What is good for D&D as a game vs. what is good for the company that makes it

[billd91]

Whereas for me, if I have both editions, three of my players have the books for OWoD (forex) and you have no books at all, we're going to play OWoD in all likelihood.

Your vote would certainly be heard, but it certainly wouldn't get the same weight as the guys who have invested in a given edition.

See, if I don't have equal say with any other player at the table simply by participating, I'm not an equal player. That's not a table I'm playing at. Not everyone owns every game they want to play, nor will I require it whenI'm DMing.

 

[Hussar]

See, if I don't have equal say with any other player at the table simply by participating, I'm not an equal player. That's not a table I'm playing at. Not everyone owns every game they want to play, nor will I require it whenI'm DMing.

How could you be an equal player if you don't own, at least, the player's guide to the game? If everyone else owns the rules, then they can spend equal time on the game. They might not, but that's their choice. If you have to borrow books to play, then you cannot.

I don't require people to own the books of what we play. However, if you don't own the books, you also don't get to choose the edition of whatever game we happen to be playing.

 

[JamesonCourage]

How could you be an equal player if you don't own, at least, the player's guide to the game? If everyone else owns the rules, then they can spend equal time on the game. They might not, but that's their choice. If you have to borrow books to play, then you cannot.

I don't think owning the books necessarily translates to knowing the rules. I could get plunked into any 3.5 D&D game and be fine even if I didn't own a book. I'd probably know the rules better than half the group.

I don't require people to own the books of what we play. However, if you don't own the books, you also don't get to choose the edition of whatever game we happen to be playing.

I think he was saying he wanted his input to be equal to that of the other players, not that he wants to single-handedly choose the edition for the group.

For example, say there are five players and a GM, and the GM is well acquainted with two different editions of a game. Players A, B, and C have the books for Edition One, while player D has Edition Two, and player E player has no books (the GM has both sets of books). The players talk about what game they want to play (the GM is open to either, and leaves it to them). Three players vote for Edition Two (players C, D, and E), while two players vote for Edition One (A, B).

Do you play Edition One because you have more books? Do you play Edition Two because more people voted for it? If so, does that mean that player E is getting equal say (even though he has no books)?

I understand that as a GM, you may just decide to play Edition One in this scenario because it has more books, but if you're deciding based on player input alone, do you discount player E completely, or is he the tie-breaker (meaning you play Edition Two)?

 

[Bedrockgames]

In most gamesi play in the GM needs to own the book, but we dont expect the players to (some do and some don't). What books a player owns doesn't impact how much input he has.

 

[Hussar]

Really?

I think the term "input" is getting used in a strange way here. The ONLY input I'm talking about is which game is getting played next. You'd be perfectly okay with a player who does not own any books for say, Mouseguard, coming up to you and telling you that he wants you to run a Mouseguard game and his input should count exactly the same as the guy who's sitting on fifteen Battletech books and wants to play Battletech?

Well, to each his own I guess. Me? I pick the game I want to run and then ask who wants to play in it. Maybe it's because I play in groups with lots of DM's, so, it's never really a problem.

 

[Bedrockgames]

In my groups we talk about what we are going tobrun. Either someone wgo GM says "hey guys i'd like to run x, what do you think?" or a player says " i would like to try Y; anyone care to run it?" Just because someone doesn't own the book doesn't mean their suggestion has less weight.

 

[Hussar]

What happens when both occur at the same time? You have one guy who's sitting on a stack of books who wants to run Game X, and another guy who owns nothing but wants someone else to run Game Y.

IME, we play Game X.

 

[Bedrockgames]

What happens when both occur at the same time? You have one guy who's sitting on a stack of books who wants to run Game X, and another guy who owns nothing but wants someone else to run Game Y.

IME, we play Game X.

We do the same thing we always do, talk about as a group and vote on it. Generally if two people want to run or play different games we have a couple different solutions:

Play one first, and when that campaign ends play tge other

Play them both on alternate days (this sunday is x but next sunday is y).

 

[billd91]

Well, to each his own I guess. Me? I pick the game I want to run and then ask who wants to play in it. Maybe it's because I play in groups with lots of DM's, so, it's never really a problem.

And nothing I've said is any different from that. But my expectation is when a group sits around with multiple people willing to run multiple things, all the players get equal say on what to choose regardless of what materials they own. We're not going to stop Dave from having input into whether we play Rob's 4e game or my PF game because he stopped buying D&D stuff at 2nd Ed.

 

[billd91]

What happens when both occur at the same time? You have one guy who's sitting on a stack of books who wants to run Game X, and another guy who owns nothing but wants someone else to run Game Y.

IME, we play Game X.

If nobody wants to run game Y, then the problem is solved. You can't draft a GM, you can only ask if someone's willing to do so. But if someone IS willing to throw in and run game Y, then even the player with no copy of game Y gets his vote counted.