GM Authority (Edited For Clarity, Post #148)

[zarionofarabel]

I have a question regarding the extent of GM authority. I would like people to answer this poll to see what the gaming community thinks should happen in a particular situation.

The group gathers to play a new campaign...

The GM "I would like to play a campaign influenced by Game of Thrones. It will still have magic and monsters but the characters will be regular people in a medieval land."

Player #1 "Nice. I will play Sir Knight the Knightliest of Knights!"

Player #2 "Sure. I will play Lady Noble the Noblest of Nobles!"

Player #3 "Sweet. I will play Sir Sneak the Sneakiest of Sneaks!"

Player #4 "Okay. I will play Sir Elf the Elfiest of Elfs!"

The GM "No wait..."

Then the argument starts. The Player insists that they should be able to play an Elf because the core book says Elf is a playable race. Round and round it goes with The GM explaining that the campaign they want to run won't include Non-Human characters, the only intelligent race is Humans. The Player insists that The GM must compromise and allow them to play an Elf, because that's what they want to play, period. After arguing for a time The GM realizes that no agreement can be reached. Either the premise of the campaign gets scrapped and The Player gets to play an Elf, or The GM must kick The Player out of the group.

Should The GM be forced to accommodate The Player? Or is The Player going to have to find a different campaign where they can play an Elf?

Who would you side with?

The Player, who then gets to play an Elf.

OR.

The GM, who will kick the player out because they won't play a Human.

 

[rgoodbb]

I would probably ask the plyer what it is specifically about playing an elf that interests them so much in a world of humans so as to generate further discussions.

The poll is too difficult for me to answer at the moment without more information.

Edit.
Although without any further information/discussion, looks like the player might not be right for your campaign.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

I just don't get why you would use D&D rules to play a Game of Thrones setting as opposed to... the RPG designed to run it. (ASOIAFRPG)

 

[Aldarc]

Probably the player, because the GM was far too vague with their initial pitch, particularly the whole "the players will be regular people" bit.

 

[aramis erak]

I have a question regarding the extent of GM authority. I would like people to answer this poll to see what the gaming community thinks should happen in a particular situation.

The group gathers to play a new campaign...

The GM "I would like to play a campaign influenced by Game of Thrones. It will still have magic and monsters but the characters will be regular people in a medieval land."

Player #1 "Nice. I will play Sir Knight the Knightliest of Knights!"

Player #2 "Sure. I will play Lady Noble the Noblest of Nobles!"

Player #3 "Sweet. I will play Sir Sneak the Sneakiest of Sneaks!"

Player #4 "Okay. I will play Sir Elf the Elfiest of Elfs!"

The GM "No wait..."

Then the argument starts. The Player insists that they should be able to play an Elf because the core book says Elf is a playable race. Round and round it goes with The GM explaining that the campaign they want to run won't include Non-Human characters, the only intelligent race is Humans. The Player insists that The GM must compromise and allow them to play an Elf, because that's what they want to play, period. After arguing for a time The GM realizes that no agreement can be reached. Either the premise of the campaign gets scrapped and The Player gets to play an Elf, or The GM must kick The Player out of the group.

Should The GM be forced to accommodate The Player? Or is The Player going to have to find a different campaign where they can play an Elf?

Who would you side with?

The Player, who then gets to play an Elf.

OR.

The GM, who will kick the player out because they won't play a Human.

The decision is one for the group as a whole, but the GM has a veto if the game is traditional mode.

 

[Dioltach]

I'd say "influenced by Game of Thrones" isn't immediately the same as "identical to GoT". Even so, if the player particularly wants to play an Elf, I'd refluff a group of Wildlings or Crannogmen to have Elf stats.

 

[John Dallman]

Probably the player, because the GM was far too vague with their initial pitch, particularly the whole "the players will be regular people" bit.

The whole premise seems weird: I thought, reading the question, that the issue was going to be that knights and nobles aren't "regular people."

I'd say, that in this case, the GM has done so bad a job of explaining their premise, that the only thing is to scrap the conversation and start again with a clearer idea.

 

[Older Beholder]

Half-elf seems the obvious compromise.

 

[TheSword]

I just don't get why you would use D&D rules to play a Game of Thrones setting as opposed to... the RPG designed to run it. (ASOIAFRPG)

Because it’s not very good. Just like the Wheel of Time roleplaying game isn’t very good.

 

[Tonguez]

Okay the example is bad, and the pitch could have been better worded with a bit more discussion to establishe the Human only frameworl, but on the prinicple its the GM who has agreed to host the game, the players ought to fit in to the GMs premise.

so unless the wife/gf/significant other wants to be the Elf, tell your player to suck it up or shove off