Burning Questions: Why Do DMs Limit Official WOTC Material? - Page 19
Page 19 of 27 FirstFirst ... 9101112131415161718192021222324252627 LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 268
  1. #181
    Member
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)



    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    2,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Panda-s1 View Post
    Again, how is a setting so inflexible as to not allow new ideas into it?
    Where can one draw the line so that you will be satisfied as a player?
    Because when posters inform you that the DM is essentially master of the setting which coincides with the advice provided by the DMG, you come back with is the setting so inflexible?

    No one is saying that DM's may not work with their players towards a solution, but it seems like you are pushing that HAS to be the case every time. The No answer is never accepted.

    Exactly where is the line? Don't give us the setting inflexible nonsense.
    XP jasper, the Jester gave XP for this post
    Laugh Panda-s1 laughed with this post

  2. #182
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    4,073
    Quote Originally Posted by tmanbeaubien View Post
    Anybody remember 3rd edition? Limiting player options was the only way to preserve DM sanity. 4th edition too.

    As for 5th edition, here's another Xanathar's Guide example. When a player wanted to take the Ceremony spell from Xanathar's Guide to Everything, pg. 151, I kinda went nuts -
    Here's the spell in D&D Beyond: https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/ceremony
    My answer to him:
    * Atonement has been:
    - 5th level spell in 1st edition.
    - 5th level spell in 2nd edition.
    - 5th level spell in 3rd edition.
    Now we make it a first level spell? Hell no!

    * Bless Water: See page 152 of the PHB - already allows this for one hour, 25 gp of silver and a first level slot.
    * Funeral Rite - Gentle Repose does what this does, but it's a 2nd level spell, lasts 10 days.
    * Coming of Age / Dedication: Just use Guidance (cantrip)
    * Wedding: +2 AC because of a wedding? Uh, no

    So, official doesn't mean good.
    Obviously tjo, its subjective. I find all these effects fine for the spell and its nature which is to create not do much go-to dungeon crawling effects but avaried list of small thematic blessings.

    Alignment has been seriously devalued in this game 5e, so keeping an alignment chg dpell at top of tier-2 makes little sense.

    Bless water - so they duplicate the effect into this ceremony grab bag. No harm. No foul.

    Funeral - the 2nd levrl GR does a lot more and quickly. It extends the clock on the various spells and is an action to cast. The diff between that and this part of first level grab bag makes sense to me.
    Coming/Dedicate - Again, these are not aimed at dungeon delving cleric beside you at all time but a one time benefit. They seem fine to me.
    Wedding - AC is meh... my bet is most newlyweds might have preferred advantage on con checks and saves for a day... or a week of just vs exhaustion.

    I see this spell as one of the somewhat underrepresented category of "effects that should be covered but not useful to typical dungeon stuff" flavor bits. As such, seemed great for my game.

  3. #183
    Member
    Titan (Lvl 27)

    Hussar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Fukuoka, Japan
    Posts
    22,966
    Between this thread and the other "Bad DMing" one, one thing stands out to me.

    People really, REALLY take ownership over their games. I think the reason I'm getting so tangled up in these arguments is that I don't. I never see it as "my" campaign or "my" world. It's ours. It's the table's. And, if someone up and said, "Well, I'm going to run X, if you don't like it, you run something", my response would be, "Do you prefer 4d6 or point buy?" Because behind that current DM, there's at least two if not three or four other people who are perfectly willing to run a game at any point in time. For me to get what I want, I REALLY have to sell it to the group. When I ran my Primeval Thule experiment and banned all classes with cantrips, I faced a real uphill battle convincing the group that this was a good idea.

    But, at no point could I simply say, "Well, either I run it this way or someone else runs" because, well, I'd be shunted to the player seat so fast I'd have burns on my cheeks.

    At the end of the day, I look at what makes DMing fun for me is knowing that I ran the most enjoyable game I could for this group. The more fun that the players are having, the more fun I have. Which generally means that yup, I'll put my preferences behind what the players want most of the time. If I can convince the players that my ideas are good enough, then, yay, I get what I want. But, otherwise, I'm pretty much stuck if I want to run a game where any of the players aren't interested.

    So, to use the Matt Mercer example. A DM who is unwilling to listen to what his or her players clearly state that they want, and adjust to their tastes, is a bad DM. DMing should always be about listening to the players and giving them what they want.

    To use @jasper's example, to me it's unbelievable that the group would exclude a friend just so they could go eat Chinese food. That's a pretty dick move. That's not what I want my friends to do and I would never do that to a friend. "Hey, we're all going somewhere that you hate, see you later" when there are obviously other options available is unbelievable to me. That would be the last time I went anywhere with you. And, if I'm late coming to the car, you're going to take my wife home and leave me there? Yeah, number one, I'd be looking for a new wife pretty quickly if she didn't get out of that car and number two, that would be the absolute last time I'd associate with you.
    XP Panda-s1, epithet gave XP for this post

  4. #184
    Member
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)

    jasper's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    montgomery al
    Posts
    3,798
    @Hussar Every Dining out hussar votes steak, steak, steak, steak, steak, steak,. Some times Fried shrimp with steak. The rest of us vote on variety. Sooner or later Hussar is going lose the vote. So he has to learn to got along with reasonable demands. Or hit Steak and Shake alone this Taco Tuesday.

    Sorry If I told the group the Convoy/Train/Plane leaves at 1600 hrs 2 times before the event, 2 times in the ride to the event. 2 times at the event. And at 1545 I tell you to be ready, you turn and run away deeper in the con. You are the one with problem.

    So Matt Mercer must allow me to use my Vulcan with wolverine claws, phaser, and magical missile or he is a bad DM. Got it.
    XP 5ekyu gave XP for this post

  5. #185
    Member
    Minor Trickster (Lvl 4)



    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Sadras View Post
    Where can one draw the line so that you will be satisfied as a player?
    Man, so confrontational "Exactly where is the line?" Are you honestly that upset over me questioning how much authority a DM needs? Is it really wrong of me to assert the idea of working with your players to figure stuff out? Guess I shouldn't tell you about how I just go from game to game ruining DMs' settings by inserting my nonsense homebrew races without nary an argument. That is the power of my "player entitlement" lmao.

  6. #186
    Member
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)

    jasper's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    montgomery al
    Posts
    3,798
    Quote Originally Posted by epithet View Post
    No, it is not the job of the DM to dictate the terms and conditions of the game. The DM creates or controls the world, and runs the game, but the terms and conditions of the game are agreed to by the group of people playing it, including the DM. Even if the DM makes an integrated pitch including the rules and setting, and the players just reply "ok," that's agreement. It is not the role of one member of the group to say to the others, "This is what we're going to play, and this is how we're going to play it," disregarding any input from the other members of the group (which is what "dictating the terms and conditions of the game" is.)

    .....
    You are missing the point. To sum up. I have 7 players 6 Dms.
    Brief and blunt summary. " I have a world but no under dark races especially Drizzit clones. My way or the highway."
    Or
    Long summary, "Guys blah blah" Using five dollar/pound words, fifty five word sentence, five paragraphs with extra props of glossy 8 by 10 photos with circle and arrows " Which is just a long sell pitch of the brief summary.
    Those are both the same thing. The blunt summary gets the main point across with less typing.

  7. #187
    Member
    Titan (Lvl 27)



    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    20,761
    Quote Originally Posted by Sadras View Post
    Given that the 5e DMG is full of Master-of-the-Setting type advice, it might be seen that with comments such as these, you're implying that the WotC designers seem to be undermining the game.
    I woudl say that they tend to undermine rather than fost what is fun and distinctive about RPGing, yes. I see a parallel to 2nd ed AD&D in this respect.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sadras View Post
    Where can one draw the line so that you will be satisfied as a player?
    Because when posters inform you that the DM is essentially master of the setting which coincides with the advice provided by the DMG, you come back with is the setting so inflexible?

    No one is saying that DM's may not work with their players towards a solution, but it seems like you are pushing that HAS to be the case every time. The No answer is never accepted.

    Exactly where is the line? Don't give us the setting inflexible nonsense.
    I find this srong normative language a bit out of place, I think maybe for the same reason as @Panda-s1. Putting to one side certain formal or semi-formal contexts (AL games, convention games, club games with a GMing roster, etc) we're talking about a social activity among friends. So the question of "where the line is drawn" is the same as "where is the line drawn on choosing a film or choosing a restaurant" - it's a matter of social negotiation among people who may have slightly divergent preferences, and almost certainly have divergent starting points, but who put a high priority on doing the thing together.

    A further consideration in relation to RPGing, though - and the one that I was emphasising upthread in the post you replied to - is that integrating and combining preferences, and bleding divergent starting points to form a common destination, is part of what is good about RPGing. Because it's part of establishing a shared fiction together. So whereas, when it comes to films or restaurants, sometimes we have to compromise, with RPGing compromise often isn't the right notion at all: the GM who works with the player to integrate the "last mage" into the campaign about a world without magic isn't compromising, s/he is building something together with the player that integrates and follows on from their divergent starting points.

    I'm not going to say that RPGers who don't want to do this are doing it wrong, but I don't think they're maximally exploring the potential of the activity.
    Last edited by pemerton; Thursday, 1st November, 2018 at 01:36 PM.
    XP Panda-s1, epithet gave XP for this post

  8. #188
    Member
    Minor Trickster (Lvl 4)



    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    70
    "Matt Mercer is the DM, he has the ultimate authority on what happens in his game."
    "If Matt wants to be a good DM he should listen to his players and see what he can do for their characters."
    "
    Quote Originally Posted by jasper View Post
    So Matt Mercer must allow me to use my Vulcan with wolverine claws, phaser, and magical missile or he is a bad DM. Got it.
    "

    Did I miss something that would lead you to this conclusion?
    XP Hussar gave XP for this post

  9. #189
    Member
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)



    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    2,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Panda-s1 View Post
    Is it really wrong of me to assert the idea of working with your players to figure stuff out?
    And if the concept does not fit, then what? Do you delay playing and keep working on it out until it does?
    At what point are you going to accept the DM as master of the setting. i.e. Where do you draw the line?

    To give you an example, your line could be - all published material MUST be available which goes against what the DMG says, which reflects that the setting is very much the DM's and he/she might decide to have 0 magic in the campaign which is one of the examples which eliminates a large portion of the playable races and classes.
    Last edited by Sadras; Thursday, 1st November, 2018 at 02:25 PM.
    Laugh Panda-s1 laughed with this post

  10. #190
    Member
    A "Drizzit" Type-Thing (Lvl 28)



    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    The Stately Pleasure Dome of Xanadu.
    Posts
    7,308
    Quote Originally Posted by pemerton View Post
    I find this srong normative language a bit out of place, I think maybe for the same reason as @Panda-s1. Putting to one side certain formal or semi-formal contexts (AL games, convention games, club games with a GMing roster, etc) we're talking about a social activity among friends. So the question of "where the line is drawn" is the same as "where is the line drawn on choosing a film or choosing a restaurant" - it's a matter of social negotiation among people who may have slightly divergent preferences, and almost certainly have divergent starting points, but who put a high priority on doing the thing together.
    Maybe. But no analogy is perfect*, because a DM is not a player. So while one person might say that it is like friends choosing a restaurant, another person might say it is like a chef cooking for people.

    And people might have different opinions on how that chef should cook for a group. Heck, some people might have very divergent views on what they want when they go out to eat!

    Some people might want a chef that caters to their whims. The chef that cooks up exactly what they want (I'd like a Caesar salad, hold the lettuce).

    Others appreciate a chef that cooks a specific meal; for them, it is a treat to enjoy what the chef has prepared.

    There is no right answer. The only maddening thing is the number of people who keep stating that their preferred way is somehow better, or superior. In the end, though, there is a difference in preferences, and that's fine. For example, when I play, I prefer playing with a DM that has a strong vision of their world, just because that's more interesting to me. But that's not for everyone- and, of course, it's possible for that style of DMing to "go bad." But it's equally possible for the laissez faire DM to go bad as well; good DMs are good DMs regardless of style, and bad players are bad players regardless of preferences.

    At least, that's my opinion.


    *Analogies can both illuminate and obfuscate.
    XP Sadras, Imaro, the Jester, Cap'n Kobold gave XP for this post

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 126
    Last Post: Thursday, 6th June, 2019, 05:42 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •