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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2587522" data-attributes="member: 18280">If everyone wants to be flexible, that's perfectly fine.  Flexible is a way of doing things. Demanding that someone do something the way you want to do it is not flexible.  Therefore, if I want to do it in way X, and you want to do it in way Y, and way X is mutually exclusive to way Y, then way Z is not necessarily a compromise.  It could just be both of us not getting what we wanted.Or another way to put it is, neither side should be flexible, except to whatever degree they wish to be flexible.You do know, I hope, that you modified my quote to match your earlier quote, which my quote was a modification of?You do know, I hope, that you were consistently saying that the DM was supposed to serve the players, and treat the players' fun as more important than his own?You do know, I hope, that I reversed the quote to show that you were consistently suggesting that the DM's fun was less important than the players' fun in any specific example that arose?Obviously the quotes are completely equal.  They were intended to be.In your pizza analogy, perhaps.  But it is a poor analogy at best, and the guy with the phone is nonetheless absolutely correct (even if he is a dink).  That you cannot force him to order something is self-evident.Your analogy presumes either (1) that everyone is paying equally for the pizza, or (2) that one person is paying for the pizza for the express purpose of feeding these five guys.If (1), then you have a D&D analogy wherein everybody contributes equally to the game.  There is no DM; there is DMing by proxy as all players decide what will happen next.  Or perhaps in the closest reasonable proxy, the DM is running a one-shot canned module in the most simple, plain-vanilla setting and style possible.I've already covered this.  It that's what you want, fine.  But it isn't what I do when I come to the table, and I doubt my players would be pleased if I started running games in this way.  An examination of these forums will show that your "Chutes and Ladders/Five Folks as Gumdrop Fairies-style game" isn't what many (dare I say most?) people are looking for.If (2), then I've already dealt with this one too.  If the DM wants you to play, then s/he must provide a game which you will want to play. This may, or may not, require a certain amount of compromise on the DM's part. If the only game you will play in is one in which everyone has to tell you how clever you are every five minutes, and the DM wants you to play, that is the condition. This is also tautologically true, and no amount of wishing it were not so is going to change that.  In this case, the guy ordering pizza has a specific desire to feed these other folks.  That is his motive.If the guy has no motive to be popular, he'll simply order what he wants.  Only the most fantastical desire to be popular is based upon some expectation to be popular to everybody.  A desire to be popular is based upon a desire to be liked by a subset of people.  Like the guys you're ordering pizza for.Another thing:  If the pizza is the adventure you're running, whose actually doing the baking?  I imagine that it is a pizza baker, and that baker is getting compensation for baking your pizza, right?  I also imagine that when you call, you make sure you call the pizza joint that has the toppings you want?  The sauce you like?  The best crust?My analogy still lurks behind your analogy.  You'd just prefer that it wasn't so visible.Again, there is nothing wrong with compromise.Demanding compromise, however, is not compromise.RC</blockquote>

Verification