D&D General How much control do DMs need?

[soviet]

It's always funny trying to have these conversations. I don't care what type of game you play, I can only do my best to explain my preferences, why I like what I like, what people I actually game with say they enjoy.

Meanwhile, pointing out that for some people other styles of game are better than the base assumptions of D&D and the traditional role of the DM I get "NOBODY SAYS THAT!!!!" Yet we've just had a couple of pages on how the GM needs constraints and that it makes it a better game. It's not that the DM is power hungry and abusive. It's just that the DM having official constraints on them prevents them from being power hungry and abusive. Not the same thing at all!

Either you trust the DM to run your game or you don't. I choose to trust the DM until proven otherwise. Even if I'm proven otherwise I'll chat with the DM and see if I can get them to see what the issue is (I've done this a couple of times with new DMs). If I can't resolve the issue then I doubt any amount of rules or constraints will fix the issue, they'll just look at it as a challenge to see how they can work around them. Because D&D is built around the idea and the DMG repeatedly states that the DM is just one player of the game with a different role. The game is about everyone at the table having fun. It's worked just fine for me for half a century.

If something else works better for you great. Just don't say that constraints are somehow inherently better or dismiss the opinions people who don't like knowing that the DM is constrained by the rules.

Didn't we just have this conversation?

 

[Oofta]

I have actually played a bit with premade 'orders of battle' for enemy factions, e.g. the Goblin King has x goblins, y ogres and z wolf riders. I'm not sure that it makes a big difference if the players aren't aware of it, but I probably need to test more.

Personally I would give the PCs the option to do research of some sort to try to determine the numbers. But I'd have it a decision point in the campaign, associate some risk to spying. Perhaps a special mission to gather intel might be fun. There's nothing wrong with the PCs knowing things ahead of time, I just want it to be knowledge that the PC earned not information the players know that the PCs had no way of knowing. It may be just a matter of presentation in some cases, but maintaining the illusions of the fiction is more fun for me.

 

[loverdrive]

It's just that the DM having official constraints on them prevents them from being power hungry and abusive. Not the same thing at all!

It's that constraints prevent them from screwing up.

DMs and players are utter complete idiots that will run the game off the first cliff given the opportunity, and it's the designer's job to protect them from themselves.

 

[Oofta]

Didn't we just have this conversation?

I was addressing the issue raised over the past couple of pages and things like "much, perhaps most of what is permitted by truly absolute GM latitude is merely the latitude to do things that are deleterious to the game." and that it always helps the game to have limitations spelled out.

I've explained why I disagree, you don't have to agree with me on this.

 

[Oofta]

It's that constraints prevent them from screwing up.

DMs and players are utter complete idiots that will run the game off the first cliff given the opportunity, and it's the designer's job to protect them from themselves.

If they're following the guidelines provided they won't screw up either. Encounter balance in D&D will always be something you have to adjust, at least the DMG starts out with low end challenges. They should talk more about turning up the dial when the minimum isn't challenging and I hope the 2024 edition does a better job. But there will never be a perfect system in D&D because there are too many variables. But that's a tangent.

I don't want guardrails if those guardrails aren't necessary in the first place and make the game less immersive. Perhaps they don't bother you, they would bother me.

 

[Imaro]

Okay. Question: Why would a party either (a) utterly blindly or (b) knowingly and willingly go into places where they know they're either wasting their time because there's nothing worth doing, or risking instant death because they're going to be in way over their heads?

I think this is presuming that some specific encounter has to result in an instant kill or a waste of time. I run a character driven West Marches/Sandbox hybrid right now and I don't concern myself with this question as it's presuming that I will know what my players will or will not find worth doing and/or instantly deadly.

As an example, an empty cave might at first glance appear to be a waste of time with nothing worth doing... or the players could decide to claim it as a supply store and mini-homebase allowing them to explore further. An ancient dragon could swoop down on them and at first glance (and if you choose to attack) it appears to be an instant death encounter... of course talking and negotiating with it could prove fruitful.

Second question: Why does everyone always assume that the existence of a system that tells you whether a particular fight is likely to be dangerous, typical, or cakewalk automatically means that the only use for that system is absolutely perfect-lockstep encounters? Seriously. It's like presuming that, because you have a more accurate measuring stick, everything must meet at right angles now. The two are entirely orthogonal. In fact...

It isn't about the system per se, but about the expectations that it sets up in the player base. The same way having costs for magic items sets up the expectation that a character can purchase them.

 

[Aldarc]

When I watch a movie or TV show I don't want to think about how the show is made. I don't even want to see "the making of shows". When reading a novel, I don't want to analyze the writing techniques. I just want to be entertained and immersed in the story.

It's the same when playing a game. If there's some kind of official constraint on the DM, I'm always going to think about how many points they've spent (or whatever the currency of the game is) and doing meta-analysis. It will lessen the immersion for me, take me out of my character, make whatever we're playing slide along the scale from "let's play pretend" to "let's play a board game" towards the board game end of the scale.

I honestly don't see why you need to think about the GM's constrains when playing the game anymore than you need to think about the production constrains that went into making a TV show or novel. If you don't like thinking about the constraints of a GM in PbtA, then just focus on roleplaying your character with integrity.

Knowing that my roll forces the GM to make a move in a PbtA game isn't really different from knowing that my failed roll in D&D means that my character fails a saving throw against a spell or fails to make an ability check with dangerous consequences. I've seen how the sausage is made as a GM in D&D, PbtA, Fate, Numenera, Fantasy AGE, ICRPG, BitD, and many other games. This knowledge of the constraints and processes of GMing these games doesn't lessen my enjoyment of playing these games as a PC player nor does it personally impact my own RP immersion.

 

[Oofta]

I honestly don't see why you need to think about the GM's constrains when playing the game anymore than you need to think about the production constrains that went into making a TV show or novel. If you don't like thinking about the constraints of a GM in PbtA, then just focus on roleplaying your character with integrity.

Knowing that my roll forces the GM to make a move in a PbtA game isn't really different from knowing that my failed roll in D&D means that my character fails a saving throw against a spell or fails to make an ability check with dangerous consequences. I've seen how the sausage is made as a GM in D&D, PbtA, Fate, Numenera, Fantasy AGE, ICRPG, BitD, and many other games. This knowledge of the constraints and processes of GMing these games doesn't lessen my enjoyment of playing these games as a PC player nor does it personally impact my own RP immersion.

I don't need to but I will. In addition, I want options when I play. Do I attack? If I do there's no guarantee that I walk out in one piece. Negotiate? Run? Can I run? I want these decisions before anything is decided, before any die is rolled to be from the knowledge of someone in that situation.

Different games handle all this stuff in different ways. For me, not thinking in meta-game terms and instead interacting with the world solely through the eyes of my PC is more enjoyable. Of course there are many times when I'll know we're up against monster X, but nothing is perfect.

 

[Aldarc]

I don't need to but I will.

Will you? Are you certain? You have proclaimed, if not boasted, that you have no actual firsthand experience playing these games, so how do you know how you will react or what you will see when you are immersed in play?

In addition, I want options when I play. Do I attack? If I do there's no guarantee that I walk out in one piece. Negotiate? Run? Can I run? I want these decisions before anything is decided, before any die is rolled to be from the knowledge of someone in that situation.

Different games handle all this stuff in different ways. For me, not thinking in meta-game terms and instead interacting with the world solely through the eyes of my PC is more enjoyable. Of course there are many times when I'll know we're up against monster X, but nothing is perfect.

I'm genuinely confused. How are these things precluded by these other games and such? Do you think that players in these other games don't or can't know these things too when makeing decisions for their characters?

I probably wouldn't recommend Fate to you on the basis of what you say here about meta-currency, which doesn't offend me in the slightest, but I'm not sure how many other games that frequently come up in these discussions would preclude you from "interacting with the world solely through the eyes of [your] PC."

 

[Oofta]

Will you? Are you certain? You have proclaimed, if not boasted, that you have no actual firsthand experience playing these games, so how do you know how you will react or what you will see when you are immersed in play?


I'm genuinely confused. How are these things precluded by these other games and such? Do you think that players in these other games don't or can't know these things too when makeing decisions for their characters?

I probably wouldn't recommend Fate to you on the basis of what you say here about meta-currency, which doesn't offend me in the slightest, but I'm not sure how many other games that frequently come up in these discussions would preclude you from "interacting with the world solely through the eyes of [your] PC."

I gave you my logic and reasoning. Feel free to have your own preferences and expectations, don't tell me what mine should be.