Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jürgen Hubert" data-source="post: 4795793" data-attributes="member: 7177">From many comments I have seen on this board - most recently in the <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/256138-whats-so-special-about-forgotten-realms.html" target="_blank">Forgotten Realms thread</a> - it seems that many players are violently adverse about their characters getting ordered around by more powerful NPCs.Yet elsewhere I have seen the sentiment that actually being the commanders - the ones who hold positions of responsibility for others - is equally to be avoided. It seems that many PCs, upon toppling a tyrant, would rather just install someone friendly on the throne than sit on the throne themselves, even if they are more qualified - since that would tie them down with responsibilities. And that despite the fact that being in charge doesn't mean less potential for good stories and adventures (at least in the hands of a skilled DM).In other words, throughout their career as adventurers, player characters strive to attain more and more power (in terms of levels, magic items, and so forth) - yet they also strongly reject any explicit duty deriving from said power.Now, I know this is not universal in all groups. But I think it might be a common trend. Do you agree with this? And if so, is this something particular to D&D, or is it common with all RPGs?</blockquote>