Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 3136795" data-attributes="member: 1210">I'd like to preface this post by saying that we only have one side of the story, and that since the dm and player in question are bf/gf, there might have been more at work than it at first appears.&nbsp; Right.&nbsp; Now then:Wow- to be honest, I'm not entirely sure what I would have done at that stage of the game.&nbsp; As a dm, I likely would have asked the player if she wanted to take up the reigns of dming, because she sure isn't acting like she wants to play in my game.&nbsp; And that's fine; change of venue, npc her character and pick up the game where we left off.&nbsp; Alternatively, she could knuckle under.&nbsp; Players who seek to avoid the consequences of their actions piss me off.&nbsp; If you're a 2nd-level fighter and you insult the hill giant chief while surrounded by his warriors, don't be shocked if you become a pasty liquified ingredient in the stew.&nbsp; This incident reads to me- and granted, we only have one side of the story- like a player who wants to control the game.&nbsp; She wants to be the decider.&nbsp; What if someone else thought that getting into the book deal stuff would have been fantastic fun?&nbsp; Is it her place to tell them, &quot;No, you have fun my way.&quot;&nbsp; IMNSHO, no.&nbsp; Worse yet, what's next?&nbsp; Is she going to decide that negotiations are boring, so just roll a damn Diplomacy check and get over it?&nbsp; Well, what about the two players who love the roleplaying aspects?The DM is the decider.&nbsp; IF the dm decides a roll or set of rolls is all that's required, that's fine.&nbsp; However, if the dm decides that the scene needs to play out more actively, then hey, PLAY THE SCENE OUT.Really, this is one idea where the player's only real control is the option to leave the table.&nbsp; She doesn't get to decide the course of the adventure.Edit: Rereading my post, it sounds harsher than I had intended.&nbsp; But I think that the player's &quot;No&quot; response was completely unacceptable.&nbsp; I also think that the player in question might greatly enjoy dming, but prolly has a lot to learn about it.I didn't mean up above that the player's choice should be &quot;my way or the highway,&quot; but if she wants to stay in that game she needs to reconcile herself to the fact that the dm is in charge.&nbsp; Maybe take a couple weeks off and then come back in.&nbsp; Hmm, and then again, I also recognize that there are legitimate groups whose games are more &quot;group games&quot; than &quot;James' game&quot; or &quot;Betty's game&quot;.&nbsp; Nothing wrong with that.&nbsp; But for me, and I think for most groups, ultimately it's the dm's game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="the Jester, post: 3136795, member: 1210"] I'd like to preface this post by saying that we only have one side of the story, and that since the dm and player in question are bf/gf, there might have been more at work than it at first appears. Right. Now then: Wow- to be honest, I'm not entirely sure what I would have done at that stage of the game. As a dm, I likely would have asked the player if she wanted to take up the reigns of dming, because she sure isn't acting like she wants to play in my game. And that's fine; change of venue, npc her character and pick up the game where we left off. Alternatively, she could knuckle under. Players who seek to avoid the consequences of their actions piss me off. If you're a 2nd-level fighter and you insult the hill giant chief while surrounded by his warriors, don't be shocked if you become a pasty liquified ingredient in the stew. This incident reads to me- and granted, we only have one side of the story- like a player who wants to control the game. She wants to be the decider. What if someone else thought that getting into the book deal stuff would have been fantastic fun? Is it her place to tell them, "No, you have fun [i]my way.[/i]" IMNSHO, no. Worse yet, what's next? Is she going to decide that negotiations are boring, so just roll a damn Diplomacy check and get over it? Well, what about the two players who love the roleplaying aspects? The DM is the decider. IF the dm decides a roll or set of rolls is all that's required, that's fine. However, if the dm decides that the scene needs to play out more actively, then hey, PLAY THE SCENE OUT. Really, this is one idea where the player's only real control is the option to leave the table. She doesn't get to decide the course of the adventure. [b]Edit:[/b] Rereading my post, it sounds harsher than I had intended. But I think that the player's "No" response was completely unacceptable. I also think that the player in question might greatly enjoy dming, but prolly has a lot to learn about it. I didn't mean up above that the player's choice should be "my way or the highway," but if she wants to stay in that game she needs to reconcile herself to the fact that the dm is in charge. Maybe take a couple weeks off and then come back in. Hmm, and then again, I [i]also[/i] recognize that there are legitimate groups whose games are more "group games" than "James' game" or "Betty's game". Nothing wrong with that. But for me, and I think for most groups, ultimately it's the dm's game. [/QUOTE]

Verification