Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Shadowslayer" data-source="post: 2888673" data-attributes="member: 8400">Heartily agree.A couple things (a closing argument if you will)-Remember that this guy (the offending player) is one of the boys. Sometimes even your best buds have bad moments. Sounds like this guy is usually a good guy. Would it be worth it to actually get rid of a pal just to avoid having to allow supplements? Anyway, it sounds like you're on the right track.-I hate psionics. Really, really do. Didn't ever want to have to deal with them in game. But I had a guy (who's still with us) who bought the psionics book and really wanted to use it. I was torn, but ultimately what decided it for me was the thought that &quot;here's this guy...he works for a living, got a wife and kid. My D&amp;D game is HIS night out. I figure if he wants to drop what little fun-money he has on a shiny new book, he's probably looking forward to using it. So why the heck would I not let him use it?&quot; And it wasn't a game breaker.&nbsp; As a side note, I learned the psionics rules this way. Still could do without em', but I'm not averse to using them if a player really wants to play a psion either.I see about half the posters here see it as the DMs game where he has sole say in what rules get used. All I'll say is that I disagree. It's been my experience that DMs with a &quot;my way or the highway&quot; attitude usually get shown the highway. That's just a huge attitude throwback to the old &quot;DM is God&quot; dark ages of D&amp;D. (most of the guys I play with hated that even then) So you're not ramrodding them into a rule-set when you sit down with the group and say &quot;what should our rules be?&quot; As a group, you'd define the rules, then as the DM (you or any of the others) would apply them. This'd be the ideal solution from my end. This way you eliminate the control issues that are getting in the way of the group's good time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Shadowslayer, post: 2888673, member: 8400"] Heartily agree. A couple things (a closing argument if you will) -Remember that this guy (the offending player) is one of the boys. Sometimes even your best buds have bad moments. Sounds like this guy is usually a good guy. Would it be worth it to actually get rid of a pal just to avoid having to allow supplements? Anyway, it sounds like you're on the right track. -I hate psionics. Really, really do. Didn't ever want to have to deal with them in game. But I had a guy (who's still with us) who bought the psionics book and really wanted to use it. I was torn, but ultimately what decided it for me was the thought that "here's this guy...he works for a living, got a wife and kid. My D&D game is HIS night out. I figure if he wants to drop what little fun-money he has on a shiny new book, he's probably looking forward to using it. So why the heck would I [B]not[/B] let him use it?" And it wasn't a game breaker. As a side note, I learned the psionics rules this way. Still could do without em', but I'm not averse to using them if a player really wants to play a psion either. I see about half the posters here see it as the DMs game where he has sole say in what rules get used. All I'll say is that I disagree. It's been my experience that DMs with a "my way or the highway" attitude usually get shown the highway. That's just a huge attitude throwback to the old "DM is God" dark ages of D&D. (most of the guys I play with hated that even then) So you're not ramrodding them into a rule-set when you sit down with the group and say "what should our rules be?" As a group, you'd define the rules, then as the DM (you or any of the others) would apply them. This'd be the ideal solution from my end. This way you eliminate the control issues that are getting in the way of the group's good time. [/QUOTE]

Verification