Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Out of the Abyss - No Drizzt afterall?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 6694069" data-attributes="member: 5100"><p>There's a balance. I've had plenty of players show up and say (implicitly) "Entertain us." I can do that, but there's a flip side: I expect to be entertained, as well. The whole group should be having fun.</p><p></p><p>I would (and have) run different settings. Even radically different settings. There are boundaries. I'm going to pick on Drizz't and PC drow, in general. My experience with them is that they just annoy me. Someone <u>might</u> sell me on an awesome concept, but it's going to have to be pretty fantastic before I'm going to consider it. If a "good DM" should be able to roll with it, then a "good player" should be have more than one concept. </p><p></p><p>And maybe that word "concept" is key. If I ask what your character is like, I'd expect a bit more than "a drow ranger with scimitars" or "kinda like Drizz't, but with whips" if you want me to tweak a setting for it. If "race+class" is the depth of your concept, I'm fine with that. Just do it within the established parameters.</p><p></p><p>Additionally, for a GM who does enjoy building a setting, asking to add in something incongruous is equivalent to asking that drow PC to deal with having tentacles instead of ears. Unless he's some sort of primadona, it really isn't all about him. Right?</p><p></p><p>I'm glad that you enjoy being a meatspace MMO. I genuinely think it's great you and your group like to play that way. That would drive me nuts and make me feel like GMing was a second job -- though I might <u>play</u> in that sort of game. I've always had a group, when I've wanted one, for 30+ years, so I don't think I'm doing anything wrong. Most of the time, I've had a hard time stepping down to be a player because people want me to GM. That doesn't make you wrong, either. It's just different styles and different social contracts for different groups.</p><p></p><p>I actually see more similarity between the player who feels like the GM should allow any concept (that isn't grossly overpowered for the system) just because he asked and the GM who makes the players watch her narrate conversations between two NPCs or tells the player "your character wouldn't do that, he'd do <u>this</u>". Either extreme is pretty selfish. There's a middle ground where both sides get something that falls within their definition of "fun", even if it isn't exactly their ideal; the social aspect makes up the difference.</p><p></p><p>FWIW, I actually really enjoy running small group or solo games (though I rarely get to). I enjoy it specifically because it gives me a chance to form a world around well-defined and interesting characters. Play what you want, and I'll make it work. But... the more people are mixed in, and the more the concepts = race + class, the harder that gets. Most often the unintentional compromise is that there are a couple strong roleplayers in the group and the world is built around them, with the other players being supporting cast or one-trick ponies. In this case, being a good GM means telling a good enough story for the observers and giving enough spotlight to the flat characters that neither group either notices or cares.</p><p></p><p>But... this could be a totally separate thread. The point is that it doesn't make someone a bad GM or player just because they don't want to see Drizz't in a module.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercule, post: 6694069, member: 5100"] There's a balance. I've had plenty of players show up and say (implicitly) "Entertain us." I can do that, but there's a flip side: I expect to be entertained, as well. The whole group should be having fun. I would (and have) run different settings. Even radically different settings. There are boundaries. I'm going to pick on Drizz't and PC drow, in general. My experience with them is that they just annoy me. Someone [U]might[/U] sell me on an awesome concept, but it's going to have to be pretty fantastic before I'm going to consider it. If a "good DM" should be able to roll with it, then a "good player" should be have more than one concept. And maybe that word "concept" is key. If I ask what your character is like, I'd expect a bit more than "a drow ranger with scimitars" or "kinda like Drizz't, but with whips" if you want me to tweak a setting for it. If "race+class" is the depth of your concept, I'm fine with that. Just do it within the established parameters. Additionally, for a GM who does enjoy building a setting, asking to add in something incongruous is equivalent to asking that drow PC to deal with having tentacles instead of ears. Unless he's some sort of primadona, it really isn't all about him. Right? I'm glad that you enjoy being a meatspace MMO. I genuinely think it's great you and your group like to play that way. That would drive me nuts and make me feel like GMing was a second job -- though I might [U]play[/U] in that sort of game. I've always had a group, when I've wanted one, for 30+ years, so I don't think I'm doing anything wrong. Most of the time, I've had a hard time stepping down to be a player because people want me to GM. That doesn't make you wrong, either. It's just different styles and different social contracts for different groups. I actually see more similarity between the player who feels like the GM should allow any concept (that isn't grossly overpowered for the system) just because he asked and the GM who makes the players watch her narrate conversations between two NPCs or tells the player "your character wouldn't do that, he'd do [U]this[/U]". Either extreme is pretty selfish. There's a middle ground where both sides get something that falls within their definition of "fun", even if it isn't exactly their ideal; the social aspect makes up the difference. FWIW, I actually really enjoy running small group or solo games (though I rarely get to). I enjoy it specifically because it gives me a chance to form a world around well-defined and interesting characters. Play what you want, and I'll make it work. But... the more people are mixed in, and the more the concepts = race + class, the harder that gets. Most often the unintentional compromise is that there are a couple strong roleplayers in the group and the world is built around them, with the other players being supporting cast or one-trick ponies. In this case, being a good GM means telling a good enough story for the observers and giving enough spotlight to the flat characters that neither group either notices or cares. But... this could be a totally separate thread. The point is that it doesn't make someone a bad GM or player just because they don't want to see Drizz't in a module. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Out of the Abyss - No Drizzt afterall?
Top