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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ridley's Cohort" data-source="post: 905278" data-attributes="member: 545">That is a fair point, but I somewhat disagree.A game is "owned" by every participant at the table.  That is true in Monopoly -- where it is an unwritten rule that you do not throw the game just because you are losing; you would play your best until that inevitable bankruptcy out of a sense of loyalty and fairness to those still in the running.An RPG campaign is owned by every participant at the table, although some are more equal than others.  We defer to the DM as final arbiter out of respect and gratitude for his greater knowledge and personal time investment in the game.  The key point is all the players own the game.  As a cooperative, social game, it is the responsibility of every player to make reasonable efforts to be accomodating to other players' wishes (though not necessarily their PCs' wishes) and help them have fun as well.  So while the 3 other players at the table should not order around the 4th player, there is a mutual duty to try and negotiate out such that all will be happy with the end result.  Extremes do not work.  Saying "I am a roleplayer, so my character does what he wants and I don't care about your characters," would be an example of playing a roleplaying game poorly.  So would be bullying another player about their PC's actions that are in character.If players do not accommodate each other, in character logic will demand that most adventuring groups break apart.  IME, most adventuring parties are bizarre, motley crews who couldn't organize themselves out of a paper bag.  Players DO accommodate each other, all the time.  That's why the game actually works.</blockquote>

Verification