Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Should the DM accommodate characters, or characters accommodate DMs?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 5099642" data-attributes="member: 3400"><p>Tough noogies? I don't think so. The Shaman's answer was an alternative to your loaded examples. It's not necessarily either choice you presented.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Whether or not a character should be able to display their concept more than once a blue moon depends on the concept. Sometimes there are concepts that don't lend themselves to frequent appearances.</p><p></p><p>But I will also say that the ability of a sandbox game to allow players to determine for themselves how and when to play up to their concepts is one of its strengths. But even then, concepts that don't work within the party may still be difficult to pull off without gaining the agreement of the other players.</p><p></p><p>For concepts that aren't well-tuned to certain aspects of adventuring, like being a mounted warrior in a dungeon delve or scaling the Cliffs of Insanity or being a fire mage in a campaign against the fire giant invasion, I would expect the player with the limited concept to show some initiative in finding ways to use their concept. And, when reasonable, I'd do what I can to accommodate them. I'd expect the mounted warrior to seek out tournaments, to advise the party to travel overland to places rather than teleport when the magic becomes available, to spend the money necessary to pay for transporting his mount in the hold of a ship, or trying to get ahold of a stone horse or other compatible magical means of getting a mount under his butt that's easier to manage.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But as we keep pointing out, usually the situation isn't that stark. And if the DM tells the players what the campaign will generally cover and the player disregards it in favor of his concept, then ultimately them's the breaks. They went with their concept eyes wide open so to speak.</p><p></p><p>I'm not going to blatantly disallow a players choices if they're using resources I've approved (resources like the Book of 9 Swords that I don't approve is another matter), I'll just tell them what they can expect and leave the choice up to them. Managing their own frustration is ultimately their own responsibility.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="billd91, post: 5099642, member: 3400"] Tough noogies? I don't think so. The Shaman's answer was an alternative to your loaded examples. It's not necessarily either choice you presented. Whether or not a character should be able to display their concept more than once a blue moon depends on the concept. Sometimes there are concepts that don't lend themselves to frequent appearances. But I will also say that the ability of a sandbox game to allow players to determine for themselves how and when to play up to their concepts is one of its strengths. But even then, concepts that don't work within the party may still be difficult to pull off without gaining the agreement of the other players. For concepts that aren't well-tuned to certain aspects of adventuring, like being a mounted warrior in a dungeon delve or scaling the Cliffs of Insanity or being a fire mage in a campaign against the fire giant invasion, I would expect the player with the limited concept to show some initiative in finding ways to use their concept. And, when reasonable, I'd do what I can to accommodate them. I'd expect the mounted warrior to seek out tournaments, to advise the party to travel overland to places rather than teleport when the magic becomes available, to spend the money necessary to pay for transporting his mount in the hold of a ship, or trying to get ahold of a stone horse or other compatible magical means of getting a mount under his butt that's easier to manage. But as we keep pointing out, usually the situation isn't that stark. And if the DM tells the players what the campaign will generally cover and the player disregards it in favor of his concept, then ultimately them's the breaks. They went with their concept eyes wide open so to speak. I'm not going to blatantly disallow a players choices if they're using resources I've approved (resources like the Book of 9 Swords that I don't approve is another matter), I'll just tell them what they can expect and leave the choice up to them. Managing their own frustration is ultimately their own responsibility. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Should the DM accommodate characters, or characters accommodate DMs?
Top