Rant -- GM Control, Taking it Too Far?

[Mallus]

Huh? How is an elf fighting a gelantinous cube inherently not consistent. You're loosing me here.

From my perspective, how is an elf fighting a hostile cube of Jello anything other than absurd?

I am saying there is a big difference in the inherent silliness found in the FR versus the inherent silliness found in Dark Sun, do you disagree with that?

Nope.

 

[Imaro]

From my perspective, how is an elf fighting a hostile cube of Jello anything other than absurd?

Absurd =/= inconsistent, it's all dependent upon the context of the world that the DM creates.

 

[Mallus]

Absurd =/= inconsistent...

You're making my head hurt.

Anyway, Imaro, I just created a new thread for posting current PC names in your party. Drop in and add yours. I'm curious to see how my experience re: names differs from, well, anyone post to that thread.

 

[Imaro]

1. Why is this concern unique to the DM? What if the DM hates dragonborn, but loves tieflings, and one of the players knows that his hatred of tieflings will ultimately have a negative effect on his contributions to the game?

If your argument is that the DM is more important, so he has to be mollycoddled more than the players because his unhappiness will reverberate in a way that a player's will not, are you really happy with that reasoning? With the idea that the DM is essentially a giant baby, and everyone has to be extra nice to him and give him privileges that no one else gets not because he will use them more wisely, but simply because catering to him is the only way that everyone can get along?

2. I question whether this really happens to people. See my earlier post about actually hating something so bad it makes the game suffer, and just being dramatic. IF the DM hates something so bad the game will suffer from his primal revulsion, THEN that something should probably be banned (or the DM replaced with someone a little less emotionally fragile), BUT I think it is very unlikely that most people actually hate something like a player character race quite that much.

I'm amazed how much disagreement my views generate. I just think that the reason that we respect the DM's authority is because he is in a position to best decide whether adding dragonborn to the game will help or hurt the overall game experience. I think the respect that the DM is entitled to is tied to this superior perspective, and is therefore forfeit if the DM abandons that perspective and starts using the authority vested in him by the group to satisfy personal whims unrelated to the quality of the game.

So, I respect the decision of a DM who bans something for a game related reason, and I don't respect the decision of a DM who bans something because he thinks its stupid and he knows he can get away with banning it because the players will let him have what he wants rather than try to find a new DM.

I don't see why that's so controversial.

Please allow me to reiterate...

I would beg to differ with this. I think a DM being upfront about not liking Dragonborn and banning them from play is probably the best solution for all, and here's why... He has to run the campaign world, now assuming a player character creates a Dragonborn because they like the race as a whole as opposed to the bonuses (which I think is a perfectly valid assumption), doesn't it then befall on the DM to create a portion of his campaign and adventures around Dragonborn? Now since the DM has already stated he doesn't care for the race, is it fair for him to have to spend so much effort and time dealing with an aspect of the game he dislikes? Another fact is that the DM will probably not do as good of a job catering to this player as he will the others for the simple fact he dislikes this portion of his duties... personally I'd rather a DM be upfront about this than wonder why the game seems to center around Fred's elf and Garry's Halfling but never my Dragonborn.

This isn't about being emotionally fragile, it's about human nature. If I don't like something it will be harder for me to integrate it into my game, come up with cool things for it and generally devote the time and effort into it that I do with the parts of the campaign I enjoy... human nature. I think it's more mature to admit you don't like it and ban it than to end up doing a mediocre to horrible job integrating the race and engaging the PC who wants to play that race.

And I mean honestly couldn't the same argument be said for a PC who has to have a specific race (out of the numerous ones offered) or OMG!!! Teh game is irrevocably ruined!!! for them?

 

[Nightson]

Huh? How is an elf fighting a gelantinous cube inherently not consistent. You're loosing me here.

A Gelatinous Cube is jello that eats people. I mean, it's a silly monster.

 

[Imaro]

A Gelatinous Cube is jello that eats people. I mean, it's a silly monster.

I get it's a silly monster but that does not automatically make it inconsistent... if one's campaign world is silly, does it? Inconsistent and silly are two different things is all I'm saying.

 

[Cadfan]

This isn't about being emotionally fragile, it's about human nature. If I don't like something it will be harder for me to integrate it into my game, come up with cool things for it and generally devote the time and effort into it that I do with the parts of the campaign I enjoy... human nature. I think it's more mature to admit you don't like it and ban it than to end up doing a mediocre to horrible job integrating the race and engaging the PC who wants to play that race.

But it would be even more mature not to be the sort of person who has such a hate-on for a part of a roleplaying game that he can't do a good job running a game if its present.

I mean, I hate half races. I think they're the dumbest thing ever. I hate the implications about biology, and I hate the way that only certain half races ever show up. I particularly hate the way all of the half races are popularly labeled by their percentage of human.

But I can't for the life of me imagine not being able to DM competently to a group with a half orc PC.

And I mean honestly couldn't the same argument be said for a PC who has to have a specific race (out of the numerous ones offered) or OMG!!! Teh game is irrevocably ruined!!! for them?

Yes.

I mean, I acknowledged that up front, in the first sentence of the material you quoted. If its possible for someone to hate something like a player race so much that he can't contribute to the game effectively if its present, then there's no reason that's limited to only DMs. Its an open question for those who think that this sort of thing happens- what should players do in those circumstances? I honestly don't know.

 

[Voadam]

Well, I've ranted on this issue more than a few times in the past as well. I find it funny that most people are taking the player's side in this, when a few months ago, when I suggested that a DM place his personal preferences aside in favor of the player's preferences, I was resoundly booed.

What changed?

Here we have exactly the point I was making back then. The DM doesn't like something. He has no reason to say no, other than his personal preference. The player wants it. Most people here are saying the DM should bend and allow the player what she wants. Yet, back then, I was told that a DM's right to veto anything and everything in the game was absolute, 100% rock solid. If the DM didn't like it, it was given the toss and you either sucked it up or left the group.

Funny how things go.

I commiserate with the OP, I don't like playing pregen characters either or constantly having my ideas shot down.

However after talking things over with the DM and trying to get him to change his mind those are the options. If he won't change his ruling architect of sleep can either suck it up and play under these conditions or decide not to play.

Ultimately its still the DM's call about what is included or not included.

 

[Imaro]

But it would be even more mature not to be the sort of person who has such a hate-on for a part of a roleplaying game that he can't do a good job running a game if its present.

I mean, I hate half races. I think they're the dumbest thing ever. I hate the implications about biology, and I hate the way that only certain half races ever show up. I particularly hate the way all of the half races are popularly labeled by their percentage of human.

But I can't for the life of me imagine not being able to DM competently to a group with a half orc PC.

I guess I don't see this as anything different than a DM/GM selecting the genre he wants to play in or what game system he wants to run... each of these is a subjective thing right? I mean honestly, there are certain sci-fi rpg's I don't want to run because I'm not interested in them or don't like certain aspects of them, is this any more or less irrational than not wanting to run a fantasy game with certain races or tropes? Again other than all of this being upfront before people choose to play or not, I see no problem with the DM having ownership over the campaign world and tropes, while the players have ownership over their characters.

 

[Voadam]

I suppose. Personally, I don't really see the difference. If, as was repeatedly stated in The DM entitlement thread I was talking about last post a DM's right to veto any and all things from his game, then, it is absolute. There should be no difference at all. His control of his game is 100% his, so, any quibbling by the player is wrong.

Note, I completely disagree with this and think that it should be very much a give and take proposition and that when the only issue at stake is the DM's personal preference, the Dm should step back, but, that's how I DM. I don't think my position as DM gives me the prerogative to squash any and all ideas that my players have.

But, I was repeatedly told I was completely wrong in that other thread.

Funny thing that.

What do you mean any quibbling is wrong? The DM has final say. That doesn't mean players can't talk about what they would like or don't like. It means the DM can veto stuff.

I still think you are wrong. I don't feel that in a conflict of DM and player personal preferences about a game world element the DM is morally obligated to accede to a player's preference.