Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hong" data-source="post: 204947" data-attributes="member: 537">Oh Ghu, here we go again.And many players don't particularly care. Not everybody places the same stock in going by the book as you do. Even those with a good understanding of the rules may be willing to cut a DM some slack, if he/she has good storytelling skills, good timing, a sense of drama, and is generally fair to everybody. Being faithful to the rules is just one ingredient of what makes a good campaign, and the best mix of ingredients will depend on who's playing.1) Going by the book is good if it leads to more consistency.2) Going by the book is bad if it requires more work than the DM is willing or able to put in, if it bogs down play, or if nobody would care anyway (eg if it's a group of OD&amp;D/1E/2E diehards, as seems to be the case for the original poster).Followups along the lines of &quot;this means the DM is lazy and/or incompetent&quot; will be treated with all the respect they deserve.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hong, post: 204947, member: 537"] Oh Ghu, here we go again. And many players don't particularly care. Not everybody places the same stock in going by the book as you do. Even those with a good understanding of the rules may be willing to cut a DM some slack, if he/she has good storytelling skills, good timing, a sense of drama, and is generally fair to everybody. Being faithful to the rules is just one ingredient of what makes a good campaign, and the best mix of ingredients will depend on who's playing. 1) Going by the book is good if it leads to more consistency. 2) Going by the book is bad if it requires more work than the DM is willing or able to put in, if it bogs down play, or if nobody would care anyway (eg if it's a group of OD&D/1E/2E diehards, as seems to be the case for the original poster). Followups along the lines of "this means the DM is lazy and/or incompetent" will be treated with all the respect they deserve. [/QUOTE]

Verification