Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 4366228" data-attributes="member: 5100">First, don't let him take over your game.&nbsp; Period.&nbsp; I've been on both sides of that one (I GM almost exclusively and didn't realize it until I already owed a few apologies) and it's no fun at all.&nbsp; The GM has to be empowered to make final rulings.&nbsp; Anything else is like letting the pitcher call outs in a baseball game -- the referree adjudicates the rules.Second, everyone has preferrences, sometimes pretty strong ones.&nbsp; If you asked me, I'd say I don't think dragonborn and tieflings have any place in the PHB, I don't like warforged, and Planescape sucks.&nbsp; But, if it was clear that PS with dragonborn, drow, and warforged in great number would be the only option for a given compaign, I wouldn't walk away without more info.&nbsp; I have preferrences, and they're pretty strong, but I've learned I can have fun with other set ups.&nbsp; But I like to know assumptions going in.&nbsp; &quot;Surprise, you're surrounded by warforged,&quot; would be pretty uncool. Who knows -- he may be a great player and open to new things.&nbsp; Or not.So, I'd say don't write him off without a face-to-face.&nbsp; Get the group together and discuss preferrences.&nbsp; But, go in with eyes open.Steven Covey talks about &quot;win-win or no deal&quot;.&nbsp; What that means is that, in any cooperative effort, each party has some goals.&nbsp; Hopefully, both/all parties can achieve their goals to an acceptable degree.&nbsp; But, there is a threshold below which the venture turns into a win-lose or a lose-lose proposition.&nbsp; You certainly don't want to let your goal attainment fall below the &quot;lose&quot; line and it's unethical to let his do so, either.&nbsp; If, at any point, you think that line has an uncomfortable chance of being crossed, you need to call off the deal.&nbsp; No deal is almost always better than a losing deal, no matter how bad you want to turn it into a win.So, know what constitutes a &quot;win&quot; for you before you meet.&nbsp; Does it have to be 4e?&nbsp; Homebrew?&nbsp; Funky races?&nbsp; Whatever your answer, that's your answer and it isn't wrong.&nbsp; It just is.&nbsp; Find out what his (and the rest of the group's) win is.&nbsp; The same &quot;not wrong&quot; principle applies to that.&nbsp; See if there's room to accomodate everyone.But, if there isn't, then there is no shame in saying so.&nbsp; It's okay to have different goals in a game.&nbsp; I'd be really bummed if I showed up to meet a new group and was told it would be a Sailor Moon themed game.&nbsp; I'd probably see if I could convince them to play 4e or some such, but I'd walk away if I couldn't -- and we'd all be happier for it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mercule, post: 4366228, member: 5100"] First, don't let him take over your game. Period. I've been on both sides of that one (I GM almost exclusively and didn't realize it until I already owed a few apologies) and it's no fun at all. The GM [u]has[/u] to be empowered to make final rulings. Anything else is like letting the pitcher call outs in a baseball game -- the referree adjudicates the rules. Second, everyone has preferrences, sometimes pretty strong ones. If you asked me, I'd say I don't think dragonborn and tieflings have any place in the PHB, I don't like warforged, and Planescape sucks. But, if it was clear that PS with dragonborn, drow, and warforged in great number would be the only option for a given compaign, I wouldn't walk away without more info. I have preferrences, and they're pretty strong, but I've learned I can have fun with other set ups. But I like to know assumptions going in. "Surprise, you're surrounded by warforged," would be pretty uncool. Who knows -- he may be a great player and open to new things. Or not. So, I'd say don't write him off without a face-to-face. Get the group together and discuss preferrences. But, go in with eyes open. Steven Covey talks about "win-win or no deal". What that means is that, in any cooperative effort, each party has some goals. Hopefully, both/all parties can achieve their goals to an acceptable degree. [b]But[/b], there is a threshold below which the venture turns into a win-lose or a lose-lose proposition. You certainly don't want to let your goal attainment fall below the "lose" line and it's unethical to let his do so, either. If, at any point, you think that line has an uncomfortable chance of being crossed, you need to call off the deal. No deal is almost always better than a losing deal, no matter how bad you want to turn it into a win. So, know what constitutes a "win" for you before you meet. Does it have to be 4e? Homebrew? Funky races? Whatever your answer, that's your answer and it isn't wrong. It just is. Find out what his (and the rest of the group's) win is. The same "not wrong" principle applies to that. See if there's room to accomodate everyone. But, if there isn't, then there is no shame in saying so. It's okay to have different goals in a game. I'd be really bummed if I showed up to meet a new group and was told it would be a Sailor Moon themed game. I'd probably see if I could convince them to play 4e or some such, but I'd walk away if I couldn't -- and we'd all be happier for it. [/QUOTE]

Verification