D&D 5E The Gloves Are Off?

[Celebrim]

I literally have never heard that term for a DM's role before.

What does it mean?

You know how players aren't supposed to get spoilers for an adventure, and so the GM often uses a screen and keeps the notes about the adventure secret? One of the important hats that a GM wears is the secret keeper, who knows all the mysteries about the game that the players are trying to uncover. The GM has the responsibility to protect the secrets from the players until such time that their agency uncovers them, so that the players can be emersed in the game and discover things at the appropriately dramatic points, just as if they were experiencing a good novel or a good movie, but from the perspective not merely of a passive observer but of a character within the story.

Make sense?

There was an entire good thread about DMing styles like a lot of months or a year or so ago, I'll see if I can dig it up.

Ok.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

You know how players aren't supposed to get spoilers for an adventure, and so the GM often uses a screen and keeps the notes about the adventure secret? One of the important hats that a GM wears is the secret keeper, who knows all the mysteries about the game that the players are trying to uncover. The GM has the responsibility to protect the secrets from the players until such time that their agency uncovers them, so that the players can be emersed in the game and discover things at the appropriately dramatic points, just as if they were experiencing a good novel or a good movie, but from the perspective not merely of a passive observer but of a character within the story.

Make sense?

Sure, I've just not come across it as explicit/pulled out before, it tends to be implicit to the role of storyteller.

 

[Voadam]

It's not the only hat I wear - I'm also the impartial referee, secret keeper, storyteller, and so forth.

Declaring what the PC is wearing seems much more storyteller role than impartial referee who is applying rules.

 

[Celebrim]

If you see the DM as wearing multiple hats, why on earth did you present a dichotomy in the first place? That's so weird.

It wouldn't be weird if you spent a bit of time thinking about it instead of playing these "gotcha" games that you think are so clever.

The dichotomy is over whether the GM is allowed to wear his hat as neutral arbiter and referee of the game. If the referee isn't, the his role in adjudication is going to be reduced to rubber stamping whatever the player would prefer to have happen. This is doubly true in any system that doesn't have a defined mechanism for sharing narrative authority, as most trad games do not. And once again, I note that in games that do have a mechanism for sharing narrative authority, the presence or absence of the gloves would be irrelevant or almost entirely irrelevant. (As an aside on the sub-conversation about agency, in such systems if the GM wins the bidding for the authority, he would be allowed to narrate at least partially player actions, so it's not like such games straight up lessen the importance of the GM.)

 

[Celebrim]

Sure, I've just not come across it as explicit/pulled out before, it tends to be implicit to the role of storyteller.

"Storyteller" is a more loaded term that implies the presence of an intended dramatic plot, something that not all players appreciate. You can have a secret keeper in a game that lacks any intended plot or even drama beyond the "kick down the next door, kill the monster, and take its stuff" cycle of play and as such the term isn't as controversial as even the most gamist aesthetic of play player wants their fog of war and mystery.

Ditto with GM as adversary hat, which I also wear, but the term is controversial the way railroading is because it usually refers to GMs that wear the hat a little too much to the exclusion of the others because they are personally invested in trying to win while in the GMs chair, which is generally dysfunctional and anti-social.

 

[Celebrim]

Declaring what the PC is wearing seems much more storyteller role than impartial referee who is applying rules.

Only if you think a standard like "If the gear isn't on your character sheet, it doesn't exist" is an arbitrary and biased standard.

 

[Maxperson]

The fact that your reply seems to indicate that you don't understand exactly what I'm trying to communicate could be due to a couple factors, including:

1. I'm not doing a bang up job at communicating my point
or
B. We're unclear as to whether or not you are wearing gloves as you type

No. we're clear as to whether or not I was wearing gloves since you could read what I typed. Gloves would make clear typing difficult to impossible, depending on the gloves.

More likely you just aren't understanding me. The action is not my narration of the PC dodging the fireball. The action being performed by the PC is the saving throw. Once the action is determined to be a success or failure, I then narrate the results, which can include the PC dodging behind a pillar briefly to avoid some of the damage(successful save) or trying and not getting there in time(failed save). Narrations of PC actions(not the same as combat actions) is my job as DM.

Were I to agree with what you said and not move the PC at all and the player didn't describe to me movement, the PC who then did nothing to warrant a save would require a ruling by me that he automatically failed it. You can't just stand there and expect not to take full fireball damage.

 

[Umbran]

You're doing the Simpsons thing:

Mod note:
If you are actually trying to improve the situation, please be advised that mockery is a flawed tool for the purpose.

If you aren't trying to improve the situation, or if your idea of "improvement" is to make someone feel bad about themselves so that they shut up... stop. Now.

Multiple people are disagreeing with you, no-one is agreeing with you, but it is you who are right, I'm sure lol.

These boards to not exist to bludgeon everyone into agreement. There is no need for anyone to agree with the majority. So please stop using the majority as a source of authority. If you can't make your argument acceptable without this appeal to authority, then your argument isn't going to be accepted, and you should move on.

 

[Vaalingrade]

NVM

 

[Maxperson]

You're claiming that making a run-of-the-mill saving throw against poison can be likened to "russian roulette with three bullets" and "rocks fall, you die." Sit back and think about that.

They're right, though. If the result of the save is death, a roll to save is like spinning the cylinder with multiple bullets in it, the exact number would depend on how likely the save is to fail. Need an 11 or higher to avoid death and the cylinder has half the bullets in it. 50/50 of randomly ending up with death.

That's why I was happy with 3e's changes to poison. It kept poison with teeth and could kill if you missed the save, but it could also(and usually did) just mess you up badly and keep you alive.