For me, the host can function as an emergency backup when a part needs to be finished quickly or is dropped unexpectedly. But the work of hosting and organizing the map is enough that they don’t need to take a part
1 year ago | 23
They absolutely don't have to but they totally can if they want!! It all depends on the personal preference of the host, I would say <3
1 year ago | 10
It's funny I think like 10 years ago there was some drama about hosts taking part that were the best part of the song before anyone else and people thought it wasn't fair lol
1 year ago | 7
I usually tend to take a part in the projects I host as I want to help get the project done, but I don't have any qualms with dropping if I'm too busy irl or if it just becomes too much for me and I would never expect a host to be required to take a part, and also if a host doesn't take a part it leaves more room for more participants!
1 year ago | 2
I feel like it's unusual if they don't take a part but I don't think it's rude or anything
1 year ago | 2
I'm with most people here: they don't have to, especially if they made it set up in a way that the map can function without them participating in it. I'd only be concerned if they initially arranged the map in which they're going to be a part of it and they planned to be a crucial part of it, so the map would fall apart without them. That'd just be poor planning if such a scenario happens in the very last second (or something unfortunate has occurred that became a sudden obstacle, but if that were the case, I'd actually not blame them).
1 year ago | 0
It'll be nice if the host takes part but it's not like they are super mega rude if they don't take part. They have the choice
1 year ago | 3
Razmerry
When hosting a MAP, do you think that the host should take a part for themselves? Or phrased another way, do you think it's rude if a host doesn't take a part in the MAP?
1 year ago | [YT] | 41