Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 8155464">I was responding directly to what the previous poster stated. Everything is based on the wording of that post. Also what you are suggesting isn't compromise. A compromise is the player wants something, the GM wants something else, so the GM agrees to change some things to give the player some things they want. What you are saying is just helping to guide the player to an option that fits the setting. Based on what the poster said, this wasn't how I was reading their statement. The point I am trying to make is for a lot of groups, the integrity of the setting matters. And a lot of players, not just GMs, get annoyed when players make special requests that clearly don't fit the setting (especially if they are taking a position that a compromise must be made). Now, I am not saying there can't be other approaches. But in any game, sport or activity with roles, it is fair to carve out who has power over what in order to make the game fair and fun. And for people like myself, giving the GM authority over the setting is important to enhancing play (and importantly that applies to the step of character creation).</blockquote>