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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9529854" data-attributes="member: 6785785">This is the kind of straightforward talk I prefer. I am very much talking about control of the setting and the contents that comprise it. Whether a person may have control issues beyond that is not something I care about (as far as this discussion goes). I've run just about every iteration of D&D since I was a kid. I've read the rule books and tons of supplemental material. The DM as primary storyteller, as arbiter of the world, and so on... it's a very strong theme across the board for D&D. I have no problem with him expressing his views or his thoughts on the matter. He can criticize my comments or my chosen methods of play all he likes. I can take it. I'm only pointing it out because when folks even approach criticism of his preferred styles... or if he perceives such criticism, he points out that it's a problem. Personally, I prefer we actually be able to examine things critically. I No, control is not an insult. It's literally what people are claiming they want. I don't know why folks would explain how they prefer to keep control over the setting, but then balk when it's pointed out as such. The desire to control things is, in my opinion, at the heart of a lot of matters of playstyle. I don't know what "hand-waving" means in this context. Do you mean "introducing only as needed in the moment"? If so, why is that a problem? If the DM invents a character two weeks before play, are they "hand-waving" that NPC into existence?</blockquote>

Verification