D&D 5E Who Picks the Campaign? DMs, Players, and Choice

[overgeeked]

Except for anything Forgotten Realms obviously because it sucks out loud.

Slurp. Slurp. Slurp.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I guess collaborative setting building is right out, then. Clearly the OP thinks that a GM engaging in this kind of play is one that cannot be trusted to run a good game? This reminds me of @Manbearcat's current thread about the 3 most underrated traits in a GM. There's quite a lot of daylight between the OP's approach and the traits provided in that thread.

ETA - link to other thread: 3 Most Underrated Traits for Gamesmasters

 

[DarkCrisis]

DM chooses. Sometime with an option "I'm feeling either Cthulhu or Star Trek, what do you guys think?"

If someone else wants to run something instead, then cool.

 

[dragoner]

Usually I have a variety of choices that the players choose from, I also listen to, and will work with players. However, it is usually just a couple of the players that have ideas, and the rest are along for the ride. I used to be more about "total involvement" of everybody, except I decided trying to force people out of their comfort zone was wrong.

 

[HammerMan]

I create my own worlds (well, create is a bit strong, I steal bits and pieces from everything, anime, comics, stetting both 3rd party and official, novels, movies) however I have DMs that lets us build our own worlds.

 

[Oofta]

I have my own homebrew setting but will come up with a handful of ideas for the next campaign and let people choose. Or they can come up with their own ideas and if I can think about how to make it work we will.

I also run very player-decision heavy campaigns, for me the fun is in setting up the politics and relationships that's going to be the focus of the campaign and thinking how others would react. Not only to the actions of the PCs, but also ripple effects of PC action or inaction, what kind of plans the different factions may have and so on.

 

[HammerMan]

i refuse to run a campaign with Players know more then I do...

Want to play a DC super hero game, then you and I have to compair what we know
Want to play rifts lets double check what books we have.
Want to play darksun, let me ask you about hallow moons and halflings.
Want to play ravenloft, lets talk about 2-5e cannon
want to play starwars...you better not have read more then me
want to play Dragonlance or FOrgotten Realms...NO!!

 

[Umbran]

Yeah, me too. I find it much easier to build on, complicate, and get excited about an idea supplied by others than to go from zero to 60 entirely on my own.

There's also the fact that if I do a lot of work in building out an idea, and the players aren't jazzed about it, my work is wasted.

Those of you who run your games in game stores, or otherwise with a large pool of players may not have this issue. Those of us who are putting up a game for a specific group are more likely to have this come up.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think either approach is valid. The DM can decide “I really want to run Dark Sun” and invite players who want to play Dark Sun. Or, the DM can ask a group of players they want to run a game for what they’re interested in playing, and either choose or construct a setting that accommodates their interests and is also exciting for the DM themselves.

 

[payn]

All of the above I suppose. I want my GM invested in their game as much as the players are. I know many players don't care as much as I do. For many of the folks I've gamed with its all about having a beer and rolling some dice. They are not picky and make things easier for the group. Though, you really get the most mileage when everyone isnt just happy to be there, but is excited to be there because of the campaign.

As a GM I'm constantly putting ideas in the back of my mind. When the big question pops up, "what next?" I am ready with options. Give the players 2-4 choices and have a good discussion about it. Thats how I roll.