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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Greg K" data-source="post: 7682424" data-attributes="member: 5038">AL DMs  get no sympathy from me on this issue. They chose to both participate in AL and DM for it knowing it is organized play. Organized play tries to provide as uniform an experience as possible so that people know what to expect going from on table to another. It is why Gygax switched tune back with AD&D and began telling people that, if they changed certain things about AD&D, then they were not playing AD&D- he was laying the ground work for organized play/RPGA  and knew it needed conformity. As for sharing DMing for the same campaign, again no sympathy to DMs that choose to do it. If a DM and the co-DMs cannot agree, they are better off not doing it.   I agreed to try it once back in AD&D. I will never do it again.  After one adventure, I told the co-DM to create his own setting and the players to ignore the adventure.  SInce then every D&D/rpg group with whom I have played/GM'd has had multiple DMs each switching off to run their own campaign when I need a break. The individual campaigns allow people to play different characters and experience different campaign settings.This one I have more sympathy toward. However, the designers are not design experts for individual groups. DMs need to make consider if something will fit in their campaign. If not, don't allow it. If so, the DM needs to be willing to make alterations if something does not work- there are also places on the internet (e.g., ENWorld and RPG.net) to get help. Meh. The designers don't know individual groups. I believe 3e had it right in the DMG when it told DMs they may need to make adjustments to published adventures to account for the people and party make up at their table.</blockquote>

Verification