Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 6350896" data-attributes="member: 6698278">I've always held to those words and consider them in force in any campaign I run.&nbsp; If I ever find I can't get players under those terms, I'll stop playing altogether.&nbsp;&nbsp; So far I have waiting lines for my games so I'm not worried.&nbsp;&nbsp; Ultimately power can be used for good or evil.&nbsp; (Evil in quotes if you want).&nbsp; You can be a jerk or you can be a DM that genuinely seeks a fun game.I believe the DM should set out to run a game that he would absolutely love as a player and that he loves running as a DM.&nbsp; Then he should seek players who have the same desires.&nbsp; If a player becomes disruptive or wants a different style then I think parting company is best.&nbsp; It doesn't mean you have to have 100% agreement but the DM should rule the game he runs because he will run that game best if his goals are right.&nbsp; The players have less commitment though not a minor one.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emerikol, post: 6350896, member: 6698278"] I've always held to those words and consider them in force in any campaign I run. If I ever find I can't get players under those terms, I'll stop playing altogether. So far I have waiting lines for my games so I'm not worried. Ultimately power can be used for good or evil. (Evil in quotes if you want). You can be a jerk or you can be a DM that genuinely seeks a fun game. I believe the DM should set out to run a game that he would absolutely love as a player and that he loves running as a DM. Then he should seek players who have the same desires. If a player becomes disruptive or wants a different style then I think parting company is best. It doesn't mean you have to have 100% agreement but the DM should rule the game he runs because he will run that game best if his goals are right. The players have less commitment though not a minor one. [/QUOTE]

Verification