House Rule #2: Calling the DM out.

[clark411]

Ew.

I just make sure Rule 0 is "Everyone has fun." Then after that... if I need to push numbers around, so be it. In the favor, or out of the favor, of the pcs makes no different.

If doing anything to heighten challenge can be considered worthy of being called out, that means that all fabricated challenge on the DM's part is somehow, on some level, antagonistic towards the players.

Might as well just run the Return to the Temple of Cream Pies.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

The problem with going by 'Everyone has fun / push the numbers around' is twofold.

1) The definition of fun varies from person to person
2) If someone fails to have fun, you might not get immediate feedback.

As an example, I tend to like fights that push things as far as is reasonable. I usually do not run alot of fights, and they take a long time. So I when I break out the dice, I like to make the most of it. And then recently one of my players said he liked the most recent few fights that went alot easier, since he was a bit tired of every fight being a life and death affair.

Now, if you think an encounter is not entertaining enough, you might tweak things on the fly to make it more fun. But if things suddenly go badly or your players did not enjoy the tweaked fight as much as you had, than you have the beginnings of a problem.

I do not tweak numbers around, but I am not above having opponents make less than optimal decisions if I think the players are getting worked (provoking a few AoO's when moving to a target, or charging into melee when hanging back is wiser).

Anyway, to each their own.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Drowbane]

Any player who demanded to "see my work" would be shown...

the door.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Any player who demanded to "see my work" would be shown...

the door.

You made a door?

 

[robberbaron]

My reply rhymes with Grollocks.

Possibly the most ridiculous idea I've seen on ENWorld, and there have been some doozies.

I hope the OP was only taking the piss.

 

[transcendation]

It had the effect intended...

Interesting responses. Thank you, everyone.

First of all, let me just say that I was the one who presented this to my players. It's not a demand they made of me, but a demand I made of myself (for their benefit).

Its effectiveness all depends on how you present it...

For example, if you precede it with the claim that "everything is prepared in advance. I don't make things up in-game or change them as I go. That's dynamic scaling, and that's cheating! If EVER you think I am dynamic scaling or modifying characters as I go, you need to call me on it. (Except ad libbing character and creature actions, of course, which are played out according to their respective personalities)."

After awhile the players truly believe everything is prepared in advance, and it adds a sense of awe to their whole gaming experience.

Everywhere they go, everything they encounter, and somehow the DM knows it all.

"When do you find the time?"

"Get a life, dude."

That's the effect I was alluding to.

Sorry I wasn't more explicit.

And it has served another (unexpected) purpose as well. On two of the three occasions in which I was called out, it was in relation to a PC death. When the PCs saw that the items or spells utilized to kill them actually were on the NPCs' sheets, it took all the air out of their heated accusations that I killed them on a whim. It's amazing how players can freak out after their PCs' first death. The despair. The frustration. The desperation and desire to turn things around on a technicality. After all, for some of them, role-playing is their great escape.

So they look for a fall guy: The DM. "You did it! YOU KILLED ME!" I never realized until those moments just how absorbed players could get.

"No... the Evil High Priest did that all on his own. I had nothing to do with it, as I'm just an impartial referee who runs things according to their design. Here, look..."

So the rule helped calm them down, giving me time to explain that "with a constitution of 16, you can be raised or resurrected 16 times!"

With their trust firmly established, they went on to bigger and better adventures. I got not a peep out of them when they met an Arch Devil whose minions had been stalking them from the Astral Plane for years (which finally explained why resurrection had stopped working for their group - each time one of them was slain, the soul was abducted by horned devils on the Astral Plane, and taken to Hell. Luckily, they only lost one PC that way, the rest being NPCs.) I scared them so bad with the appearance of Baalzebul that two of them turned green. That's something I had never seen before.

Yep.

Green.

transcendation

 

[danzig138]

it took all the air out of their heated accusations that I killed them on a whim. It's amazing how players can freak out after their PCs' first death.

I don't play with people who don't trust me to be fair. If I had a player who freaked out after his character got killed, he wouldn't be playing in my games anymore. Doesn't sound like someone who really needs to be playing these kinds of games.

Really, it seems kind of sad to me that you need a rule like this.

 

[robberbaron]

I don't play with babies who can't understand the 'it's a game' concept.

I don't play with people who don't trust me.

I make a lot of my games up on the fly, mostly as a result of the players going off on tangents whenever I do any serious preparation, but partly through laziness.
The monsters/BBEGs are all statted out in advance and not modified while they are in play. If they die easy, so be it. I don't fudge rolls for NPCs just like I don't fudge rolls for PCs.

If you want to put yourself up as a paragon of trustworthiness go ahead but I don't expect 90%+ of ENWorlders to agree to that sort of scrutiny.
You're not playing with IRS employees, are you?

 

[Ry]

I don't prepare any stats before the session. Trust is crucial.

 

[Drowbane]

You made a door?

Boot to the head.