(Poll, please read 1st post) What does the DM have the right to restrict?

[freebfrost]

It's the DM's game.

I expect my players to respect that when I am behind the screen, and I certainly respect that when sitting on the other side.

 

[Harmon]

Hi all -

I'm wondering what you, as a player of D&D3, expect to be available for character creation when you sit down at a table for a new game. What rules, etc. do you have a right to expect being in play when you're sitting down at the table with a new group and you haven't made any special agreements in advance?

Having been a GM- I am familar with most of the classes and such within the three Core Books, now bring in a Complete Book and I might or might not have knowledge of the classes, and abilities, which would restrict the Players options.

Having a campaign vision, or possibly that I would rather more role playing that one class might reduce I would restrict certein classes, or abilities. Its not to say that I would do this with every campaign.

Example- Way back when I ran a certein campaign one of the Players wanted to play a Bard, I said "I'd rather you not, I would prefer you play a Rogue," when the Player insisted I put my foot down with a "no Bards." Later when the campaign came into being the Player I think understood that there was knowledge that I might have to give him as a Bard, that he could gain through Role Playing.

 

[JDJblatherings]

The DM should be able to change or include whatever they want as long as it mostly spelled out up front and doesn't break the implicit campaign starting point.

What clerics can only get 4th level spells by sacrificing a virgin, but the chruch is neutral good ? <- bad situation.

 

[Crothian]

It's the DM's game.

I expect my players to respect that when I am behind the screen, and I certainly respect that when sitting on the other side.

That's the way I feel. DM's allow what they are comfortable with and what will work with their campaign. If as a player I feel that is too restrictive or something then more then likely I won't be happy with that campaign anyway.

 

[carmachu]

AS long as the DM lays out the rules of the road ahead of time and is clear about it, I have no problems with the DM's decision.

But if its doing it on the fly.....it can cause issues.

In the game I'm curently in, he's laid out the PLayers guide, and the 4 complete books.
Thats it. And thats fine. I have a cleric, I know what I'm working towards....now if a couple levels later he decided to yank say the complete divine, and I was working towards a PrC for a couple levels...it be a problem.

UNless I HAVE to absolutely have something from another book(doubtful) I might ask....but no means no. He's running the game.

What it comes down to is IF the DM is clear and consistant about his restrictions....it wouldnt sit well if he said no to say....the complete champion to me....but let another player use it.

 

[Calithena]

By the way, I'm happy that most of you are picking the first two options, because I'm thinking of going back to 3e and running a core books only campaign with options (mostly: number of baseline spells, races, core classes, and multiclassing) reduced to bring them more in line with earlier editions.

I do have an interest in the more general question too though because I like to play lots of my own worlds which require various restrictions in order to preserve the feel.

 

[Doug McCrae]

On the internet a lot of time you get the impression that D&D players now expect to be able to make up anything they want for any game regardless of the individual DM, world, etc.

Where on the internet? From this poll's results?

 

[Arnwyn]

I expect DMs to cut out whatever they want to - that's their perogative. Now, there are certainly consequences to doing so, but that's neither here nor there.

(Aside: For me personally, I likely wouldn't be interested in any game in which at least the entire PHB was included - but that's just me and my personal preferences. I would never begrudge a DM for doing so.)

 

[mcrow]

As GM I appreciate it when the players give my idea a try. It makes it more fun for me to run the games if I can switch things up now and then. Then again, I normally ask what the players think of the idea first. Ultimately, if the players are having fun it makes it much easier for me to have fun, so i get input.

 

[Calithena]

I hope you picked #3 if that's how you feel, Arnwyn.