Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Herobizkit" data-source="post: 4991861" data-attributes="member: 36150">It's the same understanding that you see thrown around here quite often: DnD is about killing things and taking their stuff.If you never run a single combat in DnD, some may argue that you're Missing The Point.&nbsp; If you never award XP and/or allow the characters to advance in level, that's fine, too - but you'll be sure at some point that they will want to improve.&nbsp; How one measures success and improvement determines how much fun one ends up having.For example, take myself and my roommate.&nbsp; We have alternately played and DM'd solo campaigns for over a decade.As a player:* For him, he ALWAYS wants to amass a huge treasure hoard, then use said hoard to create a stronghold, attract followers, and make a new city/town/fort/kingdom to rule.* For myself, I always want my characters to learn new abilities, try new character concepts, and finesse &quot;the rules&quot; to create interesting and (hopefully) unique heroes.As a DM:* For him, he likes to create epic plots. worlds with epic histories spanning ver ten thousand years.&nbsp; He uses his same campaign world each time, which has an epic history spanning over ten thousand game years.&nbsp; I try to add my own personal flair with each new character I make.* For me, I like the creative process, but I run each game as if it were its own separate TV serial.&nbsp; One character, one area, one group of &quot;supporting cast&quot;, and once we finish that campaign, I'm off for a new setting/concept/game system to try.He's great at planning and details, while I'm great at off-the-cuff DMing.&nbsp; He's a superb tactician; I'm a superb role-player.If we were one DM, we'd be awesome. *lolz*But we're not.And so, we each have to make some concessions if we are to enjoy each other's DMing and play style.&nbsp; I think the same applies to every set of DM and players out there; once each knows what is &quot;fun&quot; for the other, hilarity can ensue and everyone has a good time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Herobizkit, post: 4991861, member: 36150"] It's the same understanding that you see thrown around here quite often: DnD is about killing things and taking their stuff. If you never run a single combat in DnD, some may argue that you're Missing The Point. If you never award XP and/or allow the characters to advance in level, that's fine, too - but you'll be sure at some point that they will want to improve. How one measures success and improvement determines how much fun one ends up having. For example, take myself and my roommate. We have alternately played and DM'd solo campaigns for over a decade. As a player: * For him, he ALWAYS wants to amass a huge treasure hoard, then use said hoard to create a stronghold, attract followers, and make a new city/town/fort/kingdom to rule. * For myself, I always want my characters to learn new abilities, try new character concepts, and finesse "the rules" to create interesting and (hopefully) unique heroes. As a DM: * For him, he likes to create epic plots. worlds with epic histories spanning ver ten thousand years. He uses his same campaign world each time, which has an epic history spanning over ten thousand game years. I try to add my own personal flair with each new character I make. * For me, I like the creative process, but I run each game as if it were its own separate TV serial. One character, one area, one group of "supporting cast", and once we finish that campaign, I'm off for a new setting/concept/game system to try. He's great at planning and details, while I'm great at off-the-cuff DMing. He's a superb tactician; I'm a superb role-player. If we were one DM, we'd be awesome. *lolz* But we're not. And so, we each have to make some concessions if we are to enjoy each other's DMing and play style. I think the same applies to every set of DM and players out there; once each knows what is "fun" for the other, hilarity can ensue and everyone has a good time. [/QUOTE]

Verification