Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 2587120" data-attributes="member: 2067">It's strange to see people telling me that I'm not entitled to have fun when playing a game of D&D. That my fun as a player is contingent on the DM's fun. That I am not allowed input into the world despite playing one of it's heroes and/or adventurers. That the DM is entitled to my acquiescence.  OR....The DM should run a campaign where the half-fiendish earth elemental genasi or traditional cleric of Pelor is permissable.Both are valid and I think there should be compromise. If the players want traditional D&D, the DM shouldn't be trying to run a Dawnforge game. Or, if it's just one player, the DM should try to inject a feel that the player is looking for into his Dawnforge game. Those campaign settings are NOT sacrosanct, any more than the RAW is. Just as a DM shouldn't throw high AC monsters against a party that doesn't have a fighter, A DM should change his setting or a published setting based on what they'd have fun doing. For the record, I am a DM 99% of the time. And I think my own role is as the DMGII says: FYI, the first thing the original DMG3.5 says about my job as a DM is to provide adventures for the PC's. A player has a right to expect a game to be fun. Right. They don't leave because they're having fun. They don't run their own game because they're happy where they are. And some won't be. Some won't have fun with this kind of authority. And they should, I think, be able to have a dialogue with a DM without being told to go fish if they don't like it.</blockquote>

Verification