Hussar
Legend
As [MENTION=88539]LowKey[/MENTION] mentioned pages and pages ago, it's all about priorities. That's what we really mean when we talk about play styles. What is important to you and your group. For me, setting fidelity is a very, very low priority. Granting player authority is a much, much higher priority, although, to be perfectly honest, I've probably strayed from that quite a bit in my current campaign. But, that's because I wanted to do something different. OTOH, letting the players make changes to the setting and the campaign is becoming a higher priority for me now that my experiment is largely over.
And, really, it doesn't faze me too much when setting canon gets chucked out the window. In our Dragonlance campaign (I wasn't dming), it became very clear to me that the DM wasn't too interested in cleaving too closely to DL canon. I mean, this was a War of the Lance era game and our original group consisted of a Minotaur bard and a halfling cleric (with a later addition of a gnome wild mage). Obviously canon wasn't really an issue.
So, I rolled with it. My character was pretty heavily canon - a human knight of Solamnia - but, I was more interested to see how this interpretation of the setting was going to play out than getting too terribly fussed about worrying about setting canon.
And, really, it doesn't faze me too much when setting canon gets chucked out the window. In our Dragonlance campaign (I wasn't dming), it became very clear to me that the DM wasn't too interested in cleaving too closely to DL canon. I mean, this was a War of the Lance era game and our original group consisted of a Minotaur bard and a halfling cleric (with a later addition of a gnome wild mage). Obviously canon wasn't really an issue.
So, I rolled with it. My character was pretty heavily canon - a human knight of Solamnia - but, I was more interested to see how this interpretation of the setting was going to play out than getting too terribly fussed about worrying about setting canon.
