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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DonTadow" data-source="post: 2946360" data-attributes="member: 22622">I somewhat agree and disagree with this statement. If someone isn't running a game the way you enjoy or their house rules differ so much from the game that it makes it unenjoyeable for you, then by all means they have a right to complain and leave. IN this situation, I"d be upset with the system, only because as a working adult, I don't want to spend most of the time in combat and it doesnt seem that the DM is that concerned with it with this system. To demand that everyone in your game runs the way you want to without any say so is very dictator like , and is not "shaping" the player around you. Dang, Enworld for throwing away that psych thread because I could have sworn that that ws what it was about, player and dm compromise choice. And I could have sworn you sid something to the point where you would allow something in a game if discussed with the player. I know it had something to do with ninjas and dinsours...man eh forget it. In any case demanding on either side is always wrong, but there should always be the open door of communication of discussion and suggestiong.  Now, there are three situations. 1. I just join the game. In this situation, I dont have a righ to demand a game, I have joined a train that is already in motion. I will glady gaet off game A as it is not my style. Id'd tell any player to d that as well. There's no way I tell anyone to stay in any situation (game, work, personal, relationship) if they are not enjoying themselves in it. 2. These are a group of friends and the group have been together for sometime in an established group and the rules have been the same for a bit. In this situation, this is an established group and I have the DM, has the right to compromise with the group on rules. In this situation, I"d still leave the group, but probably more biterally because I assumed that the group and the dm were friends. I'd be mad if they didnt consider my time important. This happened to me in my first group when the group opted for a diceless game (again) . The first game was fun with one of the DMs but the one in charge at the end was horrible and made it an his super npc and the supporting pcs game. No one saw the problem but me so i left. 3. These are friends and this grup have been together and this is a new group. In a new group, I'd fully expect all to agree on the rules at the beginning. Definatly not a DM suggests the rules and everyone falls in line out of friendship thing (though that happens). I think the players should be as much apart into building the games as the players are. Of course there are exceptions to this. I think if the DM is the one with the world idea, and the rules are associated with that idea, the players should be more open to accepting them. Case in point, half the players in my game hate that I dont have any magic items, hate that armor equals damage reducation and hate that they have to plan for combat more so than running head first in.  I"ve heard all the complaints and talked about it with the player, they still dont like it, but understand that for the flavor of that world, that is how the rules best suit it.  Instead of just telling them this is how its going to be, I told them that if they can figure out a better way to display the low magic and magical disrutpion of the world I'm all for it. Since the thing has been dropped. Now my players did hate not rolling their own initiative after a while and I have since switched back to them rolling thier own initiatives.</blockquote>

Verification