NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Beginning of the End" data-source="post: 5099944" data-attributes="member: 55271">Man. You are really wedded to the idea of DM as Dictator(TM).In my campaign the PC is free to play a mounted character. And that means that they have to deal with whatever limitations that implies. But since I don't dictate that they have to go places that their mount can't go, they will generally choose to do things that will allow them to use their mount.And, as they gain resources, they can spend those resources to give their character even more options while remaining true to their character concept. This isn't required, but is (once again) common sense and enlightened self-interest.You, OTOH, apparently feel that the DM needs to be a railroading control freak.So, like I said before: Stop railroading your players and the problem will go away.Depends on the DM and the Adventure Path. But if you're telling me that running the Adventure Path requires the players to make specific choices and cannot function unless the players make those specific choices...Well, that's the definition of a railroad.And if the Adventure Path isn't forcing those specific choices, then there's nothing incompatible between an Adventure Path and a mounted PC.You've been told repeatedly how to do it. But you're completely stuck inside your "the DM must be a control freak" mindset that you can't acknowledge the solution.Mounted knights aren't a staple of the dungeon-crawling genre.So if your players are choosing to play mounted knights, they're telling you that they're not interested in the dungeon-crawling genre. Either pay attention or stop being a control freak so that they can take control of their own destiny and avoid the stuff they don't like.It is possible for your players to create a fundamentally incompatible group of PCs. But I would point out that:(1) Functional and enjoyable compromise is actually much easier than you make it sound. Sometimes this means time-sharing (you get to do your thing, then I get to do my thing). Sometimes this means finding the activity that both people can participate in.(2) The problem is trivially solved by having everyone communicate during the character creation phase of the game. This is partly about the GM communicating the nature of the campaign, but it's also about the players creating compatible characters who have a reason to adventure together.If you're playing with spoiled 5 year olds, of course, compromise will be difficult to achieve. The solution here is to find players who aren't spoiled 5 year olds.</blockquote>

Verification