Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 9507919" data-attributes="member: 6698278">I have said it before but I will say it again.&nbsp; This would hold true moreso in session 0 or during downtime than during the session.&nbsp; I create the campaign first generally.&nbsp; I do though have friends and when we are sitting around drinking coffee one of them might say &quot;Man I really like X.&nbsp; Have you ever thought of designing a campaign around X?&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp; Well if I like X, and probably after it germinates in my mind for a while, I may decide to create a campaign based on X.How it typically works...If I do have houserules, and this was far more common in 1e,2e than 3e,4e,&nbsp; I present them in session 0 along with the general theme of the campaign and how I DM.&nbsp; This would include the style of game which if I understand trad right it is trad.&nbsp; Preparation, smart use of skills, effective exploration approaches, and good combat tactics will all matter.&nbsp; Now there are flavor restrictions.&nbsp; I may at any time in the design of a campaign decide to restrict something.&nbsp; I can say that only these races are available as PC races.&nbsp; I could say only these classes or only these variations of classes are available.&nbsp; Most often this is for flavor but there are rare cases where I just hate the race or the class.&nbsp; I also have a standing rule that only the PHB is assumed official and everything else must be requested.&nbsp; If I don't own the extra book I will have to buy it.&nbsp; Most potential players know the kind of game I run.&nbsp; If it's a new player that player will usually just go along with what is presented.&nbsp; All the other players though will likely believe in my DMing philosophy as much as I do.&nbsp; We may argue about a rule during downtime and sometimes if their arguments are effective I will propose a new houserule.&nbsp; Many times I won't change anything.&nbsp; DMing for 30+ years has given me a lot of experience.&nbsp; Often the new player may at first not buy in totally but in time they often do.&nbsp; You gain a lot for what you &quot;supposedly&quot; give up.&nbsp; There is not the conflict in my games that I think you think there is.&nbsp; I had a lot of conflict in 9th grade.&nbsp; Many of my mistakes from those days was allowing stuff into the campaign that didn't fit.&nbsp; I stopped doing that after a while.&nbsp; I learned.&nbsp; So my approach or me and many groups since has worked well and we've had fun.&nbsp; I think it's a style that could work for many groups.&nbsp;&nbsp; I don't think it is great for all groups.I'm not trying to get you to quit playing your way.&nbsp; I will though defend aspersions cast on my playstyle which is what I'm doing a lot it seems.&nbsp; And I will admit that when someone is especially snarky I can snark back.&nbsp; I need to rein that in as much as possible.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 9507919, member: 6698278"] I have said it before but I will say it again. This would hold true moreso in session 0 or during downtime than during the session. I create the campaign first generally. I do though have friends and when we are sitting around drinking coffee one of them might say "Man I really like X. Have you ever thought of designing a campaign around X?" Well if I like X, and probably after it germinates in my mind for a while, I may decide to create a campaign based on X. How it typically works... If I do have houserules, and this was far more common in 1e,2e than 3e,4e, I present them in session 0 along with the general theme of the campaign and how I DM. This would include the style of game which if I understand trad right it is trad. Preparation, smart use of skills, effective exploration approaches, and good combat tactics will all matter. Now there are flavor restrictions. I may at any time in the design of a campaign decide to restrict something. I can say that only these races are available as PC races. I could say only these classes or only these variations of classes are available. Most often this is for flavor but there are rare cases where I just hate the race or the class. I also have a standing rule that only the PHB is assumed official and everything else must be requested. If I don't own the extra book I will have to buy it. Most potential players know the kind of game I run. If it's a new player that player will usually just go along with what is presented. All the other players though will likely believe in my DMing philosophy as much as I do. We may argue about a rule during downtime and sometimes if their arguments are effective I will propose a new houserule. Many times I won't change anything. DMing for 30+ years has given me a lot of experience. Often the new player may at first not buy in totally but in time they often do. You gain a lot for what you "supposedly" give up. There is not the conflict in my games that I think you think there is. I had a lot of conflict in 9th grade. Many of my mistakes from those days was allowing stuff into the campaign that didn't fit. I stopped doing that after a while. I learned. So my approach or me and many groups since has worked well and we've had fun. I think it's a style that could work for many groups. I don't think it is great for all groups. I'm not trying to get you to quit playing your way. I will though defend aspersions cast on my playstyle which is what I'm doing a lot it seems. And I will admit that when someone is especially snarky I can snark back. I need to rein that in as much as possible. [/QUOTE]

Verification