NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 8022946" data-attributes="member: 53980">I agree that the GMs preferences are also important, but disagree that they are more important than the players' preferences. For example, I have a player who doesn't really like sci-fi stuff. If I were going to do a campaign where they play the remnants left behind by extinct humanity, I wouldn't have just robots as playable characters. I'd consider what he likes and what would be appropriate to the campaign. In this case, he'd probably enjoy playing an animal that's been genetically enhanced to be hyper intelligent. So I'd include that as an option. My campaign concept is intact and my friend has at least one option that he'd likely enjoy playing.Yes, the GM should create a campaign that they want to run, but I don't think it should be to the exclusion of what the players enjoy.I had a DM who ran a goblin campaign once. He created all kinds of different goblin types and goblin themed classes. However, he was the only one who loved goblins, and on top of that the goblin options were significantly underpowered. We had fun with the campaign for a while, but once we left the starting (goblin) area, as characters died off they were replaced with non-goblin characters. The DM objected because I don't think he expected such rapid attrition of the goblins, but they were vastly underpowered compared to normal characters. Ultimately we chose to end the campaign. We didn't have the interest in goblins that he did, and he wanted to run a goblin campaign. Perhaps if he had made the goblin options more appealing, or broadened the campaign to include options that actually appealed to the players, we might have seen that campaign to its conclusion.</blockquote>

Verification