Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7656346" data-attributes="member: 22779">And fantastic for you.&nbsp; You are a better DM than me.&nbsp; Happy now?I realize it doesn't matter to you.&nbsp; For you, you play a game where the DM's view is law.&nbsp; I would loathe your game.&nbsp; I wouldn't play at your table.&nbsp; Not because it's bad, but because it's bad for me.However, I'm not the one who keeps trying to convince others that my way is the best way.&nbsp; You are.&nbsp; You have repeatedly tried to convince me that your way is better - &quot;consensus games lead to milquetoast games&quot; I believe was the exact comment.&nbsp; &quot;I've never lost a player&quot; is another.&nbsp; Sorry, BryonD, but, if I made the mistake of sitting at your table, I'd leave after one or two sessions.&nbsp; Again, not because you run a bad game but because I would be a terrible fit for your table.&nbsp; Fortunately, I have a fantastic group currently and this is simply an issue that doesn't come up.&nbsp; Not that we don't debate rules stuff, we do.&nbsp; But, because the entire group is engaged in trying to make the game fun for everyone, no one is left holding the bag when things go sideways.&nbsp; Everyone is pro-active.&nbsp; Which, from the descriptions of you and Steel Dragons have given, you would not appreciate.&nbsp; SD talks about being firm about not changing his setting to accommodate player concepts.&nbsp; Again, totally fine.&nbsp; I believe that you and he both have a pretty firm idea of the experience you want to present your players with and don't want a lot of changes interfering with that experience.&nbsp; It's not to my taste.&nbsp; I'm far closer to GM4PG in that if I find I'm mistaken, I don't try to cover it up and pretend that I meant to do it all along.&nbsp; I simply admit to fallibility and work with the group to find a way to smooth over the rough edges.&nbsp; I expect my players to come to the table ready to write and rewrite large swaths of any campaign I bring to the table.&nbsp; I don't expect my campaign setting to survive first contact with the players.&nbsp; I expect to get out the magic typewriter ten minutes after character generation begins and start rewriting ideas from the ground up.And, as a player, i expect the same thing from my DM's.&nbsp; I do not want to passively consume, or simply react to whatever the DM has in mind.&nbsp; Again, not that there is anything wrong with that.&nbsp; That's perfectly fine for groups that like that.&nbsp; But, again, not to my taste.&nbsp; If I come to the table with a concept, with my current group, I know that the DM will meet me more than half way with whatever concept I bring.&nbsp; And everyone else too.&nbsp; Thus, we have a 5e sorcerer in our Dragonlance game, and a minotaur bard.&nbsp; Despite the fact that neither bards nor sorcerers fit with Dragonlance (at least, certainly not 5e versions of those classes).&nbsp; Granted, my human fighter wasn't exactly a stretch to fit into the game, but, I'm going to ask if I can bring in 4e style retraining rules and convert my fighter to a paladin over the next few levels.&nbsp; Again, Dragonlance doesn't even HAVE paladins.Yet, I'm fairly confident that there will be no problems.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 7656346, member: 22779"] And fantastic for you. You are a better DM than me. Happy now? I realize it doesn't matter to you. For you, you play a game where the DM's view is law. I would loathe your game. I wouldn't play at your table. Not because it's bad, but because it's bad for me. However, I'm not the one who keeps trying to convince others that my way is the best way. You are. You have repeatedly tried to convince me that your way is better - "consensus games lead to milquetoast games" I believe was the exact comment. "I've never lost a player" is another. Sorry, BryonD, but, if I made the mistake of sitting at your table, I'd leave after one or two sessions. Again, not because you run a bad game but because I would be a terrible fit for your table. Fortunately, I have a fantastic group currently and this is simply an issue that doesn't come up. Not that we don't debate rules stuff, we do. But, because the entire group is engaged in trying to make the game fun for everyone, no one is left holding the bag when things go sideways. Everyone is pro-active. Which, from the descriptions of you and Steel Dragons have given, you would not appreciate. SD talks about being firm about not changing his setting to accommodate player concepts. Again, totally fine. I believe that you and he both have a pretty firm idea of the experience you want to present your players with and don't want a lot of changes interfering with that experience. It's not to my taste. I'm far closer to GM4PG in that if I find I'm mistaken, I don't try to cover it up and pretend that I meant to do it all along. I simply admit to fallibility and work with the group to find a way to smooth over the rough edges. I expect my players to come to the table ready to write and rewrite large swaths of any campaign I bring to the table. I don't expect my campaign setting to survive first contact with the players. I expect to get out the magic typewriter ten minutes after character generation begins and start rewriting ideas from the ground up. And, as a player, i expect the same thing from my DM's. I do not want to passively consume, or simply react to whatever the DM has in mind. Again, not that there is anything wrong with that. That's perfectly fine for groups that like that. But, again, not to my taste. If I come to the table with a concept, with my current group, I know that the DM will meet me more than half way with whatever concept I bring. And everyone else too. Thus, we have a 5e sorcerer in our Dragonlance game, and a minotaur bard. Despite the fact that neither bards nor sorcerers fit with Dragonlance (at least, certainly not 5e versions of those classes). Granted, my human fighter wasn't exactly a stretch to fit into the game, but, I'm going to ask if I can bring in 4e style retraining rules and convert my fighter to a paladin over the next few levels. Again, Dragonlance doesn't even HAVE paladins. Yet, I'm fairly confident that there will be no problems. [/QUOTE]

Verification