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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6336786" data-attributes="member: 22779">OTOH, as a general maxim, "Defer to engaged players" isn't a bad one.  It certainly isn't always true.  But, as a rule of thumb, letting highly engaged players sit in the driver's seat (at least for a bit) is generally a very good idea.And, again, as a general rule, "Don't make the DM do things he/she doesn't want to" is a very good rule of thumb as well.  If the DM turns to you and says, "No, I really don't want this in the campaign because its no fun for me", then well, it's time to shelve that character and come up with a new one.Additionally, in a heavier plotsy campaign where the DM does have a larger plot going on, say any given adventure path style game, then it is incumbent on everyone at the table to make characters that fit within that framework.  I ran the Savage Tide Adventure Path some years ago.  But, I made it absolutely clear that this was going to be a highly mobile campaign - so, no one came back to me with characters who had really strong ties and goals centred around any single location.  It just would't fit within the campaign  There has to be open communication around the table.  I'm a huge, huge fan of group chargen, creating a group template that fits within the campaign that the DM has in mind.  If I want to run a campaign where you are unlikely to leave a single city, making a nomad character that wants to explore the world is a non-starter.  OTOH, if I am running a very open, sandbox style campaign, the players are going to have to negotiate with each other as to what goals they want to pursue to find things that everyone can get on board with.  If one player has a cleric that wants to stay in a certain area to defend his home temple and another player wants to go plane jumping, we're going to have a problem.I guess, at the end of the day, secrets and secret campaign reveals are not more important than ensuring player buy in.  If there is some campaign secret that is going to invalidate someone's character, I, personally, think that it's better just to be up front with the player rather than try to maintain the secret.  Heck, I can always change the secret a bit, or be vague enough when talking to the player, that the impact of the secret isn't lost.</blockquote>

Verification