Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TrickyUK" data-source="post: 5756922" data-attributes="member: 13504">I don't post often, but I have to say that Pilgrim's original statement came across as blunt and harsh. I consider gaming as a social activity and everyone at the table is a 'player', whether DM/GM or PC and entitled to make input into the game and should have fun.Reading further, I can accept that Pilgrim's statement can be put into context, suggesting that there is an element of illusion on part of the players actually making any decisions as the DM/GM is the one that has the final say in the running of the game.However, I still feel that making a statement so boldly came across as arrogant and dismissive of the other players.When I'm planning a campaign I lay down my expectations - what rules/races/classes/etc. are being used and a rough overview of where I'm planning to take the campaign. If nobody's interested, then no game. If some are interested, then I find out what is liked/disliked and consider whether to change my original plan. If we can't agree, no game. It's more important that we play a game where we all have fun and this has caused periods where we don't get together while we think what we all want to do.In Pilgrim's case it seems that he has managed to run games with groups of people that like his style and content, and has always been able to find enough people of a like mind. In some places, finding players is not so easy and so such blunt statements would not be productive. Also gaming with friends where the friendship is more important than the sharing of a hobby can create awkward moments.I have run most of the games I've been involved in and I've run games for friends and at FLGS.I know my friends and have a decent idea of what they want to do and enjoy discussing with them how certain games can develop - for this reason, I get asked to run games and pretty much am allowed to run how I want (but this is tempered by my wanting being influenced on their preferences).With FLGS, it's more of this is what I'm planning and I hope you like it. If not, let me know and I'll consider making changes. As I don't the group as well, there is a level of tact and diplomacy required at times to keep such games healthy.It feels more like a business arrangement: This is what I'm offering, take it or leave it (if you take, I'll assume it's because you believe it will be fun).I prefer more of social arrangement: We are all here to have fun and so we will agree on what would be fun and then proceed.For me, being the GM/DM is a privilege and I humbly accept the position and the responsibility it has in keeping the whole group having fun (not that the whole doesn't share such responsibilty to a degree) even if that means that I don't get my own way all the time.</blockquote>

Verification