Burning Questions: What's the Worst Thing a DM Can Do?

And to respond to the OP, the worst things that a DM can do to me are...

1. Railroad
2. Play my PC
3. Abuse authority in the game/take things out on the players via the game

My biggest pet peeve is this: when the DM forgets that we're not playing his video game. It drives me insane.

In those few instances where I get to play a character, the DMing that can make me eager to 'get back behind the wheel' so to speak, are the overly descriptive ones.

A fine balance between key details and immersion is important. If this strange new land has purple grass that fans out at the tip instead of normal pointed grass, fantastic. I don't need a 6 paragraph lecture about it, however. By the time some DMs finish describing a scene to me, I've completely forgotten the plot and reason for being in certain places before.

This isn't necessarily my biggest irk of the lot, but thought I'd add one I hadn't seen anyone else mention.

I dosagree with point 1 and think adherence to the rules is actually a good thing for the DM. I prefer that we are indeed following the rules. I also like house rules but prefer that they are upfront in the campaign or dealt with as a group as situations arise that may demand it. In fact house rules can really help a group to flourish. Here are my pet peeves:

1. Over use of rule-of-cool. Takes me right out of the game and often everything is just a cake walk with these games. What is the point of having any rules if anything goes? I get not wanting to stifle a players creativity but really some things are just ludicrously impossible.

2. DMs who don’t use a screen. I consider a DM different than the players. As a player it takes me out of the experience when I can see a d20 roll from the DM or monster stats opened. I prefer not seeing the results of rolls and letting the description rule the day. Keep in mind this is under the assumption that there is a certain level of trust between players and DM.

3. 5e specific: inspiration - on paper it’s a great idea and can be a great teaching tool for new players. However outside of that I have seen players feeling left out when they don’t get it thinking they did well with role playing a more subtle aspect of their character. Or players who aren’t as vibrant at the table, they often get left out and players who are more “alpha” in presentation get more recognition. This isn’t the DMs fault either as often the DM is just unaware of it or running too much other stuff that they overlook that player x has been knocking it out of the park but just not in a loud way. Another issue is with players who are constantly seeking inspiration and consistently note to the DM that they are doing so. I have a standing house rule with inspiration - my preference is to excise it completely but my group loves it, so when I dm I instead award it to the group as a whole when they work well as a team. When other players DM then I go with their preference.

apologies if there are any odd spelling issues, I am typing this from my phone.

Nagol said:

Same. What the PC feels is up to the player unless an outside force is at work. My players have come to recognize if I say "you want", "you feel", or provide an emotional descriptor "the T-rex is terrifying" then they are being influenced by an external force that still allows them choice in their declarations.

Click to expand...

One way I've found to avoid getting into trouble with this sort of thing is to try to not start off descriptions with the word "You..." I try to focus solely on describing the environment or the character's impact on it after an action is resolved without reference to the character(s).

Some of these seem more like Pet Peeves then "worst thing". Maybe 4, though again if unintentional its still just annoying.

Worse would be more like:

* Being a generally unpleasant person

* Constantly running attention grabbing, but kicking NPC or NPCs that outshine the party

* Just not ready to DM. You all get together and things sputter pretty fast as its clear that he or she is just not ready

* Not ready to run a longer term game. This is extended version of the previous, and often comes from the DM being overly ambitious.

Ath-kethin said:

Wow.

What, then, is even the point of having a DM? Or going further, what give you the impression that the game's intention isn't to be tinkered with?

Where do you draw the line? The Player's Handbook has "ask your DM" type points all over it, and the DMG is a toolkit for making up your own stuff.

How exactly do you believe the game is "intended" to be played?

Click to expand...

I don't take as hard a line as [MENTION=6801585]Rya.Reisender[/MENTION] does, but I would say that the first step in what I understand to be the intended play experience is that the DM decides whether the rules need to come into play in the first place to resolve something and then, once he or she decides they must, I do greatly prefer the DM follow those rules (or agreed upon house rules, variant rules, table rules, etc.). Notably this doesn't mean the DM must use the rules to resolve something. He or she can simply narrate the result of the adventurers' actions without reference to the rules.

Inserting a DM PC.

Cosigned. To take away that basic agency of a player is a deep afront. Now, if the player is being disruptive, that’s another thing entirely. I still wouldn’t say “you don’t do that/you do X instead,” but I do have tricks I use when someone is being a butt at the table.

Railroading is pretty bad, too. Most players are pretty good about following the hook, but you need to be able to adjust and alter your adventure to account for PC actions.

However, on the converse, DMS that improv everything drive me up a wall as a player. I end up feeling the same as if I’m being railroaded, because again my actions don’t matter – there’s no defined world or plot for me to act upon.

Nagol said:

The absolute worst thing a DM can do is interfere with player decisions wrt his character. Saying "Your character doesn't do that" or even "You feel X" better have a strong in-game reason that becomes apparent to the players. The player gets exactly one chararacter (subject ot the game type), the DM has innumerable. The player gets to decide how the chatacter feels and acts.

Click to expand...

Ralif Redhammer said:

Cosigned. To take away that basic agency of a player is a deep afront. Now, if the player is being disruptive, that’s another thing entirely. I still wouldn’t say “you don’t do that/you do X instead,” but I do have tricks I use when someone is being a butt at the table.

Railroading is pretty bad, too. Most players are pretty good about following the hook, but you need to be able to adjust and alter your adventure to account for PC actions.

However, on the converse, DMS that improve everything drive me up a wall as a player. I end up feeling the same as if I’m being railroaded, because again my actions don’t matter – there’s no defined world or plot for me to act upon.

Click to expand...

I hope you meant improv; I like people who improve things! Spelling Nazism aside, I take your point. Poor improvisation can lead to a feeling of punching at a pressurised tent. Any success in one spot simply forces a different spot to billow out as the DM tries to keep the situation in stasis to maintain the conflict.