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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bendris Noulg" data-source="post: 1484777" data-attributes="member: 6398">I gotta agree with Belen on this...  Your willingness to accept "flavor" seems to have a direct relation to replacement crunch.  I also agree that one player can ruin the fun for the other players; I've experienced that first-hand several times over (indeed, such experiences shaped my philosophy as a GM as well as tempered my approach to other GMs in regards to both enforcing and accepting variance). Ah, but you are overlooking something: At any time during the "3 step interview", the player also has the opportunity to decide on his own that there isn't going to be a good fit and turn down that game at his own choosing.  And I certainly feel no ill-will towards anyone that does so. Except that I'm under no compulsion to explain the non-existance of something other than "it doesn't fit".  Indeed, "this isn't Greyhawk" should be enough. If the player's that imaginative, he can make his own setting and run it.  As is, I don't feel obligated to shoehorn in something simply because it's in the Core Rules and a player thinks it should be.  And, on top, the last thing I want is a well-meaning but imaginatively-inept player coming up with what he thinks is a kewl reason/exception to allow something when, in all reality, the idea sucks. If it fit, it would be there already.  A player that at that point really has only three choices: 1. Accept it.2. Depart in a civil manner.3. Whine about it and get the boot. 1 is preferred (and everyone that's gone this route has enjoyed themselves), 2 is unfortunate (but, hopefully, the individual will find another group that he fits into better), and 3 is a problem (which I will do everything in my power to avoid or, having failed to avoid it, eliminate in the most expediant means available). And I remind folks: These standards I hold as a GM are also the standards I hold as a Player.  If I am not willing to accept the campaign world conditions for a game I'm joining, I have no business being there.  Thus, anyone not willing to accept the campaign world conditions for my game has no business trying to join it either.  So, yes, it does indeed go both ways.</blockquote>

Verification