Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="scourger" data-source="post: 5447071" data-attributes="member: 12328">In a way, I've &quot;fired&quot; every DM in a game that I've stopped attending; and I've been &quot;fired&quot; as a DM in many of the games I've stopped running.&nbsp; Not every game is a success, even when playing among friends.&nbsp; Few campaigns get to an actual end, even if one is planned.&nbsp; The trouble with my group when it was bigger was that it really was a collection of individuals more than a group.&nbsp; By that I mean that most of my fellow players are not willing to play something that isn't exactly what they want for very long until they find something else to do with their time.&nbsp; It took me a while to realize it, but there it is.&nbsp; We're actually more cohesive now that there are just 3 of us than we were back when there were 7 of us (on average), but our options are more limited.&nbsp; Add real life concerns, and there just isn't the time or effort to spare for gaming as there used to be.&nbsp; So, attendance is down.&nbsp; Back when we had more of these concerns, I identified the &quot;player boycott&quot; and the &quot;DM embargo.&quot;&nbsp; The limits are that a boycott has to unanimous to shut off all demand for a game, and an embargo has to cut off the only supply of any game.&nbsp; Otherwsie, they don't work.&nbsp; And, it's not really the kind of thing that friends should do anyway.&nbsp; I would prefer simply to be told directly that a given game I'm running isn't working and move on to something else, and vice versa for me as a player.&nbsp; On the other hand, I will give it a go if a friend really wants to run something, and I expect the same in return.&nbsp; I've been disappointed in that expectation, so I've become more and more willing to &quot;fire&quot; a DM if I don't like a game; even if it means that I leave for a while and the game goes on without me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="scourger, post: 5447071, member: 12328"] In a way, I've "fired" every DM in a game that I've stopped attending; and I've been "fired" as a DM in many of the games I've stopped running. Not every game is a success, even when playing among friends. Few campaigns get to an actual end, even if one is planned. The trouble with my group when it was bigger was that it really was a collection of individuals more than a group. By that I mean that most of my fellow players are not willing to play something that isn't exactly what they want for very long until they find something else to do with their time. It took me a while to realize it, but there it is. We're actually more cohesive now that there are just 3 of us than we were back when there were 7 of us (on average), but our options are more limited. Add real life concerns, and there just isn't the time or effort to spare for gaming as there used to be. So, attendance is down. Back when we had more of these concerns, I identified the "player boycott" and the "DM embargo." The limits are that a boycott has to unanimous to shut off all demand for a game, and an embargo has to cut off the only supply of any game. Otherwsie, they don't work. And, it's not really the kind of thing that friends should do anyway. I would prefer simply to be told directly that a given game I'm running isn't working and move on to something else, and vice versa for me as a player. On the other hand, I will give it a go if a friend really wants to run something, and I expect the same in return. I've been disappointed in that expectation, so I've become more and more willing to "fire" a DM if I don't like a game; even if it means that I leave for a while and the game goes on without me. [/QUOTE]

Verification