Hackenslash
First Post
Hello All,
Our Group has been playing DnD for over 18 years and most of the time our DM has always been the same person. Now this person has expressed an interest in playing DnD in the newest 3.5 edition and as I have DM'ed before with other groups and this one occasionally as one off adventures, I have offered to start the new campaign with our DM as a player. One of my major concerns is that the players have never known any other DM'ing styles and mine differs a lot from our current DM. I am more flexible and less rules based as long as the story unfolds as efficiently as possible and the plot advances accordingly. I like to keep things flowing so I will adlib, judge or not allow rules that over complicate the issue at hand. Somtimes I will just interpret the rules at their most basic format to get the plot moving and get characters where they are supposed to be rather than spend ages micro managing the rules so that you get the absolutely perfect result based on whatever the character wanted to do in the first place. A good example here would be the Sundering and Grappling rules, ok while they are very well described I find them very cumbersome and uneccessary. So, while this may work for some DM's and there is no critisism here, I find this to be a difficult and very time consuming way of DM'ing and would rather memorise key rules and only look up story effecting rules where necessary and if it effects the encounter or scenario.
Also, I am very keen on making some house rule changes to certain parts of my campaign, some for flavor others to make the game better in my opinion though nothing too major, but I seem to be getting getting resistance from other members of the group without even tring it out or examing the reason behind the change. While I would appreciate this as constructive critisism, I would point out that our own DM has made house rules that have been unpopular but has used them anyway. Now I am thinking that this has more to do with the fact that the other players are used to these rules and have even asked me if I will be using them in my campaign. Well really it would not be my campaign if I used another DM's house rules would it ? I would just be DM'ing someone elses campaign for them so that they could play. Also, I get the feeling that the other players would rather not play in the type of campaign I have in mind as they are so used to playing in our current DM's campaign.
So bottom line: Do I give in and just DM the type of campign in the style that they are all used too ? OR. Do I try and show my own potential to create a different type of campaign and keep things flowing smoothly and use my own house rules ? Has anyone ever encountered this and how have they dealt with it ? I have put a lot of work into my new campign but feel as though it would not be worth it due to other players comments and negative attitudes. Any suggestions ??? Cheers All.
Our Group has been playing DnD for over 18 years and most of the time our DM has always been the same person. Now this person has expressed an interest in playing DnD in the newest 3.5 edition and as I have DM'ed before with other groups and this one occasionally as one off adventures, I have offered to start the new campaign with our DM as a player. One of my major concerns is that the players have never known any other DM'ing styles and mine differs a lot from our current DM. I am more flexible and less rules based as long as the story unfolds as efficiently as possible and the plot advances accordingly. I like to keep things flowing so I will adlib, judge or not allow rules that over complicate the issue at hand. Somtimes I will just interpret the rules at their most basic format to get the plot moving and get characters where they are supposed to be rather than spend ages micro managing the rules so that you get the absolutely perfect result based on whatever the character wanted to do in the first place. A good example here would be the Sundering and Grappling rules, ok while they are very well described I find them very cumbersome and uneccessary. So, while this may work for some DM's and there is no critisism here, I find this to be a difficult and very time consuming way of DM'ing and would rather memorise key rules and only look up story effecting rules where necessary and if it effects the encounter or scenario.
Also, I am very keen on making some house rule changes to certain parts of my campaign, some for flavor others to make the game better in my opinion though nothing too major, but I seem to be getting getting resistance from other members of the group without even tring it out or examing the reason behind the change. While I would appreciate this as constructive critisism, I would point out that our own DM has made house rules that have been unpopular but has used them anyway. Now I am thinking that this has more to do with the fact that the other players are used to these rules and have even asked me if I will be using them in my campaign. Well really it would not be my campaign if I used another DM's house rules would it ? I would just be DM'ing someone elses campaign for them so that they could play. Also, I get the feeling that the other players would rather not play in the type of campaign I have in mind as they are so used to playing in our current DM's campaign.
So bottom line: Do I give in and just DM the type of campign in the style that they are all used too ? OR. Do I try and show my own potential to create a different type of campaign and keep things flowing smoothly and use my own house rules ? Has anyone ever encountered this and how have they dealt with it ? I have put a lot of work into my new campign but feel as though it would not be worth it due to other players comments and negative attitudes. Any suggestions ??? Cheers All.
