Apparently you need to make a near infinite long list of all the banned things from the game and cover all those in a nearly infinite long session 0, lest you be required to allow whatever wasn't explicitly banned into the game.
Not to mention being contractually obligated to run games you hate for the good of D&D at large.Apparently you need to make a near infinite long list of all the banned things from the game and cover all those in a nearly infinite long session 0, lest you be required to allow whatever wasn't explicitly banned into the game.
Makes perfect sense to me
That the idea that Communication being Voluntary is bad and DMs wouldn't have so many authority problems if they were clear from the start.
But what if I think wolverine would fit into a heroic fantasy game? Since you weren't explicit does that mean I must be allowed to play wolverine?
What kind of DM runs a grimdark fantasy game and tells the players it's a Goku and the super saiyans game?
Or ... you write him up, reskinned as a Fantasy Hero. Well, probably more like an Antihero, but you get the idea.
Then I pull out page 38 of the DMG and start reading.
The idea is that they make a grimdark fantasy game but never say its a grimdark fantasy game.
I don't think anyone objects to that.
I agree.
Not to be a party pooper - but communication is a 2 way street. All the onus of being clear cannot necessarily solely be left at the DM's feet. That's the other part of the issue IMO. A DM should try to be clear about what your game is about but even the clearest DM doesn't always enlighten as sometimes different people have different ideas about the boundaries of genre/setting/etc and so outside exhaustively listing in specific terms everything that is allowed or isn't allowed you always run into the issue that communicating your idea fails.
