Search results

Sure, there are people who prefer boring games, who prefer TPKs, who prefer Orcs SAing PCs... Whatever, sure.

You're seeing a lot of crap that's not there, when I'm offering a simple way to measure. There are different measures of "bad"...there's no conflating. But no...everything's subjective, less than 3% of DMs are bad, bad players are worse than bad DMs somehow...whatever. I am going to ask...

So just using the examples provided before, I guess being boring isn't bad; rejoicing in unfair TPKs isn't bad; having orcs r**e the PCs isn't bad... Whatever, man.

It's a thought construct designed to help see if one's behaviour needs to change or not. If you can't see that, there's nothing for us to talk about.

" I don't like running games for evil characters and I have players that don't want it either." So that's a table decision, not a behaviour in-game or something else.

It's not that subjective. If the DM engages in behaviour that would drive a player to another game that is exactly the same except it doesn't have said behaviour, then it's bad. Not "evil person"-bad, but bad in that the behaviour needs to change.

Maybe "bad" means something other than "abusive or controlling."

What the hell are you talking about? Agree with me re: what? Did I set that binary you mention?

Perhaps not the same type of bad...but they're all bad in their own way.

I guess because some people here think fewer than 3 out of every 100 DMs are bad...if one can't see they might be bad, they are less likely to try to improve.

One needs a certain amount of self-reflective ability and modesty to look back and see one's faults...whether looking back 20 years or just last week. Like you, I was a bad DM back in high school, no doubts. Was fun still had? Most times, but that was in spite of my bad DMing. Of course many...

Maybe you can have one chart. The examples given are all examples of being bad at DMing; they might each have a different value (the last would have a greater negative value than the first...maybe), but they would all contribute to a negative experience.

Yeah, I should have been more clear; I meant 1e-3e.

I feel like a lot of this has to do with the populace being...not great...with on-the-fly math. It doesn't even require bad faith. Instinctively, it feels like such a maneuver (the chandelier thing) should draw some kind of penalty, right? So then a penalty is assigned...and because we're not...

Forgive me if this has already been addressed. How many people, specifically as players, like the old-school alignment system? (Just checking to see if the player role vs DM role makes a difference here).

Oh, it's true.

Oh God, yes... :'(

Didn't 4e have that?

Agreed. I just think DMs are likewise not a different breed of human, and so the idea that they have final say over the character, even if the rest of the group see it differently is...interesting.

Don't ask me, I'm not the one saying they can't. Apparently we just have to trust our DMs, because we are in danger of not knowing better (a flaw they are not prone to as much, it seems).