DM Entitlement...

[Scribble]

Or, more accurately, *I'm* going to Taco Bell. If anybody wants to come with me in my car and have some of the Taco Bell food that I'll be buying, they're welcome to do so, but I'm just going to Taco Bell. If somebody wants Pizza Hut, they are more than welcome to take their own car and maybe I'll go with them and have pizza instead!

See in this case, while I might be getting tacos, I'm now missing out on the fun of a night out with my friends.

I'd much rather compromise, go to Applebees and order a fajita... At least then, although it's not a taco, I'm stil getting Mexican AND a night out with my friends.

Thats really all I'm saying... Compromise on EVERYONE's part involved in the game can lead to a much more rewarding game.

 

[Oni]

I don't really enjoy DMing (too much pressure to have everyone's fun on your shoulders for my taste) so anything I can do to make the job of the person that is DMing easier and more fun is pretty much fine by me. That includes letting them make the world they want. They have to do all the work to run things, so I don't see any reason to be more demanding on them than necessary, let them do it how they want.

 

[Mark]

You seem to want to tell other people where to drive and what to eat. If someone invites you to a dinner party do you suggest they call everyone being invited and make sure everyone has a say in what the host prepares?

 

[Kzach]

I have a simple rule when DM'ing.

Either you agree to all my rules, or I don't DM.

If people don't like what I'm selling, then I'm happy to step down and play. I love rogues in 4e. My rogue did a 30 point crit last night, and slid someone down a well which killed him with falling damage. Rogues are cool.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

So I've seen a lot of posts (especially with some of the changes in the new edition) that have people saying things like:

"In my game there will be no (insert random thing to ban from campaign.)"

This seems pretty odd to me. D&D is a game played by more then just one person... Shouldn't EVERYONE playing have a say in how the game should work?

I understand that sometimes, yes, as a DM it falls on your shoulders to spot problematic rules, or things being used "inapropriately" but to outright say "X cannot be used in my game because I don't like it..." just seems way to bossy...

To extent I agree. To an extent.

When I started my Age of Worms game I pretty much laid down strict guidelines for character creation. PHB only. Stat buy only. No evil PC's. No Evil PC's Masquerading as CN PC's. If you want to play an evil PC, my game is not the game for you. If you want to use splatbooks, my game is not the game for you. I let them know up front what was to be expected. This was a group that was basically a bunch of strangers that met over a meetup message board. I didnt know who was a power-gamer, rules lawyer or whatever. As a DM I needed to gauge a them at the table under optimal conditions and see what they were like as players.

Later on two players of the 5 players left. I'm pretty sure one of them left because of the "vanilla" nature of the game. The other left because of work obligations. Another player joined. after a while I started house ruling a few things. I'd tell them what I planned and asked i there was any opposition. No? Great. We'll test. After a while I started opening up options from different WOTC splats, feats, classes and PrC's. Every house rule that I proposed (from eliminating confirming crits, to use of Paizo's Critical Hit deck) I pitched to the players first.

In short, Dm's do most of the leg work in prep, and putting together the baseline world that the PC's play in. The dynamic nature of that immediate world doesnt really work very well without in put from the players, true. Still, it's my experience that the players still rely on the DM to fill in a great number of the blanks and even if you use pre-written adventures you have to kind of personalize them for your group. The DM does most of the work. Yes it's a collaborative game, but unless everyone IS doing the leg work the bulk of the responsibility and the work is on the DM. So the DM should have a greater say than most. At my table, in my games if anyone has a real problem with that they're welcome to run their own game but if they don't like mine they can leave. I'd sooner NOT play or run than deal with obstinate players or players with a sense of entitlement.

Note: If I exclude a class or a race from the core and a player can come up with a really good back story for that PC, I'll usually let it go. It shows that the player actually has a story concept and not JUST a mechanical motivation.

 

[Darrin Drader]

I hope I missed the sarcasm tag somewhere...

I tend to find this attitude condescending, self-important, and downright rude. A DM's job is storyteller and rule-arbiter, not deity-who-is-always-right. While certainly most DMs do the lion's share of the work (game prep, etc) the game is a social, collaborative event of which the DM is but one participant. Remember, a DM without players is telling just stories to himself.

Nope, not sarcastic. But then I've never had a player who couldn't abide by my ground rules or want out of one of my games. I've had players I didn't want in the game, but that was simple to deal with by not inviting them back. Right now the two stable guys in our group have been friends of mine since highschool, so it isn't much of a problem. I ran a game for a couple years where I had six players and I only really knew one of them. A good time was had by all.

 

[Ranger REG]

So I've seen a lot of posts (especially with some of the changes in the new edition) that have people saying things like:

"In my game there will be no (insert random thing to ban from campaign.)"

This seems pretty odd to me. D&D is a game played by more then just one person... Shouldn't EVERYONE playing have a say in how the game should work?

I understand that sometimes, yes, as a DM it falls on your shoulders to spot problematic rules, or things being used "inapropriately" but to outright say "X cannot be used in my game because I don't like it..." just seems way to bossy...

Hence the term, Dungeon Master, not "Dungeon Accomodator."

 

[Wyrmshadows]

The DM has a unique role as world-builder and campaign anchor. The DM, unless allowing everything from every splatbook, has to restrict some things. I have never and will never run a generic "world of Dungeons and Dragons" game where most everything is a random pop-fantasy mish-mash and internal consistancy is an afterthought. I run games with distinct personalities such as:

Athas
Midnight
Ravenloft
Dragonlance
Dawnforge
Conan's Hyboria
The Diamond Throne
etc.

Even my Forgotten Realms was trimmed of some things that made it less like a giant Mos Eisly (sp?) spaceport since a lot of IMO crap was added to FR in the 3e era that IMO was unnecessary.

A setting is as defined by what you subtract as by what you add. A perfect forumla for dull, generic fantasy is making every setting the same in regards to race and class options. I've been my group's DM for 23yrs and I have always decided the setting and the type of game. I wouldn't have it any other way because I have to do all the prep and have put many, many times more work into making sure I run a good campaign than my players have to in order to run their individual characters. I simply cannot put a lot of time into something I won't enjoy running, its as simple as that. If I lose my enjoyment, get bored or burned out there is no game....period.

I always help my players come up with setting appropriate character concepts and see no reason to change the way I do buisness since it has worked for nearly a quarter century. Anyone who has a problem with me running my game as a benign dictatorship can start up their own game.



Wyrmshadows

 

[ProfessorCirno]

There are a lot more players then there are DMs. Players are replacable. DMs are not. If you dislike the campaign rules, (try to) find another DM.

You can't tell the DM "I want this, you have to give it to me." You are perfectly allowed to try and ask the DM to make/do something banned, and he's perfectly allowed to say "No."

If it rankles you THAT much...YOU could always start DMing. But then, for most players, that's crazy talk ;p

 

[Runestar]

I am inclined to say that just because a DM can do something does not necessarily mean that he should. It seems to defeat the purpose if he sets out to create a fun game for everyone based on his own (and only his own) definition of what fun entails, and ends up banning everything which his players find fun. I have always felt that the DM is there to serve the players as much as the players are there to accomodate him.

I agree with the "try to compromise" part. If a player wants to play some unique race like a monster progression from savage species, I can't say that I will always be able to find a way of slotting it into my campaign world, but I can at least promise him that I will try. For my group, playing dnd is as much for the unique experience of trying out new game mechanics as it is for the rp factor.

You seem to want to tell other people where to drive and what to eat. If someone invites you to a dinner party do you suggest they call everyone being invited and make sure everyone has a say in what the host prepares?

No, but I would expect food to my liking/tastes. For instance, if I were the host, I would at least want to take note of any special dietary needs of my guests to beter cater to them, so I don't end up with fiascos like an all-meat buffet for a vegetarian guest, or pork dishes for muslims. As a host, it would be my responsbility to ensure that everyone is well taken care of, and not assume a "Either you eat my food or scram" attitude.

Same analogy would apply here, IMO. You don't have to go out of your way to cater to your players' every whim and try to please them completely, but it would be folly to complete disregard their preferences and wants. It is their game as much as the DM's.

In the end, it is really all about everyone having fun. So I don't really see the point of unnecessarily begrudging my players.