Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Panda-s1" data-source="post: 7762781" data-attributes="member: 59554">Man that's a lot to unpack. First of all are you expecting me to side with the 2 players and say that the DM needs to cater to their whims? Secondly, this runs counter to everything everyone has said about consensus and coming to an agreement with the players.Let's pretend two of those people who don't care actually do care and suddenly we have 4 players who don't want to play in a gritty setting. Should the DM force their gritty setting game on all the players, even though he's outnumbered? Does he actually hate running a kitchen-sink setting to the point that him running it would actually be terrible? Or does he compromise and runs the game people would better enjoy and have a good time with his friends (uh, they're all friends, right??)? I get the want of playing a certain type of game, and there are all sorts of ideas I never got to run due to lack of interest, but that's just how it is sometimes, even as a DM.D:"you are entitled, bad, a failed chef, a coward, and selfish" I mean yeah, these are ways that I've seen people describe vegetarians lol. Honestly, I don't know how well the chef analogy works under scrutiny, I mean first of all being a vegetarian (and especially a vegetarian chef) means having specific morals in regards to the use and consumption of animals. I doubt the DM who only runs scary viking land game would compromise their morals by running a different kind of game. Also, I can very easily find a different chef to cook my meals. "I'm Bruce the DM I only run horror themed games" well have fun Bruce I'm gonna go join Michelle's airship campaign 'cause I like airships and I nope the <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> away from horror. But I doubt Bruce is lacking in players, a lot of people like horror themed games, unless Bruce is a hardass then maybe not so much.But let's revisit the vegetarian chef. Focusing on the vegetarian part is a bit too inflexible for this analogy, so we'll say Bob is a vegetarian chef who runs a vegetarian restaurant, but refuses to use any sort of meat substitute (well he uses tofu, but that only sorta counts). So Bob's restaurant does fairly well (though that's largely because he's the only game in town), but some customers are like "hey Bob why not have something with seitan that'll bring in more newer vegetarians" or "why not make something like this jackfruit I saw in a video" but Bob just refuses to cook with these things, maybe he thinks they aren't really "vegetarian" or maybe he just really doesn't want to put in the effort to learn new things. Eventually his restaurant runs out of steam, and while he has a few dedicated customers his business is going stagnant. One of two things will happen here: Bob can finally come to terms with what his customers want and look into new ways of vegetarian cooking. He starts expanding his menu (and probably does a bit of rebranding) and suddenly gets new customers who love what he brings to these meat substitutes he refused to cook for so many years. OR Bob still refuses to innovate and his business suffers. Jo, who used to be a regular customer (again, only game in town) enjoys cooking vegetarian cuisine but has grown tired of Bob's restaurant. Jo decides that maybe she should start her own vegetarian restaurant. She has to ask for help online, and gets cooking tips from her friend who lives in a big city, but eventually she starts the restaurant and SURPRISE it's a huge success. Bob can't compete, and even if he tried doing what I said he could've done at this point he's gonna have a hard time getting back his share of customers. (also, again, I don't know why you're saying "coward" applies in this scenario. I explained in very plain terms what I meant by coward and spelled it out even further. if you don't want to actually read what I said I guess that's your prerogative).man that sounds cool, like maybe he brought the wolf with him from a more temperate place. or maybe he could have a different animal that was reskinned for a tropical setting? what exactly did he ignore in this guide, was there a "no wolves" rule that he missed?First of all, people are misapplying coward to themselves even though I explained exactly what I meant by coward. "I find it cowardly if you ban something without looking into it because you think it'll ruin your plans." "So if I ban a race because it doesn't fit my setting it makes me a coward? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> you buddy!"But also you make it sound as if such DMs don't actually exist. There's already an example in this very thread; some people refuse to allow the Ceremony spell because in 3rd edition Atonement was a 5th level spell and therefore it's too overpowered. But as others already pointed out the Atonement part of Ceremony is not nearly as powerful as its 3rd edition counterpart, also alignment has little to no mechanical value in 5e. IIRC Atonement was mostly used in 3rd edition to help paladins who went against their alignment, but now paladins follow a very specific set of vows and no amount of changing your alignment is gonna help with that.I also recall when 4e came out some people lost their <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> over Eladrin getting Fey Step as a racial encounter action, making it a daily action instead or just outright removing it. They argued that getting a teleport at 1st level is just too powerful, and made things like pit traps functionally useless. People who actually put thought into it realized as an encounter power Fey Step wasn't all that powerful. Even if a character TP'd across a chasm, the rest of the party would be left behind with no really good way to get across themselves, and then the Eladrin character would have to hang out on the other side by themself for 5 minutes before they could regroup with the party. Also 4e had some pretty specific rules about teleportation, so it's possible that many scenarios these alarmist DMs were thinking of wouldn't even work the way they were afraid of. You could argue an entire party of Eladrin would be a problem, but at that point can you not think of different ways to challenge this party? Do you just love pits and chasms that goddamn much?Man with no players the game doesn't run either, and without enthusiastic players the game comes to a grinding halt pretty easily. I know that DM'ing is a lot of hard work, but to say that listening to your players should be optional goes against how a good game actually functions.</blockquote>

Verification