LFP - Dragonlance: DL1 Dragons of Despair

[JohnD]

Posts like this are unlikely to be a magical key to having other DMs welcome you into their games RaiRai. You may indeed find this cuts you out of consideration for many games. In fact, it most certainly has already done that, but not much to be done now; can't stuff the genie back in the bottle.

Much better ways to handle it as damned has already said. Best would have been to respectfully withdraw and look for another game without poisoning the well in a public manner.

[RaiRai]

I have been forced to withdraw as he outright cut active communication, and my review was sincere especially if he intends to sell the adventure, particularly set in the Dragonlance setting, as a product on DMsguild or Drivethrurpg, much less DMing further campaigns. Forcing the plot of the adventure on the players harder than an Adventure League DM could with an official module is a sign of poor narration and by extension DMing, especially forcing characters to make a decision that they wouldn't normally agree to, which summarized a majority of our interactions with the world and by extensions some NPCs. Not to mention the glaring plot hole with the macguffin itself that you had to be Lawful Good to wield the bloody thing in the first place, which technically rendered the entire adventure moot and pointless to begin with in the first place.

Damned, he failed to communicate this facet with me after the session, much less approach me civilly about it, and I'm certain JohnD that people will emphasize with the unpleasant aspect of being accused for breaking the game when simply playing it how should be as a player.

[damned]

Rai Rai

Every game is different. Many, many games have a large element of a railroad. Many, many macguffins have specific requirements like alignments. I get that you didnt like it. No one is arguing that. RPGs mean very different things to different people. How you respond to things you dont like is important. JohnD alludes to your post quite likely colouring future GMs views on you and then you double down on it. Perhaps the GM could have outlined that the adventure can be a little railroady in the post, perhaps he should have insisted on you playing a pre-gen, perhaps you could have expressed that you felt it was a little railroady and that you preferred more sandbox - but then got on the train and enjoyed what was to follow, perhaps other things couldve been done differently.

As to selling the adventure on DMsGuild - so what. A huge percentage of adventures on DMsG are railroady and contain macguffins that only a specific character can use.

Your opinion on how the game should have been played as a player is your opinion and worth whatever the going rate for opinions is. Ive run good sessions before and Ive run crap sessions. Ive had 5 out of 6 players love an adventure or session and had one totally not enjoy it. Was I wrong? Was he wrong? Its not easy getting it right every time. Some player/gm combos dont work. Some player/player combos dont work. Some group/adventure combos dont work. If you cannot resolve one of those situations just move on and find one that works for you.

This is my opinion and worth whatever the going rate for opinions is.

[Binestar]

As a player in this campaign I would like to remind RaiRai that this adventure was clearly stated to be a 5e conversion of the Dragonlance modules. It isn't a sandbox. Beyond that, the DM was very clear on which classes and races were available and you pushed back during character creation so heavily that the DM finally relented to get the campaign moving. This is Dragonlance. There were hill and gully dwarves, minotaurs, elves, kender, human, half-elf, tinker gnome available and you chose a Triton Warlock. Triton was bad enough, but the lore of Krynn has a list of Gods, and there aren't any patrons to be had!

As for choosing the pre-made characters vs rolling your own: Keep in mind this is a conversion PLAYTEST for the conversion (again said so by the GM). Feedback will be provided afterwards and stuff like that will likely be addressed.

Also in defense of the GM, I would like to add into that that you were literally telling the GM the results of your actions (and cheating during that timeframe BTW). During our first combat you used your awakened mind to make an intimidation attempt on one of the creatures we were fighting. You didn't use an action for it, you just did it as conversation. Then, when the GM didn't respond fast enough for you for a ruling, you told him it causes fear. That's completely not true. An intimidation check doesn't cause fear. Fear is a level 3 concentration spell for wizards, or can be obtained in other ways, but to tell the GM your awakened mind allows an intimidation check that if they fail causes fear? That's just cheating.

I wish you well in your gaming endeavors, but you just weren't playing the same campaign as the rest of the group. Had you not been asked to leave, *I* would have left, because your style of play is incompatible with mine.

[Alsard]

RaiRai,

Have you ever read Dragonlance? There is a very good reason that staff requires L/G. not to mention a volcano wouldn't have destroyed it, it would have come back at dawn the next day. Dragonlance in itself is very narrow in the begging. Worlds of possibility open up after the staff is delivered. I won't say much more, because I don't want to ruin story depending on how close it follows the novels and for players in the game that have not read them. Maybe you should have taken the time to tell the DM your feelings and find out if he had reasons.

Not every game is for every player. But from the players post regarding your behavior, you aren't likely to find many games that suit you.

[damned]

Ok guys. Differences of play styles happens and happens a lot. I think enough has been said. Enjoy your gaming everyone and if something isnt working out for you polite discussion is always best.