No. My problem is that DM Scarcity + DM Authority + Zero Responsibility allows bad DMs to stay Bad DMs and teaches some naive DM bad practices.
I don't want the new generation of D&D fans to be corrupted as technology progresses. I don''t want D&D to fall because it became flooded with power hungry jerks and confused novices because no one encourages clear communication.
What gets to be called a bad DMing practice? Some treat dice-fudging as an absolutely necessary tool in the DM's kit and others consider it the death knell of player agency and the meaning of the game. Is it good or bad DMing practice to have a campaign with a plot? Should DMs always encourage players to talk in "voices"? Is moving an encounter or a location
into the path of the PCs a clever way to conserve prep-work and take advantage of the indeterminacy of campaign details that haven't yet "hit the table," or is it wretched illusionism and quantum ogreing, a way of deceiving the players into thinking that they have choices they don't really have?
I would caution anyone against conflating "good DMing practices" with "personally preferred DMing practices." Beyond that, the idea that bad DMs can leverage their own scarcity to continue being bad DMs seems more like a boogeyman than a real phenomenon. It suggests that bad DMs can't grow into good DMs on their own, or that there's some sort of inertia that keeps bad DMs bad so long as they continue to have players.
To this I would ask, what do you personally do to fix this perceived problem?
Also, what exactly constitutes a bad DM?
For me a bad DM is a DM that has only ever run D&D games. Or only runs published adventures. Or only runs games that focus on combat. I skimmed a copy of Xanathar's and was devastated to find a "downtime" system that is basically built so groups can skip over anything that involves roleplaying things not focused on combat. To me a DM that uses a system like that is the worst kind of DM as their games probably have, IMHO, virtually no roleplaying. This is because to me roleplaying is the part of the game where the PCs are interacting with NPCs in something other than combat. I am not one of the DMs that thinks combat stats and magic items and mechanical bonuses means character depth. I have met many DMs and players that can't tell me what happened in their game, all they can do is rattle off combat stats or mechanical information.
So, how do we as a community decide what a DMs best practices should be? As far as I can tell from many of the interactions I have had on this forum, many would consider me a bad DM. Does that mean I should change how I DM to make others happy, or just not advise people of how I DM for fear of corrupting them into my bad DMing style?
Anyway, sorry for the rant. I think people can be jerks, but I am very skeptical about the idea that DMs can be objectively bad as there is no standard to live up to, the hobby is far to varied for that. With luck there will be a sudden spike in interest among the novices to become DMs and they will all start playing Mythras and Burning Wheel and Mouse Guard and M-Space and Far Trek and the hobby will be saved by system much better than D&D!
That seems a terribly narrow-minded way to look at DMing. There's nothing wrong with only wanting to run D&D to the exclusion of other RPGs. I may not be fond of published adventures, but I won't fault a DM who runs them. Some games that focus on combat are tremendous fun. Downtime is an
incredibly useful mechanic for keeping the game focused on the action when different player characters have personal agendas that would otherwise eat precious "screen time" and result in boring-ass spotlight-hogging. I thoroughly
despise any definition of "role-playing" that means "improvisational playacting," and D&D should support my style of play as well as yours.
I would despair at the notion that my particular flavor of D&D (old-school board-gamey fantasy wargaming with a heavy emphasis on dungeon exploration and challenging the players) might be lost from the world while a story-driven, thespianism-heavy style flourished. If anything, we should all strive to see the
variety of possible play-styles flourish, expand, and be celebrated.