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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mallus" data-source="post: 3057703" data-attributes="member: 3887">It has nothing to do with being closeminded. Restricting campaign elements has more to do with different tastes, different DM 'comfort zones' and the desire to create a specific kind of play experience.  You can't do everything at the same time. Even in a fantasy game.Problem: I'm a busy man. I don't have the time to pour through and evaluate the ever-expanding corpus of 3.x rules. If I'm not familiar with it, chances are I won't use the material. Perhaps you can make make me a few more hours in the week in which to read rules?As DM, I pride myself on offering players a specific setting in which to adventure. With a set of specific, and ultimately knowable, characteristics. A setting is defined by what isn't in it as much as by what is in it. Plus, some people enjoy structure in their campaign worlds. That's not the same as being unimaginative.Let me employ a food metaphor. Some dishes have a small number of ingredients. Others, a large number. Some are like a loose framework, and are able to accomdate of variety of haphazard additions. But to suggest any dish can accomodate any and all ingredients, without ruining it, is silly. Yes. You enjoy a specific kind of game. Others don't. And there shouldn't be any value judgements or perjoratives thrown.See above re: pejoratives and value judgements.See, I (mostly) agree with that. But that doesn't mean 'anything goes'. My experience is the opposite. My players enjoy exploring --well, and often looting a killing-- the specific game environments I create. I'm actually quite flexible, but there is always that indelible stamp of my 'vision', such as it is, on my worlds. And that's exactly what my players enjoy. If I allowed everything into my game, than I would cease to be able to offer the experience of 'my game'.</blockquote>

Verification