Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 6400134" data-attributes="member: 2011">This.Because those players do not realize that the ones being controlling and manipulative, are themselves, not the DM. They see a disallowed race and the first thing that comes to their minds is how THEY are being mistreated or restricted. They are not interested in all of the hard work that the DM put into this campaign. They are not interested in whether their PC idea is disruptive or causes other players to accommodate their eccentricities. They are only concerned with the fun that they will have being the odd man out and that they will have forcing the campaign world to bend to their will.And they do not even see it. They place all of the DM's and other player's objections into the simple box of "the DM is so controlling" or "the DM is not being an advocate for the players".The first thing out of their mouths is "If I am not having fun, why should I play this game?".Not "If we are not having fun, why should we play this game?".The concept is not one of the DM telling a player "you must play a Cleric". I've never done that in my life, in fact, I have run many campaigns where we roll PCs up individually in a bubble where the other players do not know what race/class/alignment the other PCs are until we play. This has the downside of not allowing players to share background stories, but it has the upside of each player getting to play exactly what they want (within the limits of any race/class/alignment houserule restrictions). No subtle coercion to play a certain role, just because the role does not yet exist in the PC party.But the point of the game is for everyone to have fun, not just one entitled to change the houserules player.</blockquote>

Verification