The GM is there because you players decided that GM was the GM. They make those rules because you decided they could.
The player is playing a half-Dragon half-Drow Shadowsmeller because you, as a group, decided:
1. That person could play, and
2. That other person could GM, and so could decide to let him.
The Paladin is fiercely adhering to her alignment restrictions because you decided:
1. She could play, and
2. That other person could GM, and so could decide to let her.
Your ability to talk, or simply to communicate unhappiness, is your vote.
If you are afraid to talk to these people and inform them of your vote, that's a social problem outside the game.
If your fellow players are apathetic to your unhappiness, that's a social problem outside the game.
4 comments:
This, so many times this. Thanks. You have a great way of stating things Zak, this one's getting bookmarked.
Cutting and pasting to the whiners in my group!
Clearly the RPG's social contract.
I might be mistaken, but isn't the whole idea of the statement somewhat the opposite (i.e. that the correct way of treating whining - or other voicings of unhappiness - isn't to say "i, empowered by this set of rules or that idea on the internet, command you to shut up and accept that there are half-dragon drows" but perhaps instead to say "hey, what's bugging you? How about we resolve our differences over the time-honored act of Southern Comfort and Tekken?"
Anyways, that's how i read it.
Post a Comment