up on a cross". The statements you quoted were not to be taken as an excuse for poor DMing; the were meant to be a broad statement of gaming philosophy. And, I suppose, life philosophy. Simply put, the two cruxes are: "If you're not having fun, stop doing it" and "Whoever puts in more work has more say". Every right has corresponding responsibilities, and every responsibility has corresponding rights. Neither rights nor responsibilities have meaning without each other. Because the DM has so many responsibilities, his rights are correspondingly larger. Because the DM has so many rights, his responsibilities are correspondingly higher. Time and again, though, I hear the argument on these boards that "a DM with no players isn't gonna being doing much DMing" (or words to that effect), nearly always in conjunction with a statement such as yours that claims that the DM does not have the right to say "My way or the highway." Of course the DM has that right. No one can be forced to play with people they do not wish to. You cannot force the DM to run a game. You cannot force anyone to run a game in a way you prefer. You may be able to compromise, but your two absolutely always-available choices are "Play in the game I'm running as I am running it" and "Don't play in the game I'm running as I am running it." This is not only true, it is self-evident. Sure, if the DM is a dink and runs "Dink way or the highway" games, he's going to spend a lot of time at an empty table. I've said this (or things like it) numerous times myself. The qualifier, though, is all-important. You say, "Now, your mileage may vary, and RC and BU's mileage I know does, but last time I checked, a DM with no players isn't gonna being doing much DMing." I say, "The twin philosophies stated above, combined with not being a dink, are [I][B]why[/B][/I] our mileage varies." I have a huge group of players. I have another large group of players begging me to DM. Both groups have others who want in if I am willing to allow it. I have no concerns at all about not having players. Honestly, I don't even have concerns about handling problems that arise with players during the game. Everyone who plays is told, now upfront and in writing, that I am the final arbiter of the game and if they don't want to play under those conditions they can, and should, choose not to play. And they keep coming. And, as I said, I'm not the only person in our group(s) who GMs, but I am the only one with too many players. I am also, oddly enough, the only one who doesn't follow a "democracy gaming" philosophy. Is it just possible that there is a correspondence between those two facts? If you're not having fun, stop doing it. Whoever puts in more work has more say. Easy rules to live by. Easy rules to game by. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification