Search results

Not any that I recall and that includes comments of "it's just a game". Definitely not in the 21st century. My wife and I have been playing together for decades, she wouldn't let it slide. The guy we had a while back that refused to cooperate with the group didn't repeat the bad behavior...

Below average is 49% of all DMs. You have a very different definition of bad than I do.

You might be able to get a ranking with a large enough pool of people rating, but that doesn't mean the rating would matter much to any individual. When it comes to restaurants for example I have very simple tastes. I'd rather eat at Culver's because I get exactly the portions I want and I...

Expertise and reliable talent can make a huge difference. I don't think any individual class is required for a group, you can almost always compensate for another class. But if you are doing things to compensate for a missing piece that means that you've compromised the niche of your chosen...

It just comes down to where you put them on the bell curve and what the person making the decisions qualifies as "bad". I may value rules knowledge over encounter variety, someone else may value sheer entertainment value over ability to improvise and react. But those things are all completely...

If it was as high as some people claim (20-25%) then on average every table should have one of those people. I find that hard to believe. One in a hundred, perhaps a bit higher that are high enough on the narcissist scale that it harms the enjoyment of the other people at the table? Maybe. I...

I know I've come up with ideas in the past that I thought would be fun for everyone at the table and when I ran it by the player affected (offline) it was a big "absolutely not". But as you said, at one point in the past I may not have verified if it was okay or not. So I'm glad the 2024 DMG...

I wasn't talking about the literal jack of all trades, rogues get more skill proficiencies than any other class along with expertise. Reliable talent I would argue is better than jack of all trades although of course it doesn't kick in until 7th level. But we're talking about 1-20 here not low...

If every new DM is bad, if every DM that doesn't have instant recollection of every rule is bad, if every DM that isn't a professional voice actor who happens to DM is bad, if someone at the table doesn't think the DM is as good as they believe the DM thinks they are, I don't know how any DMs...

This started with the declaration that 25% of all DMs are objectively bad. Unfortunately a small percentage that are truly bad but most of those do not DM for long. I think some DMs are better than others but just because I'd prefer Sue over Chuck it doesn't mean that Chuck is a bad DM.

There's also no real solution. Millions of people are happy playing D&D or a variation but you can't please everyone. It sucks if you can't find a group playing a game you enjoy but that's one of the reason there are so many options. It sucks that I don't want to gather round, drink beer and...

One more thought on this. Well, two actually. First even if someone thinks they are better at DMing I don't see why that necessarily makes them a bad DM. They may think they're far above average and they are just average like most people. But second? How the heck would you know? Unless they...

Most DMs are average. Which should be expected, there's going to be a bell curve of DM aptitude, that doesn't mean everyone on the downslope side of the bell curve is a bad DM in my opinion. There is no objective measurement of good and bad here. The closest that we can get is a DM that is...

I agree and that's been one of my main sticking points. If every table had that guy there's no way so many people would play the game. We are all flawed individuals but that doesn't mean 20% of the people playing D&D are so narcissistic that they don't understand the way their behavior is...

The 2024 books talk about mutual respect, fun for all and so on. Not specifically what you said but appropriate for playing and running the game.

As far as I can know I've never encountered a DM who thought they were that good. Virtually all of them were just doing the best they could and wanted their players to have fun.

We have very different definitions of what a bad DM is. To me a truly bad DM doesn't care what their players want, perhaps abuses the authority given to them by the game, is an all-around jerk. Being slightly below average? That doesn't make them bad. There may also be DMs that aren't right...

There's a significant amount of guidance throughout the DMG, I will say that the 2024 DMG does a better job of it than the 2014 one did. But how much is enough? You can talk all you want about how the goal of the game is to ensure everyone is having fun, listening to your players, finding your...

So anyone who is not great, or at least good, is bad. We can't just have decent, average GMs or GMs who make the occasional mistake, GMs who are learning so we give them advice and feedback. Kind of sounds like if you aren't a Matt Mercer or Brendan Lee Mulligan level of expertise you get...

So anything less than "average" is bad. Which is why I think the poll was meaningless.