Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SSquirrel" data-source="post: 1474789" data-attributes="member: 5202">Ya know I was gonna do a point by point answer to KM, but BN beat me to it and Barsoomcore said the other things I was thinking so yeah I second both.  I think the 3 step interview may be a bit much, but then again, my groups over the years have always been much more free form with membership.  I used to play in a CoC game that had about 6-8 players who were there every week and then another dozen or so that showed up occasionally, etc.  If you were a part of the group that day and someone hadn't told JIm they wouldn't be there that character would be the first likely "oops".  If you told him in advance it was cool so long as ya didn't make a habit of it.  If you gave no notice you got tossed into the mix of possible hits.  My current group has had the same 4 people at the core the entire time and over time another 3 have become core members.  We've also had at least another 8 people drift in and out in the last 4 years.  Generally these were friends of at least 1 of us and most were gaming for their first time. Some decided it wasn't for them and left, some got annoying as all get out and were told to do so by the DM.  One pair has been in and out of the group several times over the last 7 years and its generally when they're on our DMs good side that they would join up.  That got old for him pretty quick and BANG they went again heh.    We're all a generally helpful bunch and want to make people comfortable and to enjoy themselves so we try to make it the least confusing we can *not so easy when our main game was Rolemaster for a long while*.  I'm going to be running a game of my own of AU in mid-May and have already told people I want to use the new version of Ken Hood's Grim n Gritty rules and there's no Oathsworn.  I've told them that I have problems with seeing how I'd be able to easily work the Oath needed into the game that wouldn't set conflict into the group for what firection they would go etc.  Everyone is fine with this.  Being old Rolemaster fans, grim n gritty is ok with them.  While I did justify my decisions, it was just b/c that's how I am.  They would have accepted the decision anyway, but I just always explain myself. I don't think a DM is REQUIRED to do so tho.  I mean it's THEIR game.  If the world doesn't sound like fun, don't play in it.  If your pet race has never existed there, that is the ONLY reason they need.  Heck if there's no gnomes and you press him and he goes on a rant about how useless they are and how annoying and he just hates em (hypothetically speaking) hey that's a reason too and a good one.  Why?  Because why should the DM run something that doesn't fit HIS vision?  He shouldn't be made to redesign his world to fit elves in if he doesn't want elves in the game.  It could be a world of just Goblins, Dwarves and Orcs and someone might bitch.  Tough.    Ya know, I ssaid I wasn't gonna respond about it but oh well I guess I did *grin*  least I didn't do it point by point.  Anyway, run your game with exactly what you want in it.  Make sure the players know BEFORE character creation what all of your house rules and other alterations are.  Reasonable players will possibly ask why something isn't there, but accept whatever the DM says as his ideal of the setting.  If the DM decides the player is right and X would be more interesting to have in the game after all congrats.  If everything stays the same that's great too.  Good players look at "limitations" and see what they can do that is interesting to them and how they can stand out from each other.  Read some of Mark Rosewater's columns over at <a href="http://www.magicthegathering.com" target="_blank">www.magicthegathering.com</a> about limitations vs completely open.  1 pushes creativity and 1 does not.  Guess which one.  yup.  Limitations.  Hagen</blockquote>

Verification