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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elf Witch" data-source="post: 5827279" data-attributes="member: 9037">Sigh and I am getting a little annoyed over this. in BIG LETTERS EVERY PLAYER KNEW THIS GOING INTO THE GAME. The DM is not running roughshod over anyone. Only one player out of the six at the table had an issue that day the player who offered the clerics the deal did not it have an issue outside of the game over it. He role played out his anger with the cleric in game and it was some pretty cool role playing. The other player who took it out of game and still brings it up three years latter is just being a dick because he enjoys debating and wants to win the debate.I totally agree that a DM needs to be sensitive to their players moral sensibilities and if they are going to add something that might offend a player they need to let the player know ahead of time. But once they have done that the burden is on the player not the DM. If the player finds the theme of the game to morally repugnant  to play in then they should leave the game not expect the DM and other players to change it just for them.But the DM should not have to accommodate you if you do it in a stupid way. Just like the DM should not have to accommodate you if you are third level characters and decide to fight an ancient red dragon. If you want to fight powerful slavers and you are only first level then you need to start small and be very secret.  It would not make much sense that  a small group of first level characters could go toe to toe with a powerful organization and expect to win if they take them on face to face.As a player I don't want to win just because I am the PC and as a GM I won't let PCs have automatic wins like this just because they are the PCs. If you want that kind of game go play a computer game where you set the level at what you want and buy cheat codes. I disagree with you on your idea of the GM is just another player he isn't. And if you don't like thst kind of style of play then don't play in it. We disagree on a lot for example I can't stand forge style playing or DMing.I feel the GM has the right to set up a world and run it like she sees fit. Players have a choice of either playing or not playing. If no one wants to play the DMs game then the DM has a choice too either change the game or simply not run it. But the DM is not obligated to change their setting if they don't want to and players are not obligated to play in a game they don't like.If I want to run a game based on King Arthur and I want all the trappings of that and the players agree hey that sounds cool we want to play and then as we get into a the game one player starts playing his character like it belongs in a Conan game. He then expects the DM to adjust how the world and NPCs react based on that not the setting that everyone agreed to is just the perfect example of player entitlement and think the DMs only purpose is to serve him what he wants.That does not even make the DM and equal at the table it makes them a waiter.</blockquote>

Verification