Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
D&D and the Implied Setting
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Gold Roger" data-source="post: 3044618" data-attributes="member: 33904"><p>Nowher explicitly. I just wanted to prevent any misunderstanding in that direction.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I remember now, that you prefer a very specific kind of campaign, where the gameworld is one complicated puzzle. That's ok, and I agree that for such a campaign this doesn't work. However, if you want to DM such a campaign you already need very specific players that want the same and resign all control to the DM to make it happen. It works, but is very far removed from usual games and in no way what I was talking about.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That player sure enough sound like a pain in the ass. But I wasn't talking about him, I mean the many people that are happier when they get what they like.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Aye, but that's not your usual D&D game then.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>These are all examples of very tightly and narrowly focused games. You know, the kind of games you like to play and I sure as hell won't forbid you to play like that as long as you find players that want to do o as well.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I need to clarify some of my position: I'm not saying I have found the path to ultimate DMing and happiness and everyone not following is wrong and a bad DM. All I'm saying is that in a game that is 1) based on no specific premise and 2) played in a diverse group is propably better of that way.</p><p></p><p>I'm sorry I didn't state this earlier and sincerely appologize to everyone I might have offended.</p><p></p><p>However, there is one thing I don't understand, I opposed the view that players have to be controlled and restricted. But then I came to see from the posts of those pulling for restricted games play with people that generally play the same style and happily restrict themself for the sake of the game they want. Why do you hold on to your right to forbid things to the players when you don't have to forbid anything? Why say you have to be able to restrict Bob when you don't play with Bob anyway?</p><p></p><p>(no snark or rethoric question, I'm genuinely interested in your answers)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Gold Roger, post: 3044618, member: 33904"] Nowher explicitly. I just wanted to prevent any misunderstanding in that direction. I remember now, that you prefer a very specific kind of campaign, where the gameworld is one complicated puzzle. That's ok, and I agree that for such a campaign this doesn't work. However, if you want to DM such a campaign you already need very specific players that want the same and resign all control to the DM to make it happen. It works, but is very far removed from usual games and in no way what I was talking about. That player sure enough sound like a pain in the ass. But I wasn't talking about him, I mean the many people that are happier when they get what they like. Aye, but that's not your usual D&D game then. These are all examples of very tightly and narrowly focused games. You know, the kind of games you like to play and I sure as hell won't forbid you to play like that as long as you find players that want to do o as well. I need to clarify some of my position: I'm not saying I have found the path to ultimate DMing and happiness and everyone not following is wrong and a bad DM. All I'm saying is that in a game that is 1) based on no specific premise and 2) played in a diverse group is propably better of that way. I'm sorry I didn't state this earlier and sincerely appologize to everyone I might have offended. However, there is one thing I don't understand, I opposed the view that players have to be controlled and restricted. But then I came to see from the posts of those pulling for restricted games play with people that generally play the same style and happily restrict themself for the sake of the game they want. Why do you hold on to your right to forbid things to the players when you don't have to forbid anything? Why say you have to be able to restrict Bob when you don't play with Bob anyway? (no snark or rethoric question, I'm genuinely interested in your answers) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
D&D and the Implied Setting
Top