DM as Facilitator or as Adversary?

[Markn]

I said facilitator. I think a more interesting question would be: How do your players view you? As a facilitator or Advesary?

I've played in some groups who see it both ways. I think the results would be much more interesting...

 

[FickleGM]

Out of the two choices, Facilitator is the most appropriate for me.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Both.

 

[Mallus]

A DM is a facilitator who sometimes has to play the role of adversary.

 

[Shemeska]

Never, NEVER adversary.

Absolutely.

I pray that DnD has managed to move itself out of the 'Muahaha the PCs will never escape my dungeon filled with traps and monsters, I will finally get them this time!' mentality.

There's a giant difference between challanging players and giving them a fun time that they have to work for success in, but it's simply anathema to a longterm game for the DM to actually be gunning for the PCs. Let's let that rot in a tomb of horrors somewhere.

 

[Lanefan]

There's no "both" option, so I didn't vote.

In terms of generating the setting, tweaking (or redesigning) the rules, and generally having a game for people to play, the DM is facilitator. (and as most games take place at the DM's residence, the DM is facilitator in a host capacity as well)

In terms of nuts-and-bolts running the game, the DM is more like a chairman, or referee.

In terms of combat, the DM has to be the adversary, or at least think like it, in order to play the opposition NPC's and monsters to their best potential...in full knowledge you're probably going to lose 95-100% of the time.

Lanefan

 

[The Shaman]

I facilitate adversity.

 

[Shemeska]

Facilatator, no question about it.

I'm reminded of Shemmeska's story hour where I've seen quite a few people ask Shemmie why his players keep playing in such a dark campaign where evil always seems to have the upper hand and what the players thought were great victories on their part turn out to be part of the plan of the BBEG. He said it was because they knew and trusted in the fact that somewhere, deep down, Shemmie [the DM] was pulling for them, and if they weren't stupid, then at the end of the day good really would triumph over evil.

That's what makes for an excellent campaign.

Aye. It was hellishly dark, and there were some episodes in which the choices the PCs willingly took led to them being used in absolutely wretched ways by some of the BBEGs. The players actually cried at one point because of a situation that they had, in good faith, allowed and made to happen.

Darkness seeming to triumph can be depressing, but if the players out of character trust the DM to allow them to opportunity to earn their eventual triumph, and that the DM really wants to see them do so, in the end it works.

More than anything, that trust element is probably more important than anything else. And yes, the PCs managed to turn the tables on that particular BBEG who was behind the crying at the gaming table incident. There's a crater on the Gray Waste sprinkled with his ashes.

 

[wingsandsword]

Since the GM has to provide challenges for the party, his position by nature is slightly adversarial. However, he is not there as an adversary to defeat the party. He's there to help the players have fun. If he was an adversary he could say "You open the dungeon door, and four Balors storm at you, roll for initiative", and that's probably it for most parties. He's not an adversary, he doesn't "win" when the PC's lose.

Gaming is collaborative, you do it to have fun, and the GM has the most power of any single person there to ensure that everybody has fun, players and GM. Providing a challenging game that fits the play style the players and GM want is what a good GM should do. Given the two choices, "Facilitator" is much closer to the truth.

 

[lukelightning]

Definitely facilitator. But since players one and all love to kill things and take their stuff and are always up for a big fight, in effect you are a facilitator pretending to be an adversary.

On a side note, when I DM I always feel like King Zarkon from Voltron. Remember him? He was the bad guy, always trying to defeat Voltron by sending new and "more powerful" robot beasts. "This time for sure!" he says, and it seems like he's going to win, but of course he loses.

Of course PCs, unlike Voltron, never hold off on their Blazing Sword or other super move. If Voltron was D&D they'd be "I got a 17 in initiative, I go first! Blazing Sword! Blazing Sword! Blazing Sword! Blazing Sword!"