Search results

Anyone can be taught (or learn) to DM. But whether they will be truly good at it is another matter entirely. I know the rules of chess, but I'm a terrible opponent. I play the RISK variations with a group of guys, but one or two of us nearly always win, even though we all know the rules...

That makes two of us, brother. Such a collaborative approach is interesting (if not for me), but I think we can safely assume it's neither the widespread playstayle of most nor the main playstyle they'll suggest with D&D-Next. I'm not really sure how this relates to the main topic of DM...

My breakdown of the basic groups: 4e players: About a third of these will never get onboard unless D&D-Next suddenly becomes 4.5e; so they'll stick with 4e. Another third, after some protesting or a win-over period, will make the switch. The last third will move ahead to Next because of...

All sadly true.

Agreed, ForeverSlayer (and thanks for bringing this thread back on point). There's nothing here I disagree with. Sometimes you see something that's houseruled so often that it should be ruled, period. Example from 1e: Low M-U hit points. Everyone I knew thought starting a mage with 1 hp at 1st...

You make a good point. But in pre-3e editions there are mitigating factors that reduce the effect on overall play: — We're only talking about spellcasters here. So the DM hasn't "lost his autonomy" for half the party's actions. — Many spell descriptions allowed some interpretive implementation...

Agreed. I'm happy this style works for you Grabuto138, but it's hardly the mainstream style of play (and I say that knowing that defining "mainstream play" in D&D is tough). Whatever floats your boat, and all that. What motivated this OP is an attempt by a small but active faction to change the...

Precisely, eh? :) I thought my original post was pretty clear, but to restate: I never said any DM powers were lost with 4e. And I can't yet speak about D&D-Next, because it's still in playtest. I was merely commenting on a recent "movement", primarily by a subset of 4e fans, to seemingly...

So much goodness in so few words. This strikes to the heart of my whole point—profound thanks ExploderWizard. I don't want to tell my players what to do. I don't want to grant them permission for their actions. But what I reject, and some players now seem to want, is the ability of the player...

Your example pretty much sums up how I DM 4e at the moment. :) As far as looking up rules, it's more the players that feel compelled. Folks feel compelled to use the anyway, and it's often easier to make up a houserule to cover an unruled situation than to convince people not to use an...

As a DM, I never control what the players do, or how they react. If a player wants to leap a 200-foot gap, they are welcome to try. I supply the players info and they decide their actions. What I will do is assign odds and create spot rules to cover what the rules don't cover. (Something that...

You must have a lot of disagreeable players. This is reasonable. I just never experienced problems because of expectations. When I played 1e on a regular basis, which I did for over 10 years with a variety of groups, I don't recall anyone ever feinting. There was no feint rule in the PHB, so...

On this we can agree, my friend. And your sig line keeps making me laugh and lose my (easily derailed) train of thought.

I think this is fairly stated, to a point. Certainly there is a chance that player expectations may clash with DM judgement. But long experience has shown me, and perhaps I'm lucky, that with a good DM the players and DM very soon learn to mesh their expectations; the DM learns what the players...

The thing that strikes me about these two examples in that in both preferred instances, the DM isn't doing anything, excepts perhaps standing aside seemingly subservient as the players do as they please. (And please don't read this wrong, in my own games I allow player actions about 99.5% of the...

This is true, though I think we can reasonably assume that a great many folks have played the game in the manner Gygax and others originally laid out (often with clear examples) in early editions. I have no way to know that the thousands of folks that purchase chess games move their bishops...

Much appreciated, good sir. We probably agree little on this particular issue, and we'll challenge it other on it. Hopefully I'll learn from the exchange. At the end of the day, we're all gamers here and brothers (and sisters) under the skin.

Before I delve into your thoughtful post any deeper, I had no intent to put words in anyone's mouth (or I wouldn't have asked for other folks' opinions and opened myself to the firing line in the first place). I'm trying to understand what seems—to me, emphasis there— to be a newish phenomena...

(My apologies in advance, this is long.) I've noticed that coinciding with the arrival of the D&D-Next playtest a new sentiment has arisen regarding the overall DM role and DM houseruling. People have decried the so-called "Mother May I?" ability of a DM to make rules calls. This sentiment...

I couldn't agree with the above more. Well stated.