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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6095849" data-attributes="member: 6681948">OK, as an open question on the "Players should get to decide what parts of the campaign we explore and which get bruched aside into background" theory.Assume five players.  One dislikes playing out overland travel (that's not the characters' goal, just getting there - get on with it!).  A second dislikes dungeon crawls (underground labyrinths are just old school character grinds - make with the storyline already).  A third detests social interaction (enough of the GM's improv acting - on with the game!).  The fourth detests mysteries, puzzles and riddles (fine for Doyle to write Sherlock Holmes, but he's the character, not the player, and you're no Doyle - let the character roll against his great skills to solve it), while the fifth gets bored in combat (it's about the character, not the mechanics).So, describe for me the game to be run for this group.In my world, these guys are extremes, and most players like certain aspects more, and others less, but also like some variety in their game.  There may be periods where the game drags a bit for them, but they respect that the game is a group activity and cannot be tailored to their specifics.  They also have some trust in the DM (lacking that, why would he be the DM) so they're prepared to give him the oppportunity to lead the game in a planned direction, with some faith there is a payout (much like I don't walk out of a movie because the opening credits didn't enthrall me).</blockquote>

Verification