Search results

Thanks! :D I hope they come in handy.

Good monsters can become enemies, either by changing their alignment or by having an opposing viewpoint that goes against the party's. Law vs. chaos is one way to do that. Also, evil PCs may want to fight good monsters.

Whereas I always took "roll play" to mean people who only ever did what was on their sheet and never tried to actually play as their character, just as a bag of meaningless stats. My table, when playing D&D, gets very deep into character, and most of our interactions with the world are social...

I... explained it. It's an actual spell from a 2e-era fanbrew netbook. I even provided the link to the netbook. I also explained it's not a spell I would ever convert to 5e.

You disagree that some people here think that there are rules that are designed to control GMs, or you disagree with that those games even exist?

Hence the need for different scales. The GM who writes boring adventures probably needs to read some blogs or watch some videos on how to make games more fun and then work to use that advice in their own game. The GM who thinks casting power word castrate on PCs is funny (at a table where the...

Then that's quite different than the way I've ever played or run D&D over the past 30 years.

Incorrect. Some ENWorld members think that things like GM Agendas and Principles are rules that are designed to control GM behavior. This belief is incorrect.

Yes, seriously, it's insulting, for several reasons. It's not constructive in any way. It doesn't tell you how to be better. It's all-encompassing. If you're a Bad GM, then you're Bad across the board. Like take your belief that bad = anyone less than 50%. Except that's a bad idea, all around...

I very much doubt that. Because you can't lump them all under the same umbrella. Or rather, you can, but then you have to have sub-categories under that because it's seriously unfair to everyone to say "this GM writes boring adventures" is the same as "the GM thought it would be funny to have...

Define "bad GM," then. And are you going to say boring or incompetent GMs and malicious GMs are both the same type of bad?

I have no idea. I just think it's probably higher than a couple of percent.

It's not boundaries. Nor is it any sort of restriction. It's guidelines on how to GM that particular style of game. In Daggerheart, the GM Principles, Best Practices, and Pitfalls To Avoid take up a total of five pages, six if you include the chapter's intro page and the art. That's barely...

I'm pretty sure that every table has had at least one of those people. But the thing is, you (generic you) may not recognize that behavior as not OK, or may have said "relax, it's just a game." Or you may have just learned to live with it ("missing stairs") because that's easier and less...

No, I meant some players (or GMs) that are horribly obnoxious or abusive at the table don't care. Like, there's a difference between a spotlight hog who's just so eager to play their character that they don't realize they're not giving the others a chance, and one who literally doesn't care...

It would need to be multiple scales. You can't have "really boring," "throws OP foes and traps and then laughs when the party dies," and "has the orcs gang-rape PCs" on the same chart.

That's my point. The book can't force you to run the game in a specific manner. It can't force you to, say, use Legendary Resistance the first three times the monster needs to make a save*. You can choose to have the monster hold onto them for when it needs them. There's nothing that forces you...

People are willing to put up with a lot of crap in order to not rock the boat and risk being ostracized by the rest of the group. Also, it's not just that people don't understand how their behavior affects others; it's that they often don't care.

So you've judged the entire genre by reading a single game. Bravo. That makes about as much sense as me refusing to look at any D&D book because AD&D1e had a lot of baked-in sexism. You've honestly never thought that later games by different people could be different?

You've explicitly said that the changes made are relevant because they're not specifically your tastes, and you've explicitly said that you don't follow the leading edge but instead play your own 5e/LU mashup.