D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[kermit4karate]

If I look at Critical Role, I don't see some exemplar of a good game. I see a game that the people playing enjoy, Matt obviously has a style many people would find excellent. But for some people who want a game dominated by hack and slash without all of the shopping trips and constant yacking? He's a bad DM.

This came up before about Matt. Clealy he's got mad skill, creative flair, and many people love his games, but I'm wirh you. The exposition-heavy style works well for streaming, especially at a table of entertainers and influencers, but it isn't my personal cup of tea.

I also like more hack and slash.

Not ONLY hack and slash, but more of it.

 

[TiQuinn]

Whether or not a game is boring is subjective.

 

[Remathilis]

1 out of 4 DMs are boring sociopaths with orc fetishes.

I don't see how anyone could possibly disagree with that.

Remember kids: the only bad restaurants are the ones who give you food poisoning. Everything else is just a matter of taste.

Dig in:

 

[AlViking]

This came up before about Matt. Clealy he's got mad skill, creative flair, and many people love his games, but I'm wirh you. The exposition-heavy style works well for streaming, especially at a table of entertainers and influencers, but it isn't my personal cup of tea.

I also like more hack and slash.

Not ONLY hack and slash, but more of it.

When 9% of the people responding to a poll say that all or almost all of the DM's they have ever had were bad, and one person far upstream said every DM that they had ever had was bad. I think it's pretty save to assume that some people would say Mercer is a bad DM.

On a related note I just remembered seeing an article which sadly I can't find right now about a set of modules where it's guaranteed that everyone dies. The author thought it was a fun idea. Heck there are games out there where by design the goal is to be the last one standing before your character inevitably perishes. So even a TPK is not considered automatically bad in those cases.

 

[bloodtide]

So I limit my definition of bad DM to something like

1. Doesn't listen to feedback
2. Knowingly have objectionable plots or content (see #1)
3. Run strict railroads with players being unable to make any decisions (again, see #1)
4. Are abusive or controlling, includes misogynistic, bigoted, insulting

Perhaps a couple others. But even those in small doses doesn't make a DM bad (with the possible exception of #4), it may just be part of the learning curve we all have. If you're (eventually) willing to listen to feedback and change to be a better DM that just means you're learning to be better. There is no objective agreed upon definition of what makes a DM bad.

Are you sure? #4 does seem like an Everyone will Agree one...


And really for most people, nothing is a life time stamp.

For Example, there are tons of DMs that run the Wild Sandbox type style and their games are just random messes of activity where no one has any fun. Such a DM can be taught and learn how to run a game a much better way.

 

[Xamnam]

Being called bad, when you yourself recognize that you are bad, is insulting?

Heck, being called bad at something is insulting? As in something that would seriously bother people? I'll admit that it's hardly complimentary, but, insulting? Seriously? I wonder if this isn't a cultural thing. Being bad at something is pretty standard for anyone starting out in a hobby - regardless of hobby. Since when is "bad" insulting?

I think this might be what you're running into, because, yes, if someone else directly called me bad at something, especially to my face / in my presence, I'd probably be somewhat insulted, unless I also agreed and we knew each other reasonably well.

Because I wouldn't say someone who is starting out at something is always gonna be bad. I'd say inexperienced, or new, or learning first! But if I was pressed to give something on a rating level, I would say not good (yet!) before I'd say bad, because those have very different connotations, in my circles at least.

Edit: And that's before even getting into the difference between saying someone is a Bad DM versus Bad at [specific skill]

 

[kermit4karate]

Are you sure? #4 does seem like an Everyone will Agree one...


And really for most people, nothing is a life time stamp.

For Example, there are tons of DMs that run the Wild Sandbox type style and their games are just random messes of activity where no one has any fun. Such a DM can be taught and learn how to run a game a much better way.

When the DM asks for help. If they don't want help, or don't agree they need it, then it's probably time to bounce. Can't force someone to see things someone else's way, right? All we can do is ask and hope they're receptive to it.

 

[kermit4karate]

Being called bad, when you yourself recognize that you are bad, is insulting?

Heck, being called bad at something is insulting? As in something that would seriously bother people? I'll admit that it's hardly complimentary, but, insulting? Seriously? I wonder if this isn't a cultural thing. Being bad at something is pretty standard for anyone starting out in a hobby - regardless of hobby. Since when is "bad" insulting? Then again, if you're taking the interpretation that bad="malicious jerk", then, I suppose I can see why that might be insulting.



Well, the counter argument is that there are almost no bad DM's out there. That it's a TINY fraction of the hobby. That over 95% of DM's are average or better. Which I find a ridiculous assertion.

I disagree with the entire spirit of your comment, from top to bottom. I think it's bad. Just thought you should know that, even though you didn't ask for my opinion.

See what I did there?

 

[nevin]

I think the thing we miss a lot talking about bad DM's is a significant percentage of them are new DM's just trying to hold the game together while they figure it out. I don't have any numbers but I bet that 9 percent one would be well below 1/2 that if you take those guys who are just learning out the equation.

 

[kermit4karate]

I think the thing we miss a lot talking about bad DM's is a significant percentage of them are new DM's just trying to hold the game together while they figure it out. I don't have any numbers but I bet that 9 percent one would be well below 1/2 that if you take those guys who are just learning out the equation.

Seems like there'd be an easy way to sidestep getting into that predicament though, right? "Hi. Have you DM'd many D&D campaigns before?"