Free to choose?

[EricNoah]

Ok this might be a little bit of a touchy subject, but I'm curious...

Are you "stuck" in your game? What I mean is, if your DM wanted to run a game that you weren't all that interested in, would your choices be between "no gaming" and "gaming I don't enjoy"?

Here's my theory: most players don't know enough DMs (or have connections with enough gaming groups) that they really have the luxury of picking and choosing. So when it comes down to it, rather than not play at all, they sometimes get stuck in games they don't like. That's not a good situation sometimes!

Curious to hear your experiences...

 

[Crothian]

It's not that I don't know enough DMs, I don't know enough good ones. So, ya I would be stuck in thew no game or lousy game scenerio.

 

[Arnwyn]

I'm a full time DM - and no one I know has any interest in DMing.

So even if I wanted to be a player, I wouldn't be able to. (Thankfully I'm happy DMing.) So, I'm stuck with the "no gaming" option should I ever want to be a player.

 

[Nifelhein]

Add me to the "stcuk" ones, I know a lot of DMs but few handle things the wya I like to and even fewer DM games that I really like or have interest in, so I usually accept games that I would not quite like.

Once I entered an old D&D game (about one year and a half ago), I disliked it because the party was 6th to 8th level adn I was entering at 1st, not to say that we were 10 people playing and I like to haev 4 or 5 people plus Dm at a table...

The game was okay but when I coudl not go to the sessions anymore I did not get any sad too...

 

[der_kluge]

My group has 3 GMs in it, and possibly as many as 5. But, at least 3 of us have experience running 3.0/3.5.

That said, we're on DM #3 now (me), and we've done a pretty good job at taking turns. So, once I finish with my campaign, the choice will be for someone to run something different. At this point, there really hasn't been any debate about what people want to play. It seems that we've all been happy so far with standard (more or less) D&D. That is, no one has said, "I want to play Ravenloft, or Planescape! WAH!", so that hasn't been an issue yet. I am aware that some of the players in our group, myself included, enjoy some of the various subgenre of D&D that were popular in 2nd edition, but those haven't really come up at all yet.

The last campaign lasted a little longer than most really wanted, and when it finished, I think we were all quite happy when it concluded. So, for that time, we were really just kind of stuck with it, because we knew it wouldn't last forever, and then we'd be on to something new eventually.


Of course, embarking on a new campaign is a bit of a gamble for any group. I mean, if I left, met a group of guys (or girls), and agreed to play, and then found out a week later the DM was really awful, I would feel somewhat uncomfortable approaching the DM to say, "Hey, you really suck". How do you do that tactfully without majorly pissing the guy off?

 

[eXodus]

bad gaming vs. no gaming: the ultimate battle

i have been guilty of taking the 'bad' over the 'no.'

when i was in high school there were but eight gamers in a fifty mile radius. my only gaming option was to play in a game where every other session someone would kill someone else's characters, the 'complete' books ruled supreme, any sort of character development or roleplaying was met with scorn.

so i played. it was the only game in town so to speak. and it all worked out for the best. over the months the stronger willed players dropped off and i was able to take over the game as dm and molded the game into something that i would have wanted to play in.

 

[milotha]

At one point in time, I knew enough GMs that I could afford to be picky. Nowadays, I don't. So, I'm stuck with whatever the small crop of GM's wants to play. Most of the time this is fine, but occasionally, I've been stuck in crummy campaigns. This is especially true if the GM is also your friend. On these occasions, I've tried to talk the GM out of the campaign beforehand, but sometimes they just don't listen. The - you are all enslaved 0th level commoners comes to mind.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

I guess I'd have to be part of the "a bad game is better than no game at all" crowd, but I'm kind of lucky when it comes to gaming. I game with 3 high-school friends (we're 27-28 now), and 3 of us are DM's (we each have our strengths and weaknesses, but I wouldn't consider any of us "bad") PLUS I've been introduced to another group (by one of the aforementioned high school friend who DMs) in which there is another good DM.

The games haven't all been great, but I've had some fun in each and everyone of them, if it's just because I was hanging out with really nice and cool people.

If I was put in an "Ab3" situation, I'd probably NOT game.

AR

 

[Mythtify]

If a player is "stuck" then they should learn to DM. If the DM isn't running things the way you would, do it yourself. It isnt as hard to do as it may seem.

There is no reason to be stucked unless you are not willing to learn to do it yourself.

I have found that a first time DM is almost always able to find players.

Better yet, find new players. Learn the game together. You can learn to DM, while your players learn to play.

 

[Hjorimir]

Actually, my problem is just the opposite; trying to get my players to look at different campaign settings. I'd love to run something more exotic (along the lines of Persian, Indian, or Asian cultures), but if it doesn't have a strong Eurocentric element most of them start to cry a little.