Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oryan77" data-source="post: 7653066" data-attributes="member: 18701">I'm not so sure that these issues are DM related issues any more than just being a "bad player" issue. Most of those examples reflect a guy that is simply a bad player and he could have easily never DMed a game in his life. Being an experienced DM or not is really not an excuse or a reason for him being a bad player under a new DM.The most common issues that I've seen from experienced DMs turned player is hogging the spotlight or rules lawyering. Although plenty of players do that, DMs seem to have a hard time adjusting to the game as a player by not doing that. Even so, dealing with him is no different than dealing with any other problem player. It could actually be easier after you've openly discussed it with him, because he can relate to the problems he's causing.That's your opinion and is in no way the truth. I've played in games where the DM gave absolutely no thought to his game world and simply relied on what the players would do during a session. Either because he thought he was being a better DM by running a "sandbox" game and expected us to help in world building. Or because he was just lazy and thought his game would flourish just fine for the simple fact that we have characters & want to adventure. In either case, these games are almost always a flop and extremely boring. I've yet to see one last long term. I'm not interested in world building as a player or creating adventures and plots for the DM. That's your job as DM as far as I'm concerned. All I ask in that regard is to let my in-game actions have an affect on the game-world.I'm kind of curious to know what you think being an "entitled DM" entails. Most players I've seen that have issues with a DM wanting to run his game world without players dictating to him what should or shouldn't happen/exist were "entitled players". I agree that collaborating can and does enrich a game. But a DM may have limits to that collaboration that are perfectly valid. The problem arises when players refuse to except that and can't let go of their own control or selfish wants. It's more likely that a player can still have just as much fun in that game than it is for a DM to have just as much fun DMing in a way that he doesn't want to. Collaboration for me is defined by me asking for PC backstories so I can get ideas to add in to the game. Or asking the players what sort of adventures they want to play in, what kind of locations they'd like to visit, or what kind of creatures they want to encounter. If I don't want the player to create a new god, or have his PC be the son of a god, it's perfectly fair. If I don't want the player to name his PC "Bud the Weiser" cause I want the game to be more serious than that, there is nothing wrong with that. If I say he can create a new town where his PC was born and raised, then great. If I don't like that, it's part of our right as DM to say, "Sorry, no." I see no harm at all if players ask for that sort of stuff. The harm comes from him complaining when the DM isn't digging it.Putting some limitations on player control doesn't mean the DM is "locking down his game world." It's a perfectly valid style of DMing and I've never had less fun as a player because of it. Provide me with some rules, give me a good adventure with roleplaying opportunities, and equip me with some cool loot and stuff to kill, and I'm good to go.</blockquote>

Verification