D&D 5E Respect Mah Authoritah: Thoughts on DM and Player Authority in 5e

[Lyxen]

For someone who doesn't have enough information you make some very confident assertions.

Then it's up to you to provide more, since you are accusing some people of being "bad", just provide some evidence.

And get strangely angry.

Yep, there are a few things that I don't like, see below.

Are you familiar with the module? It does not mandate a plot. It is a situation.

No, obviously, there is no plot, in a module the structure of which is:

• Day One: Events
• Day Two : Events
• Day Three: Events / Investigating the murder / Vincenz's plan
• Day Four: Exploring the Sea Maiden / The Plant / The Sea Maiden's First Attack / The Final Attack / Resolution

Are you going to claim that this whole synopsis of events (that you call a "situation", really makes me laugh) does not have a complete pre-scripted plot (that you also call "one of the better modules I've run in 30-odd years of GMing") ? And at the same time still claim " I don't have a plot that has to be roughly followed" ?

 

[Oofta]

Well, as I posted I don't play RPGs to be entertained.

I just have to say ... that's a really strange attitude. Maybe we're using different definitions of the word "entertained" but why would anyone play a game if it was [edit] not fun and entertaining, at least most of the time?

 

[Lanefan]

I just have to say ... that's a really strange attitude. Maybe we're using different definitions of the word "entertained" but why would anyone play a game if it was fun and entertaining, at least most of the time?

I think you're missing a "not" in there somewhere, else this doesn't parse very well...

 

[Lyxen]

There is always another choice. You never have to railroad the players.

And sometimes, you are stuck, you can't even run what you had plan to run (sometimes because of annoying players but these have all the permission to do what they like, right ?), and you can't see a way out to get back to what you had prepared. And you still want to run the game, to try and please the players. Do you really think that all the DMs who do that do it on purpose to annoy the players ?

It's incredible how DMs can be bad people with nasty intentions, but players are always pure of heart poor little snowflakes in danger of being railroaded.

Remember a few pages back when I said that when one of my players was beginning he asked if we would stick to the rails during session 0? It's okay for beginning DMs to do that if they get permission from the players.

Oh yes, and of course every beginning DM knows that he is going to need it, and brings his certificate with him for players to sign.

This displays a level of respect for someone who has prepared a game for you close to zero, Zero tolerance. The thing is that I'm pretty sure that if I, as a DM, applied the same principle, I would boot every single entitled player out of my table in no time. But no, I must be too good of heart, trying to accommodate them, just as I'm accommodating as a player when a DM is stumbling around a bit.

Honestly at this stage, let's just agree to disagree. Sticking to principles like this and as a consequence getting nasty with real people who are simply try to run games for you is the mark of such horrendous playing habits (and simple behaviour as a person, actually) that I really hope that it's just a stance that you are taking here because you are safely hidden behind the internet and that you never behaved that badly with real people in real games.

 

[Umbran]

Maybe we're using different definitions of the word "entertained"

I'm going to guess he means that in the sense he put it upthread: "I play RPGs to play RPGs. If I want to be entertained by someone's story I'll read a book or watch a film."

So, "to be entertained" is "to sit and passively receive pleasing input."

Apparently, the idea that the act of playing the game might itself be entertaining has been missed in repetition of this point that, admittedly, he's had to say several times already, and folks have seemed to not bother paying attention.

 

[Oofta]

I think you're missing a "not" in there somewhere, else this doesn't parse very well...

Well, obviously people play because we're masochists. Notice how I keep posting to these silly threads, obviously I'm a glutton for punishment!

 

[hawkeyefan]

I want to share an experience I had as a player in a fairly recent 5E game. I think it's relevant to some of the points in the discussion and may help by presenting a specific example rather than hypothetical.

My PC is a ranger with the folk hero background. He's a bit of a Robin Hood type. The other PCs are as well. We'd recently escaped capture by the archduke, who's kind of our Prince John; he's placed a bounty on our heads. This was as a result of the first few sessions of play; the PCs have effectively become outlaws, but the reigning government is at least corrupt, if not outright evil (there's some hint of possible black magic at play).

So we had to flee the town we had been in, and we arrived in another nearby town. We crossed a dangerous stretch of river in order to throw off any pursuers. So we arrived in the other town with some sense of safety; we'd evaded the law for now, but night was coming, and there was a storm forming. So our rogue scouted the town out a bit, and discovered that the Inn was overrun with the archduke's troops. The last thing we wanted to do was to wind up in another showdown with the duke's men, so we needed to avoid the inn.

I decided to use my Folk Hero Background Feature: Rustic Hospitality. It says:
Since you come from the ranks of the common folk, you fit in among them with ease. You can find a place to hide, rest, or recuperate among other commoners, unless you have shown yourself to be a danger to them. They will shield you from the law or anyone else searching for you, though they will not risk their lives for you.

We went up to a farmhouse on the outskirts of town, and I asked the farmer and his wife if we could take shelter in their barn. We mentioned that the inn was filled with the duke's men, which wasn't exactly safe for us. The farmer took our meaning, and recognized my character, and granted us shelter.

The characters woke in the morning to find the barn surrounded. The duke's men had "discovered" they were in the barn. There was no sign of the farmer or his wife. The GM had essentially overrode my use of my PC ability in order to ensure that there was a fight with the duke's men.

Is this acceptable per the rules as written? Per the spirit of the rules? Per the social contract among the group? For the purposes of discussion, assume that we're a group who knows each other well, and has played together long enough that we're comfortable with each other. Also assume that the GM hasn't yet shared his reasoning behind the duke's men arriving.

What do you all think? How would you have handled it?

 

[Jmarso]

I want to share an experience I had as a player in a fairly recent 5E game. I think it's relevant to some of the points in the discussion and may help by presenting a specific example rather than hypothetical.

My PC is a ranger with the folk hero background. He's a bit of a Robin Hood type. The other PCs are as well. We'd recently escaped capture by the archduke, who's kind of our Prince John; he's placed a bounty on our heads. This was as a result of the first few sessions of play; the PCs have effectively become outlaws, but the reigning government is at least corrupt, if not outright evil (there's some hint of possible black magic at play).

So we had to flee the town we had been in, and we arrived in another nearby town. We crossed a dangerous stretch of river in order to throw off any pursuers. So we arrived in the other town with some sense of safety; we'd evaded the law for now, but night was coming, and there was a storm forming. So our rogue scouted the town out a bit, and discovered that the Inn was overrun with the archduke's troops. The last thing we wanted to do was to wind up in another showdown with the duke's men, so we needed to avoid the inn.

I decided to use my Folk Hero Background Feature: Rustic Hospitality. It says:
Since you come from the ranks of the common folk, you fit in among them with ease. You can find a place to hide, rest, or recuperate among other commoners, unless you have shown yourself to be a danger to them. They will shield you from the law or anyone else searching for you, though they will not risk their lives for you.

We went up to a farmhouse on the outskirts of town, and I asked the farmer and his wife if we could take shelter in their barn. We mentioned that the inn was filled with the duke's men, which wasn't exactly safe for us. The farmer took our meaning, and recognized my character, and granted us shelter.

The characters woke in the morning to find the barn surrounded. The duke's men had "discovered" they were in the barn. There was no sign of the farmer or his wife. The GM had essentially overrode my use of my PC ability in order to ensure that there was a fight with the duke's men.

Is this acceptable per the rules as written? Per the spirit of the rules? Per the social contract among the group? For the purposes of discussion, assume that we're a group who knows each other well, and has played together long enough that we're comfortable with each other. Also assume that the GM hasn't yet shared his reasoning behind the duke's men arriving.

What do you all think? How would you have handled it?

Totally acceptable. Roll for initiative.

You used your background ability. Great. It didn't work out the way you expected. Too bad- that's life.

The farmer and his wife may be loyalists. There may be other factors at play of which you are unaware- maybe some of that black magic in the form of enemy scrying. Or there may have been a 'Bill Ferny' type that followed you into town and beat your passive perception checks. The point is, you don't know. It is possible the DM is railroading you into a fight? Maybe, but you don't know and you shouldn't jump to the conclusion that the DM is just being a dick. Don't get petulant just because things didn't go exactly the way you wanted.

As for the DM sharing his reasoning for the encounter- he is under no obligation to do so, especially if it gives up something you aren't supposed to know yet. Don't metagame it- just deal with the situation as it is presented. You'll probably find out how it happened later, or maybe you won't. Roll with it. Pun intended.

 

[prabe]

Is this acceptable per the rules as written? Per the spirit of the rules? Per the social contract among the group? For the purposes of discussion, assume that we're a group who knows each other well, and has played together long enough that we're comfortable with each other. Also assume that the GM hasn't yet shared his reasoning behind the duke's men arriving.

What do you all think? How would you have handled it?

It seems to be within the realm of pure RAW, but distinctly shirty. Maybe there's something going on offscreen that makes this make sense, but it has the distinct vibe of "I need you to fight the duke's men." I mean, they already kinda got to where you were running to, before y'all did. That doesn't seem exactly like pursuit ...

I think as a player, I'd feel put on notice unless it became clear there was something offscreen. Depending on what else was going on, I might talk to the DM away from the game to find out why he overrode that background ability.

I think as a DM I'd look at that background ability and think hard whether the duke's men would really work that hard for a small band of outlaws, that they'd go to every farmstead at night; and be so persuasive about the cost of protecting the PCs that locals would turn the PCs in.

 

[Campbell]

Without knowing more I'm not a big fan of that sort of move. You leveraged fictional positioning to the best of your ability and had a relevant ability that was not broken in any way by the details of the fiction. That feels like punishing good play to me.

If I were the GM in that circumstance I would have made a much softer move. Maybe the farmers wake you up and say they were looking for you last night and they can't hide you any longer. At least something that did not result in immediate danger. You scouted the inn. You utilized strong fictional positioning. You made good moves.

There could be more to the situation, but I do not like making such an immediate and final move in the fiction after what seems like good decision making to me.