Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 1568389" data-attributes="member: 19675">That would be me, and no I didn't.&nbsp; You missed mine.Yes, the group has a right to expect players to conform to &quot;unwritten rules&quot; of the campaign.But players have the right to play the PC they designed for that campaign without being subsequently neutered.The DM is not just the creator of the campaign- he's the gatekeeper of the internal logic of the campaign.If, in your example, the DM wants to play a serious campaign, he should not allow a player to play &quot;a gnome prankster doing his best to make light of any dark plot.&quot;&nbsp; That PC concept is entirely counter to the campaign and will be as abrasive as a sandstone suppository, and should not be permitted into the campaign under any circumstances.Here, the DM allowed a combat monster into a role-play heavy campaign, and is now (among other things) griping that the PC outshines everyone in combat.&nbsp; Asking the combat monster not to excel at combat is like asking a lion to become a vegan.&nbsp; The PC's design should not have been allowed in the campaign, and now all are suffering.&nbsp; The DM and his buddy are at odds, and the other players are feeling superfluous.&nbsp; This is the DM's fault, and none other- he didn't act as the gatekeeper to his campaign.&nbsp; If he had, this string probably would not exist.If nothing else, the player, upon being denied his combat monster, might have decided not to play in the campaign.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 1568389, member: 19675"] That would be me, and no I didn't. You missed mine. Yes, the group has a right to expect players to conform to "unwritten rules" of the campaign. But players have the right to play the PC they designed for that campaign without being subsequently neutered. The DM is not just the creator of the campaign- he's the gatekeeper of the internal logic of the campaign. If, in your example, the DM wants to play a serious campaign, he should not allow a player to play [B]"a gnome prankster doing his best to make light of any dark plot."[/B] That PC concept is entirely counter to the campaign and will be as abrasive as a sandstone suppository, and should not be permitted into the campaign under any circumstances. Here, the DM allowed a combat monster into a role-play heavy campaign, and is now (among other things) griping that the PC outshines everyone in combat. Asking the combat monster not to excel at combat is like asking a lion to become a vegan. The PC's design should not have been allowed in the campaign, and now all are suffering. The DM and his buddy are at odds, and the other players are feeling superfluous. This is the DM's fault, and none other- he didn't act as the gatekeeper to his campaign. If he had, this string probably would not exist. If nothing else, the player, upon being denied his combat monster, might have decided not to play in the campaign. [/QUOTE]

Verification