D&D General Fighting Law and Order

[bloodtide]

And if you don't want to run that, you just say 'well I'm not good running a game with X or without Y. Is there a compromise we can reach? If not, I'll just not run the game and you can find someone else.

There is no compromise. Many players want a rated G game....I want an Unrated game. There is no meeting in the middle.

You do not just do what you want anyway because you're the DM and you're going to force them to do what you want.

I don't force them.

The MD isn't Daddy. The DM isn't the Alpha of the group. The DM isn't In Charge. They're the player entrusted in running the game for everyone. If they break that trust, they are not worthy of the position.

Guess you have a different definition of trust and how it applies here.

I'd add that I often have to teach morals. A LOT of players are clueless about the topic, and it does not help that many modern games like 5E are "Alignment Lite". A typical gamer, or really any person, does not even understand good or evil. At best they think what they see on TV or in the Movies is the way.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Why?

Explain to me how the above is NOT teaching Sarah about the game or policing the morality of her stated actions (by refusing to even acknowledge them and refusing to let her perform them).

Because sure as heck, Sarah leaves the table with no doubts about the social contract, or what's expected of her in the game.

And knowing the social contract isn't policing morality. Saying 'please put your pants back on, this is a Subway', is not policing morality.

So, if I was playing a mass murdering genocidal torturing psychopath in your games, but had 'LG' written on my character sheet, Youd rule the following game effects targeted me as if I was 'good':


And would also rule I went to the Seven Heavens on my PCs death?

At what point in not caring about it would it be suggested that I'd bother with the game effects or where you character goes when they die?

 

[Vaalingrade]

I was being ironic and pointing out your hypocrisy actually.

Poorly.

Lol.

Luke Skywalker refusing to strike down his father strongly disagrees with this.

And you ARE teaching. Players look to you as the DM (and to other players) for how to play the game, and for guidance. If you tell them 'X is not allowed in my games, for reason Y' and also ignore players that try and do those things anyway, that's both a rule (X not allowed) and a lesson (The lesson being: The DM can and will ignore or even boot jerks from the game, so dont be a jerk).

This isn't even the process I described. Notice how I said 'the group'? Because I'm not the only person at the table and I actually care what they think instead of going it alone?

 

[Flamestrike]

And knowing the social contract isn't policing morality.

Knowing it isnt, but policing breaches of it certainly is.

Saying 'please put your pants back on, this is a Subway', is not policing morality.

Yes it is. In fact, directly telling someone to stop flashing their private parts in a restaurant is explicitly policing morality.

At what point in not caring about it would it be suggested that I'd bother with the game effects or where you character goes when they die?

Because (as DM) you have to make rulings based on alignment. So you have to care about it or make a decision about it.

Example. Im playing a mass murdering genocidal baby eating monster who regularly trucks with Demons and engages in all sorts of horrific and immoral acts. I have LG written on my character sheet.

Can I pick up and attune to a Book of Exalted Deeds in games you run?

 

[Flamestrike]

I actually care what the players at my table think instead of going it alone.

Oh so the DM has some sort of obligation to look after the feelings of the other players at the table now, and to enforce certain standards of behavior from others that overstep that boundary?

Is that what you're saying?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Knowing it isnt, but policing breaches of it certainly is.

Again, that's for the group, not just me.

Yes it is. In fact, directly telling someone to stop flashing their private parts in a restaurant is explicitly policing morality.

Who said flashing your private parts? I never said there were no tighty whities.

Because (as DM) you have to make rulings based on alignment. So you have to care about it or make a decision about it.

No. I really don't. I haven't in 23 years. I never cared about alignment. I've never made a ruling on it. When someone asks a question about it, I say I don't care and let them know not to bother taking any effects that run on it. nary and issue over dozens of players.

Example. Im playing a mass murdering genocidal baby eating monster who regularly trucks with Demons and engages in all sorts of horrific and immoral acts. I have LG written on my character sheet.

Can I pick up and attune to a Book of Exhalted Deeds in games you run?

You're not going to find a Book of Exalted Deeds in my games.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Oh so the DM has some sort of obligation to look after the feelings of the other players at the table now, and to enforce certain standards of behavior from others that overstep that boundary?

Is that what you're saying?

The group.

the DM is the person who plays the world. The group deals with its homeostasis.

 

[Flamestrike]

Again, that's for the group, not just me.

The group cant stop bad behaviour unless the DM does.

The group could be entirely against a fellow PC murdering them in their sleep, but unless the DM also cares it's totally moot.

Get it yet? It's the DMs responsibility. The buck stops with him (or her).

You're not going to find a Book of Exalted Deeds in my games.

Ergh. Nice way to avoid the question. Not.

OK. A vile monstrous PC has died, and the PCs are later tasked to recover his soul from the afterlife. He had LG on his character sheet when he was killed.

What plane do they look to for his spirit; the Nine hells, or the Seven Heavens?

 

[Flamestrike]

The group.

But you said before it was down to the DM to 'refuse to acknowledge the actions of the bad player'.

Which is it?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

What an insanely uninformed, disturbing and ethnocentric thing to say. Mexico is a Federal Republic just like the USA, and to some degree my country as well (Australia). It in no way resembles a Feudal medieval society to anyone other than... well you know exactly to whom.

I'm just saying, its a country where authority is a fairly complicated thing, and that doesn't necessarily apply everywhere either. Tijuana is rather different from Cancun too. This is not about insulting anyone. I've been, most of my neighbors come from, there's nothing wrong with the place, but its very different from the US.