Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8120175" data-attributes="member: 22779">Heh.  I love that last bit.  That was funny, and, yeah, that's generally what I've been pointing to.But, then again, I don't even get the notion really.  If someone said, "Let's play a "Knights of the Round Table" campaign, of course we would all be knights.  It's right there in the title.  I'm not going to start playing barracks room lawyer on everything the DM says so I can say, "AHA!  GOTCHA!  You didn't SAY that we couldn't be a hexblade sorcerer knight in this Knights of the Round Table campaign, so, I guess that means I can play it and you're being needlessly restrictive if you disagree.  You should have been more specific in your campaign description!"No thanks.  I'd rather be able to trust the players at my table and know that when they say that they want to play the game I've pitched, they ACTUALLY want to play the game that I've pitched and not go out of their way to twist it simply because I didn't have a lawyer look over the contract to play.For me, if you tell me that you are running Game X and I want to play in Game X, I will guarantee you that my character will be deeply embedded in Game X.  I would never do the whole bait and switch thing as a player.  It's such a douche move.  If you don't want to play, don't play.  That's groovy.  No problems.  Or, maybe I can make room for the concept, it never hurts to ask.  But, the expectation that I'm going to rewrite my campaign to make room for your character so you can play against type again is a bridge too far for me anymore. I'm simply not interested in playing with players who can't get with the program anymore. It's too frustrating and just makes DMing suck too hard.</blockquote>

Verification