Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Evenglare" data-source="post: 6011904" data-attributes="member: 63245">You misinterpret my post. I meant on message boards everyone is basically saying bow down to what the players want. This is -in my opinion- treating the gm crappy, and revoking what HE wants. Everywhere it's &quot;cater to the players&quot; , if this were the one true way of playing then no adventure paths would ever be sold since they don't &quot;cater to the players&quot;. There are people out there that like running their own campaign and worlds, and there are players who enjoy playing in those worlds because they trust the GM. I understand that some GMs enjoy it when their players are happy and basically don't care about what they run, as long as it makes them happy. I am not one of those people. If I have people that make a party full of wizards or rogues or something and I am NOT prepared for it, then I will NOT enjoy running the game, and the whole party will suffer (as in not enjoy playing because I'm not prepared, not suffer as in &quot;rocks fall everyone dies make new characters). I know It's an awful monstrosity for a GM to run something HE wants to , but sadly it's just how I feel, i guess it's that human drawback of mine.&nbsp; If the player doesnt like my world or story or campaign or whatever, they don't have to play, im not forcing anyone . I can find other players who enjoy the style of game I wish to play. Fortunately for me I have actually never encountered this problem. I pitch my cam[paign and the players converse with each other and make their own characters and have a balanced party where each person excels at a particular situation. I guess they think it would be boring to have 4 rogue who all basically do the same thing. I mean sure you have archetypes and all&nbsp; ,but customize all you want, 2 rogues are goign to be much more similar than a rogue and a wizard (for example).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Evenglare, post: 6011904, member: 63245"] You misinterpret my post. I meant on message boards everyone is basically saying bow down to what the players want. This is -in my opinion- treating the gm crappy, and revoking what HE wants. Everywhere it's "cater to the players" , if this were the one true way of playing then no adventure paths would ever be sold since they don't "cater to the players". There are people out there that like running their own campaign and worlds, and there are players who enjoy playing in those worlds because they trust the GM. I understand that some GMs enjoy it when their players are happy and basically don't care about what they run, as long as it makes them happy. I am not one of those people. If I have people that make a party full of wizards or rogues or something and I am NOT prepared for it, then I will NOT enjoy running the game, and the whole party will suffer (as in not enjoy playing because I'm not prepared, not suffer as in "rocks fall everyone dies make new characters). I know It's an awful monstrosity for a GM to run something HE wants to , but sadly it's just how I feel, i guess it's that human drawback of mine. If the player doesnt like my world or story or campaign or whatever, they don't have to play, im not forcing anyone . I can find other players who enjoy the style of game I wish to play. Fortunately for me I have actually never encountered this problem. I pitch my cam[paign and the players converse with each other and make their own characters and have a balanced party where each person excels at a particular situation. I guess they think it would be boring to have 4 rogue who all basically do the same thing. I mean sure you have archetypes and all ,but customize all you want, 2 rogues are goign to be much more similar than a rogue and a wizard (for example). [/QUOTE]

Verification